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

I have a few rimfires I need to scope, including a CZ 455FS in .22WMR. I've taken a real liking to little straight tube low power variables, in particular the like of the Weaver V4.5 or similar for such rifles. Something about a straight tube scope on a Mannlicher stocked rifle just looks so right, and the vintage scopes have a certain appeal. I also find I enjoy the way some older reticles look, including post and crosshair types.

My question is, rebuilding them aside, are these older scopes worth it if found in good oncition? I know I can pick up a Leupold 1-4x20 or 1.5-5x20 for between $150-450 or so depending on model, but every once in awhile one of these classics pops up at a good price (just missed a Weaver V4.5W for about $65) and I'm tempted. With it just going on a little .22, I'm not worried about recoil. Thoughts?

Yes and no. If they are in good working order go for it, but don't expect them to be free from fogging up. I have had a bunch of vintage Weavers and they do have a certain appeal, but if they need repair it's not worth it.

No.

Scopes are like CD players, once they're a year old they're out of date and worthless.

How about an I answer in between the previous two. Old Weavers with dust or fog in the innards, pass. Repair costs is not a sound investment these days. Leupolds and any other brand that warrants the product forever, may be a good buy. I have several Vari-X III scopes that are about thirty years old that are too good to toss. If one goes bad, they will repair or replace it. New technology is better. I have a couple of Leupold Ultralight 3-9EFR scopes on two of my better .22s. I think they were worth the investment. One old, one right new. The new one is a shade better.

Best wishes,

Jack

I like the old Redfield scopes. Some are 30 years old, work just fine.

I have the Redfield accutrac 4x12 on my 22. Sight in dead on at 50 yards. Move target out to 75 yards, count clicks to dead on. Move to 100 yards, count clicks to dead on. I do this out to 200 yards. I have it taped to the stock. I do this out to 300 yards with my 22 magnum. You might look at that. Those accutrac Redfield’s go for less than 150.00 in the classifieds

I have accumulated around 300 scopes that are over 30 years old, and think that some vintage scope are worth owning, some are even worth spending the $100 or so that places like Iron Sights, Inc. charge for a rebuild them, but I don't have any vintage scopes on first tier hunting rifles.

I have a few 1960's and 1970's Weaver V4.5s and think that they are fine for casual hunting/shooting, but I have installed Weaver RV7s on my CZ 452 FS rifles in 22 LR and 22 Mag.

A good, but often neglected, scope with a "straight" objective that can often be purchased for under $50 on eBay is the Japanese-made Bushnell Banner in either 1.5-4.5x20 or 1.75-4.5x20. I bought several of these scope within the past year to put on used deer hunting rifles that I have been giving away to kids who are just getting started.

This doesn't surprise me in the least bit. Good on you, 260Remguy!

I've got a buddy that I've known for about 45 years who hunts with custom built rifles all over the world. He is not one to spend a lot of money if he doesn't have to. So his guns wear plain walnut stocks that he installs himself. He uses surplus military 6.5 and 7mm barrels that he has contoured, etc.
He hunts for old steel tube Weavers and Leupold fix magnification scopes in good shape. He doesn't hunt wet country with the Weavers I'm told. Never had one any of them let him down on a hunt.
I've got an old Leupold 7.5XAO, an 80's M8 4X and a B&L that I bought in 1972. The only one I wouldn't use for a serious big game hunt is the 7.5XAO. Not because I don't trust the scope. I wouldn't because of it's short eye relief and small eye box. But the two 4X's are proven performers. One of them is a backup scope for my custom '06'.
I do prefer the modern scopes. But one of the rifles I'm about to take on my three week hunting trip is a 20 yr. old 6X42 Leupold. So, it's your call. If it is a new to you scope, I'd test it a good bit before trusting it. The other thing is all scopes will fail if used enough. So, take a backup if hunting far from home. E

I have a Burris 4X that I bought new in 1983. It has been on many rifles including a lightweight 338 that eats scopes for lunch. It has held up fine and it's clarity and reliability matches or beats newer scopes I have.

