OT - Confirmed that I Found a Gem yesterday........
 

Last week I was out and about and I stopped at a nice looking pawn shop in a part of town that I normally don't frequent. They had a big sign out front that read "Guns", so what the heck if I waste 5 minutes of my time.

Anyway, I go in and on the shelf behind the counter my eyes quickly go to what looks like a Pre-64 Wincheste Model 70 that looks very nice from 15 feet away. I ask to look at it and the guy hands me a rifle that I now know by serial number dates to 1961. The rifle is in immaculate condition, both wood and metal, and when I flip it over to look for a caliber I see "264 Winchester Magnum" on the barrel. On top of it is an also obviously old but pristine looking Leupold Vari-X 3X9 scope mounted in equally old Weaver Tip-Off mounts.

For those of you who are too young to know what Weaver Tip-Offs are, they made a scope mount base and ring device that allowed you to unlock the rings and tip the scope to the left and out of the way so that the iron sights on the rifle could be seen. Tip the scope back up into place and lock the rings in the mount again and you were back in the scope business. Very old school from a time when scopes weren't to be trusted fully. :)

I won't ever go into how much I paid for the rifle, but it wasn't even close to the rifle's value. No where near close. Not even within wind blowing range..........

Proceeding on to yesterday, I took it to a public range to shoot it and check it all out. I bore sighted the rifle and found that the point of impact needed to move to the left and up. So I twisted the knobs and when I looked back through the scope, the vertical and horizontal cross hairs had shifted from their normally centered position in the scope in conjunction with the knobs being twisted. The rifle was now bore sighted but the reticle on the scope was no longer centered when you looked through the scope. What the h3ll was wrong........?????

Absolutely nothing..... The scope pre-dates the modern erector set-up in today's scopes, and back then if the a scope was not perfectly aligned with the rifle bore you might end up with an off centered reticle. It was the nature of the beast back then. That is why Redfield invented and Leupold still sells a rear scope base with windage adjustment in it. Shims under the rear base either front or back took care of any elevation issues. I called Leupold yesterday to see if they could tell me anything historically about the scope and I got an obviously young expert who told me after my explanation of what happened that I was crazy......without him saying that. He did say that by the serial number that I provided that the scope was likely made in the early 1960's... Today I called back and got an obviously older man and he knew exactly what I was describing. He told me to send it to them and they would go through it, but he doubted that they had parts on hand to fix it if anything was bad. But if they couldn't fix any issues due to no available parts they would replace it and send me a new VX-Freedom scope which I have found to be a very good quality, very reasonably priced scope that Leupold has been peddling for a couple of years. If they replaced it, they wouldn't send the old scope back to me.

I'm now debating whether I want to keep the scope as is for a paper weight/conversation piece or whether I want to send it in and hopefully get a reconditioned paper weight back even though I will never use the scope on a serious hunting rifle which this Model 70 is even though the scope is clear and bright. I'm leaning toward I'd rather have the old scope as is and just go buy another scope for the rifle.

Not sure how to end this other than to say that sometimes it pays to be old even if you're obviously not an expert like a much younger guy generally is....:D As for an additional comment on the rifle/scope/ring and base condition, all that was needed to make it all look NIB was the box. I'm maybe old and dumb in some minds but I'm old, happy, and dumb in this case.......... and the rifle/scope combination shot extremely well with the old scope in place in spite of where the cross hairs were in the view through the scope.

-BCB

I think I would just keep the scope as is, for conversation piece and history and put a new, up to date one on BCB. By the way that is a great buy. Have a friend that has one of the first one's, like that put out by Winchester, he even has a few of the original two diameter 139 grain bullets that were first put out for that gun and chamber. you remember those ? Bill K :)

I am planning to keep the scope as is with the reticle left off centered. Who knows what conversations it might incite or even maybe a nostalgic trade for something at the right time. Sometime Safari Club Conventions lead to interesting older items.

I did replace the Weaver Tip Off mounts with Warne bases and Weaver style Burris Signature rings before taking it to the range. Hence the need to bore sight it.

I never got involved with the 264 Win Mag until the early 1980's so I'm not familiar with the bullet that you mentioned, Bill. I've always had good luck with Sierra 140 grain bullets in the 264's that I own. It's a great cartridge. But what 6.5 cartridge isn't.......? Well.......maybe the 6.5 Creedmoor????

