Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Are vintage scopes worth it?

Unertls are still better than most new scopes.

I have quite a few old Weaver scopes (all fixed powers) and don't hesitate to use them under any conditions. I also use some old Bushnell Scope Chief four power scopes (not as rugged but better optics than the Weavers). I have one K2.5 on a 35 Whelen which has been used in conditions as bad as you will see and it has had no issue whatsoever. On one fifteen day trek, it rained every day and that rifle and scope bashed through miles of alder. Apart from some light rust on the scope tube, it came through just fine; no fogging and no shift in point of impact. The rusting of the steel tube is bothersome but only occurs in very wet conditions when the scope is not protected by wax. I even use a J-4 (3/4 inch tube) on a Mauser rifle and it works just fine; clear, compact, and reliable.
I have some more modern scopes as well and they are optically superior but the tubes are too short and the ocular bells too large for them to mount well on most of my rifles. The old Weavers fit well and look good. The adjustments are reliable and repeatable. What's not to like? GD

I have owned lots of old steel tube Weavers, Lymans, Redfields, Leupolds etc. The fixed power Leupold M7 and M8 3x and 4x scopes are hard to beat for durability and are very easy to mount on a Savage 99 or similar due to their long tubes.. I have had several old Weavers fog up, but most seem to hold zero well and have great eye relief. They Lymans I have had all held zero and had what seemed like very clear glass, but almost none had duplex type reticles and were very hard to see in low light. The Redfields seemed to track well and were clear, but had less forgiving eye relief than the others. They are all worth a roll of the dice if you find one pretty cheap.

Where do they fall in the Redfield hierarchy? I've got a 4x Widefield that's okay for its age, but nothing special as far as I can tell.

This Lo-Pro will get some use if the adjustments are okay, replaced if not. Somewhere, I seem to recall reading that widefield scope have more trouble than usual with parallax. A lighter scope, maybe a K4 or K6 would help a bit with the Model Six's weight.

One point in the Lo-Pro's favor is that there are enough threads on the eyepiece to allow this old man to shoot without glasses!

For me the Lo-Pro Rock solid adjustments,Widefield TV screen front and rear lens for
shooting at deer on the move!
I started out hunting with my late Father 50 yrs ago
We would be part of Man Drives making a lot of noise
to force the bedded Bucks out of the thick stuff for a stander
to get a shot at,
The extra WIDE view of the Lo-Pro really helped to swing thru a deer
on the move to take a shot.
I HAD Redfield Lo-Pro Widefields
2) 2-7 Lo Pro
1) 3-9 Lo Pro
1) 3-9 ILLUMINATOR for still hunting clear cuts at dusk
I hunted with just these scopes for years!
Not one bit of any trouble then the internet came along in
my twlight years to inform me that my Lo Pros like me
were OUTDATED and inferior to Modern Optics
I sent all of them to ABO to be rebuilt then gave them
all to my brother in Pokey Idaho
He would not part with them for love or money!
He has them mounted on
S.S. BLR 270 WSM
WBY MKV 300 WBY
Savage 7 rem mag
Ruger S.S. 308 Win.
Browning single shot 22-250
NO problem with any of them for him
since I gave them to him.

I'll give this one a fair try on the pumpgun, but those see-through mounts have got to go! It's a long bugger, perfect for a Mauser or M70. I suspect, based on their fine condition, that the rifle and scope have been sitting in a gun cabinet somewhere for a good while.

On a vintage rifle I think it deserves a vintage scope. Of course the optics are better on a newer scope but the times an old scope let me down I don't think a newer one would have helped. The failures were from sun flair and low light but in almost all the low light situations it was after legal shooting hours so that may be a benefit.

The old steel tube Weavers and Kahles are hell for stout too. They might even surpass current models in this regard. Perfect for a gun that gets banged around in the truck or used by kids.

