Home Forums Lever Action Central Lever Actions - General Period correct scope mount 88 winchester

Hey guys, I have finally found a period correct scope to put on my mid 60's winchester 88. I'd like to be period correct with the scope mounting system too. Suggestions needed.

The rifle:









The "new" scope.

Dave,
It looks like a correct Weaver base. How 'bout a set of medium weaver "large knob" rings? I've got a set, will send pic.
Thanks,
Scott

I probably have a set of rings like that, I just wasn't sure if maybe a set of "strap style" or? Thanks for the input, I think i know what you are talking about.

I have a set of Redfield rings on a one piece Redfield base on my post '64 Model 88 Winchester 308. That's plenty correct enough for me. The rig looks great and shoots just fine.

got any pictures?

Didn't know it was so hard to find weaver rings and bases?
Probably a Redfield,Bushnell, lyman or Weaver scope would be more "appropriate" than the leupold. Don't remember much about those leupolds until the later 70's.

You might be right, JB said this was a 60's erra loopy, I think I'll get the serial # & see if leupold can tell me when it was made, never the less I think it needs to go on the 88. My 88 is a post 64 and would have still been a relatively new when this scope came out even if it was a 70's scope. It's just old enough to look the part in my mind I guess.

Well I got digging through my stuff and found a set of weaver rings I kind of like which are on an old K2.5 right now.

What do you think? maybe just get some new screws for these and clamp em onto the weaver base I have on the rifle already?

Check the paralax in that thing, they were notorious for going gaga.

The old weaver? well I don't plan on using that one. Where do you figure the parallax should be stabil for the little fixed 2.5X?

100 yds?

I had considered sending it in to el passo for refurb and maybe mounting it on "the right something" what ever that something might be.

What do you think of the rings though?

If I remember right they set the parallax on that 2.5 and the K4 at 100 yds.
Those rings will work good if the screw holes aren't stripped out to terribly.

Threads look clean and sharp. Just missing a screw for each ring & the screw heads are bubba'd in the screws that are there.

The big side knobs are nice though.

A Redfield base and the single screw per side square edged Redfield rings would be spot on. Much cleaner looking than Weavers although not as rugged,

Those mounts look nice Dave . The only reference I have are the tip - away mounts that Dad put on his 88 . hard to find a good pic and the rifle isn't handy right now , I'll take a better look this weekend.
It had an old weaver like yours that was upgraded at some point in time.

This was on the Leupold site, it'll tell you if manufactured after 74. If its not on there you can guesstimate it was made earlier.

Every Leupold scope produced since 1974 will have a letter included in the serial number acting as a date-code. Scopes using a letter as a prefix (the beginning of the serial number) were produced between 1974 and 1992. Scopes using a letter as a suffix (the end of the serial number) have been produced after 1992. On the chart below, you will notice the letters �I,� �O,� and �Q� have been omitted as they are easily mistaken for �1,� �0,� and �0� respectively.

Prefix: Suffix:
E = 1974 A = 1993
F = 1975 B = 1994
G = 1976 C = 1995
H = 1977 D = 1996
J = 1978 E = 1997
K =1979 F = 1998
L = 1980 G = 1999
M = 1981 H = 2000
N = 1982 J = 2001
P = 1983 K = 2002
R = 1984 L = 2003
S = 1985 M = 2004
T = 1986 N = 2005
U = 1987 P = 2006
V = 1988 R = 2007
W = 1989
X = 1990
Y = 1991
Z = 1992

I bought my first centerfire in the mid/late 60's. It was a Rem 700 ADL, Redfield mounts, and a K4 Weaver.

Redfield mounts were the state of the art at my gunshop back then. Weaver K4 scopes were the standard for the reasonable scope line.

My NIB rifle was $102, I couldn't afford the extra $13 for a BDL. With the $20 for the mounts and the price of the K4, I was out the door for $156.

Period correct on a modern firearm??, that isn't even a pre 64..Any of todays scopes are period correct for your gun..I suppose if you wanted to get really technical you could go with a 2x7x33 Leupold or a 3X, 4X Leupold or even a 3x9, any varix 11 will work. Any K series Weaver.

