Hi guys: Fellow Winchester gurus..... I've been tossing around the idea of putting a Leupold VX3 2.5-8x36 on this old rifle for quite a while now. This is how it looked with the hubble on it:



It's really proven itself on the range with this set-up:


However, I think it would be more handy with a slimmer and lighter piece of glass on it. I've got the Leupold DD's ready. What do you guys think???




By the way, the Talley lightweights went to a good home. Thanks Desertmuledeer.....

That scope is never a bad choice, except maybe for hunting in really thick timber. It could be made to make do even there.

There ain't a handier scope made. I'd prefer it or the 1.75-6 on any rifle I hunt with in Oregon.

Tough to find a more balanced scope than that, light, lean, bright and dead reliable in my years of experience of using them. A no brainer in my mind. This pre-64 270 of mine came with the 3.5-10X as purchased and it just looks a bit big to my eyes but will remain for other reasons.

The 2.5-8 Leupold is a great scope, however, in mounting it on a pre '64 Model 70, its tube length means many mounts such as Leupold DD's or any standard Weaver mount will not let you get the scope mounted so that the eye relief is perfect, in my experience.

You can make it work with Leupold DD's or Weaver style bases but you end up having very little "wiggle room" to account for awkward shooting positions or heavy clothing. Talleys let you reverse the front ring and let you take advantage of the scope's generous eye box at all powers.

I have un corrected vision and a pretty average build, but I am sure people with different eyes and body sizes may feel differently.

It's pretty tough to ever go wrong puttin the 2.5-8 on, especially a Fwt. I have a couple on mine, but, I have to agree with Fireball, the 1.75 is a dandy as well. A 2-7 Kahles looks mighty fetchin aboard one too though, and it's a damned nice piece of glass as well. Regardless of your choice, you aren't going to be doing wrong with any of them.

If only obviously. No need in putting on or carrying around any more than you need. Extra xxxx's always take away from slim and handy. You need 8x for hunting? Straight 3x-Leupold said it is closer to 3.4-, 4x, 1.5-5s are really nice on a FWT or a 6x36 if you don't. Used to think the 2.5-8 was special. Found out for here in Pa I don't need it most of the time. Leupold QR's solve the problem for when I think I may.

Hardly even know they are there. What do you need?

My experience mirrors TCP.

I just referenced my .300Magnum in another post. It came to me wearing an M7 4x. It was all out of whack. A tiny little scope on a big heavy rifle. I found a Century Edition gloss 3x9 40MM and think it looks and functions fantastically. It looks like it fits, because it does fit. It was easy to mount and looks great.

I love love love the 2.5x8 Leupold but not on m70's. Hard to make it work as it is intended. These rifles are big and heavy and look and function well with bigger scopes. just my .02 worth.

My .375 wears a 1-4x20mm as well but those scopes have little place out here in the West.

There was a time that I thought a 2.5-8X was a BIG scope;that was years back when I used 3X and 4X only on BG rifles and hated every variable ever made.

Today I only hate MOST every variable ever made ,and have had a few 2.5-8X's..... but hate the 2.5-8X somewhat less;so I put one of the "new" VX3's on my 270 4-5 years.I have not touched the scope for adjustment since then. I twist it to 6X on the range and 4X while hunting.

It's been pretty good so far.

Big? It looks like a perfect fit to me.

3.5-10x40

Long action --> long scope.

My soon coming M70 7x57 is going to sport the Leupold 2.5-8X with their DD rings/mounts. I think that combination will look superb as it should also on a pre-64. Low mount rings should work well.

Which comes first; what works, carries and balances best or looks superb?

That scope gets my vote, then again with my old eyes my favorite Leupold scope to hunt with is their 4.5X 14 X 40 AO with varmint reticule.But I shoot a lot more crows and varmints than whitetails and we can harvest 12 whitetails a year! very best winpoor

Not only how many, but how also enters into the picture. With the increasing amount of stand hunting how a rifle carries is becoming less important to many.

Model 70's are not all that lacking in body fat to begin with. Standards especially.

I do have a couple of model 70's, and a few scopes have been tried thereon you know.

Have long been a fan of Leupold M8 fixed power scopes....3X, 4X and 6X. They look good on both new and old rifles and can often be had for a song at the markets that I frequent.

Yes I know. Also know you understand the concept of matching target to scope power and reticle and that BG game has a beeeg sweet spot. Unfortunately most these days don't.

