OK--the 1952 era M70 in .220 Swift project is coming along, over and above the crazy ammo pricing and shortages in some of the older once popular varmint loadings. .220 Swift and .257 Roberts at the head of that parade. But the older Weaver 1"3x9 with parallax adjusting 50 mm bell parallax goes from 50 to 1000-- all blued steel, no model number marking, but it has the "widefield" rear optic lens (like the Redfield "Widefield" and the windage and elevation have the radius rimmed in brass, with std threaded covers-- Here's my problem-- At 50 yards on std. sight-in targets, windage is 100"% "dead nuts on"--but elevation with Remington factory 50 grainers is not right-- 4 inches low, shot after shot, shooting off a sandbagged rest.and- the elevation adjustment is "maxed out"- no more movement available, except, down, which just increases the problem I am currently facing with this set-up-- any suggestions from the cognoscenti hereabouts?? Thanks-- RWTF

This is the German style mount?

I went through this with a Weatherby. Their rifle, their mount. Best they could come up with was a shim.

A Leupold mount fixed it.

Obviously that scope is waaaayyyyy too modern for a 1952 Model 70. You need a Weaver K8 or for the hard core a Unertl Varmint or Fecker "Woodchucker."

what rings and bases??

Might put front ring in rear if Weaver style

I thought you were discussing a rifle you intended to equip with a Buehler mount in the rifle section.

Apparently not. My error.

Shim in the bottom of the rear ring. Don't use any more ammo, just bore sight to get in the bullseye.

I think I have an older pre-74? Weaver-- and Weaver rings and 2-pc. bases. When I bought this .220Swift about 2 months ago, from Jay Schacter"s Vintage gunshop in GR- I asked the gunsmith (Kevin Duchene) about a used Unertl-- he had one, but told me that to mount on my M70 .220Swift, it would have to be "adapted to take the larger front bell, and moved forward. Yes, I thought about using a Buehler one pc. base and either Buehler or Leupold 1" rings-- but I got a good deal on the older Weaver, with the 2 pc. bases and rings-- Just for the "heck of it", I'll survey the ebay and other internet sales web sites, and see if I can find an identical set of Weaver bases and rings for sale, with pictures , for reference.

FWIW, I still have the Buehler one-piece mount base that I bought from a gentleman from TX-- with box and instructions, If I should ever decide I do not need it, I'll list it for sale for the same price I paid him for it--Not sure yet. Thanks for the input. RWTF

Suggest that before you shim that you centralise elevation adjustment ( wind all the way down and half way back).


Then set up a tall 50 yard target with an aiming mark at the top, and fire 1 or 3 rounds to measure total drop at 50 yards(1,800 inches).

Divide drop in inches by 1,800 and multiply by distance in inches between centres of your scope rings will give you a ball park figure for thickness of shim to insert between bottom of scope tube and the top of the lower rear scope ring.

I shall do this, Parabola-- I recall in my 80 year old brain a way to "re-adjust the elevation' and you explained that in easy terms for me to grasp. Do you mean a single shim, as I read Eightbore's sage reply, and at the bottom of the rear ring?-- that seems to make sense to me. What do you recommend I use for shim stock? My first thought might be a feeler gauge, marked in thousands of an inch, and flexible (assuming .010" as a "starting point"--but I can also gauge fine emery paper, and waterproof it, cut to bend to the OD of the scope tube..

I've probably said it before, but IMO it bears repeating: what a wealth of gun knowledge and willingness to share that info exists amongst the membership of this Forum.. RWTF

Sliced up Coke cans work pretty well.

coke can shim

I also suggest this very much. I’m certain you’re aware, but use care when you are bottoming out the erector (either up or down) during this adjustment. While “modern technique” in long range shooting is to “dial the turrets”, the older optics really weren’t designed to be cranked on repeatedly. Just treat it with the respect it deserves! I also suspect a base issue. It’s normal in long range shooting to instal what is referred to as a “20MOA base” (they come in 0, 10, 20, 30) to allow say a 200-300y zero in the bottom of the scopes adjustment range. This allows the ability to “dial” the turrets for using the reticle directly for aiming at distances past 1000+ yards dialing the elevation directly.

Anyhow my .02. You may also want to measure the rough height on each base using a micrometer or fine ruler. Another way to confirm the problem without firing a shot.

Make the shim out of any type of soft metal or plastic sheet that is easy to cut. PUT SHIM UNDER THE REAR OF THE BASE NOT IN THE SCOPE RING.

You also need to center the reticle in the scope before bore sighting. Do this by counting the # of clicks for the full travel of either elevation or windage & divide by 2 then add that # of clicks from the maxed out position for both windage & elevation. This should center the reticle.

Use the shim (s) to get the elevation adjusted as closely as possible & the windage as close as possible using the windage adjustment screws (assuming you are using a Buehler or Redfield style base) @ 50 yds. before using the internal adjustments of the scope.

