View Full Version : Installing a scope on a No. 4 Mk 1*
48040480414804248043
This scope mount is bolted onto the receiver with two screws, a nut and a spacer using existing holes in the receiver. No drilling or tapping is required.
The first photo shows the existing ejector screw. Remove this screw and remove the rear sight pin and key. Get ready to assemble the new hardware as shown in the second photo. Remove the rear sight and plunger and spring as shown in the third photo. The fourth photo shows the installed scope. Time - 10 minutes. Easily reversible so save the original sight and hardware. I found out what a great shooter my No. 4 really is.
Addley Precision supplied the mount and hardware. I bought the scope separately.
Outstanding!!! Many of the LE series are very capable of excellent accuracy. Scope makes it much more evident. Sincerely. bruce.
Outstanding!!! Many of the LE series are very capable of excellent accuracy. Scope makes it much more evident. Sincerely. bruce.
I bought the mount and scope a few years ago to see what the rifle could do. As well worn as it is, I was actually able to hit the dead center bulls eye at 100 yards.. Once I saw what the rifle was capable of, I reinstalled the iron sight and tried to tune my aiming skills with limited success. I’ll take it to the range a few times and see if the magic is still there.
The mount is well made from anodized aluminum.
JB White
08-26-2020, 06:27
Is that a spacer which spans the rear sight bosses? Looking at their web site it appears as though they offer a version of the Mkll rear sight.
Do you think it would be useable as a see-under backup to the glass?
After having scoped a few with a NG type mount, I have seen the accuracy for myself. However not getting a proper cheek weld made it tiring after a little range time. At least for me anyway. Had the CadTechnic (with a very very low serial number) and without a cheek rest I needed a giraffe's neck :)
Looks like a good alternative to the S&K mount so people get a choice regarding style and fitting up. Hope it is as rigid and holds zero as well. That's where the cheaper ones always fail.
The very low ones are often reported to interfere with loading and sometimes ejection.
Name escapes me at the moment, but there is also a British-made mount reputed to be very good. Costs about twice as much though.
JB, Yes it is a spacer. It has a flat side cut lengthwise and fits very snugly in the receiver.
Edit: The flat side has a purpose. It must be facing downward in order for the bolt to be removed so that the bore can be cleaned.
JB White
08-29-2020, 09:10
In the past, I used inexpensive glass on mine as well. No point in buying very good if its going to be knocked around by a failing mount was my theory.
Realizing something might go awry on an outing, I've always preferred to have iron sights onboard as a backup. I even bought a Leupold 'tunnel base' for a 10-22 for just in case. Turn the knobs and go back to irons if needed.
On the No4 rifles, I used a spare long butt with a repro cheek piece installed. Made the scope much easier to use but the rest made using an iron backup sight all but impossible to use if the need arose.
Since Addley offers their version of a MkII L-flip sight, (in place of a spacer I presume) it caused me to wonder if they managed to find an intermediate sweet spot in regard to scope height and ability to actually use a dual sighting system.
I spoke to the owner, Gerry Addley several years ago before I bought the No. 4 mount. Guessing he may have been just starting out. Now it looks like his business has grown considerably. I’d give them a call or send them an email with a request for info. Their knowledge of LE rifles must be extensive.
JB White
08-29-2020, 11:06
Id rather not waste their time kicking tires over a matter of idle curiosity. However should I ever want to try scoping a No4 again, I'll be sure to ask since I'm not likely to forget. I prefer to purchase via phone than website order anyway.
What’s the best way to prevent a scope from moving in the rings due to recoil?
What’s the best way to prevent a scope from moving in the rings due to recoil?
With Weaver sheet steel rings, I’ve scratched/scored the inside surfaces with 60 grit sandpaper. . . . LIGHTLY!
are the rings loose?
a dab or 2 of some sticky stuff, like accraglass gel, or some double sided tape will work,
JB White
08-31-2020, 06:08
A 1/4" snip of friction tape centered on the lower half of the rings works too.