Battue, For sure every year added age wise seems to bring less and less walk and spot, I used to call it indian hunting and it was by far my favorite way to hunt, I also used to love the creek and river bottoms,now I hate the chore of getting the deer out of the deepwoods. Back in the 70's I loved the super cold and windy days as I would walk and jump shoot em, if the wind was just right you could get to within 15-20 yards before he would jump and run, killed my biggest and oldest buck that way, first thing I would do is turn that 3x9 down to 4x. Boy time and age changes a lot of things.. very best WinPoor

BSA,I'd put a Leupold 6x 42mm on it and kill deer,elk,bear or whatever else you hunt up there.

You may want to take a better look at the mounts and rings (see pic) I have on this old girl. I am using the extended rear so I can push the scope forward because of the ER. Talleys just don't look right to me on these pre 64's..

I can tell you this, all of those scopes are way too light on the x's for me and my eyesight. 8 is also a little weak as I'm usually running a minimum of a 3-9x40 on my rifles. This is not going to be my long range hammer, so I figured a 2.5-8x36 should be worth looing at. I also considered a 2-7x33....This rifle will also weigh 7 3/4 pounds with the 2.5-8x36, which makes it just about the perfect weight. Pretty light by my standards and I carry a rifle all season vs. stand hunting, which I've never done.

The way I see it, it's best to have both...

I started out with a 3-9x40 and am used to keeping it set on 3-5 when in the thick stuff and instinctively turn it up to 9 when the need arises.

I'd go Leupie 6x36 with or without dots.

From seeing your groups do you seriously think they are too light on the x's for your eyes to miss the basketball size vitals of Deer and Elk? And it will not be used for long range. It's your hunt and rifle, but I'm not buying in on the theory.

Of course if you never try you will never know.

battue, I'm sure just about any scope will work seriously. I do know from personal experience that I don't like the lower powered scopes. I've had the leupld 4x, and 1.5-5 and didn't care for them. I do a lot of target shooting too and like the versatility of the higher powered scopes. I appreciate your input, but I know my likes and dislikes in some scopes. I've never personally tried the 2.5-8x36, but it gets rave reviews so I figured it would be a good compromise. You mention the target pic, that was shot with the scope on 14x. I also don't have a problem shooting that same power offhand at 100 yards. No problemo...

I love that scope, you can fix the eye relief problem by using extension rings on a model 70. I recently had a very souring experience with Luepold customer. So I will not be investing any more of my money with them for the foreseeable future. To be clear I think leupold makes a good product, as long as it works. If it doesn't their current philosophy is deny there is a problem until you send it back for the forth or fifth time. Maybe in the furture that will change, but when I can buy other scope of arguably the same of better light transmission and clarity for less. I'm going to give those ones a try, I am currently trying Vortex and Nikon. Conversely I can spend a bit more and get into a Swarovski for about 650-750 and I know they will stand behind their product, plus they have better glass. Any way I'll get off my soap box now, sorry for the rant. Still a great scope and I'd mount that thing no problem. In my opinion it a the best compromise between power, weight and small profile.

BW, is that what you are going to put on your new 308 fwt. Nice rifle by the way!!

Thanks for your input. It is much appreciated. I've ran into problems with Leupold scopes myself. The last one to take a chit was a VX 3 3.5-10x40 with CDS. I figured I'd give them one last try, since they are a local company. ...

Vortex is local, unless you live in the Oregon, then you are very local If your ever looking for good scopes cheap. Try www.samplelist.com it is through SWFA.com, but they are used or demo products. Sold at a discount, good deals to be had.

Like I said it's your hunt and rifle. Although you asked regarding the 2.5-8 specifically I threw some other options onto the table that were slimmer and lighter.

16x offhand would have me bobbing and weaving like a great fighter.


Have fun.

That 2.5-8 will shoot very long if you need it to.

I found out long ago, the Zeiss Diavari 3-9 is superior to the 2.5-8 Leupold in both size and clarity. They are worth looking for and they make a Model 70 look good...

Thanks shrappy. I knew you liked the old Zeiss and I've been keeping an eye on ebay and gunshows for just the right one. I also kicked around the idea of buying the old redfield 2-7 you had for sale a while back. I like the suggestion of the Diavari as it's definitely a power range I can live with and a nice piece of glass to boot. Does anyone know how many oz's these are?? Those are good looking rifles too, by the way..

