Need scope recommendations for a Remington 40X in .22LR (early '70's)

[IndianaRog]

Actually posted this in introductions as I am a new member, but realized it might get more response here. Forgive my dual post in this case.

I found this forum in the process of looking for info on the Hi-Lux Malcolm 8x Unertl repro scope (sorta repro!). I mostly shoot .22 LR but shoot a lot and I am looking for recommendations of how to scope an early '70's Remington 40X/heavy barrel US marked trainer rifle in .22 LR. I'm quite happy shooting with the existing Redfield Olympic iron sights at 100 yards, but my club is about to open a 300 meter range and my 62 year old eyes could use some help with a proper scope for this distance.

My Remington 40X has scope blocks mounted to the barrel and receiver...I am looking for a drop in solution for scoping...maybe 8-12X power. The Hi-Lux repro "looks" like it would be a nice addition to my Rem 40X, but after browsing online I find lots of complaints of poor quality mounts, screws etc., yet basic scope is well received. My questions are three fold:

1) What would be a good scope option for my Remington 40X /22 LR for shooting 300 meters?

2) Are the Hi-Lux Malcolm 8X mount/screw problems now resolved?

3) If the Hi-Lux would work for my rifle and mount/screw problems remain, is the accurized version (cleaned up/new screws etc.) from Creedmoor worth the money?

Gents, I appreciate any advice on the above. This looks like a great forum and I will enjoy browsing for some time to come.

cheers,
Roger (aka: IndianaRog)

[Andouille]

I believe (and may be wrong about this) that the popularity of the Malcolm scope is generally due to it's price and utility in reproducing the M1903 USMC sniper rifle for the CMP matches and other re-enacting purposes. The original rifles and USMC scopes are hellish expensive and a facsimile can be produced for a reasonable amount of money. You have already noted the quality control and material problems that have been variable with the Malcolm.

For what you're wanting to do, seems to me one of the real Unertl 1 & 1/2" to 2" target scopes in 10 to 20 power would be a better choice. One of the Lyman Targetspot or Super Targetspot should not be overlooked either. This guy here has a boat load of information on the original Unertls, and may even have some for sale. I've never been able to actually get in touch with him, however, but your mileage may be better than mine. There's always Gunbroker and Ebay, of course.

http://unertl.alexweb.net/index.htm

Be aware that Unertl made two different types of rings & mounts and that they are not interchangeable. The website shown above should help you determine which bases you have on your rifle.

[Herschel]

I agree with what Andouille has said. I would think one of the target scopes with external adjustments would be the way to go. Target scopes were also made by Litschert, Fecker and Bausch and Lomb. Any would be good quality but on such old scopes there may be problems should it need repair. They are not cheap but should appreciate in value. I suspect the Malcolm would depreciate in value. There may be a problem getting sufficient elevation on the scope to be on target at 300 yards with a .22 LR. Shooting the .22 LR at 300 yards would not be the thing to do on a windy day.

[IndianaRog]

Thank you gentleman...good suggestions all! I am taking my time on this effort, so will check out those other names...never heard of Litschert and Fecker, so might find they don't command the prices Unertl does. As for that website with lots of old Unertl's on it...I have not been able to email the guy, emails just keep dead ending. I heard on another site that he is either not selling any longer or worse. Shame as he has some beauties on there for half way decent prices.

cheers,
Roger

[n64atlas]

Considering it is a 40X, you can mount a modern scope with standard scope and bases. You can even get bases with 20 moa that will let you reach out to 300m. Weaver target scopes and Leupold
target scopes will give you the powers you will need to shoot that distance.

[Andouille]

There is a limited amount of information that can be transmitted without appearing to be a self-appointed expert, and I'm really just a B.S. artist from South Texas who occasionally remembers something part-way correctly.

But, if you really would like to delve into the subject, the book Old Gunsights and Scopes by Nick Stroebel, is pretty much the gold standard on the subject, and well worth the money:

http://www.amazon.com/Old-Gunsights-Rifle-Scopes-Identification/dp/0896896986/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380749369&sr=8-1&keywords=old+gunsights+and+rifle+scopes

[n64atlas]

Nick Strobles books are very good. I have been using them for many years. I have the one on Iron sights as well as the one mentioned above. The thing is, the 40X series was started at the end of the external adjustment scope era. If you remove the target scope bases and buy normal 700 Remington bases, you can use a modern scope. Don't get me wrong, I like my target scopes like the 20x Lyman Supertargetspot. Good scopes till the light fades. They are getting pricey though. People with Remington 37's, Winchester 52's ect that are not D&Ted for the modern scopes, will pay high prices to have there rifle period correct. Some have went to the Vianie (sic) or EGW mount on these rifles and use modern scopes. You don't have to do that with the 40x series. The very early ones are based on the 722 Remington action and the B's and later are the current 700 action. You said yours was a 70's era, so it would be a XB or might be an XR. I don't think the CMP had any XR's for sale though. Anyway, it does leave you with more options than a rifle with mounts on the barrel only. Weaver scopes are nice mid price range scopes and available in 30x or greater. That helps for long range 22lr shooting, which is not easy to do. Some of these will focus down to 50 feet as well. When I was younger, I wasn't bad at 300 yard 22lr shooting. It was fun.
Now it is not as easy but I still will give it a go.

[IndianaRog]

Thanks for all the inputs guys...this site is the mother lode of wisdom!

Roger

[dave]

Nicks book has been reprinted and is cheap compared to used copies.

[Dollar Bill]

I shoot a couple Win 52s and Rem 40 X-HBs. The external adjusting scopes such as Unertl and Lyman are fine scopes but given the cost of a decent Lyman STS or Unertl in, say 20X for 300 yd shooting, you are kind of blessed in having the modern scope option with the Remington. A Weaver T36 and bases will cost less than half of what a Lyman or Unertl will.

[usmc69]

I use mostly Lyman TS & STS scopes (Have five 10X up to 25X) for my rifles, I even have an original Malcom 10X scope. I use them when the mood strikes me. I also have several Leupolds (6.5-20X, 24X, & 36X) to mount on a Vianni mount for the 52D and on my 40X. The barrel mounted scopes are getting pricey. If I was doing it all over again I think I'd go with receiver mounted scopes.

AJ

[jgaynor]

FWIW here is a site with a review of the Leatherwood/Malcolm 6x scope (not the replica of the Unertl). It dates to 2008 and some of the user comments could be taken as precursors of more recent experiences. That said some of the dealers are taking some extra pains with the Unertl 8x replicas.

http://www.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1223609182

Also DZ Arms makes reproductions on the Unertl/Lyman style external mounts. Use the folllowing link and scroll down the page. Note they are expensive compared to the imported versions.

http://www.hepman.com/dzarms/index.html

[bd1]

Lyman STS, Redfield 3200, if nobody's mentioned them. Remington badged one, 20 or 25X, but I don't know who made it for Remington. I get good service from a steel Weaver T25 and a T30 on a couple of mine, a new era Weaver 36X on another.