Then do the final adjustments to get the desired zero @ 100 yds using the internal adjustments on the scope for windage & elevation.

I agree with "entropy" about being careful about bottoming out internal adjustments. Bottoming out the turret adjustments gives me the creeps. I'm always afraid something will stretch or break.

Shim is a piss poor 'solution'.

I still say just cut your losses and get a Leupold base and ring set.

It will fit, and won't need any stinking shims.

Of course it won't look like vintage Weaver (Thank God).

Whilst you can shim under the rear base rather than under the scope, my feeling is that it it best to get a very solid connection between the bases and the receiver ring.

They should be well snugged down and firmly loctited.

My reasoning is that it is much easier to monitor the tightness of your scope ring screws rather than that of the base screws which are inaccessible under the scope mounts.

Agreed, a shim is not the ideal or most elegant solution.

They are still a very useful way to get a rifle to deliver its group where you want it, particularly if you do not have a better solution to hand.

As Herbert McBride found, rusted bits of razor blade can even stop a Warner and Swasey scope wobbling around on a .303” Ross.

Right now, the reticule is in"dead center"-- I will CAREFULLY dial down to dead stop the elevation knob,counting carefully the clicks- then again Carefully raise the dial back UP 1/2 the number of clicks it took to bottom it out-- Interesting, as I though a shim would need to be placed in the bottom radius of the mounting ring, but the group seems to endorse placing it on the bottom of the mount, where it sits on the radius of the receiver--That might present a small problem, as I used a drop of Blue Loctite on the machine screws for each mounting ring--however, I applied the Loctite on the top of the screw head, and not into the D&T holes in the receiver of the rifle. Parabola-- a Warner and Swasey scope on a '.303 Ross rifle- sounds a bit like a Canadian set-up, am I correct? I know Warner & Swasey, as I know LeBlond, Cinncinati, Brown&Sharpe, Lufkin, Starret, Bridgeport, Atlas, and all the other great names in American Machine Shop operation- "back in the day"-- RWTF

You might want to take a peek over at Vintagescopes.com. I’m NOT affiliated with them, but have used them for several projects and to refurbish an old K6. They do good work and usually have a plethora of period correct rings and bases available. Good folks.

First World War sniper issue, although the Canadians also made use of and seemed to prefer armourer mounted Winchester A5 scopes.

His book “A Rifleman to War” has been reprinted and is well worth reading as in “In the Trenches 1914 to 1918” by Glenn R. Iriam.

Fox, I think the Weaver scope you have is a late enough version that is has as Lyman used to call it a "PermaCenter" reticle that is always centered in the visual field. What I'm talking about it to get the erector tube which carries the reticle & on which the adjustment dials work as close as possible to the center of the scope before bore sighting. This way, when bore sighted using shims for elevation & the windage adjustment screws in the mounts you should have close to maximum internal adjustment for windage & elevation left in the scope.

To achieve this you need to move the internal adjustment (can be either windage or elevation) all the way to the max adjustment stop for either up or right & then all the way in the max adjustment stop in the opposite direction while counting clicks & divide the result by two. If you then crank in this number of clicks for both windage & elevation from the max adjustment stop you then should have the erector tube & reticule centered in the scope.

Now you want to bore sight using shims for elevation & the windage adjustment screws in the mount to get it as close as possible before using the internal adjustments before final zero.

A couple of points:

Shims may be an inelegant way of achieving a zero but they are much cheaper than having a custom base made & done properly will be stable & cosmetically acceptable. Brownells used to (& may still do) sell blued, drilled & shaped shim packs for Buehler & Redfield type bases. I still have some & they are .010" thick. Loctite the shim to the receiver bridge & the base once you have determined the shim (s) needed for the correct zero & Loctite the base screws. Blue Loctite holds well & isn't all that difficult to disassemble if you use properly fitting screw drivers.

It is not uncommon to need to use a shim (s) to get a scope properly mounted & in my experience the problem is usually in the rifle as opposed to the base & pre 64 M70 rifles are not exempt from this . I have a custom .280 Rem built on a 1950 era M70 that required a .020" shim under the rear Leupold Dual Dovetail base to get the rifle zeroed w/o using up most of the internal adjustment for elevation in the scope.

I have found that it is the rifle 90% or ,ore of the time. I used to build a lot of custom rifles, and in the last decade built many .22 target rifles. Getting the scope on paper was the single biggest problem I always had. I use a one piece bench rest bench for testing, and simply hold on the bull, fire a round, recenter the gun on the bullet hole and while holding the gun down firmly, I move the reticle back to the bull, then shoot again. I seldom even fire a third shot. This is actually called the "Sighting in with 2 Shots" technique. I remember as a kid reading articles in Sports Afield and Outdoor Life on the subject.Before starting, I bore sight and adjust the reticle to the bull. If I can't get it adjusted, I don't even start shooting.

