Uberti 1885 w/ period correct scope.

[littlejack]

I decided to go with the Leatherwood Malcom 6x scope on my Uberti clone.
If you NRA members remember back in September of 2010, there is an artical on
this same setup, with the rifle and scope on the front page. This setup was used
in Africa and also without the scope and with factory sights with factory smokeless
45-70 loads.
I was considering a Unertl or Fecker for the longer look, but I couldn't justify the
cost or putting either scope on the rifle unless I was going to do some serious
match shooting.
I wanted the look of a longer scope, but not so long as to be troublesome in a
hunting environment. I did want the rifle and scope to look period correct also.
Bottom line, I had the gunsmith that is going to mount it, order the Leatherwood
Malcom 6x by 18". I am concerned about getting used to the 3/4" tube though.
I looked through one that the gunsmith had, and figured I would be able to
adjust. All of my other scopes have the 1" tubes, and consequently lots of F.O.V.
The F.O.V. on this scope is 12' at 100 yards, and it is darker because of the
smaller tube.
From the articles I read, the quality of the lenses is very good. The one I looked
through was very clear. There is some machining marks on the outside, and the
mounts are not match quality.
Don McDowell (Ranch 13) on this forum bought one of these scopes a few
months back. Maybe he will chime in a give me some details.
Does anyone else have expierience with this scope? If so, lets hear how you like
or dislike it.
Jack

[Doc Highwall]

I have one of the 3X scopes mounted on a Marlin 39 Cowboy and I like it.
Don't get me wrong the machining and mounts are on the crude side but the scope itself is sealed and will not fog up and for hunting and is clear.
I will probably buy a MVA scope for match shooting.

[Cap'n Morgan]

I have a Leatherwood/Malcolm x6 scoped Uberti 45-70 just like yours. The scope works great. Don't worry about the POV, it's more than adequate - and far better than the sights the rifle came with. The mounts suck, though, I replaced the front mount with a more solid one:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=93512

I had to replace the spring loaded plunger in the rear mount with a threaded non-spring plunger. The scope was whipping during recoil, and the friction in the front mount kept it from return to battery.

I have a x3 Malcolm as well, but haven't tried it yet. It will probably end up on my 12.7 x 44 Swedish Remington.

[bigted]

i have a 38-55 in the works being built on a browning '85' action with a #4 contour green mountain barrel. i had the malcom long scope so im having it mounted on this rifle.

all this being said i have no words of encouragment yet as my experience is still waiting for me as well. i have some of the same concerns as you but fat is in the fire now so ill be better able to say in a couple mounths i hope.

keep us informed tho as to your experience with this leatherwood

[Doc Highwall]

TexasMax has on his web site information about a scope mount being made for the highwalls and replacement mounts for the Leatherwood/Malcolm scopes.
I think they are made by DZ Arms IIRC.

[littlejack]

Thanks all for your replies.
It looks confirmed, as I said in my original post, that the scope itself has no issues. I did read
Texasmacs article, and it is one of the reasons that I decided on this set-up. I also saw a
review that Ranch 13 posted, saying basically the same thing. The scope is good, but he
bought the better mounts from DZ that Doc has mentioned.
I plan on setting the scope for 100 yards, and not adjusting past 200 yards. This will be
minimal adjustment for the rear mount, and maybe I can get a repeatable placement for the
range in between at 150 yards. I would like to be able to set the rear mount dial and be able
to repeat 100, 150, and 200 yard distances.

I do feel better about the 3/4" tube, and the scope overall after reading the posts. I may
contact the smithy that is going to do the work and check with him about better mounts
right from the get-go.
Jack

[NickSS]

I have one of the 6X 18 inch scopes on one of my Sharps rifles in 45-70. It works OK but the mounts are sub standard as far as I can tell. I have gotten to the point where I can make them work but they are less than optimum. The Optics are good and once I get the zero adjusted the scope produces good groups at 200 yards which is just about as far as I can get it to shoot with what came with the scope. I have heard that Buffalo arms carries a better mount but it costs more than the scope cost me. But maybe I will spring for one in the future.

[littlejack]

Thanks Nick.
The 200 yard distance is what I will be looking to shoot for, (pun). If the mounts will work for that distance, I will be ok. I do not plan on any long distance matches. Sound like everyone that has expierience with this set-up, has the same opinion.
I did talk to the smithy yesterday, and ask about movement of the scope from recoil. He said, I may have had some problem with the longer scope, but hasn't seen problems with the 18" scopes. It is a matter of weight and momentum from recoil. So, all seems to be coming together well. Thanks for your information.
Jack

[Don McDowell]

Jack, I like the optics on this scope. I like the long eyerelief. I did mount it in the DZ Arms mounts and will know in a few days if they will indeed have enough elevation to reach 1000 yds. I have shot it at 600, and can say it is nice to be able to see the target.:bigsmyl2:
I'm still not cranked up on the 3/4 inch tubes, didn't like them as a youngster and there are some things that just don't change I suppose.
If you are figuring to zero that scope for 200 and leave it, then the rear factory mounts should be fine. I think a person would have a heck of a time changing anything and returning to the original settings with those mounts.
I would also urge you to turn the "slide lock" ring around and improvise a slide rail for the front mount, as I believe the thing that comes with it would likely tear the mount off the gun in time from the recoil. I found a cotter pin that was the right size and then clamped it between the clamp screws so that the scope slides freely under recoil.

