Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Unertl scope questions

What are good about the old long tube Unertl target scopes from the 60s? Other than they look very nostalgic, I am wondering if they are as good as current manufacture target scopes or not. I just picked up a used Remington 40x in 7mm Mag that has Unertl mounts, and wonder if I should place a Unertl there, or just receiver mount a current target scope. What are your opinions please?

I kinda always wanted one, looks cool!!

Depends on your goals and priorities. Unless you already have one on hand, you are going to pay a lot for cool looks and nostalgia.

Overall function and optical quality may not be as good as a comparable modern scope, and it will be more vulnerable to bumps and knocks. The external mounts work well, but if they don't, you will probably have to send them to a specialist for service and you will wait months to get it back. BTDT.

If all you are looking for is function, you'll get more with a modern scope at the same price.

I have a couple mounted on vintage single shot rifles. I also slightly prefer the Lyman Super Targetspot to the Unertls, but they are pretty comparable.

Paul

You don't want one if you are going to carry the rifle in the field, especially anything over 6x. The glass is very good quality but all the wieght on the barrel is a bit cumbersome. No problems using them in Smallbore position shooting or from benchrest. Field of view seemed to be significantly narrower than a modern scope of the same power. I have a couple but for me they are for the target range. Having said all that, I do plan on mounting a 4x Fecker on my Sharps and 1881 Vetterli, mainly because they look like they belong on those old rifles. Damn things are expensive these days too.

Practically speaking, they really don't bring much to the table. I have a couple of them, and while they are large, clumsy and slow to use, the optical quality is very, very good. The "cool factor" is off the charts for those of us who grew up drooling over customized Winchester High Walls and Sharps and Martinis wearing those long, sexy tubes. I have an 1875 Sharps wearing an Unertl 10X and it is a pleasure to drag that thing out and set it on the bench and plink at the target 600 yds away while enjoying a good cigar and cup of coffee. Nope, they aren't practical at all, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy them.

Cool looks, good glass.

Just a very limited, narrow FOV.

OK for targets, IME, not so good for hunting and general use.

Had one, sold it yrs ago. Don’t want another one.

DF

I own/use three Unertl's, one Fecker, and one Litschert. The Unertls always had/have excellent lenses, and most models are adjustable to eliminate parallax. The mounts are very precise and with their micrometer scales are extremely repeatable- when I swap the scopes around on guns I simply make a note of the micrometer readings on the windage and elevation knobs so I can be assured of correctness when I mount the scope back onto the gun. (Never off by more than a MOA after doing so.) The mounts on all those old target scopes were the same way. Adjustments are repeatable up and down the scale- thread lash isn't an issue.

Those are the benefits. The cons are numerous too. The negatives are length and weight- but that can be ameliorated by selecting one of the later generation Unertls that were/are a lot shorter in length, probably not any longer than some "modern" target scopes. Another negative is the relatively narrow field of view. I never felt handicapped by that, but then again I never used one to track a moving target through the woods. However I do use the 12x Fecker on two smallbore target rifles that do double duty as squirrel rifles (Winchester 52 and Savage M19-33 NRA), and I still never feel handicapped by narrow field of view.

Another negative is their relative fragility in terms of knocking out/breaking the crosshairs. I keep a small stash of .0005" (half a thousandth) diameter tungsten wire in my shooting kit for that very reason. It's rather easy to re-string the crosshairs if you have a couple tools and good eyesight.

The other negatives are obviously the hideous prices they fetch these days, and the difficulty in getting them repaired. Also, they aren't fog proof.

That said, they are pretty rugged after all is said and done. After all, the Marines used them on their M1903A1 sniper rifles in WWII to good effect and no complaints. They just couldn't bring themselves to use the Army's M1903A4's with 2 1/2x Weavers and Lymans. The use of Unertls on Marine sniper rifles continued into Vietnam- Carlos Hathcock used one on his Model 70.

Would I want a Unertl over a Leupold 36x for a benchrest gun? Debatable. Both have strong points, and I guess I would want them both...

I've had a number of Unertls over many years, still have five. Only have one not currently mounted on a rifle. No optical expert here, but I'd call Unertls great scopes. Adjustments are repeatable and they have a unique feature for leveling a crosshair, far better and easier than more modern scopes. Unertls always seemed delicate to me and I always treated them as such, but that may be a misconception on my part.

Military use of Unertls is certainly a testimony as to ruggedness and reliabilty. Someone referred to the Model 70 .30-06 / Unertl used by Carlos Hathcock in Viet Nam. I haven't read that book in a long time and don't remember which model Unertl he had, but I'm pretty sure is was 8X, a magnification considered suitable for very long-range use years ago.

IIRC Hathcock used a Redfield 3-9 for some of his sniper work.

I have his autographed biography, White Feather. Will look it up.

DF

If he did use a Redfield, I'm guessing it was probably late in his sniper career. Such a scope would have probably been on a Remington 700 heavy-barreled gun rather than his Model 70. I'm not positive on this; going from memory only and that memory is sometimes quite faulty.

I think you’re right, later career, Remington with Redfield.

I’ve seen pictures of him with the M-70/Unertl rig.

DF

I have a dozen or so dedicated 'chuck rifles that my Father had put together in the 1950's, all of which are mounted with Lyman Super Target Spots or Unertls.

I think that they are nice, retro, scopes. Fun to shoot on the range, but rather impractical to carry afield unless you're driving to pdog shoot.

The book cover shows Carlos with the Redfield. That looks like a painting and I'm not sure if the artist was trying to paint a M-70 or a M-700. Or, if he knew the difference...

Signature below.

DF

My friend, Dr. Dirtfarmer from the shotgun forums, greetings. You are truly a gun person for all seasons. OK, about the Hathcock painting, it seems to be one of the Model 70s, possibly supplied by General George Van Orden, because of the target base evident on the barrel, probably not something we would see on the later Remington 700, but I am not an expert so I will wait for more comment. Hathcock was a regular visitor at the Virginia Gun Collectors shows at Hugo's Skating Rink in Bealeton, Virginia. My Viet Nam era experience was far more peaceful than his, so I did not initiate conversation with him. Today, I am happy with my early Van Orden Model 70 Marine Corps Sniper, which will never be fired in anger.

According to the book Marine Sniper 93 Confirmed kills, Carlos used a Unertl scope on a win M-70.

I am a long time Unertl fan. They are optically excellent, although eclipsed by modern high end glass. Their shortcomings are fragility, weight and the requirement that the front scope base is mounted on the barrel. I purchased my first Unertl, a used Ultra Varmint in 1967. In that era the Unertl was one of the few scopes that could be relied upon to provide DEFINITE, POSITIVE movement of the reticle when dialed. That attribute was of vital importance for long range shooting. Another target scope used in that application was the Bausch & Lomb target scope (6-24x). I've seen several of those fitted with custom mounts holding Unertl thimbles. The Lyman Super Targetspot was more for small bore applications dictated by its smaller tube diameter and much shorter eye relief. To me, a Unertl is far superior to the Lyman scope. Still have a Unertl on a 40X "varmint" rifle.

"Chuck" Mawhinney, used a Rem 700 with a Redfield scope. Chuck had 103 confirmed kills for the Marine Corp. in Vietnam.

Unertl's used to be fairly common when I was a kid hanging around the riflemen in my area..

I had one on a 40XB .244. Glass was excellent, the FOV too small to suit me. It went down the road.

DF