K98 scope mount idea

[Doc1]

Anyone who's fooled with .mil K98s for any length of time has to be frustrated by sighting options. You either have to drill and tap the receiver for a decent scope mount or D&T it to mount a solid peep sight. I've successfully D&T a K98 for peep sights, but haven't tackled the more challenging scope mount D&T job.

The various aftermarket sights designed to sit on the rear sight base all have their problems: Rear sight base peep sights, like the Mojo, are well-made but sit too far away from the eye. This excess eye relief really detracts from the peep sight's aperture effect. Rear base LER (long eye relief) mounts are limited to low power, are not the last word in accuracy and to some folks - including myself - just look plain ugly.

Bear in mind that the Mauser's rear sight base is attached to the barrel with nothing more than solder. The single screw present on most is there for nothing more than alignment; it's not there for strength. The large amount of surface area on the rear sight base achieves great strength with only solder. Because of the low temperatures required, removing or changing rear sight bases is pretty easy.

Got it so far? OK. Here's my idea:

Why doesn't anyone manufacture a steel rear sight base replacement with a cantilevered - steel - weaver or pictatinny rail extending back over the receiver? If it was pre-soldered (tinned), it should be an easy replacement for any Mauser owner with a propane torch! Additionally, I'd think it would be an attractive rig!

This would require no drilling of a (possibly rare) receiver at all and nothing collectible - including the barrel - should be altered at all with this approach. Maybe I'm reinventing the wheel here, but I've never seen anything like I'm talking about.

Oh! One last thing. I think the same approach could be taken to design a similar scope base that would be soldered to the larger barrel step immediately forward of the receiver and behind the original rear sight base location. This should be stronger still, but would require removing the original sight base and then removing the blue and tinning the barrel.

Any thoughts?

Best regards
Doc

[mike in co]

anyone who's fooled with .mil k98s for any length of time has to be frustrated by sighting options. You either have to drill and tap the receiver for a decent scope mount or d&t it to mount a solid peep sight. I've successfully d&t a k98 for peep sights, but haven't tackled the more challenging scope mount d&t job.

The various aftermarket sights designed to sit on the rear sight base all have their problems: Rear sight base peep sights, like the mojo, are well-made but sit too far away from the eye. This excess eye relief really detracts from the peep sight's aperture effect. Rear base ler (long eye relief) mounts are limited to low power, are not the last word in accuracy and to some folks - including myself - just look plain ugly.

Bear in mind that the mauser's rear sight base is attached to the barrel with nothing more than solder. The single screw present on most is there for nothing more than alignment; it's not there for strength. The large amount of surface area on the rear sight base achieves great strength with only solder. Because of the low temperatures required, removing or changing rear sight bases is pretty easy.

Got it so far? Ok. Here's my idea:

Why doesn't anyone manufacture a steel rear sight base replacement with a cantilevered - steel - weaver or pictatinny rail extending back over the receiver? If it was pre-soldered (tinned), it should be an easy replacement for any mauser owner with a propane torch! Additionally, i'd think it would be an attractive rig!

This would require no drilling of a (possibly rare) receiver at all and nothing collectible - including the barrel - should be altered at all with this approach. Maybe i'm reinventing the wheel here, but i've never seen anything like i'm talking about.

Oh! One last thing. I think the same approach could be taken to design a similar scope base that would be soldered to the larger barrel step immediately forward of the receiver and behind the original rear sight base location. This should be stronger still, but would require removing the original sight base and then removing the blue and tinning the barrel.

Any thoughts?

Best regards
doc


lol been done...

Look in shotgun news, elite or something like that.

[Doc1]

Mike,

The Iron Elite is not quite the same thing...but it's sorta' close. The IE is a cantilevered rail, but it fits to the existing rear sight base. I'm talking about a solid, one piece sight base replacement.

The IE mounts have a generally good reputation, but there are complaints about them coming loose and otherwise losing zero.

Best regards
Doc

[Mk42gunner]

The problem I see with this idea is the bolt handle to scope clearance. Even the bent bolt handles will hit the occular lens housing on a regular scope. If you are going to have to forge or replace the bolt handle anyway, you might as well drill and tap the receiver.