I took the No. 4 (with the scope installed) to the range yesterday and I could still hit the target in a 2 inch group at 100 yards. No adjustment was necessary.
I torqued the small hex head ring screws as tightly as I dared and the scope still moved a few mils. I have some double sided tape that I’ll try.
The ammo I shot was head stamped “HXP 83” that I bought from a friend. It’s FMJ military ammo made by the Greeks. I have been reloading commercial .303 soft points so I was curious to see how the military FMJs would do. They performed very well and I’m anxious to shoot more of this ammo, but I noticed a few minor things hardly worth mentioning: The cartridges chambered and shot accurately and the empty cases ejected smoothly but the fired cases bulged out considerably near the head due to the spacious No. 4 chamber. After examining them closely, I’m surprised they ejected so easily. I cleaned the rifle today and it seemed like it took a lot more effort, patches and solvent than usual to get the barrel bore to give up the metallic fouling.
JB White
09-02-2020, 08:19
It isn't unusual to have deformed brass in an Enfield rifle. The chambers are generous as you noted. Intended for ammo from anywhere in the Empire and under any conditions. Safe for firing but reloading was never part of the equation.
Modern brass is thinner than milspec so problems can arise amongst those unfamiliar with the nuances. HXP is good brass though. It can be reloaded and if done correctly it should last a good number of times.
If this rifle is the only one you're using it's easy. The brass is fireformed to your chamber, so neck size only.no point in overworking the case body when it doesn't need to be. You can make it look pretty but you might be reducing case life dramatically.
If you have any doubts or reservations simply put up a few pics. Guys here do more reloading than I do and might spot something relevant to your needs. They might also find a quirk which will need attention? Don't be bashful. It can't hurt to let others see.
It isn't unusual to have deformed brass in an Enfield rifle. The chambers are generous as you noted. Intended for ammo from anywhere in the Empire and under any conditions. Safe for firing but reloading was never part of the equation.
Modern brass is thinner than milspec so problems can arise amongst those unfamiliar with the nuances. HXP is good brass though. It can be reloaded and if done correctly it should last a good number of times.
If this rifle is the only one you're using it's easy. The brass is fireformed to your chamber, so neck size only.no point in overworking the case body when it doesn't need to be. You can make it look pretty but you might be reducing case life dramatically.
If you have any doubts or reservations simply put up a few pics. Guys here do more reloading than I do and might spot something relevant to your needs. They might also find a quirk which will need attention? Don't be bashful. It can't hurt to let others see.
your advise on neck sizing is spot on ,
and yes, HXP is some really good ammo, both the .303 and the .30-06 they made
I’ll neck size these cases and see how they chamber and eject. Previous neck sized .303 cases, made by various manufacturers that I reloaded, were often difficult to chamber and eject in my No. 4 due to cases that were bulging.
Does anyone know what kind of powder the Greeks used?
JB White
09-06-2020, 07:09
Does anyone know what kind of powder the Greeks used?
Combustible. Definitely combustible.
Seriously, I don't know. Cant remember but recall someone breaking down some rounds years ago when making comparrisons. I cant even remember which site that was on. Ask Lyman as I'm sure he can help you with that. No problem.
Hey Lyman, here comes a bus!!! LOL ;)
482404824148242
A day at the range with my 76 year old Savage No. 4 Mk 1*. Shooting Greek ammo with the scope was a lot of fun.
The first target was 4 shots aimed at the center at 50 yards. I shot the group after a few scope adjustments to get on target paper. No, I didn’t purposely try to make a face. If I did, it would have been smiling. The group was tight but a bit off center to the right.
The next target was 3 shots aimed at the center at 100 yards. The first shot drifted right and was on the target edge. Some fine tuning was required. The in-between shot was after adjusting the scope 3 clicks left and 3 clicks down and the shot that was in the center of the target was after adjusting the scope another 3 clicks left and 3 clicks down.
