What’s worked for me:
Pachmayr Decelerator Sporting Clays pad
https://www.lymanproducts.com/sc100-...sporting-clay/
Leupold VX3 2.5-8X36
What’s worked for me:
Pachmayr Decelerator Sporting Clays pad
https://www.lymanproducts.com/sc100-...sporting-clay/
Leupold VX3 2.5-8X36
Thanks for all the replies so far! Here's the rifle. Pardon me if images end up upside down...
I'm pretty sure the stock is either a Reinhart-Fajen or Bishop, likely somebody in this thread can positively i.d. between the two.
The scope height is necessary to clear the 2-position safety. Rings are Weavers.
Great looking rifle! One thing to consider on a long-action rifle like that is scope length. Ordinarily I'd agree with Steve on the 2.5-8 Leupold. GREAT scope, but I actually pulled mine off my 1976 Ruger M77 in '06 because I found myself fighting eye relief in field positions with heavy clothes. Pick up a Leupold Vari-X III, VX-3, etc in the 3.5-10x40 variety, gloss finish off Ebay in the $350-$400 range and you'll be set.
Agree on the Pachmeyr Decelerator pad as well.
Congrats on restoring an heirloom!
Food Court Apprentice
Semper Paratus certified AR15 armorer
Gorgeous rifle. It definitively needs gloss-finished base, rings, and scope. I would be tempted to use the existing mount and rings, just changing the scope.
Install a red Decelerator recoil pad. DO NOT- I repeat- DO NOT install any recoil pad with a white line spacer. White line spacers are tacky.
Get rid of the Weaver rings & mounts. They're cheap and ugly. Get something like the Leupold dovetail mounts & rings. They're stronger, much better looking and will let you rough in the windage so there scope can be set close to its mechanical zero.
We wish to thank the United Network Command for Law and Enforcement, without whose assistance this program would not have been possible.
Im guessing you could go quite a bit lower on the rings and bases without any problem with the safety, Ive had a couple that set much lower and had no problems. The base of the bolt handle may need a little adjustment to clear if you go lower, but thats not critical or hard to do either.
Your receiver is also drilled and tapped for s side mounted receiver sight, such as the Lyman 57 SME, I think that means Springfield, Mauser Enfield, as in US 1917 model.
Nice rifle, I really like the classic sporters built from military rifles when well done. Id second the Decellerator pad. If youre hunting closer in stuff, id go with a leupold 2-7, at 2 power they are pretty easy to use at very close distance.
“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
There's no white line spacer on it now, I don't know why I'd put one on in the future.Originally Posted by MistWolf
A couple of you mentioned about the rings and /or mounts. For now I'm leaning towards replacing the scope only. For one thing, I have a long neck and the rifle comes to my eye nicely in the current taller position. Also, cheap or not, they're what my grandfather put on it and I doubt they're really hurting anything. It's not a target rifle and the barrel's not free-floated (I just checked)...my main goal here would be to get better quality glass on the rifle without hurting the period look. I can always switch rings and bases later if I feel the need.
Believe it or not, regardless of their faded utility it's a little hard to take either of these things (scope and recoil pad) off and the replace them with my own. That's one reason I'm going with bare minimums here; this rifle is a connection to someone I lost long ago. But I guess in another way it turns it into 'our' rifle rather than 'his' rifle.
Last edited by Welder; 12-08-2020 at 11:22 PM.
Yes, I was looking at that D&T job and the stock cut for the receiver sight and had put that together already although not the exact model as you did. My grandfather was never a rich man, and I expect he put the rifle in this stock originally with that sight before he had the money to scope it. Or even barrel it for that matter; this barrel has no provision for a front sight.
Thank you and others for agreeing on the Decelerator pad, I'll get the size figured out and get one on order.
Also for the many suggestions to go with a gloss Leupold, that's what I'll do.
The barrel may be the original one. They came as 24", and had dates and front sight machine work on them, but if its cut to 20" all that would be gone. They had a nice barrel contour, many aftermarket barrels copied it as a "sporter" contour. I dont recall which number profile it is in the Douglas or other makers, but mostly they just needed a good polish to make good sporter barrels. Most 1903 Springfield barrels shoot very well, much better than one ordinarily thinks of military barrels of being capable of. Ive had a couple that did under 1" for the first 3 shots, and a 5 shot group over the seat of my bike once with factory 1903A3 peep sight that was about 1/2" tall and about 1 1/4" wide with a decent crosswind and 190 gr BT match bullets. Dad had a 1903 he varmint hunted with in the 60s, he had a 5 shot group with 110 gr bullets that a nickel covered completely.
“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
