Leapers UTG Accushot 2-7X44 Scout scope: Part 3

by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier

Part 1
Part 2

UTG 2-7X44 Scout SWAT scope
Leapers UTG Accushot 2-7X44 Scout Scope is a remarkable sight!

This report covers:

• What is a scout scope?
• Magnification
• Bright!
• The test

It’s been a long time since we looked at this UTG 2-7X44 Scout SWAT scope, and I want you to know that it isn’t because the scope isn’t interesting. It’s very interesting. But other questions and products always seemed to get in the way of this third report. Today that ends, as we’ll take another look at this great scout scope.

What is a scout scope?
Scout scopes are scopes that have very long eye relief. Where a normal long eye relief scope might allow you to position the eyepiece 4-5 inches from your eye, a scout scope lets you get back 9-11 inches. This scope we’re looking at today has an eye relief of 9.5 to 11 inches, so it spans almost the entire length that all scout scopes provide.

You use scout scopes when there’s a reason. Either the rifle’s action has parts that get in the way of a scope being mounted in the normal place — such as the Mosin Nagant bolt-action rifle family whose straight bolt handles rise 90 degrees when the bolt is opened, or there needs to be some clearance for cartridge ejection — such as with the M1 Garand and Winchester model 94 rifles. While there are other ways of mounting scopes on these guns, with the left side mounts being the most popular, a scout scope allows you to look straight ahead, so there will never be a problem adjusting the side angle of the scope’s optical axis to coincide with the bore.

UTG 2-7X44 Scout SWAT scope Winchester 94 with scope
If the scope can’t be mounted above the receiver, such as on this Winchester model 94 lever-action rifle that ejects straight up, a side-mounted scope has been the traditional solution. The scout scope puts the scope above and in line with the bore, making alignment issues less critical.

Magnification
Scout scopes typically don’t have much magnification. That’s their weak spot. I guess it’s technically difficult to provide such a long eye relief and also magnify the target image, or perhaps they don’t do it because of how much the field of view diminishes as the scope goes out farther from the eye. What I do know is that Leapers gives us 2-7 magnifications with this UTG scope, which puts it at the top end of today’s scout scopes.

Bright!
A second big plus with this scope is its brightness. I was able to see the target clearly and make fine aiming adjustments at 7-power. That comes in very handy when you’re putting the thin mil-dot reticle on the target. This Leapers scope has reticle lines fine enough to shave with.

On top of that, this reticle is illuminated; so if the black lines are hidden by the target, they can be lit. All things considered, this is one fine hunting scope. I’ll say more about that in a bit, but let’s now test it at 25 yards.

The test
The scope is mounted on a Crosman MK-177 Tactical multi-pump pneumatic rifle. While that rifle doesn’t need a scout scope, it’s one of the few airguns that has a Picatinny rail long enough to mount such a scope at the correct distance from the eye.

I learned in the last test at 10 meters that this rifle does well with Air Arms Falcon pellets, so I used them exclusively in this test. Since I was shooting from 25 yards, I decided to begin with 6 pumps per shot. That should give a muzzle velocity of about 600 f.p.s. With multi-pumps, I’ve found that 5 or 6 pumps are sufficient for good accuracy at 25 yards indoors.

The first group was shot with the scope as it was left adjusted after the 10-meter test in April. The pellets landed high and to the right, with the group’s center being 2 inches high and .75 inches to the right. The first 10 pellets went into a group that measures 0.837 inches between centers. While that isn’t a wonderful group for most air rifles, it’s pretty good for an inexpensive multi-pump like the MK-177.

UTG 2-7X44 Scout SWAT scope group 1

The first group of 10 Falcons went into 0.837 inches at 25 yards.

Following this group, I adjusted the scope 6 clicks to the left 6 and 14 clicks down for the second group. This was also shot with 6 pump strokes per shot. Ten pellets went into 1.063 inches. Again, not the best group but still pretty good for one of these rifles. Note that the pellets did hit lower on the target following the adjustment.

UTG 2-7X44 Scout SWAT scope group 2

Following a scope adjustment, group 2 put 10 Falcon pellets into 1.063 inches at 25 yards.

I adjusted the scope down 6 more clicks and shot the next and final group. This time, I decided to pump the rifle 8 times for each shot — just to see what difference it might make, if any. Ten more shots went into 0.958 inches. The group was lower but also moved to the left. I must not have the scope leveled on the rifle. And that also makes me wonder if a scope level would help decrease the size of the groups. Several times, I found myself wondering if the gun was canted. The MK-177 doesn’t have the clues that a conventional rifle stock would have. It’s like holding a plank in your arms.