I currently have it on a pre-64 M70 and it has a nice retro look and matches the gun well and I trust it.

This^^^

I grew up hunting with the old steel tube Weavers. They were prone to fogging up which I surely don't miss. That said, I do like to use them on rifles I really only shoot at the range or plink with, mostly .22's. For a hunting rifle, I tend to favor Leupolds.

I have several rebuilt steel tube Weaver 4xs on hunting rifles and like them a lot. The scopes were free in the junk box at a local gun shop so the $60 to rebuild was an easy thing to do.

they are good for good conditions/ youth/ retro builds etc. But for not alot more money you can really benefit from the last 20+ years of optics evolution.

That may be true, however when I consulted with D'Arcy Echols about using a 2.5x steel Weaver on a light weight .416 he agreed that it was a good selection. I have several hundred rounds thru the gun and it still works. I'll use them 'til the break and then see where it goes.

I like the Leupold VX3’s, but a lot of people on here bash them. I’ve never had a problem with one, but I’m careful with my rifles. I’m not on horseback. I have a soft case I carry them to the stand, this helps a lot. I don’t carry them in gun racks. I’ve been lucky and never fallen with one in the rocks. I keep them in socks in the safe too.

I must have ten or so of the old accutracs laying around. They are my all time favorite scopes. I still have them on 5 or 6 rifles. I’ve killed many a deer and pigs with them. I like the old 3x9 widefield with a crosshair and post. I have a couple of them somewhere too. They aren’t quite as bright as new glass, but I can see 15 minutes before and after legal shooting hours. I killed a pig last Sunday with one. I couldn’t see the feeder until I put the scope on it. He was right under it. This was shortly before He expired.





Killed these a little later.

I found a Ted Williams/Sears model a couple of weeks ago in a 1.5-4.5 variable. I have been told they were made by Weaver. Have a Ruger 44 carbine I will put it on. Believe it or not, it is one of the clearest scopes I have. I hope it works as it should. Gave $50 for it at a pawn shop. If it doesn't work, not out that much. For me, it is worth the $50 to have a scope not many people have around on a sweet little carbine. To me, as an old Geezer, it is worth the cool factor. BTW, I am comparing the clarity to a few Leupolds (not the newest models, a couple of VX-III's) and a Monarch.

Thanks for the feedback, everyone!

My primary draw to the older designs is first for the "vintage" reticle styles that most manufacturers (if any) just don't seem to use anymore, in particular the post and crosshair (Leupy does the post and duplex, but I found the intersection of the hairs too think and the vertical line above to be unnecessary), or the standard crosshair (while you can get them, they're usually in high power target scopes). Since this is going on a CZ 452FS, I'm hoping to keep with classic looks both inside AND out, I guess, haha.

The potential for fogging is noted. Where I'm currently located, I don't think that'll be a problem (AZ) for most of the year, but I'll keep it in mind. Now to track down a few examples for a reasonable price (particularly that post and crosshair)...

eBay often has Weaver K2.5 and K3 scopes with PCH reticles up for auction.

I still have my Banner 1.5-4x20 I bought new in 1972..............

Free ones may be okay, like the Redfield 3-9 Lo Pro I picked up yesterday on a trade into a very nice Remington Model Six. I've abandoned the notion of picking them up for real money, though, except for a very few exceptions, and I'm not real sure about those, unless I can take a look before I buy or the seller has a return policy.

Redfield 3-9 Lo Pro or 2-7 Lo Pro best hunting scopes ever made

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?

Are we talking about on old valuable gun and you need a period scope? Then yes, Anything else, not really.

I have windage adjustable rings and shim for elevation, just boght a set Leupold windage adjustable base which should be easier than having both front and rear adjustable .

The older I get the more I appreciate very good to excellent quality optics. I have no use for vintage scopes.

It's a rush killing stuff with scopes the youngsters think are un-useable. There isn't much that a NF 2.5x10 on a coyote calling rig the my old B&L Balvar 8 won't do as well.