Robert

[mike in co]

i have done the opposite. put the scope high by adding a spacer rail then a stock bent bolt will clear...just barely.

like the man said if you mount a normal eye relief scope low the bolt will not clear and you have another issue to overcome.

yes you can do what you said, but why.....
and where is your market ?

how many guys are gonna unsolder thier sight base ?? or get one back on straight ?

[Dutchman]

The various aftermarket sights designed to sit on the rear sight base all have their problems:........Rear base LER (long eye relief) mounts are limited to low power,


Good evening :-) There's always something fun in this forum. That's why I like this place. It's my new 2nd home. I'm going to assume you're not familiar with my long eye relief scope mounts. I've been plastering them all over this forum long enough but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

LER is not limited to low power. I'm using 2-7x32 and mostly at 7x. Is that low power? (no) So, you're first assumption is incorrect, Mijnherr Doc.


are not the last word in accuracy

This is where I figured you were just filibustering the crowd without actually having any experience with LER scopes or rifles with LER scopes and the accuracy thereof.



and to some folks - including myself - just look plain ugly.

Them's fightin' words, dude! Now I know you haven't seen my mounts.

http://images41.fotki.com/v195/photos/2/28344/6806565/DSCF1354yy-vi.jpg

http://images110.fotki.com/v559/photos/2/28344/6806565/DSCF1357-vi.jpg

http://images53.fotki.com/v426/photos/2/28344/6806565/DSCF0867bd-vi.jpg

You want the last word in accuracy and you're shooting a K98k? If I laughed any harder I'd be getting a hernia!!!!



Bear in mind that the Mauser's rear sight base is attached to the barrel with nothing more than solder. The single screw present on most is there for nothing more than alignment; it's not there for strength. The large amount of surface area on the rear sight base achieves great strength with only solder.

Read back over your own words where you say: "...on the rear sight base achieves great strength.....". If this were a court case you would've just tossed your case out the window with that statement. You admit soldered rear sight bases achieve great strength. And they do it with only solder. Hmmmm....

The great strength is achieved, actually, by the capillary action of the solder joint. In joints using 99.9% silver solder (for example because it's what I have the most experience with) the joint is .002"-.003" at most. If it starts getting larger than this the "great strength" goes bye bye. It's the tight fitting, to a degree, that's responsible for the great strength of a soldered joint.

My Swede m/96 LER mount is so beautiful I get misty eyed just looking at it. It's so perfect nestled down in the rear sight base, with great strength I might add. I've been shooting the m/96 with a LER scope for 10 years. That rear sight base is still connected to the barrel. It hasn't shot itself loose or broken the solder joint. And it won't. I may never design anything again that's as good as my m/96 LER mount but bygoodness it's the best dang LER scope mount for the m/96 Swede in the entire world. What makes it the best is the thought that went into it. Its low and it doesn't impinge the integrity of a collectible rifle. No modifications required. There are none lower than my beautiful <sniffle sniffle> m/96 mount. And you use the word UGLY?



Why doesn't anyone manufacture a steel rear sight base replacement with a cantilevered - steel - weaver or pictatinny rail extending back over the receiver? If it was pre-soldered (tinned), it should be an easy replacement for any Mauser owner with a propane torch! Additionally, I'd think it would be an attractive rig!

Propane... Do you know what happens to a barrel when its heated too much in one spot? It shrinks. Yeah, the bore shrinks. Enough to strip off more copper in that one place than the rest of the bore. And you wanna turn loose JoeBob with a propane torch on a nice rifle?

And here you want to install this cantilevered mount...... with solder? Didn't you just disparage soldered rear sight bases? I'm so confused!

Attractive? (barff!) There are a couple such mounts already on the market. You can tell how popular they are by all the posts in this forum about them. Huh? You need a dang ladder to climb up and see through the scope, they make them so H I G H. Why do they do that? I think it's because they want to leave room in case Bambi jumps over the rifle, between the barrel and scope so she'll have adequate "hoof" clearance. That must be it. I can't think of another reason why those mounts are so H I G H.

Cantilever: it means one end of the scope rail is hanging out in space unsupported.