UTG 2-7X44 Scout SWAT scope group 3

For the third group, I adjusted the scope again and also pumped the rifle 8 times for each shot. It put 10 into 0.958 inches at 25 yards.

Okay, that’s today’s test. Remember, I was really testing the scope and not the rifle. I found it to be clear, sharp and very easy to use. The adjustments moved the reticle positively every time. Maybe a scope level could help accuracy, but that remains to be seen. I don’t think I’ve done this wonderful scope justice, yet.

I will now look into mounting this same scope on one of my firearms, so we can continue to look at it. This scope can take some of the budget-priced firearms like the Mosins and SKS/AKs and turn them into useful hunting arms for a fraction of the cost of a new rifle. If you’re in the market for a good scout scope, I think you better look at this one!

68 thoughts on “Leapers UTG Accushot 2-7X44 Scout scope: Part 3

  1. I thought you were going to buy a firearm for this scope! Slippin’ up again? At one point I really considered mounting this on my 392, after much deliberation I’ve decide that if I scope it I will go with the integramount instead of intermounts. As you said, a gun must have special needs in order to require a scout scope. I will keep it in mind in case I run across something that needs one. It’s nice to know that if I run across a good deal, this is available to improve guns that have difficulties fitting a scope.

    Reb



  2. BB
    I think scopes are a hard thing to tell about. Its one of them things that do the best when you can actually see how they are when you look through them.

    But I will have to say that little Leapers Golden Image scope that I have is the clearest sharpest scope that I have looked through in a long time that costs only 50 dollars. But it ain’t got that side wheel focus for the parallax that I like so much and its a fixed power scope. But if it did have those features I guess it would cost more.

    But I can see this scout scope would have its advantages with the long eye relief. I wish I could look through one though.



  3. I have used a Burris 2 1/2X power scout scope in an SK mount on my Mauser 98 for deer hunting in our thick cover and find it to be very practical. The scopes optics provides a clearer sight picture than a receiver sight does, helping to avoid things like tree branches .


  4. B.B.

    Can this Leapers UTG Accushot Scout Scope be used on a pistol? Currently I have a BSA 2×20 pistol scope mounted on my Crosman 2240 pistol. This BSA scope is only about 6.8 inches long with an advertised eye relief of 11 to 20 inches. A few days ago I was looking for a 4x pistol scope, but the only scopes I found were variable magnification scopes about 12 inches long which is longer than the 2240 pistol. Having used 4x rifle scopes at 10 meters distance to target, I rather prefer the 4x magnification and would like to have that on my 2240 in a scope that’s no longer than the 6.8 inch BSA scope. Do you have any recommendations?


    • Charles,

      I thought about that when writing this report. No, I wouldn’t recommend this scope for a pistol. That’s because you couldn’t extend your arms and still see the full image. Your hold would always be a compromise.

      B.B.


      • B.B.

        I was just doing a Google search for handgun / pistol scopes whether they are for firearms or airguns. Are there any you can recommend? I found one listing at MidwayUSA for a reasonably priced Simmons ProHunter 4x32mm Pistol Scope with a length of 9 inches and an eye relief up to 20 inches. Having been in the airgun shooting hobby for only 2 years now, I’m still very new to this and have no idea how to discern whether or not this Simmons scope or any other pistol scope would be appropriate for the 2240. That’s why I was hoping you might have some recommendations. By the way, I think the Pyramyd Air listing for the BSA 2×20 pistol scope has an error. It says the scope’s length is 6.8 inches. I just used my tape measure to measure the scope length at 8.25 inches. Someone may want to correct that length in the BSA 2×20 listing.


        • Charles,

          I haven’t tested many pistol scope, so my answer is no. The BSA scope on the Pyramyd Air site is the only one I’ve tested.

          As far as the length goes, manufacturers change their specs without alerting their dealers, so it’s possible this has happened. Edith will look into it.

          Thanks for the heads up!

          B.B.


        • Leupold FX-II. A little under 9 inches and a genuine 18 inches of eye relief. Has withstood 1000′s of +P rounds out of my 629 chambered in .44 mag.
          NOT reasonably priced though. Might have to sell some blood.