The rifle is very predictable and is still an accurate shooter after all these years.
. . . . . .Does anyone know what kind of powder the Greeks used?
I once got a whiff of the smoke from my Greek ammo . . . . .
I figure “ground-up grape leaves” was part of their powder recipie!
Combustible. Definitely combustible.
Seriously, I don't know. Cant remember but recall someone breaking down some rounds years ago when making comparrisons. I cant even remember which site that was on. Ask Lyman as I'm sure he can help you with that. No problem.
Hey Lyman, here comes a bus!!! LOL ;)
thanks JB!!!
I earned that one ,
I honestly have no idea, but if I can remember, I can pull a round later,
I loaded up a bunch of cast boolit loads a few years ago and tried them in a longbranch, and cannot remember what powder I used,
did well tho,, at 100
Powder type isn’t important. I was thinking about getting around to reloading the fired Greek cases but I have several large boxes of the Greek loads which should last for a while. The powder did have a distinct smell to it. I can’t complain about the quality. I was lucky to have a calm day, almost no wind, so I could really see what the rifle was capable of.
I've not noticed much of a smell, but my nose is a bit fried smell wise ,
I did have some Egyptian 9mm once, ran it thru a Mac11,
that stuff stank,, and was smokey
I do the majority of my shopping for shooting supplies at Cabelas and the only .303 British bullets they carry for reloading are soft points and of course, the Greek ammo uses full metal jackets. I’ve had two trips to the range firing the Greek ammo and was impressed with its accuracy both times. Ballistically speaking, is there a difference in accuracy between SPs and FMJs? With all the shortages, I doubt if I could find either one now.
I've only reloaded the cast, I have a ton of HXP and a can of Winchester contract ball to last a long while,
I'll ping a friend that is also on this board, he loads for Enfields, and has some good thoughts and loads for distance,
Thanks. I wonder if the hoarding will stop anytime soon.
BlitzKrieg
10-08-2020, 05:13
Soft Point vs BTHP bullet accuracy: yes BC drives accuracy and SP ammo just is not as accurate.
The BC on the bullet is what kills the hunting bullet's accuracy vs. a BTHP and with the Lee Enfield, its a smashing difference. The MarkVII issue FMJ load for the 303 Brit Service rifle had a 174 gr flat base FMJ bullet.
They don't make those bullets any longer but the fable exists that only a flat base bullet will be accurate out of a Lee Enfield and if one looks for bullets...you find the only flat base 174 gr are Soft Point loads. Hunting to 300 yds they are accurate enough for big game. Beyond that they really suffer for accuracy.
I ran a test with my No.4Mk1 (the one I use out to 1000 yds with my 303 Match load) and I shot the 174 gr SPFB rounds and 174gr BTHP rounds. At 300 yds the amount of elevation I needed was 2x more for the SPFB hunting rounds and accuracy was 12 inches on average. The Boat Tail Hollow Point 174 gr bullets brought in 4 to 5 inch groups . Both shot with iron sights. At 600 yds, forget the accuracy of the SPFB hunting rounds, the bullets shot terrible ...in fact 38 inches more elevation needed than with the same load using the 174 BTHP bullets. I could get 18 inch groups with the 174 BTHP easily from 600 yds ..on average. Old eyes ...mind you.
So what is my match load: you can email me and I'll tell you. I find the Hornady .312 diameter , 174 gr BTHP are the most accurate bullets in all my Enfields. Now the Sierra 174 BTHP are .311 diameter and are almost as accurate. I buy Sierra when I can't find the Hornady.312 dia 174 BTHP bullets . Mind you: Hornady makes a .3105 dia 174 BTHP bullet and its great in my M39 Mosins but truly stinks for all my Lee Enfields...No.1, No4 and No.5 rifles.
Now there is a Hornady 150 gr BTHP and I've never used it. Why buy it when price is same as the 174 gr BTHP and the barrels of Lee Enfields were made to fire a 174 gr bullet (remember MarkVII was 174gr ).