Period correctness only applies to collector guns IMO, probably inferred by most as pre 1964..am I wrong on this?

4x Redfield

2.5-8 Baush and Lomb Balvar in 2.5-8 internal adjustments

Yes, you are wrong.

But thanks for the insult anyways Ray.

WTF is "modern" then?

Anything that uses smokeless powder?

Anything that uses a case?

Anything classified as "non repeater"

Where do you draw the line? If a guy has a nice pushfeed XTR M70 and he wants to rig it with something other than a set of talley's & a VX7 because he wants the look and performance it would have when his dad or uncle hunted with it I'm not going to have a problem with that.


Just looking for a little help on what rings would have been found on a hardware store shelf in 1965, that's all Ray.

It's a neat old rifle built before I was born and I'm 40, so it's not exactly a tupperware stocked rem 710 or an AR-15. It is what it is, a mid 60's average Joe deer rifle and I just want it to look like it would have if it were scoped up 45 years ago.

I have a scope that I like for it now, an early mid 60's Leupold vari x II 3-9X that I got from JB. And now I just want the base & rings to "fit in".

I don't know the answer and that is why I asked if I was wrong. Your sarcastic answer did nothing to clear things up btw..

I am simply stating that the only time I have seen the phrase "Period scope" used in my lifetime of hunting and collecting guns is if the gun was a collector and the scope,mounts being of the same time period as the gun would then add to the guns value, otherwise it has no bearing that I know of..

I ment no insult what so ever and if you take it as such then I apoligize to you.

Dave bear in mind there are a few of us around that remember when the pre 64 winchesters were just ordinary winchesters. It's what was on the shelf.
So when we see something that we well remember as being all there was referred to as "period correct" it may set us back just a moment...
Sorta like when the still wet behind the ears pup optometrist says to you , well you've gotten to the age when we need to discuss the B word... No he wasn't askin me to give him a bottle.....

Well I'm a classic auto enthusiast and I guess my idea of "period correct" applies to the right look, the right wheels & tires, the right paint for a certain build whether it's an early 70's muscle car, a late mid 60's build, an early mid 60's... a 50's nose high gasser etc. And for this rifle I simply had the same path of thought.

I had no idea that the term period correct was reserved for or pertained specifically to firearms of collectable status.

With "period correct" in my post title I certainly wasn't implying that I had some sort of wonderful collector gun here.

I just have a hunting rifle that I do hunt with and I want it to wear 45 year old optics, rings & bases. That's all.

Sorry I got hot headed, I may have incorectly read/interpreted things as a relatively condescending reply and that set me off a bit.


My stupid Millet rings have got to go and I'm just looking for ideas on what mounts to shop for on ebay or on other sites that might be peddling trinkets like that.

These are as period correct as any you'll find. The "big knob" Weaver's are what was on my 1955 vintage 336 SC when I got it. It had an early to mid-60's Weaver 3X on it so figure it was scoped about the same time as your rifle was made.

The only problem with the ones I show on that K2.5 weaver is that they only open far enough to slide on the 1" tube.

Good for straight tube scopes only. I was going to use these until I realized they wouldn't open so I could put them on the old Leupold I've got. The need to slide on from the end, know what I mean?

Ray, sorry i was a dick.

I took offense & shouldn't have

Dave, my M88 is a 63 vintage and I have Redfield rings and one piece base from the mid-1990's on mine and a Leupold 3-9x40 from the 100 year tin box (think it is a VX-II derivative). The Redfield base looks vintage to the gun, but the Redfield rings from the 1960's used four screws instead of two screws like the mid-90's style. You might find some older Redfield rings in a gunshop somewhere on the shelves or on one of the auction websites. Good luck in your project, I think the M88 will look cool decked out in vintage optics.



Ps. At one time Redfield made a set of rings that had some light engraving on them and the screw came up from the bottom, it was blind on the top side. I know they are older than the 1990's but don't know if they go back into the 1960's. I think I still have a used pair somewhere out in the shed if you think they might work for you.