          • Thanks Dangerdongle, I’ll check into it. In the mean time, do you have any experience with scopes from Simmons Optics? I’ve just started researching the Simmons ProHunter 4×32 Pistol Scope. It’s about 8.5 to 9 inches long with 20 inch eye relief, 1 inch tube, and 1/4 MOA adjustments. MidwayUSA has it priced under $100. Do you know anything or heard anything about the quality of Simmons scopes?


            • Sorry for the late response. As you can see by their pricing they’re not exactly top of the line, but I think they’re just fine. I have one on a 10/22 that has held up well. It’s a no frills rig but holds adjustment perfectly and has clear glass. (no fogging around the edges) Unless Simmons quality has dipped lately, (seems like everything is junk nowadays) it should work well.


              • I read several reviews at other websites, and as expected they ranged from those who really liked the Simmons ProHunter scope to those who didn’t like it. According to the UPS tracking number, it’s scheduled for delivery on Monday 7/7/14. I’m looking forward to getting it.


      • I wondered the same thing about the possibility of this as a pistol scope, and realized the eye relief would still be too short for offhand shooting and far too long for a carbine setup. I ended up putting a Leapers UTG 4-16×40 on myCrosman 2400KT, which may seem like overkill (“Your scope is bigger than your gun!” my wife exclaimed when she first saw it) but it works well. Heavy scope, though.


        • HiveSeeker

          I had a similar situation with two of my pistols. I have both the Crosman 357 revolver and the original Dan Wesson BB revolver. Both have 6 inch barrels. I put the CenterPoint MultiTAC Dot sight on both. Although the dot sight is not longer than the pistols, it really made them heavy. I eventually took the dot sights off both pistols.


  5. I like what gunfun1 said about it being hard to judge a scope, with so much going on with the gun to get it straight its hard not to assume every scope is perfect and something’s wrong mounting it. On that note I think your right with the cant, that long plastic rail could easily be way off from the barrel. I was reading a magazine (off topic) about rifles and their firepower, you might ha able to guess, and it said a 556 can shoot 223, but not the other way, said a 55 has a slightly larger case and wouldn’t fit a 22 and it works at higher pressures, but, here’s my question, the velocities show the same grain bullets going identical velocitys in both 56 and 23, so the pressures would essentially have to be the same, no? Now, I understand different ammo may be much hotter, its just curious that the examples disproved the statement, and maybe someone could clarify?


    • RDNA,

      The exterior dimensions cases of the 2 cartridges are identical. The military cases are made from thicker brass, so their internal volume is less. The chamber in the military rifle has a different throat at the cartridge neck.

      The pressure of the military cartridge is higher to achieve the same velocity, and if the military cartridge is used in a civilian chamber, the pressure will spike up another 10,000 psi, at least.

      B.B.


      • Oh, I get it, it take higher pressure in the smaller case to create equal pressure in the bore, the slightly larger case may have a bit lower pressure but at a higher volume creating equal pressure in the bore. Makes sense, I missed a few parts to the equation and just saw higher pressure equal velocities, didn’t think how it would level off in the bore. Nice I can say I learned something today!


        • Or at least how something I knew applied to something, I feel like finding something else to learn about now… lol


    • RDNA,

      5.56 cases have a ticket wall and can stand hotter loads. 5.56 chambers have a deeper throat (more distance from the case rim to the start of the rifling). 5.56 chambers can therefore accept a heavier, longer bullet like that found in military ammo. Up to around 100+gr.

      .223 Rem cases are thinner and the rifle’s chamber is shorter, being built for shorter, lighter varmint bullets. What this causes that is dangerous is when someone closes the bolt on a .556 long bullet round. The bullet may get pushed back into its case by the rifling causing over-pressure and spontaneous disassembly of the gun when fired.

      /Dave

      The .223 Wylde chamber is a compromise in throat that will shoot either one.


  6. I have an off-topic pellet question if you don’t mind.
    I’ve recently discovered the joys of Crow Magnums…don’t know why it took me so long to get around to trying them out, but it turns out they are devastating on flying poo bags and tree rats. Is that simple cup shape really what makes all the difference?



  7. I can’t believe I have managed to miss the first two parts of this series. Thanks, B.B., for doing a report on this glass!

    First, a question: is this scope really as heavy as it lists? 25 ounces seems painful compared to the Leupold fixed 2.5x scout scope (7.5 ounces) that I’ve used nearly exclusively on firearms for the last fifteen years.