So its hog wash Boat Tail bullets don't shoot well out of Enfields, Its hogwash you got to have a flat base bullet and its total hogwash Soft Point Hunting bullets will shoot as well as match grade BTHP bullets. Hunting bullets for hunting at responsible distance and BTHP match grade bullets for precision shooting 100 to 1000 yds.
My sniper team mate has an original No.4 Mk 1 "T" sniper. He shoots my match load and holds 9 & 10 rings at 1000 yds. At our club we use the 600 yd bullseye for 1000 yard competition so figure out the accuracy math he's really getting !
All I have said is worthless if your reloading procedures are half wonderful. You have to carefully prep the brass, precisely weight each charge...not dump them from a measure to your case. You must carefully seat your primers and bullets. Dies....Hornady and RCBS are just fine to 600 yds. Hunting ammo: Lee is just fine.
You want precision : it must be Forster dies or Redding Dies. I've tried all the brands in 303 caliber and what I post here is the truth. I really did not believe that and tried to make Lee dies work to 1000 yds but they can't load long range precision accuracy.
Most here could use Lee dies for their 100 to 300 yd hunting or CMP competition purposes and be shooting as good as their skill is and as good as their barrel is. You need better dies to move off the 300 yd line and you bloody well need the best dies to hit 800 and 1000 yd lines.
Decide what you want to do with your Enfields. Hunt : use SPFB bullets. Precision shooting : BTHP match grade bullets.
and for the doubting Thomas reading this , let me assure you most Lee Enfields have more accuracy in them than most shooters can make use of. I have a 1918 mfg, No1MkIII*, worn bore, tight muzzle. Cast bullets at .314 Diameter with rear sight at 450 : 7 inch groups at 300 meters !! My cast bullets for this old girl are 50 50 lino type to wheel wt material, carnuba red hard lube, gas checks on bullets , cases normally prepped but I've added a M Die step to the process. I use Forster dies.
slug your bores, find out what diameter bullet is right for your Lee Enfield.
BlitzKrieg
10-08-2020, 05:25
and while I am in your bunker line this fine evening, a bit from GB forum that I posted to confront all those who snivel about their Jungle Carbines have a wandering zero ....
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?314303-No-5-accuracy-at-600-yds
That is the link and I shot on 28 April 2013 as follows:
Default No.5 accuracy at 600 yds,
Here is todays results. Here are the facts:
Rifle: No.5 dated 1945, BSA manufacture
Condition: mint bore, overall 90% orig. condition
Loads for testing at 300 yds: 148 gr Soviet FMJBT pulled bullets and 4895 powder, Privi cases, Tula Lg Rifle primers
Elevation 13 clicks up on rear sight
Accuracy: 8 inches which is 2.5 max MOA at 300 yds. No doubt old eyes and surplus bullets do not do this justice but I call it 2.5 MOA at 300 yds worst case results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
600 yds, weather went from sunny to light drizzle rain and I had some beginnings of target acquisition / sight picture issues with iron sights. Eye sight: I give 70% to old eyes and 30 % rain / grey overcast. No winds but we had no wind all day today
Shot Reload 1: the pulled surplus 147-148 gr pulled Soviet bullets over IMR 4895 with 45 clicks on rear sight: no hits on target, went 50 clicks: no hits. I have to assume the rounds are striking low but I ran out of this load and had to stop. Goodness knows when i can find more IMR 4895 powder !
Shot Reload 2: This is my 1000 yd Match loading for the No.4 Long Branch Canuck rifle with 2 groove bbl and awesome accuracy. The load is Varget ,.312 Hornady BTHP in 174 grain weight.
Results: 13 inch group 600 yds at 2 inch below point of aim with sights at 55 clicks UP on rear sight. Then shot two more groups at 600 yds with sights at 56 clicks UP on rear sight and got a 12 inch group and then a 13 inch group with rounds landing 1 inch above point of aim.