(Being old and senile, that comment should raise a few bumps and bruises on my pointed head) :D

-BCB

What a great find. I also think it would be best to just keep the scope and put a modern scope on the rifle. All the new optical coatings make a huge difference in optics. I like my old Unertls, but contrast and color rendition can't compare at all.

If I remember correctly back then in and around 60-61 when they brought that caliber out, the reason for the two diameter bullet, was that the front half was slightly smaller so it would fit into the chamber without hitting the lands, as the bullet was fairly long and it helped keep the pressure down.
My friend bought the rifle at a gun shop in Mt. Shasta, Ca along with a couple boxes of ammo in the late 60's or early 61 as I remember and we went out to a spot in the woods outside McCloud, Ca and sighted it in. He shot a nice black tail that year in the fall with it. Ah history and old memories. Bill K :)

That's interesting about the bullet. At one time I had an older well-worn Pre-64 in 264 WM and it shot the Sierra bullets without any issues. A friend years ago felt he needed it more than I did, so I sold it to him. Since then I've picked up a Rem 700 BDL, a USRAC Model 70 when they first came out with the controlled round feed actions, and the newest is a 2 year old Winchester Model 70 Extreme Weather. This Pre-64 is by far the oldest age-wise in the stable.

I was surprised at how good the view through the scope was yesterday on an overcast day. It was clear and bright. Having an off-center scope reticle is a bit disconcerting however and not something that my spoiled eyes adapted to...... So a new scope will be a worthy addition. The old scope will go into the new scope box for safe storage in my cache of "stuff".

btw - the cross hairs on the old scope are the old slow taper from not very thick to fairly thin. Maybe an early attempt at a Duplex reticle before they had been invented.......:D

The only downside to the rifle is the flat plastic thin stock recoil pad that Winchester put on the older Pre-64's. Not much of an improvement from the steel butt pads on the earlier ones. With the 264 WM cartridge, you definitely notice that something happened when you pull the trigger at a bench. While hunting it will be a non-issue. Putting a soft recoil pad on a Pre-64 is like defacing a Rembrandt with a razor blade for my eyes. All three of the others have soft recoil pads. The BDL came with one, I had one installed on the USRAC Model 70, and the Extreme Weather came with one on it. I'll just have to "man up" with this one..... :D

-BCB

Quite coincidental! I picked up the exact configuration last spring, except mine has Burris rings and bases. I hope yours shoots better than mine, I'm getting minute of heart at 100 yards and can't keep 3 on a 9" paper plate at 200. I'm going to try a couple more different bullets. I've tried 3 different types with three different powders without much change in accuracy. I did pull the early 3X9 Leupold (same moveable crosshairs as yours) and put a Vari X3 3.5-10 on it. It didn't improve my groups :( I'll give it a couple more chances before I push it down the road. As said, I also won't deface it by accurizing....

Aaron

Aaron, anytime that I buy an older rifle I always wonder about it until I shoot it. By all appearances, this rifle had been shot very little over the years. The original blue on the CRF bolt face was all still intact.

It shot easy 1" and smaller three shot groups which is about all you can expect of any light barreled factory hunting rifle. I'm more than pleased with it in all respects

I hope you find a load that works in yours........... For me, the 140 grain Sierra Spitzer with IMR 4350 has always worked well. IMR 4831 is another good power. Both will get you in the range of 2900+ fps with very good consistent accuracy.

-BCB

I think that Leopold called that tapered crosshair a CPC reticle. I have one on a Vari-X II 3x9 with AO, and like it a lot.

Mine, shows very little usage also. The powders you mentioned are two of what I did try along with Retumbo. I will pick up a box of the Sierra's, I tried 2 of Nosler's offerings and One from Hornady. None of them showed any real signs of improvement over the others. As a hunting rifle I was very careful and spaced my shots so I had no chance of warming the barrel. I would be tickled pink with "1" groups. The way it's shooting now I won't take it to the woods. Temps here are below any level of comfort for load development. 7* this morning with a high of 21* this afternoon...…. A project for next spring ;)
There were area's in the Keewenaw peninsula that received over 30" of snow the last couple of days. I've still got bare ground here in the banana belt of the UP but it's mighty hard ground!