Some of my mounts have a semi-cantilever appearance but not too much as I understand vibration and the accentuated leverage of recoiling forces so this rail is 4.75" long. That last word in accuracy you're seeking won't arrive on a long cantilevered scope mount.

http://images50.fotki.com/v1558/photos/2/28344/6806565/DSCF8656aa-vi.jpg



This would require no drilling of a (possibly rare) receiver at all and nothing collectible - including the barrel - should be altered at all with this approach.

In part of my life on the internet I play a hard core purist vintage military rifle collector and on the forum that's my 1st home, where I'm the co-owner and moderator, you'd get tossed out in the street with talk of unsoldering rear sight bases on collectible rifles. One of the most sought after virtues of vintage military rifles is the condition known as "un-messed with". Its a technical term that's included in the original text of the Book of Crufflerism.

You've extended your argument way out on the end of cantilevered logic. It's a lot like a plank on a merry ol English ship with you being the pirate and that cantilevered plank being the last place your feet will touch before you get deep-sixed for messing with a nice valuable collectible rifle.

For 10 years I lived in what I refer to as my monastery years. Dirt road, lots of corn and soybean, no women, guns, woodchucks and winters, long long winters in northern Indiana where you can die outside it gets so cold. What do you do in such a place during winter? You study the religion of long eye relief scope mounts on vintage military rifles. You sit for hours (because the ice has disabled your satellite dish) holding your really nice collection of crufflerwapen. And you study and ponder how to get more horsepower out of those dang lousy iron sights. You can't drill & tap even though I have a rather nice machine shop at home. You are restricted to the confines of the rear sight base, or other points of possible attachment of a scope mount. You might also comb the U.S. Patent Office database to peruse past monkly endeavors by other men who lived on dirt roads during winter blizzards.

You think you know "ugly" when you see it?

Meet the Lee sisters. Ug-Lee, Beast-Lee, Home-Lee....

http://www.mc15371.com/prodotti.html

There are others I'd prefer not to name. They were made mostly for giraffe-human hybrids who have very long necks to raise up to S E E the stratospheric scope mounts.

There's one well known scope mount maker who's so well versed with his product that the scopes on his mounts are....... backwards. And positioned incorrectly in the rings. The backwards scope is the good one, though. You go ahead and buy your scope mounts from the guy who doesn't know which end of a scope to point towards the target. :-)

Getting back to your barrel sleeve scope mount......

The Mosin-Nagant m/38 and some m/44 carbines have a rear sight on a sleeve. Its not soldered to the barrel. It appears to be pinned with 2 steel pins. Because my son-in-law has an unnatural attraction for Mosin-Nagant rifles we seem to have an abundance in this house. So I've studied the m38 Mosin carbine with an eye towards a barrel sleeve scope mount. But not a cantilevered mount which would use a short eye relief conventional scope. Just a very strongly mounted and finely machined steel barrel sleeve long eye relief scope mount. Because I know, from experience, that long eye relief scope mounts really are about the last word in optical sights for vintage military rifles and they function really good once you get used to them.

I spend a lot of time in this particular area of thought so I have a lot to say about it. (too much)


Any thoughts? Remember you asked 8-).

Dutch

[Doc1]

Hoe gaan dit, Meneer Dutch? You will forgive my spelling, but my Dutch background originates in southern Africa, not Europe. They do things differently there...

I appreciate your response and your gift with the language. Now...er...your comprehension may be a bit lacking. S'ok. We all have our shortcomings: I can't do advanced calculus and I've yet to master all of the blues scales on the piano. I'll address, in no particular order, some of the points you raise.

I never inferred that soldered bases lack strength; just the opposite. I noted the strength they achieve and yes, I'm familiar with capillary action and its role in achieving a strong soldered joint.

I didn't say I wanted "the last word in accuracy" or that I expected to find it in a K98 and I surely don't want you to laugh too hard, Dutch! For a man who's gone ten years without a woman, that could be dangerous!

What I said was that the rear sight base-mounted scopes aren't known for being the last word in accuracy. In general terms - your mounts notwithstanding - this seems to a widespread sentiment amongst a lot of people who have tried various mounts from different manufacturers and have been unhappy with them. Your own extended manufacturing efforts at improving the type would seem to bear this out. You are making my case for me! Baie dankie, ou maat!

