doublegunshop.com - home

I would leave the blueing as is, I don't like new bluing on old guns, except in special cases (rust etc). The present scope is fine - if a bit on the large side -, I would live it as is. A possible second scope could be a little Leupold 1-4x or similar, maybe a 2-8x32, but I would never put an even bigger scope on such a handy BF. But this is only me, we all have different ideas of course.
Cheers,
Jani

Jani,
I would agree about the bluing if the gun was an unmolested historical piece. It is post war, has had 2 scopes mounted ( so it has already been blued at least once). The owner seems to intend to use it regularly, so bluing it won't detract from any "collector value". "Collectors" will turn up their noses at it if it is blued and will turn up their noses, if it is not blued. Since it doesn't seem to be for sale, it wouldn't make much difference to anyone except the owner.
Mike

It will certainly look nicer re-rust blued, and protect the metal. Please yourself! Do you intend/need to remove and replace the scope often? If not, you could leave the scope as is...I certainly respect that model Zeiss. Good find!
And let us know how it groups as we don't get report on those often.

Mike,
My main concern is that many of the reblued barrels I saw were done badly, with improper polish, faint markings, etc. I have nothing against properly done reblued barrels, I just personally prefer evenly worn original blue over a reblue.
Cheers,
Jani

Jani all of the work will done by a master gunsmith in Germany. I get the impression the prices are cheaper and the work is better over there but I may be wrong.

Jani,
I wholeheartedly agree with that. That is precisely why I put the caveat " properly hand polished" in. If you buy a drilling with a scope in clawmounts with soldered in bases; the barrels have been reblued, and you can't tell it. For a while some were glued(2 component glue)precisely to avoid rebluing. I understand they sometimes came loose, later.
Mike