Thats cool odessa. We put one of those 100 yr tin box leupolds on my boy's M70, I believe they are a VXII

Dave,Just for your info the Weaver refurb facility in El Paso closed a couple of years ago.The guy finally retired.He started that business after Weaver closed in El Paso.He was the guy who did refurbs for Weaver.I managed to squeak one in right before he closed.
Incidentally the term "period correct" can apply to anything you wish it to.

Stan in SC

Dang Stan, I didn't know they closed.

Thanks though.

Supposedly these folks took over repairing old Weavers from Frank Ruiz in El Paso. They bought all of his repair parts inventory.

http://www.ironsightinc.com/

Here's the thread where I found this: https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth..._Maintenance_of_El_Paso_Weav#Post4405884

Also, if I understand you correctly the old rings just won't slip over the scope tube from the side. That was common on Weaver rings up until a while ago. Wrap a narrow piece of paper just a tad wider than the ring around the scope tube to protect it, notebook paper works okay, and you can pop those rings over the tube. You should be able to do it without the paper, obviously, but that could scratch it. You can even double the paper for a little extra protection.

Don't know when they changed the rings but do know what you mean. The Weavers I've bought in the last couple of years will easily slide right over a 1" tube from the side with no problem.

Hmmm, seriously?

They have that much spring and memory to them?

That's interesting. I might take a look at that today but my initial thoughts were that if you tried to open the clamp style ring it would just bend open & stretch/distort the ring's metal?

I'll look at that today though. If that works then I'm done with my search.

Don't want to mess up your scope so if the rings are really, really tight then I wouldn't force it. You should only have to apply maybe 10 pounds of pressure on the ring to get it to pop over the tube.

One other thought and I apologize if this is so obvious as to sound stupid. But the rings do come apart. When you take the two screws out that fasten the upper ring to the base half the upper ring slides sideways out of that slot in the lower half on the other side.

You just need to pop the upper half over the scope. Then you join it back to the lower half by sliding it's hook back into that groove opposite the two screw holes. It won't pop back into that groove from over the top, you have to move one half forward and one half back and then slide it in from the front or back.

Only reason I thought of this is your comment about them having that much memory. If you try to pry the ring up over the scope without separating the upper and lower half then, yes - that's going to ruin the rings.

Again, don't mean to make such a "duh" comment but just trying to cover all possible situations.

I know the kind you are talking about Jim but these ones I have are a little dirrerent. They don't have the upper ring portion that hooks the ring base on one side and has the screws on the other side. They are aluminum and I messed around with trying to pop them on over the side of the old weaver 1" scope tube and they egg shape, they simply bend. I'm pretty certain these rings are ment to slide on really simple 1" scopes with no bell shaped ends.

I visited a friend of mine at a local hardware store this morning and we got talking about this. He said he has some inventory in the back of the store that they purchased from an old area sporting store that went out of business 10 years ago or so. He went in back and came out with a weaver swing away or "tip off" style set of rings & 1 piece base. Those rings had the hook & screw style ring caps.

The stuff was new old stock. I'm thinking about giving them a try, although tip offs wouldn't be my first choice.

10 bucks for the rings & base.

Can't beat the price but I'm not sure if I want them.

I experimented on the old weaver scope so I didn't scratch the leupold which is the scope I will be mounting.

I didn't get a chance to look closer at the tip away rings on Dads 88 , but it looks like there is no a 1 pc base , just the rings .
Out of fear of tipping away too often and loosening them up , I've only tried the tip away a few times . The rear sight flips up and I get the same poi at 100 yards , scope latches back down very secure and no deviation on the target. I guess that they were designed not only to flip the scope away if the lenses got covered in rain or snow , but also for when the older scopes went bad.
And if it don't look just right on that '56 model I don't care because that is the way it has been set up for a long time and that's close enough for me

That's cool Phil.

That may be the way I go, my buddy has a NIB setup like that for mine. Hinge is a bit different but otherwise it looks the same.