    I’m a huge believer in the scout scope concept. For those who have not yet tried it: be aware that you will not grok the value of the concept fully until you have used it across the spectrum of general purpose riflery. It’s too easy to discount the idea if you simply shoot it off the bench or otherwise do only one thing; this is not a specialized glass, it’s a generalized glass, and it comes alive in the field. I’m comfortable with it from snapshots at nearly arm’s length, out to my 300-yard self-imposed hunting limit looped up in prone, and I can still make hits a long way past that. It’s amazingly fast, and very friendly to binocular vision. Speaking for myself at least, I haven’t found anything better for a single sighting system. And that’s with “only” 2.5 diameters’ magnification.

    Still, I’m excited to try this new Leapers glass (the light transmission and field of view are even more exciting than the magnification, to me), and if all goes well, in the next couple of months I will get my first chance. A rifle project that I commissioned some six years ago is finally up and being worked on right now, and I’ve asked the smith to mount the Leapers scope on it instead of my customary Leupold. I’ll be happy to share results when that comes in.

    (For those into such things, the project is on an 03 Springfield that belonged to my grandfather. I’m having it made up into what Jeff Cooper called a “Springfield Scout”, and from the sound of it, it’s going to be a fantastic representation of that concept. The rifle’s raison d’etre, to me, is going to be its ability to handle those marvelous 200-grain .30 caliber bullets. Our critters up here do tend to the large side, and this is where the .30/06 really does outperform the .308.)

    Anyway, I’ve got my fingers crossed, and will love both to hear more from B.B., and to share once I get to put shots on target myself. :-)


    • Kevin,

      I will take the scope off the rifle and weigh it later this afternoon. However, I cannot believe that it weighs 25 oz. It looks like a 12-14 oz. scope at most.

      It is a very good glass! I plan on mounting it on a 91/30 Mosin Nagant rifle next and putting that through its paces, so you will get to see more of it.

      B.B.


      • This is an awesome idea. Instant Mosin snipers become a possibility. Can’t wait to hear the report. The scope can be equally transformative for the M1 Garand. Brownells sells a part that replaces part of the fore-end and makes mounting easy with no change to the rifle. Hint hint. :-) I’ve never liked the idea of the offset scope used for the original M1 sniper rifles. Reports are that accuracy is good, but the scope is high to get an normal cheek weld. It requires a chin-weld.

        Matt61



      • Well, fooey. I was sorta hoping that was a misprint. Okay then, that’s what we have. Thanks for confirming!


      • The Leapers UTG 4-16×40 on my .22 Crosman 2400KT weighs 22.3 ounces and is almost too top-heavy for me. It’s definitely too top-heavy for my wife. This gun with a short barrel and no carbine stock is similar to the Crosman 2240, which clocks in at a hair under 29 ounces. Tossing in the solid Accushot scope rings, the mounted scope approaches the weight of the base model gun itself. This is one heavy sight, but solidly built.


  8. I’ve been wondering about this scope. What it boils down to me is how inferior if at all is the quality of the image compared to a regular scope. A regular scope requires such a delicate eye relief (without which the image disappears) that to image focusing on a scope that is inches away with light intervening is hard to imagine. And the general question. Given a choice, is there any reason why one would prefer a scout scope when it is possible to mount a regular scope? In other words if handling and gun design are not a concern?

    Has anyone noticed that .22 LR is still hard to find and seems to be the remaining and greatest casualty of the ammo shortage? Where before you could get a round for 5 cents, almost comparable to a pellet, now they are four times as much. They don’t represent the savings that they did before. Elmer Keith used to buy .22 LR for practice in cases of 10,000. I just saw a case of 5,000 Wolf Match ammo which I prefer sold for over $700. I don’t think that Keith was paying that kind of money. You would think that this would drive firearms enthusiasts into airgunning. But the impulse just seems to be going to low-powered centerfires. Unfortunately for me, it means that I can’t be nearly so lavish on the shooting range while I’m waiting for the high-powered firearms to cool. :-(

    Matt61


    • Matt,

      If anything the image on this scope is clearer than many regular scopes. That’s why I like it so much.

      Yes, it does get darker when your eye isn’t centered, but there is no sudden blackout.

      B.B.