The 13 inch group with my match loading is the worst case results for today. Divide 13 inches by 6 (for 600 yds) and its shy of 2.2 inch accuracy or 2.2 MOA for 600 yds. Now, that is not shabby for a short carbine, my old eyes, and the fact the weapon was meant to kill Germans / Japanese , not register accuracy results at 600 yds. I claim my eyes and human error degraded the real performance of the weapon today. Nothing wrong with this jungle carbine. Maybe a small % is my learning curve how to shoot the carbine got into this scenario.
Yup: heard all the tales of wandering zero, lightning cuts on receiver / knox form, snivels about trigger pulls and sights, horrors about recoil and muzzle blast... but you know, I think that is all fog. I own 4 of these carbines and recently decided to get drop dead serious about finding out how good / bad the weapon is and how far I can take it down range. I punched through all the nonsense and frankly, if one can't shoot a No.5 well, that bloke need to try harder. Of course if the condition of ones No.5 is not top form and is shot out, there is no fog involved. All of mine are in top condition. I will admit, it was a challenge but its a challenge you can work through.
Thanks. I wonder if the hoarding will stop anytime soon.
and he made it,
just so you know,
Blitzkrieg is a hellova guy,
until you tell him you like brussel sprouts,,
then he will turn on you,, :headbang:
BlitzKrieg
10-09-2020, 07:49
Just noticed the date of that Jungle carbine test...7 years ago and powder had dried up, I had no idea where I was going to get more IMR 4895. And rolling on to this very day in 2020, the situation is powder has dried up again as well as ammo, pistols, rifles, shotguns in a far worse drought...driven by politics and fear. We recovered off that last drought /panic / scare , hope we so this time as well.
Guess I am 7 yrs behind taking a No.5 Jungle carbine to 800 yards which is the limits of its rear sight. As was the 03A3 rear sight. I'll be fixing that delay shortly for both rifles. Certainly no doubts on either doing a fine showing at 800 yd line with issue iron sights and my match hand load. I do have a 3006 match hand load I use out to 1000 yds out of my Gibbs clone 03A4 sniper rifle at the Quantico Vintage Sniper Match and my last results with that rifle & load was a score of 188 out of 200 yds , with 3x's. Not awful results on a 600 yd bullseye and using issue WWII scope of 2.5 x optical power. My issue 03a3 at 800 yds ...I got the load for it and I know it will hang !
JB White
10-10-2020, 06:55
Using flat base projectiles is hogwash?? I beg to differ.
It's been a proven workaround for tired 303 rifles for decades. The same as many other compensating "tricks" to get old war horses looking respectable again.
The vast majority of shooters simply want to print respectable groups between 50 to 200 yards on a nice day while socializing with other shooters. So talking up 1000 yard match loads is moot to most. Those loads might work very well in a nice condition No4 or a low mileage FTR SMLE. That's not what most of us collect.
To get the history, rifles tend to be well worn with less than stellar tubes. Throat/Leade erosion from cordite in service etc. Reloaders need to compensate to get from pie plate patterns to at least fist sized groups on a nice afternoon
Flat base is a recommendation for tired barrels with digestion problems. Most readily admit that many rifles will digest boat tails. Some won't. Therefore those who collect many Lee Enfield rifles may choose to load flat based projectiles into everything. Somehow they can still find FB's.
Hogwash it is definitely not. There have been decades of positive results to show for it.
All information is valuable. Whether or not its applicable is something to be judged on an individual basis.
BlitzKrieg
10-10-2020, 05:21
JB...you collect. I shoot. I don't own tired worn relics, I don't run a museum. I own battle rifles
that are accurate or they're long gone.
Its moot to develop 303 Match loads that produce long range accuracy..... ? I should develop half
accurate loads that make it to 200 yds perhaps.
The problem with the Lee Enfield is : shooters make excuses for poor performance when the rifle most likely
can do the task, its the inattention of the shooter who fails the rifle.
