So I'm trying to mount a 2.5x8 Leupold on my nephus pre 64 7x57 build...we wanted to use Buhler 2 piece bases...he had found some like new on eBay...problem with this setup is there in not enough scope body to scoot the scope back where it needs to be...did Buhler make a setback front base...or do we need a dif scope....he really wants the one he has as its gloss and so are the Buhlers...and they are sweet looking rings...

Sorry, not going to happen. The 2.5-8 only has a 5.1" tube mounting length. Too short for my needs when it comes to the pre 64. A 3-9x40 will be more forgiving to mount on that rifle, if you plan on using those mounts. There are guys here that have the 2.5-8 mounted on their pre 64's, but theres no fore to aft adjustment. Again, not suitable. As the eye relief will not be right 9 times out of 10.

Yea we really want to use the buhlers...so the scope may need to go...was hoping buhler made a set back but oh well...back to my origonal recommendation would be a 1.5x5. But him being young he still thinks he needs higher power...
Wonder if tally makes something? I doubt it tho...
My FW has a 2x7 on it with a weaver base that has 2 slots...it works perfectly only that set up is not worthy of this build...it's kinda homley looking..

Talley makes an extended front lightweight, that may work. It would be worth looking at. The lightweights dont look quite at home as a nice set of steel bases and rings do though. The problem with just about all those mounts is the spacing is too much for the short tubed leupold. A 1 piece base would work, but not look as good or be quite as strong.

I have a one piece Buhler that I would give you if you think it would work, should shorten the distance between the rings

My .243 Fwt with a Leupold 2.5-8 in Buhler 2 pc. As BSA said no fore and aft leeway however it does work for me.

That looks good tmitch. I wonder why the op can't mount his in those mounts? I'm assuming he has the same thing...

I always go the easy way and just use a 3-9x40 with Leupold DD's..

Here's my $475.00 fwt..

I'm assuming his nephew is smaller statured and needs the scope further back. From the looks of it Leupold DD's would have the same issue with the chosen scope unless an extension ring is used. The one piece Buhler base is even worse, the ones I've seen for the M70 have the front ring mounted ahead of both mounting holes rather than between like the 2 piece.
As the OP said, the 2.5-8 may need to go in order to use the desired mount.

I went through this with a Dakota Rigby length action and Talley rings & bases. I had to find a scope with 6"+ of tube length to fit between the rings.

Thanks for the offer..that's nice of you...but..I also have a one piece on hand and they are worse yet the mount hole for the ring is ahead of the 2 screw...it would take a pretty long scope to use one of those...

If you had a redfield jr 1 piece, it would work. The space between the rings is pretty short. Like i said earlier, though, that mounting system isn't quite as strong because it only uses 3 screws to hold the base and the windage screws have been known to bend and break.

I may have a redfield base...I will have to dig around and see

The nephwe is a grown man actually and neither him or I can get a good sight picture without crawling fowarad on the stock...

I thought you were stuck on Buehlers. Leupold makes or used to make Reversible Front, Reversible Rear, or Reversible Front and Rear two piece bases for Win 70's. Figure out which you need to get the proper eye relief; shop around and if you have to buy two sets to make one you will still have a standard set left over.

We are really wanting to use the Buhlers as they look really nice and are very good quality...
The combo just may not work out...this is a nice rifle and will become a family heirloom for him...so how it looks and fits is of the utmost importance...the rifle will be stocked from a piece of walnut off our family farm where my mother grew up...his grandmother...
So ideally we want to use the 2 piece Buhlers ...
Wonder if I cut a one piece to use as a front and install it in reverse? Got a go see...

So the 2 piece base fits fine in reverse and will give plenty of room to move the scope back...just need to put a height gauge on it and see if there heights match...looks like to the naked eye they may be different...

If you're talking about front and rear base interchange, then yes there is a significant height difference

I set it all up on my surface plate to measure height...it's off by around 35 tho...basicly higher in the back...after further investigation I found that setting it up with a mandrel through the bore on v blocks the manderal seems to be running high also about 15 tho which is puzzling but subtract from 35 for 20 tho height difference...
The measurements are being taken from an action that has been polished and blued so I might have to tear down one that I'm building or maybe just bed those bases with acragalss 20 tho really isn't that bad

What a clean look and the scope looks great on there....that's y we want to go this way..

Any trouble with the bolt handle rubbing the scope..

sucess!... After machining down the underside of the rear base I was able to get the heights to match...the front ring was hitting the action where it goes through the mounting hole...I had to mill off a little of that...now the limiting factor is the scope bell hitting the front base...still need a little more so I relieved it a little with a ball end mill..wala perfict....

And that's why I use Leupold DD's... They are perfect to begin with. No monkey fu cking around with them..

My nephus came by tonight and is very pleased with the results..it fits him perfectly ...the result was and is not as eye pleasing as the origonal front base but it makes up for it with the cool looking rings...he is anxious to hunt with it...the rifle is far from done...we have it in a relatively nice handmade stock..but the mission was always use a blank from our tree..
I will probably just cold blue it for this season as he needs a rifle to hunt with..