[Don McDowell]

Jack forgot to mention a "lense pen" will be a nice addition to your shooting kit. Shooting bp into the wind you'll find out if your lube is making it out of the barrel or not.

[littlejack]

Thanks for the heads up on making it a slider. I will do some head scratching and maybe come up with something. I wonder, does Leatherwood have a sliding mount that a person could buy for such situations? I will give them a call.
On you second post Don, Is that anything like "spitting into the wind"? LOL
Jack

[Don McDowell]

Yeh only greasier. lol

[Longwood]

Here is a link to a precision mount for the Leatherwood scopes.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=376025

[Don McDowell]

http://www.hepman.com/dzarms/UNERTL%20SCOPE%20MOUNTS.htm

[littlejack]

I think, with those reviews, I will pass.

[littlejack]

I picked up my rifle today at the smithy's.
It looks so fine with that period correct scope on it.
First off, I found this out the hard way. One needs to remove the elevation and windage
adjustment screws, and polish the faces that are pushing against the scope.
When machining them, there is a little tit, (teat) left in the center of each screw. They
scratch the scope very easily. Ask me how I know.
I used 600 wet/dry on a piece of polished granite. Now the screw ends will do no MORE
harm.
I cleaned all of the threads on the scope and mounts and lightly lubricated everthing.
The scope is very clear, and after adjusting the eyepiece, the cross hairs are very sharp.
I believe I will be able to get use to the 3/4" tube, and knowing that the scope is period
correct, will help with my acceptance.
I don't think I will be able to get to the range tomorrow, but Saturday for sure if God willing.
I will post some results.
Jack

[Doc Highwall]

littlejack. please post some pictures of the gun and mount.

[littlejack]

First range report, with new Leatherwood Malcom scope.
After bore sighting at 50 yards, I fired for effect. I adjusted the rear windage and elevation, and fired again. This shot was close enough to get on paper at 100 yards.
I moved to 100 yards and began again.
First two shots were low and right, so I adjusted the rear elvation up and windage to the left.
The groups kept jumping around. I know that the scope will bounce in this type of mounts, but also they are supposed to come back to their previous position.
The mount in front, allowed too much slop. When I saw what was happening, I loaded up my gear and headed for home.
I realize that the front mount has to have enough clearance to pivot when the rear mount is adjusted, but I believe there was too much. I took the scope off of the bases, and loosened the lock ring for the forward mount and slid the mount back. I then put 2 layers of black electricions tape on the scope, where the forward ring sets. I then slid the forward ring over the tape, and the extra slop was taken care of. One cannot see the black tape. This will also give a little cushion for the scope to play in.
The gunsmith had shimmed the front base about .030 to give me a little more adjustment
in elevation. After seeing where the POI was at 100 wards, and the adjustments I needed to make, I decided to take the shim out. That worked out well. I will find out on the next range session if there is enough adjustment for 200 yards.
I hope the slop thing is fixed on the scope, and the groups settle down.
The scope is very clear. The crosshairs are very sharp. The target is very clear.
Plenty of eye releif. I'm getting used to the 3/4" tube. I like the scope.
Doc, I will try to post some pictures. I am not that talented with electronics or on the computer.
Jack

[Markbo]

http://forum.m1911.org/images/smilies/worthless.gif

[Chicken Thief]

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm153/Chickenthief/Blandet/ThisThreadIsUselessWithoutPictures.jpg

[6.5 mike]

I'm glad to know I'm not the only who gets ragged on about no pic's,LOL. And all the way from Denmark, got me beat.:kidding:

[littlejack]

Your right Mike, we don't cut anyone any slack.

[littlejack]

OK, after thinking about this front mount set-up some more, I come to the conclusion that something can't be right. One should NOT have to shim a new scope in this way.
The scope tube must touch the 2 contact points when the scope is mounted in the correct fashion.
I went to my local BP shop, (The Gun Works) and talked to the owner, and a friend of mine whom I have worked with in the past. Both agreed, that the scope tube needs to touch the contact points on the inside of the the front mount ring, with some tension agaist them from the bottom tension screw.
I then came home and called Hi-Lux Inc. (Leatherwood), and the technition stated the same thing.
Apparently, there was something keeping the tension screw under the front mount from pushing up on the scope tube. I checked it all out, removed the electricians tape that I had put on the tube a few days ago, and retensioned the screw. All looks good now. Th scope tube is touching the two top contact points, with tension against the tube.
When moving the scope tube purposely by hand, in the front mount, the tube comes back to its original position when released. Hopefully this will solve my problem.
Jack