Optimum performance : that is what I see from all my Lee Enfields and I've found over the last 50 years they have more accuracy than "collectors" have any idea of.
Not napalming you JB, I know you take the history of Enfields seriously and if collecting is your focus, its all good.
I collect old guns that I like to shoot. I’d be willing to bet they are all accurate shooters with the right ammo fired on a wind-free day through a scope. The No. 4 with Greek ammo proved that to me. It just so happens that the No. 4 is the only rifle I own that will accept a bolt-on scope mount. All others (M1917, M1903 and 03A3) require drilling and tapping in order to mount a scope which is something I’d never do. I can remove the scope and mount and re-install the iron sight on the No. 4 in less than 10 minutes. So, for now, the No. 4 will be the rifle I’ll take to the range to see how well I can do. Next time out, just for fun, I’ll set up targets at 100 and 200 yards. With these ancient eyes, do I care if I do poorly with the No 4 at 200 yards, or the best I can do is 6 inch groups at 50 yards with all the rest of my rifles equipped with iron sights? Not at all. There’s a lot to be said for just going to the range and shooting a few rounds with a 100 year old relic that fellow range mates can admire.
Ned Butts
10-12-2020, 06:10
Just a heads up, you can get S&K inst amounts for all of the above http://www.scopemounts.com/index.html?main.html
Ned,
Thanks for the information. I’m actually familiar with the company but didn’t know about their extensive offering.
My Greek returned 1925 M1903 Springfield with a new High Standard barrel would be an excellent candidate. I was shooting fairly consistently at 100 yards with it with the iron sights.
It’d be nice to put a mount on my M1917 Winchester.
JB White
10-15-2020, 04:00
Merc, did you feel as though you needed a riser/cheek rest to get a proper weld to the stock? I think you might really need one on a 1917.
I tried scoping an Eddystone back in the early 80s before anyone had a no-smithing mount on the market.
So, with the help of a friend we made one up. Got it as low as we could go within the realm of practicality but it wasn't comfortable. Prototypes were lacking in aesthetics and rigidity. Call them fugly and not to be trusted, but we chugged along in our spare time and actually used them.
Forward a couple of years and B-Square offered one on the open market. Looked much better! But my teeth took to rattling upon firing. I needed a neck like a giraffe to be able to settle in. I don't recall any cheap tie-on rests back then. Of course we didn't have the same shopping resources then as we have today. Gave up on the notion.
Blitz, a reply to your message I think I pretty much covered on the other board. No need to repeat here?
While it is still somewhat on topic in this thread, as accurate as that Eddystone was it wouldn't match what the Ruger M77 or the Win 70 could do in the same chambering. Not without glass anyway and my eyes were much sharper back then. ;)
I was comfortable shooting freestyle but the scope did seem too high when the rifle was mounted on the rack because the bench seat was too low.
JB White
10-18-2020, 10:18
Nothing a seat cushion might remedy. Eh? ;)
Glad to hear things are in your favor regarding the No4 rifle. Things *might* be different on the P14/M1917 platform.
So, if going that direction it's something to keep in mind.
JB,
I was 5’ 11” back in the day. Gravity took over and now 5’ 9 3/4”. A cushion or three would definitely help.
I might hold off scoping the other rifles for a while. I’m having cataract surgery next month so things might be looking better real soon. I could still see the targets at 100 yards really well a few years ago but things seemed to have gone down hill in a hurry. I discovered I could still see 12” white paper plates at 100 yards, but now they’re even getting hard to see. The scope on the No4 might be the only one I do because it’s really a hoot to shoot. I passed up taking it to the range this past weekend due to heavy winds in our area. No wind at all is ideal, but those days are rare around here and it always seems to be a cross wind from the west. The range runs south to north.
My Dr. only offers laser surgery which sounds like the best way to go. Anyone out there with a cataract story to relate?
wife is having hers done in Dec,
lens replacement, not sure if lasers are involved or not,
"...that are accurate or they're long gone..." Battle rifles aren't and weren't made for great accuracy. Neither was the issue ammo.