I still have 3x9 widefield accutracs on 4 or 5 rifles. They don’t give up much to the newer scopes.

first scope I ever bought was a 1 3/4 to 5 Redfield widefield in 1982. I have killed a lot of game looking through that scope. I could go outside in the dark with it right now and see good enough to shoot anything in my neigborhood .No scope I have ever owned or looked through is better in low light. I sent it back once because the seals failed. It was definitely worth it.
I have a 2x7 widefield that isn't as good a scope. I wouldn't spend much to have it worked on if it broke. But it's 35 years old and has been hunted and it's not broke.

first scope I ever bought was a 1 3/4 to 5 Redfield widefield in 1982. I have killed a lot of game looking through that scope. I could go outside in the dark with it right now and see good enough to shoot anything in my neigborhood .No scope I have ever owned or looked through is better in low light. I sent it back once because the seals failed. It was definitely worth it.
I have a 2x7 widefield that isn't as good a scope. I wouldn't spend much to have it worked on if it broke. But it's 35 years old and has been hunted and it's not broke.

No. Only for keepsakes or show & tell.

MM

have used a bunch of old weavers but they fog and the lenses separate causing bubbles,

Really am echoing the same things.

Have paid L&K to refurb. three: A nice K4 duplex (for sako L61R finnbear), a K6 (fine crosshair, for cz 452 American), and a K3 post/crosshair for the same rem760 '06 it came to me on (in swing mounts, no less!). So, retro guns, fun guns, and truck guns. They're beautiful, but if am going to hike up/down for miles actually hunting, am going modern glass in a light package.

I can't say how accurate this statement is overall, but I can attest to the one 10x Unertl I have owned being the equal in clearness to all my others. I was astounded that a 50s era scope was still in that good a shape.

As to the older scopes being worth using and/or rebuilding, generally I would say, "it depends"! I still use the older scopes where light gathering is not essential. The steel tube weavers and Redfields are tough and solid, but they work better in good light. I used to have them rebuilt but stopped that because, even cleaned up, they still did not compare with modern glass in low light.

That being said, there was a recent exception:



I acquired this old Model 1917 that had been turned into a hard core shooting tool decades ago. A Weaver 330 M8 had been mounted using Stith mounts. The finish is almost completely gone and the Weaver was so milky that lining up a black bulls eye at 100 yds was very difficult. However, when I tried it out, the scope was within a couple of inches of being zeroed and it corrected accurately to zero. Wanting to make meat again with the ole warhorse, I had L&K clean up the glass at a cost of a little more than I had in the entire rig. This was very cost ineffective, but it is worth it to me to get it back in the woods again. So, sue me....

Old scopes have a certian apeal and in some situations they do the job.

I built some rings for a drilling I have and mounted an old Weaver K-1.5 on it for hunting in the forests, it does the job nicely.



I put an old B&L Balvar 8 on one of my coyote guns, it's a one load gun and works well for called coyotes.



I have lots of modern scopes but it is fun to hunt with the old timers too.

I kllled my biggest buck ever with a Winchester M/88 topped with a Weaver K2.5 with a post and crosshair reticle. My slug gun is equipped with a Weaver V4.5, Winchester M/52 Sporter and Springfield 1922 M2 both have Lyman Alaskans with 2 minute LEE dots the Springfield's Alaskan sits in a Griffin & Howe mount. My pre'64 deer rifles a .257,.30-06 and .35 Whelen are all equipped with Leupold Vari-XII 2-7x &3-9x. When not hunting with Whelen wears a Lyman All American Perma Center with LEE dot. So as you can see I an kind of a vintage scope junky. The only scope out of the lot that I ever had any trouble with was the Weaver V4.5 that fogged on a snowy deer hunt. It was replaced with another V4.5 which has been trouble free.

Good on you for returning those to service instead of leaving them as interesting wall-hangers. Everything doesn't have to be the latest super-duper.

For my hunting rifles I have been using Leupold since 1975 with never a problem of any kind.

The problem with older scopes is that the rubber seals have a finite lifespan. The glass and mechanical parts may still be in perfect condition but unless the rubber seals have been replaced I'd not trust any optic much over 30 years old on a serious hunt.

How do you adjust for windage and elevation with you B&L Balvar8?