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.....