    • It’s not hard to find (online, anyway) but it still goes for around 10 cents/round. What’s really odd is that other stuff – especially the “assault weapon” calibers (.223 and 7.62×39) – is as cheap as I’ve seen it in the past 4 years or so. In some cases, it seems to be even cheaper. I hope this means that .22 is soon going to recover…


      • You can buy ammo online? Lucky you, we can’t here anymore (NY state). My local Wally world hasn’t had .22RF since Feb 2013. Some centerfire stuff is available ,as well as some pistol rounds like 9mm. Most folks aren’t shooting much here because ammo is so hard to get. The hunter safety course my son took last fall could only allow ONE round of .22RF per kid during the range part of the course.


    • “Given a choice, is there any reason why one would prefer a scout scope when it is possible to mount a regular scope?”

      Yes, absolutely there is. Are. Plural. (Not everyone may agree with me, but my opinion does come from having used both extensively.)

      A historical note, first. The series of “Scout Rifle Conferences” that were held during the 1980s and 1990s, were intended to produce an idealized specification for Col. Cooper’s basic concept. Essentially, interested parties would do independent and shared R&D work for a time, and then meet at the Conference to share results and codify/refine the specification, taking new data back with them for the next iteration. My comments here are given both in the context of my having followed those events at a distance, and also having first-hand experience in using the concept afield for about fifteen years now.

      The actions I have used scout scopes on personally include boltguns (Steyr Scout, Ruger 77, Remington 600), semiauto (M1A), and single-shot (Ruger No.1). One thing that really sticks out with all these actions is that the forward scope is completely out of the way of the action. Loading, unloading and administrative handling is much friendlier than with the conventional mounting style. (One of the things I’m most excited about with my forthcoming 03 Springfield Scout, is the ability to single-load over the magazine cutoff switch, and also to retain the ability to charge with stripper clips. The former is more convenient with a forward glass; the latter is possible with a forward glass.)

      Another thing is that carrying the rifle in your hand, in the field, is more natural with the glass out of the way; it’s more like carrying a rifle with iron sights than a traditional setup. For me at least, this makes a difference after a long day of walking over varied terrain.

      When shooting, I do find it much less prone to blacking out on a bad mount. As well, it’s mounted far enough away that the dominant eye retains noticeably more peripheral vision (that is, even when locked on target, you can still “see around” the scope better). And it is noticeably faster to pick up a target quickly with both eyes. (I have taken a Cooper rifle course that demonstrated this by having students, on the last day, execute snapshots at straight-away clay birds; we all hit at least once. I assure you that doing that with a high-powered rifle is gratifying.) And just to be clear, I’m talking about a comparison to a conventional scope with decent eye relief and set on low power. The speed advantages become even greater if the power ring on the conventional glass is left higher.

      The Scout Conferences did, incidentally, investigate both variable and higher magnification power in scout scopes, and the consensus was that with magnification power above 3x, shooters started to lose the advantage of efficient binocular tracking because of the disparity between the two eyes. As well, field of view suffered noticeably with the greater power. (And so the Leupold 2.5x fixed glass has been an excellent de facto standard for a long time now.)

      With this new Leapers glass, what I’m hoping to find is that with a solid field of view and improved light-gathering, the trade-offs of the weight and the complexity of a variable might be worth it. In practice, my plan is to leave the ring at somewhere between 2x and 3x for all the speed advantages, and dial up if necessary. In my hunting experience at least, if I actually need magnification, there is always time to dial up. There is always that possible long shot.

      Anyway, ultimately I can speak only for myself, but your question is a good one, and I do have answers I’m confident about! Hopefully you find them helpful.


  9. I’ve been trying to watch the new episode of American Airgunner but can’t find it.Is the July 2014 episode available for watching yet? If so could someone give me a shove in the right direction, Please?

    Reb


  10. I broke out the QB-36 yesterday. It started grouping well right off the bat! Very surprising considering I haven’t even cleaned the bore yet. I put about 7 rounds downrange earlier into about 3/4″, just before it started spittin’ rain 1/2″@10m, off the bag.I’ll back it up to 20-30m when the weather clears up.

    Reb


  11. An additional question for the Commentariat.

    The short question is this: what would be the proper way to modify an Airsoft bolt rifle to mount 1) a “scout scope” such as the Leapers or Leupold, and/or 2) a front sight onto a barrel that is not designed for one?

