Long eye relief scope on Rifle???

P

Prof Young

New member
Shooters:

I have a relatively old bolt action Stevens 22 cal rifle that I'd like to put a scope on. It still shoots well, but I'm not a good enough shot to hunt squirrel with iron sights. Took it to the gun smith to see about scope mounts and he showed me the kinds of problems we'd have because the bolt comes up really high right were the scope would be. It's almost vertical. Now I'm thinking of putting a long eye relief scope on it. While it seems like that should work, am I going to run into some not so obvious problems?

Live well, be safe
Prof Young
 
Are you talking about a "scout type" scope. They are usially mounted on the barrel and finding monunts for this rifle may be impossible.

Back in the day when many old WW-2 bolt rifles were being converted to sporters it was common to bend the bolt handle to allow room for scope clearance.

Anything you do will likely cost more than the value of the gun, and maybe more than just buying a new rifle designed for a scope. I'd keep it as is and spend the money on a more modern rifle designed for glass.
 
Any gunsmith should be able to find/fit (D/T) a single (small) Weaver scope mount base, from a two-piece base set meant for whatever rifle, onto your Steven's front receiver ring - as long as the subject base's concave underside closely approximates the receiver ring's convexity.

The single base is more than ample to hole a small red dot sight or reflex sight ($80 TruGlo @ Dick's Sporting Goods), some of which (the TruGlo being one) have dial-switchable reticles to accommodate most vision and/or shooting situations.

The reflex sights are used just like a scope.

This is a $35 NcSTAR reflex sight, typical of the config

http://www.amazon.com/NcSTAR-Reflex-Sight-Different-Reticles/dp/B003G321A0

41jPNij-gGL._AA300_.jpg


A pistol (LER) scope is also doable, mounted to the barrel only on a long, Weaver-type "gunsmith" base (from Brownell's).
The "gunsmith" base is easily cut to the length needed, and screwed to the bbl ASAP it's D/T'd.
A Simmons 2x pistol scope is about $45 (new) onlne.

.
 
Last edited:
I think rather than putting money into gunsmithing and an expensive long eye relief scope for that old Stevens that I'd keep it as is and save up for another 22 that will play better with a scope and then put a good rimfire scope on that. You can buy a decent 22 rifle for $180-220 (and up) and scope it with a good quality rimfire scope for less than $150. In other words a new rifle and nice scope for less than the cost of a long eye relief scope and the gunsmithing necessary to make it work.

Either that or put the money into practice ammo and get good with the iron sights.
 
Last edited:
More info . . .

Shooters:
Thanks for all your thought.

I should have included more info. The Henry is a hand me down from my father in law and I kind of want to keep it in the family. I already have a long eye relief pistol scope I'm not using so the expense is just the mount. And, by "long eye relief" that's what I mean . . . a pistol scope.

I have a Ruger 10/22 which is a decent squirrel gun, but I suspect this old Henry is a tack driver if I can learn to shoot it better.

Any more thoughts would be appreciated.

Live well, be safe
Prof Young
 
I can't speak specifically about your Stevens, but when I used scopes on rifles, I always favored the forward-mounted LER type. (I've since switched back to iron sights, since I got my eyes "fixed" - I always strongly preferred irons, anyway.) NOT because Jeff Cooper liked the idea, or out of any sense of "fashion" - but because I tried both conventional and forward scope mounting - and I LIKED the forward mount better. I shoot with both eyes open, so a forward mounted scope gave me a very wide field of view (not just looking through the scope, but around it, as well). I always found a receiver-mounted scope cumbersome, as well (in the way of loading, too close to the bolt handle, etc.).

Note that the forward-mounted scope setup works best with a relatively LOW magnification. If you are one who likes a 3-9 x scope, cranked up to 9x all the time, don't bother. But, if you can get by with 4x or less, then the LER scope works very well.

As for parallax, which is a potential issue with LER scopes, especially handgun scopes (which have parallax most commonly set at something like 50 yards)... stock fit and a consistent cheek weld (and thus, a consistent view through the scope) are critical. But, if you get that right (it should be addressed with ANY scoped rifle, anyway)....then the parallax setting of the scope WON'T matter.

Finally, I'll say this. The forward-mounted LER scope is an "acquired taste". Some like it, some do not. But, don't let anyone tell you that it is somehow inferior to a conventional scope mounting. That is nonsense. It's all in the details. I shot just as well, if not better, with an LER scope (even a handgun scope with 50 yard parallax) than I ever did with a conventional scope....from 0 to at least 200 yards. Since I liked the LER setup better, anyway.....and I had little interest or chance to shoot beyond 200 yards, it worked perfectly for me. Others might have had different experiences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top