I have found over the years it is usually the gun barrell/reciever/sight base holes in misallignment. Occasionally it is a bad scope. It is occassional a damaged barrel, but I have only ever seen one bad base/ring. It was on a Ruger No.1 two or three years ago and I swapped 2 or 3 other bases with it and the one was always off. Incidentally, if you are using one of the pricier Leupolds. be careful about crakking them to the max or min. They work by friction and will stick either up or down and won't move at all, even when the knob is turning.

As to what to use for shims, Brownells used to sell them by the package. They came in 0.50 and 0.866 hole spacing (the standard) and a few thickness. They were made of blued spring steel and matched a standard scope base. I could never even tell they were in place. I suppose they may still sell them. I bought a supply 30 years ago and still using them.

If windage is the problem (which is about half the time something's wrong) then you will need to go to a Leupold style ring/base with windage adjustment. They are heavier and bulkier, but the easiest to adjust.

Weaver Bases

54 & EARLY MOD. 70 W/SERIAL NO.
BELOW #66 350



48
(48048)

46
(48046)

Thanks Mr. Skeetx- no ils. of these bases--but the M54 and the early M70 rifles did not have the rear receiver ring drilled and tapped for a scope mount- why that is, or was, I do not know. Perhaps the answer is hidden in my copy of the Roger Rule "Bible" on the "Rifleman's Rifle"". RWTF

Simple way to center the reticle/crosshairs is to place the objective end of the scope against a mirror. Look into the scope and dial the windage and elevation until there is only one set of crosshairs.

Leupold windage adjustable mounts will fix a lot of problems. Leupold used to make a mount that did windage and elevation, I don't have the name handy right now.

Here's an old Balvar 8 that has no windage or elevation adjustments. I mounted it in a Leupold windage adjustable mount and shim for elevation, this one is very close so only used a piece of greased paper on the rear ring. It is accurate enough for me to make it to the final round of an egg shoot. I wanted to see if 50 yr old scope could still be competitive. We stopped on the way home from the competition to take a coyote with our comp. rifles.



If you look closely, you can see the shim paper under the scope in the rear ring.

Takes good close in vision, but I can just see it- but if you had not mentioned it, I would have not noticed- great shot with the deceased coyote
and it is always rewarding to hear from a brother varmint hunter-- range? bullet type and grain wt. cal and make of your rifle.. This past late Winter here in MI was a fairly good one for both fox and coyotes- I use the Sako .243Win with Leupold 4x12 Vari-X-111 and we have a game caller with the dying rabbit squeals- but both critters are smart--a real challenge indeed. RWTF

Savage Model 11, SSS Custom Comp. Trigger, XLR adjustable cheek piece, surprisingly a factory Tupperware stock hogged out for lots of barrel clearance and the action bedded. 22-250, 52gr Speer HP Varmint bullet. Foxpro CS-24 with bird sound nailed it at 20 yards in thick sage. Being a FFP the Balvar crosshair are quite fine at 2.5x but it was late afternoon and the light was good, it wouldn't be my ideal scope for low light or forest work. My Model 70 222 Rem had a Meopta 1.5-6x40mm with a German#1 for early mornings and in the woods. I have a couple other rifles with 1.5-6x40/42mm of various makes with illuminated dots and heavy duplexes that I like also..

Model 70 222 Rem with Meopta. I put it in a more modern stock that I could cut the LOP with out ruining the original wood stock.


with both stocks.


I sold it to another coyoter hunter for his son so he could use the second stock as he grew it went with a B&L 4200 1.5-6x40mm and B&L4200 2,5-10x40mm

You are indeed, a gent I'd like to shoot/hunt varmints with anytime. So-in'law and yours truly are thinking about a August trip to SD for praitie dawgs-- but gasoline costs, motels ad meals, and ammo costs are of some concern to us. Would sure like to try it if possible. RWTF

There are some very nice state campgrounds in SD. We used to stay in one East of Winner right on the Missouri River. I've often thought about taking my boat and coyote hunt the shore of the Missouri. My van is set up with a bunk, solar power and a built in furnace so I can camp anywhere and not even have to drive from the motel to hunt, I stay at boat ramps, BLM, National Forest camp grounds. Where ever. I even have it set up for a second bunk and we bring a cook tent then.

NE MT for pheasant


Just to keep this DG oriented. Success there.

Nice pair of roosters, man's best friend, fine double- the stuff "dreams are made of" I've hunting or pheasant and ducks along the Big Horn River in past Octobers- a "cast and blast" float trip from the Yellowtail dam downstream-flew into Billings and had a week of great fly fishing and wing shooting. NE MT is indeed, a great place to hunt native birds, nothing against the expensive lodges in lower SD-- but NE Montana would be great choice yet today. And indeed, we are most fortunate that Dave Weber has set up this forum so that doublegun shooters and hunters can also discuss their other "passions" in the gun and shooting world--my passion has always been pre-WW2 Winchesters--so be it. RWTF