    Background/elaboration:

    One of the things I want to do is to build an “Airsoft scout” for personal training and for teaching. This may actually be a fairly large topic; I am hopeful that B.B. might do an additional installment in the Airsoft series about modifying other action types, and specifically bolt rifles. As much as possible I want such a rifle to have the same features as I have on my firearm scouts:
    - short length of pull (about 12.5″; most stocks are much longer than this)
    - Ching Sling (the middle stud may be problematic for placement)
    - overall length of one meter or less (i.e., may require shortening barrel)
    - scout scope (mounting often requires gunsmithing)

    I don’t yet own an Airsoft boltgun, and so my knowledge is limited. From the look of it using the great and limited lens of the Internet, it seems that overall quality can vary, and you can upgrade quite a lot. Lovely. I’m prepared to make an investment if the result is durable and feature-correct. What I would want to know is:
    - Will an Airsoft boltgun stand up to vigorous bolt work?
    - Will an Airsoft stock stand up to looping up tight in a Ching Sling?
    - Would a home hobbyist find an Airsoft stock to be similar to firearm stocks (for shortening, etc.)?
    - Would the forward placement of magazine and well interfere with mounting a Ching Sling?
    - What material is that “outer barrel” made of? Does one simply drill into it to mount things, or would the screws simply rip out?
    - Would a home hobbyist be effectively able to shorten and recrown an Airsoft barrel? What would be involved in this?

    Any enlightenment would be most helpful; probably the most critical question is the feasibility of mounting a scout scope on a barrel not designed for it.


    • Kevin,

      The average type of airsoft sniper rifle is unsuited to the rugged use you describe. But there may be some very expensive airsoft guns that will stand up to it.

      The average gun is made mostly of plastic, and cannot take the kind of stress that a Garand can. No hasty slings, etc.

      B.B.


      • Well, certainly not the answer I wanted to hear–I hate to see good ideas killed in the nest–but thank you for the intel, B.B.

        That being the case, then, is there such a thing as a custom gunsmith for Airsoft? Who might be willing to build one that is capable of being a real trainer?

        This would seem to be a worthwhile enterprise, as the cost savings of training with Airsoft ammunition, especially in a manual spring piston design with no dependencies on gas or batteries, could easily justify the expense of a custom piece. It wouldn’t take too long at all to recover the cost in savings over training with .308! (Even a custom built .22 “cub scout” wouldn’t be as ideal as an Airsoft piece, for most training…you’d still need a firearm backstop, ear protection, and of course right now finding .22 is rather like finding the chupacabra…)

        (Incidentally, just to be clear for anyone who hasn’t heard of it, the Ching Sling is going to be much tighter than a hasty. It’s a true shooting sling–think military loop sling, but so fast you can get looped up even while acquiring your squat/sitting/prone position.)



  12. Pleased to see that you’re still shooting that MK-177. I’m continuing to enjoy mine as well. With that long forward Picatinny rail, it’s ideal for the Scout scope.


  13. The moment I saw the first part on this Leapers scope, I knew I had to get one. I had a scout set-up on my first Sheridan Blue Streak back in my teens, and I always found it to be a quick-pointing, accurate solution which worked favorably with the pumping action (mine had the plastic hand guard on the barrel). I mounted a cheap pistol scope on my Baikal 512M in .22 on the forward grooves using a UTG 11mm to Weaver mount, and that’s been one of my favorite knock-around guns for the past few years. Recently I was impressed with the Ruger Gunsite Scout, but was wondering what scope I might choose for it – this sounds almost perfect. To Matt, the .22 LR shortage has totally curbed my carefree, recreational shooting (but increased my airgunning), and has me doing a surprising amount of centerfire and shotgunning. I just can’t get myself to blow through my remaining .22 ammo, as it’s an eternity between seeing it on shelves in my area. No one seems to have the real answers for why it disappeared altogether. I’ve never been to a sporting goods dept. where several people haven’t showed up and asked whether they had any – in the brief moment I was there.


  14. Just two quick comments from a newbie. The M1 sniper-set I toted in 1950 came with a fat, laced-on leather cheek piece to align your head to the scope. It never felt “right”, but seemed to work, OK.

    BBP – Your current efforts with the Rooski, reminded me that Stephen Hunter’s newest Bob Lee Swagger yarn, “SNIPER’S HONOR” centers around a WWII Mosin-Nagant 91 with a PU scope.


    • Newspaperguy,

      Welcome to the blog.

      I have one of those leather lace-on cheekpieces for my Garand, but I don’t like it either. Of course my rifle only has the original sights.

      B.B.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


+ 6 = 8

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>