Having owned the same 88 since 64,I can say that the Weaver V-7 was a popular scope back then. There was a special run that was a cheaper verison with plastic turret knob covers vs the better one with steel covers.I have one of each There was also a Redfield tip off mount called a "Quick Switch", however, the base itself was too thick to effectively see the irons ,so I machined a groove in them to facilitate seeing them.These were a two piece mount.The ring base and mount were integral. The gun came back to zero very well after flipping the scope off to the side and flipping back. ( I still have those mounts.)

At the time, Bushnell offered a 3x9 " Banner " scope for $19 that had no self centering reticle and one had to at least shim it to get the reticle sort of aligned height wise. Mine always in the upper right quadrant.I had one on the 88 prior to the V-7. Leupolds were not very common then and were usually seen more on high end guns as were Bheulers.

At the time, the gun cost $136 and the Weaver scope was $46

Dave- I wouldn't worry about the Weaver pivot mounts. They are rock solid. I've used them for years on a Rem. 742, a Marlin 336, and a couple of Savage 99's.

I've never had one fail to return to zero, and have never inadvertently bumped one out of position while carrying in the woods.

In all fairness, I can only remember a couple of occasions when I had to use the pivot feature (fogged lenses), but didn't see anything to shoot either time, so there's really not much utility for it with a quality scope.

What they are great for, however, is mounting a scope low to the gun. I haven't seen any other mounting system that can get a scope lower.

Oh yeah they get that scope low, that's for sure.

I'll maybe do that today. If I do I'll post pics.

These have got the pointed allen head set screws for the pivot.

I doubt I'd ever use the pivot so I'd probably just snug those screws pretty good.

Leupold Detacho Mounts, 2-pieces bases and rings, would be a nice match to the old Leupold 3-9x.

Jeff

Well here we have it. I had my doubts on the weaver pivot mounts but it's on there and it really does feel stout.







It's too windy to shoot today but we are planning a shooting day next weekend so I'll get it lined in then.

I like it, that's a fine looking rig (of course Model 88's just look "streamlined" to me anyway).

Looks good Dave

Thanks Phil and Odessa.

That's a fine looking rig you got there Dave. Do the crosshairs line up on what you're looking at when you shoulder the rifle? It looks like there's enough drop in that stock that the low mounts ought to really help out with "point-ability".

If they don't they aughta
We''ll work on seein if he can scale down the size of that telescope later down the road

Does look good Dave , the rear sight looks like mine , can you see and use it with the scope tipped away ?

Scope is a bit much eh?

I think I could use the weaver base groove & the front sight to shoot if I wanted lol! but if I flip up the rear sight yeah I can see it.

You want ugly (and strong), go Weaver, you want class with built in base windage, find a Redfield turn in base and equip it with the with the old square cornered 1" rings.
Buy a Leupold M8 2.5, 3, 4 or 6X (correct period) and the iron sights will just be decorative.
88s can be accurized quite well but they'll never be a pre mil 99R or a SAKO Finnwolf.

My 88 is post 64, one piece Redfield base with low Redfield rings, front ring is extended (the screws are on the bottom of the ring) Scope is Leupold 3-9X Compact.
Don't know how period it is but I've had this set up a long time.

nice!

That looks nice and I gotta admire anyone who can deal with those
GD$Y*(!# Redfield rings with the screws on the bottom.

Mounting systems that I remember from time period:

Leupold M3 mount and rings.

Conetrol.

Buehler.

Redfield.

Weaver.

My first deer rifle was a pre '64 M/88 in .308 it had a Weaver K2.5 60B scope with post and crosshair reticle in a Weaver pivot mount. I always liked that set up, used it to kill my first and biggest deer. Always regret having sold it.

I shot the rifle with the "new scope" last Saturday. I only had a handful of ammo so I didn't shoot a bunch. Just enough to verify zero @100. Didn't get a chance to shoot a group @100. Maybe next weekend.

it shoots just fine with the new old glass.



150 gr rem core lokt

100 yds.

Those Weaver rings are the same as the ones on both of my 88s Dave. They look good to me.
Jerry

Not a thing wrong with "new/old" glass, all my rifles wear "new/old" scopes and all shoot just fine.