As to K98s and accuracy, In my safe-full of rifles I have three that stand out as being especially accurate. One is an ancient, inexpensive, Western Field M842B .22 that's just plain spooky...or at least it was when my eyes could take full advantage of it. Another is my Remington 700 in .308 and the last is an old 7.62 NATO Fabrique Nationale - GASP - K98! I have lots of other rifles which are all more than adequately accurate, but those three stand out. Some rifles just have the "magic." Excuse me for a moment while I throw the bones and rearrange my ju-ju beans and muti...

"Do you know what happens to a barrel when it's heated too much in one spot?" Yes, actually I do. I also know what happens when you step onto the tracks in front of a train, jump out of a plane without a parachute, put a double charge of Red Dot into a case and lots of other awful things. I don't recommend any of them and I never suggested overheating a barrel. You have a penchant for trying to put words in my mouth. Perhaps you acquired it from your cousin, JoBob.

"Them's fightin' words, dude"??? PIck any other poster on this thread. Go ahead. I dare you. Now, let's you and him fight. The photos of [I]your[I] mounts are beautiful. Many others are not. Again, you thoughtfully made my case for me by including a portfolio of ugly mounts and the time you spent fabricating your mounts, instead of buying an off-the-shelf product reinforces my opinion. You're making this too easy Dutch, but for all that I still prefer the aesthetics of a conventionally-positioned scope.

On that note, I have to go. My 82nd Airborne son just called :-)

Best regards
Doc

[mike in co]

what you see is what you get when you are willing to spend some money on a quality product.
most, as you have noted are poor quality or/and poor design.

try these two...dutchman's and s and k "scope monts". once there you will not go back.

where you are correct i sthat no major us manufacture produces a high power ler scope. i took dutch's leed and bought ncstar 2-7 lers......low end of the price spectrum....but life time warrantee.

mike in co

[Dutchman]

Not putting words in your mouth, just taking your loose ends and running out their inference.

Aside from all this... the barrel band idea has merit but for mis-match and shooter grade rifles. So, with that in mind the rearward cantilever idea is in use by a couple mfg's. But to stabilize the tendency to flex they use strain screws bearing against the receiver ring. Just pushing on it. Ugly hath manifest itself.

pssssst.. Mike.. its S&* that puts the scopes on backwards. Look through their whole website. They do it more than once. And the way they position the scope in the rings is misleading. They're using NcStar 2-7x32 in some/many of the photos but they show the scope too far forward. This scope needs only 8 to 10 inches of eye relief. This is why this particular scope is ahead of the much older looooong eye relief scopes that put the sight picture too far forward. Add to that the older handgun scopes used were low power. You end up with something better than iron sights but not X-ring worthy. The NcStar 2-7x32 gives a very sharp clear picture of the X in the X ring at 50 yds for most of my cast bullet shooting.

I ran into someone on another forum who was also disparaging LER scopes with much the same argument as MrDoc1. But this guy had never held a rifle with a LER scope. Never shot a rifle with a 7x LER scope. He was quite the authority, hey? You'll find an awful lot of opinions on LER scopes on milsurp rifles. You have to wade through them to find the ones who've had experience and shove the others off to the sides.

Some of S&* mounts reflect an improvement in having a Weaver rail extend rearward to allow sufficient ring positioning and eye relief. But not all of them by a long shot. And they've improved their selection to include using Weaver instead of their proprietary rings. But for the most part they're still too high for no good reason. They do have a couple that have come way down. One is for the Spanish m/1893-16. Somebody at S&* got it right for a change.


My K98k is de-nazified and Yugofied so I decided to scope it with a receiver scope. I bought the Weaver K4 used. Its a European post & cross-hair that came from Sweden. I wanted to try Leupold bases and rings and I like 'em. If it shoots really good as it is I'll leave it as it is. But if it shoots lousy I'm yanking the barrel and putting a new Adams & Bennett F54 .30-06 and drop it into a Richards Microfit laminate stock. (I use to work around the corner from them in Sun Valley down in L.A.). This particular receiver is Mauser Oberndorf 1940. Very slight remnant remaining.

http://images46.fotki.com/v1433/photos/2/28344/1676633/DSCF1436rs-vi.jpg

http://images110.fotki.com/v560/photos/2/28344/1676633/DSCF1440rs-vi.jpg