Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Savage 23AA scope mount options

The Redfield 3/4" 4x are great scopes I've had them on my Winchester M/61 and M/63, that said you won't find any within your $100.00 budget. I have also had Weaver J4's that would be more period correct on your Savage 23AA, they can be had at a price that's within your budget.

Here is my sons 23aa with a weaver. 3-9 with ao. This rifle came from the factory drilled for a side mount weaver 29s. Was able to fit the weaver side mount base with a little machining to match the taper of the reciever the factory holes lined right up. You could probably do the same with shims? Might be another option if the rifle is factory drilled. You will need taller rings.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/galleries/13168836#Post13168836

JoeMartin - that is a good looking setup for sure!

But now that I've thought my way into this a little further, there are some nice quality scope options based on 1" tubes, and some decent scopes from the 50's and up (or at least they started their run in the 50's) that will give good optics and won't look wrong, just not exactly from the same decade as my rifle. Basically, as if someone decide to scope it a long time ago, just not from Day 1.


Does anyone have any experience with the Unertl Hawk 4X's?
Or can explain the difference in optical quality between the Weaver K's and the K-1's?

Kinda looking at both of them, possibly Redfield as well.


Thanks again!

That's what I was talking about a month ago on page 1. Those Redfields fetch $3-400 these days, the Gru-Bee Wolf Pup clone (which is actually a better scope optically and finish-wise than the Redfield IMO) sells for $100+change.

Unertl Hawk 4x? Great scope, all steel, nice optics, rugged, state of the art 50-60 years ago, on par with average quality scopes of today. I've used three of them in my life, no complaints at all. You likely won't find one for $100 though- they're priced like modern Weavers are currently. I have one that could stand a re-blue, and is missing the spring that fits under the windage/elevation element- an easy fixerupper. I'd let it go for $50. (I bought it on a whim with the intent of fixingupping but never got around to it.)

I thought you ,ight have, I was just too lazy to check my research. I think I have one of those Redfields banging around in a box somewhere. It was supposed to have gone on a Marlin 39 until some thief thought he needed the rifle more than I. I do hate crooks!

For anyone who was interested, here is a quick update while I'm down with a cold.

I have a pretty good idea how I'm going to approach this, basically a "quarter rib" style mount between the rear sight dovetail and the peep sight holes.
I picked up a good piece of brass bar stock for the base, and some of the old Tasco blue steel rings that are windage adjustable only. Not quite the Leupold-Redfield turn in style but visually similar.
I still don't know when ill get a chance to do any machining, but I have a feeling that it will be a little here and there.
I have a simple approach for forming the tapered decreasing radius of the "action" without fabricating a custom cutting tool as well.
I probably will have to make up something custom to machine the pockets for the mounting studs though.

So, at least some progress....

Re-thinking this a bit. A solution that would appeal to someone with a bigger budget to play with would be to mount an old Fecker or Unertl Small Game scope- a 3/4" straight tube "target style" scope of either 4x or 6x, short in nature, with target-style external adjustment mounts. Certainly the best small scope optics of the period encompassing the 30's-40's. Parallax either set for .22 rimfire distances or adjustable down to that depending on the specific model. They were the go-to scopes employed by discerning shooters, but nowadays they aren't cheap. Figure $500+, which is why I mentioned needing a bigger budget.

To my knowledge, factory .22's weren't d/t'ed to mount those scopes (except of course top tier target rifles). But in my opinion drilling and tapping for a pair of Unertl or Fecker scope blocks (essentially identical) on a rifle from the 30's wouldn't detract from its desirability- who could prove it wasn't done by the first owner when the gun was new? On top of that one of those scopes setting on the rifle only adds to its re-sale value, except maybe to a wild eyed collector of pristine perfect factory original condition rifles only.

The rear sight holes could be employed to mount a rear block (with some mods to get around the odd screw hole sizes) leaving one to merely d/t two small holes farther forward.

To expand on Gary's comments. The Lyman 48Y was made to fit the top screw holes on the 23AA and it also functions as a rear scope block. You could go that route if you wanted to spend the cash (probably about 200-bucks) and take the time to find one.

Just a couple notes that I don't think were mentioned already. The early 23-AA's were drilled & tapped for the No 10 receiver sight and require two different size screws which are hard to find, later ones for the No 15 sight had a narrower spacing and used two screws the same size that was in between the ones used for the No 10, but was a standard gun screw size.

All Lyman 48's I have seen are made to mount on the earlier hole pattern for the No 10. Correct screws for these are even harder to find, front is a #10 (corrected, had #12) and rear a #5 but both have the same size head.

There were scope blocks made by some company to match the the hole pattern for the No 10 receiver sight, they are not very common but are easy to identify since the holes are two different sizes. The ones I have also require screws with the same head size.

I also have been looking at tying front target sight blocks to mount scopes using the sight dovetails, I have found these in different heights and standard scope mounts seem to fit on most. These are made to drive into a 3/8" dovetail. I have shorter ones than pictured here, with this one the rear block might have to be shimmed up for use with a internally adjusted scope, it probably would be close enough for an externally adjusted scope.



Note that one of these is made to take two different scope mounts.

I have a couple of those blocks that fit into 3/8" dovetails. They were made for use on Winchester M54's and and early M70's when utilizing the factory holes on the receiver ring and not wanting to drill holes in the barrel for the front block. Nothing saying they can't be used on other rifles like Gene pointed out. They work a treat on my Winchester bolt guns. I assume that was Winchester's plan all along since they only drilled a set of target block holes on the receiver ring and nowhere else on the guns. Be aware though that the tops of those dovetailed blocks are of a height to match the height of the receiver block- keeping them in the same plane, taking into account the taper of those barrels.

Thanks everyone!

I'd love to keep it simple and mount a 30's scope in blocks, but my eyes and budget (and the fact that I miss working with my hands) mean a newer more common scope. "Kinda early" 1" tube stuff. So... a bridge mount of some sort. One advantage is mounting flexibility - I can position the ring mounting points anywhere I want.

Gene - I believe the #10 screw threads are 10-36 & 5-48? Can you (or anyone else) confirm?

And if anyone out there can post or forward me any pics of cosmetically appealing quarter ribs or bridge mounts id like to see them.
Otherwise ill just let form follow function.

Thanks again
I'm already having fun and I haven't started making chips yet...!

You are correct, they are not #12's like I originally had posted above.

Thanks Gene. Ill take a look at Brownells, Grainger, etc to see what I can find for screws. Hopefully I can find some blued ones. If not black will do.

I think that Gene has found that the 10-36 is the same as used for the Winchester lever front tang sight screw. The 5-48 could be opened to 6-48. With a bridge mount do you really need two screws in the rear?