Anyone make a decent scope LESS than 1" tube?

T

the possum

New member
This is a point of curiosity that's been kicking around the back of my kind for a while. I don't have a good use for such a thing now, but might in the future.

Does anyone make a good quality scope with a tube that's less than 1" in diameter? I've seen cheap BB gun scopes that are 18 millimeters, and a bunch of antique scopes on old .22's that might qualify. But are there any modern ones with decent glass like that? Preferably with a correspondingly small objective bell, and variable power would be a bonus.
 
I don't know of any modern scope smaller than 1". And can't think of a reason to make one. I'm curious, what use you have in mind that would require one.
 
"Decent" is pretty subjective, but there would have to be a very specific reason for me to look at one.
The purpose of a scope is to provide a more precise aiming system by providing a very high resolution sight picture in most any condition. In general, smaller tubes work against that.
 
A custom featherweight .22 single shot. Thinking about starting with the Ruta Locura carbon fiber barrel, which is only 4 oz and 1/2" diameter. Good chance I'd end up sticking with irons, but if there is a super light & compact scope out there, it might be an option. I just think a scope (tube) twice as thick as the receiver would look totally ungainly. That would be like a Model 70 with a scope tube nearly 4 inches in diameter.
 
Last edited:
I don't know of any modern centre fire scope smaller than 1" either. There are lots of decent .22 scopes though. Issue with 'em is they usually use a 3/4" wide factory groove to mount.
BB gun scopes are no good for .22's never mind a cf rifle.
The Malcolm scopes repro's for '03A4's and M1 C's and D's.
Anyway, the diameter of the scope is about its light gathering capabilities. Has nothing to do with the barrel diameter. What you're planning on doing with a featherweight .22 single shot matters most.
 
The old redfield company made a fixed 4X rimfire with a 3/4 inch tube which was very high quality for its time. You can find that scope occasionally on e-bay and other secondary markets. The redfields are becoming collectible and I've seen asking prices range from 300 to 500$. If you buy one, make sure it has the original redfield steel rings, which are unique to the scope.

Presently another company is importing a Chinese replica of the redfield for about 140$. You can find the replica at the website: grubee.net.

While it's a one inch tube, the current leupold 4X-28mm rimfire scope is pretty compact at 9 inches in length, and the quality of the optics, is far superior to the old redfield.
 
Last edited:
My "utility" 22's have Sightron 2.5X scopes. Small and light with good glass and clarity. I don't know if you could find anything lighter or more compact with similar optical advantages. Putting one of the el cheapo 7/8" scopes on a 22 is a self induced handicap.
 
I'll agree the 3/4 in tube made by Redfield in Denver was an elegant little scope.
It also had an upsized objective bell,sothe objective lense would be comparable to a straight tube 1 in scope.
I saw that GruBee Chinese copy of the Redfield on E-bay.I don't know. Certainly there are plenty of junk optics from China,but we buy name brand prettygood optics that are made in China,too.
From the E-bay ads it looks to me like an entrepreneur/enthusiast wanted to bring back that scope.I don't know why anyone would want to bring it back as a junk scope.But,Ihave never seen one. For the $140price point,it COULD be reasonable quality.I might buy one.

The CMP vintage Sniper rifle game has inspired a Chinese remake (maybe a Malcomb) of the Weaver 330 that was used on the 1903A4 Springfield.
I have never used one but I have heard they work in CMP competition.
I would not expect miracles,but its there.

I have a Lyman Alaskan with a 7/8 in tube.Its on my fake 1903A4.I think its very nice scope.I've taken Pronghorn with it.The "collectable" market has inflated the price.

Some of the old Weavers were 3/4 and 7/8,that were deemed suitable (by Weaver) for centerfire use. The J-4,maybe?

Condition would be everything. Junk is junk,but a pristine one might be a good fit for you. They are out there for $20 to $100.
Seems like youmight be prepared to spend some $ on the rifle,you might risk buying one.

A micro-red dot such as the Burris Fastfire with the protective wings and a 3 MOA dot might scale to your project.

I don't know if its discontinued,but Burris made a nice little Compact 6X,.Its a 1 in tube,but short.Ihave one on a BRNO 22 mag semi-auto.

There are some pretty tiny variants of the ACOG in the 2x to 3X range. Not cheap,though.

I own a Chipmunk .22 WMR at about 2 1/2 lbs.I've sure had a lot of fun plinking with it.

I'd have to agree,there ARE optic compromises.
But as a young shooter with a 3/4 in tube Weaver on my 22,I was quite happy.
 
Grubee

The little scopes go on little rifles. Too much scope on a Henry lever, or a 10/22 makes those tidy little rifles look plain goofy, to me anyhow.

I saw the Grubee, and was tempted to put one on my Henry they gave me for retirement. But the Bro in law came up with a Bushnell 7/8" 4x that is the right size. It's a bit whopper-jawed though, the reticle does not set square in the one piece mount....

I see those old 7/8 Bushnells (they made a 2-7x too) on ebay all the time, going for more than you'd think. No support though.

I'd sure like to hear from somebody with a Grubee........the post and crosshair version is calling to me.
 
There was a Browning branded 3/4" scope, Redfield or Burris, probably; and I think a Weatherby.
Likely available on the secondary market if you are ok with optics and adjustments 30-50 years out of date.

Leupold made a somewhat replica of the Alaskan, which would probably be the best choice, if you could find one.
 
Last edited:
I have a Browning 3/4" scope, don't know who made it where. Weaver made some 3/4" and some 7/8" scopes years ago. You might make some gun shows and find one to meet your needs.
 
Thanks for the all the suggestions, everyone. If I get that far with this project, I'll keep this thread in mind & refer back to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top