Scoping an as issued Lee-Enfield is a kind of waste of money. And it reduces the value of the rifle. An already bubba'd rifle has no collector value though.
None of the aftermarket no gun-smithing bases are very good and a lot of 'em require removing the rear sight.
"...having cataract surgery..." A scope will not help if you have cataracts. A scope will not make a rifle accurate either.
JOHN COOK
10-22-2020, 11:29
north.
My Dr. only offers laser surgery which sounds like the best way to go. Anyone out there with a cataract story to relate?
Had laser surgery 2 years ago, check up 6 weeks ago and I checked out 20/20. Wife had hers last month went for final checkup yesterday and she has 20/20.
I had option of surgeon using knife or laser, I chose laser. In my and wife’s case Medicare will not pay a penny for laser but will with surgeon using knife. I paid out of pocket, couldn’t quite get my mind to accept knife in my eye. Probably a mental thing..LOL
John in SC
"...that are accurate or they're long gone..." Battle rifles aren't and weren't made for great accuracy. Neither was the issue ammo.
Scoping an as issued Lee-Enfield is a kind of waste of money. And it reduces the value of the rifle. An already bubba'd rifle has no collector value though.
None of the aftermarket no gun-smithing bases are very good and a lot of 'em require removing the rear sight.
"...having cataract surgery..." A scope will not help if you have cataracts. A scope will not make a rifle accurate either.
The Canadian made high quality scope mount that I installed on my No. 4 did require the rear sight to be removed but it isn’t permanent so no damage was inflicted on the rifle. As I mentioned previously, the scope mount can be removed and the original sight can be reinstalled and the rifle restored to its original configuration in less than 10 minutes. I posted some photos here that showed the targets so, yes I was able to shoot the rifle more accurately with the scope in spite of the cataracts. I can best compare looking through cataracts to as if you were looking through slightly fogged glasses. You sound as if you don’t have cataracts yet, but nearly everyone gets them at some point in their lives. The No 4 might be the most accurate shooting rifle I own. The scope just allowed me to see the target more clearly and to aim the rifle more accurately.
From what I’ve read, the HXP Greek ammo has a good reputation for accuracy even though it fires a military grade bullet. I was impressed.
Had laser surgery 2 years ago, check up 6 weeks ago and I checked out 20/20. Wife had hers last month went for final checkup yesterday and she has 20/20.
I had option of surgeon using knife or laser, I chose laser. In my and wife’s case Medicare will not pay a penny for laser but will with surgeon using knife. I paid out of pocket, couldn’t quite get my mind to accept knife in my eye. Probably a mental thing..LOL
John in SC
John,
I also don’t want to have my cataracts removed with a knife. The laser is more uniform and precise and the incision is supposed to heal faster with less pain.
wife is having hers done in Dec,
lens replacement, not sure if lasers are involved or not,
I read as much as I could about both methods. My doctor charges $2300 per eye for the laser surgery so it’s expensive and Medicare will only cover the knife method.
JOHN COOK
10-23-2020, 11:22
not,
I read as much as I could about both methods. My doctor charges $2300 per eye for the laser surgery so it’s expensive and Medicare will only cover the knife method.
Wow, we paid $1400.00. per eye. Our surgeon operates only on Wednesday, you have follow up next day. I was amazed at the colors were so vivid afterwards.
John in SC
wife is young , only 54
but has had bad eyesight for a long while,
first 2 docs told here she had cataracts, but would not do anything until she got worse, unless she wanted to pay,
$8K an eye,, insurance would not cover unless the doc said it was needed,
we traveled to see her mom's doc, who did a great job with her mom's cataracts, and he said they were bad enough for insurance to cover,
still has to pay for some , depending on what lens she decides to get
JB White
10-24-2020, 04:56
The most evident advantage of laser is that it can be programmed to work at the precise depth and only the exact area involved. Humans can't whittle that good.
