Turn in mount base query again (Ron Wharton)

[JMH123]

Ok chaps, I’m continuing the journey with the mounts and mount bases as part of the refurb on my Ron Wharton. It was fitted with Redfield rings, (30mm, which I’m changing to 1’’), but after trying various options, Redfield turn in front rings are relatively loose to turn in. Leupold are quite a bit tighter and so it may be better to fit suitable Leupold rings to these bases (unless something else is even better).

What I don’t yet know is what make the actual bases (pictured) are, which would be really helpful to know. The only markings are ‘W70’ underneath the front mount. I can’t find any Redfield bases that look like this (although Ron did use Redfield mounts). I don’t think they will be completely bespoke either.

Any thoughts on brand?

I think the front rings should be at least a firm turn in with finger pressure?

Thanks!

 

[Andy RV]

No idea on the make sorry, I wouldn’t be surprised if some gun makers took standard bases and profiled the radius’ to create a more bespoke and attractive solution, without having to start from scratch.

I recall having to use the handle of a small ball prin hammer acting as a short lever to turn a Leupold ring into its base, I certainly wouldn’t have been able to do it by just finger pressure alone.

 

[Klenchblaize]

Spud profile is your friend or enemy.

K

 

[enfieldspares]

Ah! To those reading this that may not know. Now the turning in should initially be done with a one inch broom stale mounted in your rings as if it were the actual telescopic sight! Sights are for looking through not for use as pry bars. After a dozen or so turnings ins (as it were) using a little bit of lubricant on the two lugs the thing can then have the broom stale replaced with your chosen telescopic sight.

The "history" of the Leupold is, apparently, that in WWI the US Army were impressed with German mounts and held a competition in the USA for American makers to come up with something that the US Army could use. Well that's the story! Redfield won. In truth they are a McGyvered answer and not a very good one at that.

Yet I also have them on my .30/06 so they do work but there are better quick detachable mounts! So what use are they? Well really I suppose when travelling overseas or elsewhere when you'd prefer that you valuable telescopic sight to travel in your luggage not on the rifle. They do not "return to zero" when dismounted and remounted with the same exactness as do German quick detachable Suhler type claw mounts.

But within their limitations they do work. But the best return to zero quick detachable mounts I have ever had on a sporting rifle that I have owned are Holland and Holland's sidemounts. Which are even better that Suhler type mounts IMHO as they give a clear view underneath.

And to the original question? Redfield mounts should have on the side of the front mount an R in a circle.

 

[JMH123]

Ah! To those reading this that may not know. Now the turning in should initially be done with a one inch broom stale mounted in your rings as if it were the actual telescopic sight! Sights are for looking through not for use as pry bars. After a dozen or so turnings ins (as it were) using a little bit of lubricant on the two lugs the thing can then have the broom stale replaced with your chosen telescopic sight.

The "history" of the Leupold is, apparently, that in WWI the US Army were impressed with German mounts and held a competition in the USA for American makers to come up with something that the US Army could use. Well that's the story! Redfield won. In truth they are a McGyvered answer and not a very good one at that.

Yet I also have them on my .30/06 so they do work but there are better quick detachable mounts! So what use are they? Well really I suppose when travelling overseas or elsewhere when you'd prefer that you valuable telescopic sight to travel in your luggage not on the rifle. They do not "return to zero" when dismounted and remounted with the same exactness as do German quick detachable Suhler type claw mounts.

But within their limitations they do work. But the best return to zero quick detachable mounts I have ever had on a sporting rifle that I have owned are Holland and Holland's sidemounts. Which are even better that Suhler type mounts IMHO as they give a clear view underneath.

And to the original question? Redfield mounts should have on the side of the front mount an R in a circle.

I suspect the correct period Redfield rings pre-date that little ‘R’ trademark- the older Redfield rings don’t have it. It’s the mount base I really need to know about though- in order to try and get hold of a matching turn in ring with a correctly sized ‘spud’ (foot).

 

[enfieldspares]

I suspect the correct period Redfield rings pre-date that little ‘R’ trademark- the older Redfield rings don’t have it. It’s the mount base I really need to know about though- in order to try and get hold of a matching turn in ring with a correctly sized ‘spud’ (foot).

I have a 1966 Shooter's Bible. I'll have a look over the next few days.

 

[JMH123]

Spud profile is your friend or enemy.

K

And different makes seem to have slightly but materially different profiles (presumably not varied across like examples from the same maker). But what to do about it? Can I alter the spud profile, or pack it somehow? Last ditch solution is to replace the original bases, which would be a great shame.

 

[HonestJohn]

They are Redfield bases SR70 (for Winchester pre 64) style, modified for a military Mauser action with smaller rear receiver ring - see sample attached

Vintage gun scopes in the US will have rings to fit them, how well they fit is trial and error as all things get worn and ‘broken in’.

Otherwise try Joel Dorleac in Perpignan.

 

[Klenchblaize]

A few observations:

1. Probably best to start afresh with a complete set of period correct mounts and rings. First determine and secure the scope you wish to use and work back from there. Be careful to consider scope eye relief as you may need mounts or rings that allow for offset c/o reverse orientation. Also be careful that scope mounting height doesn’t compromise bolt lift.

2. I’ve never considered the Redfield turn-in mounts/rings as “quick detachable” but rather a system that offers windage adjustment c/o the rear mount. Something that was often important back in the day.