BSA, sometime last month I bought and old post 64 with the red W grip cap in .225 win, it had the very first fixed 8x AO I had ever seen or shot, eye box is great, just perfect for my eyes. I cannot see the scope being to much nor overpowered.I started looking around for another for my fwt.I have only found one but my ad did yield a couple 10X that I like as well on varmint guns. very best winpoor

My M70 7x57 will be shipped out this Monday per Cabelas and I'll have the Leupold 2.5-8X with DD rings and 2 piece DD mounts by tomorrow. When the rifle arrives I'll take some pics for all to drool over...especially ingwe.

Yes that is where I will start or a Weaver 6x38. I just gravitated there due to the simplicity and fewer internal parts.

Thanks for the feedback guys.

BSA, I vote Yay.

Here is a VX3 2.5-8x36 on a '55 SG 30-06. It looks good, balances well, is light, and has a decent variable range with a wide field of view. It's just a great all round scope for the money and if you change your mind it will sell in two seconds flat here on the Fire.

Eric

Eric M, What a fantastic rig! Im still sulling like a possum over missing your SG NM 06 !

I guess Im a lucky guy as so far knock on wood I have never had a pre 64 mod 70 that was not accurate, (post 64 as well) nor have I had but one bad Leupold, I bought it off fleabay for 200, a fixed 12X AO and I sent it off to Oregon,Leupold, they sent it back like new! I love the idea of made in America and their CS to me so far. When you were raised on iron sights using a good scope feels like cheating! very best WinPoor

Thanks, Winpoor. I'm still kicking myself for selling it!

Eric

I think this bad boy would look superb on any pre-64 Winchester, especially for woods hunting and looks most appropriate. In fact, I'm fighting an urge to try it on my '52 270.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lyman-All-A..._DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f381a25ec

Not a pre-64 (mine wears a fixed 6 leupy) but a long action M70 in 7x57. 2.5x8 loopy in extra low talley rings.

Nice rifle buddy. I like it!! Thanks for the help..

Winchester M 70 Featherweight 7x57 Mauser and Talley Lightweight bases/rings and a Leupold 2.5x scope.

Looks good to me. I think that 2.5-8x with the low rings I've bought will look pretty good. Scope and rings should be here soon but late next week on the rifle. I ran across an old M8 4X that would look good as well. It looked nearly new.

You may have a problem mounting the short tube 2.5-8 without the extended base or ring. Let us know how it works out for you.

The 1.75-6X looks right to me as well. Here on my pre-64 358 Win.

I have two 57' fwt's both 06'gs. One has the 2.5x8 and the other has a vx-2 3x9. I hunt mostly Pa farmland and woods. Both scopes are pretty similar to me and don't feel handicapped with either. But If I had to choose one it'd be the Vx 3.

Looking good ed...

Thanks. Just one of a dozen a couple of years ago.

Pre '64 M 70 Featherweight .30-06 with a Leupold 6x 42mm scope,Leupold bases & rings. It weighs 7 lbs 14 ozs.

Looking good guys. EdM, I think GSSP (Allen) uses the 1.75-6 Leupold on a couple of his nice pre 64's...

We've discussed this before on this site.

The 2.5-8X Leupy is a tight fit on a Pre'64 70 with Dual Dovetails.

I had to machine the rings narrower to mount these.

Yes we have rembo. These (the DD's I pictured) are not nearly as tight as the ones in your picture. The extended rear base solves 2 issues for me: Helps with long eye relief and allows one to set the scope far enough forward to get optimal sight picture. The scopes in your picture are chit out of luck for lateral adjustment. I won't shoot a rifle where I have to adjust my head each time I shoulder it: Just not going to happen. I guess it's the snap shooter in me

This Vari-X III 2.5-8x36 has been on my 30-06 for twenty years - no issues.

My 3o-o6 M70 FW has a 2.5-8 mounted on it using S&K mounts. I really like it and the eye relief works for me, but I can see how it might not for everyone. Not a lot of room to adjust it for sure, it just happens to work for me. Sounds like the DDs might have more adjustment in them with the extended rear base? I'd say go for it... I love that scope.

Wow, nice. I really like that.

Cool picture wrongside.

I've been hooked on fixed-power scopes lately, but the 2.5-8X is never a bad choice in both performance, versatility and looks.
Bob

Hard to beat the 2.5-8 on a Featherweight!