Haven't needed cataract surgery yet. I'm the youngest of the old guys in my crowd being in my mid 60s. Many of my friends are half bionic man though. I listen closely as they tell their medical war stories.
To repair my hernia, my doc called a friend out of retirement to sew me up since I opted not to go with mesh. I heard the horror stories long before the ambulance chasers began advertising the class action lawsuits.
A Japanese friend had cataracts for long time. Now he drive a Rincoln.
wife is young , only 54
but has had bad eyesight for a long while,
first 2 docs told here she had cataracts, but would not do anything until she got worse, unless she wanted to pay,
$8K an eye,, insurance would not cover unless the doc said it was needed,
we traveled to see her mom's doc, who did a great job with her mom's cataracts, and he said they were bad enough for insurance to cover,
still has to pay for some , depending on what lens she decides to get
This is an old thread but I sing the praises of cataract surgery every chance I get.
Optometrists tend to tell you your cataracts aren't "bad enough yet" because they want to sell you glasses. My cataracts were bad enough that I was afraid to drive at night but my Optometrist still told me I didn't need the surgery. I went to see an opthamalgist and he told me they looked bad enough to him. The surgery was a piece of cake, five to seven minutes total each eye for the surgery. They don't do both eyes at once, at least my doc didn't he did them a week apart. The difference was dramatic, I could see true colors again. If you have cataracts you are basically looking at the world through what amounts to smeared up amber sunglasses. Even though I was corrected for far vision I can read normal print without glasses in good light (your mileage may vary) and not having to wear glasses in bad weather is a true blessing.
As I understand it there is no laser surgery for cataracts. Cataract surgery involves removing the lens of the eye and replacing it with an implant. Sort of glasses on the inside. To do the surgery the anesthesiologist "gives you a little margarita :headbang:" LOL because you have to be able to focus on the little light over your head for the doc to work. There is no knife as such. The surgeon makes a small punch incision at the edge of the cornea, pulverizes and extracts the old lens with a tool, inserts the new lens (which is rolled up) through the incision, unrolls it and you're done. I didn't feel a darn thing, zero pain or discomfort. Eye drops are necessary for a week or so but that's it. While I don't have the superior vision I did in my 20s its still pretty darn good.
If you're over 65 Medicaid will pick up a big chunk of the bill. If you have good supplemental insurance the cost to you will be minimal. In my case it was no out of pocket at all.
I recommend the surgery highly. Being able to shoot with iron sights again alone made it worth it :icon_salut:.
JB White
10-27-2020, 03:20
Hello Art!
Regarding lasers, they approved the laser for cataract surgery a few years ago. Probably closer to ten years ago, but the procedure has become more popular with the increase in availability. Perhaps within the last five years or so? Said that because that's when I began hearing more about it.
There are restrictions though. Not everyone is a candidate.
Betting there is a cost differential which likely explains it not being covered by certain insurance carriers.
Thanks for the info. Science and technology march on.
I do know that one of the reasons insurance companies don't cover new (and more expensive) procedures is the idea that the older method is just as good. Sometimes yes....sometimes no.
I had the laser surgery on my right eye on 11/10 and will have the left eye done on 11/23. Huge difference in my ability to see. After about 15 eye drops (don’t know what they were but I suppose they were dilation and anesthesia meds), I actually had 2 laser procedures. The 1st procedure uses a laser knife to chop up the old lens into small pieces. The 2nd procedure uses a different laser to make the precise incision at the exact area and at the exact depth in the cornea. The surgeon then uses a device to remove the old lens fragments and he installed the implant. Total time from start to finish is probably less than 5 minutes.
Edit: I had no post surgery pain or even mild discomfort. Semi-normal vision returned in about 24 hours after all the eye drops wore off and continued to improve over the next few days, especially my ability to see details and to read. The Dr. says it will continue to improve for about a month. I was given Prolensa drops which is an anti-inflammatory agent to use once a day.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.