3. Whenever I’ve used Redfield mounts & rings I’ve purchased two matching sets and used the 2nd front ring to replace the windage adjustable rear one. Not only does this provide a more rigid setup but it looks more elegant IMHO!

Here are the pair that once sat on a Sauer 90. I used their mounting hole spacing to determine where to drill & tap the air gun’s receiver. The mounts were not flat based as machined to the S90’s action contour. I filled the hollows with Devcon and sanded back until level. You can just make out the ‘R’ on the front base.

K

 

[Overlay]

A few observations:

1. Probably best to start afresh with a complete set of period correct mounts and rings. First determine and secure the scope you wish to use and work back from there. Be careful to consider scope eye relief as you may need mounts or rings that allow for offset c/o reverse orientation. Also be careful that scope mounting height doesn’t compromise bolt lift.

2. I’ve never considered the Redfield turn-in mounts/rings as “quick detachable” but rather a system that offers windage adjustment c/o the rear mount. Something that was often important back in the day.

3. Whenever I’ve used Redfield mounts & rings I’ve purchased two matching sets and used the 2nd front ring to replace the windage adjustable rear one. Not only does this provide a more rigid setup but it looks more elegant IMHO!

Here are the pair that once sat on a Sauer 90. I used their mounting hole spacing to determine where to drill & tap the air gun’s receiver. The mounts were not flat based as machined to the S90’s action contour. I filled the hollows with Devcon and sanded back until level. You can just make out the ‘R’ on the front base.
View attachment 345653
K

That’s a tidy job KB and on a decent air rifle as well

 

[JMH123]

I'll keep trying to find a set of turn in rings that fit these original bases tightly enough, or a way of making them do so.......
Still haven't found a definitive model no/make for the bases.
In the meantime, as a last resort, I'll research a new set of suitable bases (and companion rings) from Leupold or similar. Do I need to be looking for Mauser FN or 98 bases to fit the Ron Wharton (which was originally a 1939 Rigby)?
Thanks

 

[HonestJohn]

Try to email vintage scope.com with pictures of the lm

 

[HonestJohn]

Try to email vintage scope.com with pictures of the lm

Vintagescopes.com

 

[JMH123]

I'll keep trying to find a set of turn in rings that fit these original bases tightly enough, or a way of making them do so.......
Still haven't found a definitive model no/make for the bases.
In the meantime, as a last resort, I'll research a new set of suitable bases (and companion rings) from Leupold or similar. Do I need to be looking for Mauser FN or 98 bases to fit the Ron Wharton (which was originally a 1939 Rigby)?
Thanks

P.S. Any tips for making the spuds tighter in the receiver holes?
As far as I'm aware I need bases suitable for a Mauser 98 military action without the stripper clip hump? (1998 Ron Wharton which was originally a 1939 Rigby)?
There are two screw holes on each base.

Thanks

 

[JMH123]

Vintagescopes.com

Done that- thanks for the tip. He's been very helpful identifying the original (I think) Redfield rings.

 

[HonestJohn]

Done that- thanks for the tip. He's been very helpful identifying the original (I think) Redfield rings.

If he doesn’t ship to the U.K., I’m visiting family in the US in Feb

 

[enfieldspares]

I have a 1966 Shooter's Bible. I'll have a look over the next few days.

I have had a look. Some systems that no longer are current such as the excellent Jaeger sidemounts that I had on my Churchill .270. Also various others but no styles that mimic the turn in 'scope the OP has.

 

[Andy RV]

How important is the ability to detach the scope while out in the wild? If it’s not I’d be tempted to put a couple of spots of weld or braze on the underside of the base with the ring aligned in position.

I acknowledge that it’s quite a robust solution!!!

Another option would be one of the Loctite engineering retaining compounds to quite simply ‘glue’ the ring into position. They’re very high performing adhesives that operate under high industrial loads and temperatures.

Loctite Engineering Adhesives: Threadlocking Adhesive & Flange Sealants

simplybearings.co.uk

 

[Klenchblaize]

How important is the ability to detach the scope while out in the wild? If it’s not I’d be tempted to put a couple of spots of weld or braze on the underside of the base with the ring aligned in position.

I acknowledge that it’s quite a robust solution!!!

Another option would be one of the Loctite engineering retaining compounds to quite simply ‘glue’ the ring into position. They’re very high performing adhesives that operate under high industrial loads and temperatures.

Loctite Engineering Adhesives: Threadlocking Adhesive & Flange Sealants

simplybearings.co.uk

You could do something similar with steel Devcon but not sure if you can remove the front mount with the lower ring half in position. That said you could make tiny indexing marks for realignment once both removed. You would also need to ensure the scope’s windage is set 50X50 and then at least know the point of aim will get you on paper at 100 yards c/o the rear mount adjustment.

Once you’ve bonded the front assembly in place, any attempt to move the rear of the scope would be putting stress on the main tube as the front ring can no longer move pivot!

K

 

[HonestJohn]

You could do something similar with steel Devcon but not sure if you can remove the front mount with the lower ring half in position. That said you could make tiny indexing marks for realignment once both removed. You would also need to ensure the scope’s windage is set 50X50 and then at least know the point of aim will get you on paper at 100 yards c/o the rear mount adjustment.

Once you’ve bonded the front assembly in place, any attempt to move the rear of the scope would be putting stress on the main tube as the front ring can no longer move pivot!

K

Ahh, the old ‘jimmy rigging’