Need help in trying to scope a new Winchester 52 B repro

3300 Views 74 Replies 17 Participants Last post by budrichard, 1 mo ago

Rimfireraptor

Discussion Starter · 3 mo ago

I have this model 52 for close to 20 years and have never shot it. I now wish to turn it into a 95% target gun, 5%hunting. Looking to shoot everywhere between 25-30 yards and long range & silhouette. Mostly 50 & 100 bench to see how far she will go. Bought a Hawke 6-24x56 30 SF thinking she would go on it but after looking it over it looks like it may not work, but if it does will need a serious cheek rest pad. I know the bolt handle issue is a problem on these but once I started the process I had no idea of just how frustrating
it was going to be. If..... if the scope doesn't work out on this gun it's really no big deal as I wish to get another high end .22 for strictly target and most of them come with the 60% handle. I am looking to mount a tactical variable scope with as much magnification as I can get (26-36) with focus & parallax down to the 25-30 yard range if possible and all the other bells and whistles (return to zero, locking, (lite reticle if option) if possible, great glass) I would say $1000 would be my limit.

The Hawke in the picture has a 30mm tube and front 56mm objective which clears the barrel by about a 1/4" with the burris bases and 8 glued pennies atop... but the bolt handle is VERY close and tough to see if she'll actually clear the bolt to use. SK was going to make the split bases and rings for this gun but when I sent him the pic she stated "won't work, get a different scope". Actually this setup "might" clear as is and I would just have to use a cheek rest pad as she is high but not sure if having like this is a realistic look/approach. (opinions pls) Just for reference the 8 glued pennies are .450 in hight. Owner at SK told me to do the penny trick and let him know as he can determine height by # of pennies. If I did go with SK then I would have to remove the burris bases. If things work out would SK be a good option for bases & rings or just stick with burris and ??
So, I'm not really sure what to do. Since this Hawke has a 30mm tube does that mean I must switch back to a 1" tube as I would assume it would have a smaller ocular lense which is really where the problem arises. Do they make other high magnification scopes with 30mm tubes like above that have a smaller ocular lense ? Granted the 56mm objective on current scope is big but she clears by 1/4 but if I had to downsize that end of the scope to get things to fit I would.

I just don't know who how much of a scope I can put on her to get her to clear the bolt handle and barrel.

If setting this scope up this high (like in pic) works should I go with it or does it look out of place ? It's really just the rubber ring on the ocular end of the scope that is close, not the tube. If it weren't for those rubber turning knobs the scope tube would clear easily and could be dropped down somewhat.

(lastest picture) I JUST MOVED THE SCOPE AS FAR FORWARD AS I THOUGHT THE RINGS WOULD ALLOW AND MAYBE THE BOLT HANDLE WILL CLEAR THE RUBBER KNOBS AND POSSIBLY ALLOW THE SCOPE TO DROP A SMALL BIT. Would anyone happen to know what rings (heigh) might work for the burris bases I have. I would like to get and assemble to see if my problem is not longer a problem.

Does anyone have any specific scopes they feel might better help the above problem. Would love to put a scope on her with the specs like the one I have ..... I just don't know
if it's possible.

I sure hope someone can help me.

See less See more

Save

1 - 7 of 75 Posts

Milo 2.5

· #2 · 3 mo ago

You may be pioneering putting a 56mm objective scope on a sporter.

You can definitely come down some, but if the bolt will not operate, you are kind of hosed. If you run rings that high, being it is a sporter stock and not the monte carlo version like some or all Browning made ones had, I wonder if you are going to end up with a wonky cheek weld.
You can't just slide a scope forward or back and expect it to work anywhere, sure you know this, but by first pic, I am not sure the scope is back far enough.
Grab one, or 2 of your rifles and measure the distance from the back of the butt plate to the scope eyepiece, you will find they may be extremely close in distance. Check the distance here. I am wondering if that front base being extended may not bite you.
If it was my rifle, and I needed to run that optic, I would opt for a picatinny rail from EGW and start there, my .02

Save

Milo 2.5

· #5 · 3 mo ago

Here is the one I had, little guy on the right took it away from me. Leupold bases and rings, 3-9 Rimfire, AO. Good pic, just not of the rifle.

Shooting range Match rifle shooting Vertebrate Air gun Table

See less See more

Save

Milo 2.5

· #7 · 3 mo ago

Rimfireraptor said:
Milo, yeah, a pioneer using the 56mm objective..... I like it..... and I agree the 56mm has roome to come down, but we have to see if bolt will clear. So..... I called Burris today and tech said go with Burris #420582 extra high Signature ring in 30mm matt which are 1.02 height. Not sure how or where they take that measurement. I doubt it's the height of where it attaches to the base to the bottom of the scope because I only have 8 pennies inbetween there which only measures .450 So, I thinking of ordering a pair just to see what it will look like and if it will clear bolt. If I have a ton
of room the next small set of rings (high) are .8 in height so about 1/5 of an inch lower. As far as comment you thing scope needs to come back more ....... compared to "Tomany22's" model 52 pic, my scope if farther back. "toomany22's".nice pic....What scope and ring/mount setup do you have. I was hoping to hear from others with optional HP scope selections that would be a tad smaller in dia but with high magnification. I'm not done yet, will keep pursuing till the puzzle comes together. Will keep everyone posted, thanks

I put a NF 2.5-10x32 on a Kimber Super America, with a pic rail, and just bought a Weatherby XXII bolt gun, I'm in a conundrum like you at the moment, not quite the same.
For all the glass that is out there, finding the perfect scope at times seems all but impossible, lol. If Leupold would free up some elevation in their turrets, about perfect for these guns, but they are too limited for me.
Good luck, love that rifle ! !! !!!

Save

Milo 2.5

· #14 · 3 mo ago

Rimfireraptor said:
Once I receive the Burris extra tall rings we will know exactly where we stand and can make decisions from there. Thanks

This right here is where you need to be, get the rings, see where you stand. Shelve all this until then, lol

Save

Milo 2.5

· #21 · 3 mo ago

SageRat22 said:
I'll probably just confuse the discussion, but I like a scope to compliment the look of and balance with the rifle. That means gloss scope with a gloss blued rifle, of a size that doesn't overwhelm things and mounted low enough to get some kind of cheek weld on the comb. The 52R is a challenge because of the high bolt lift which as you've shown whacks the ocular end of the scope. My suggestion is to use a good compact scope that has a smaller diameter ocular assembly that builds in some bolt clearance. This is my 52R with a Leupold Compact 3x9 AO EFR mounted with medium Talley rings and bases. Everything clears and I think makes a very useable combination.

I agree with everything you have said here, and the rifle I had wore the same scope with Leupold rings and bases.
The OP didn't scope his rifle 20+ yrs ago, and other than resale of items, has no access to new high gloss Leupold's. How long has it been since Leupold offered gloss? Better yet, how long has it been since this rifle was produced? Or Kimber's for that matter. Going period correct could be a chore.
The OP is asking too much from one rifle, if he removed 100 yard bench, I assume BR, from his requirements, it would open up a lot of glass selections.
I am somewhat with the OP on concentrating on functionality over aesthetics here.

OP, not bashing you in any form, I just know thousands before me tried to build a hunting-target rifle, I tried myself and found the rifle did little justice to either discipline. Too heavy for hunting, too light and mismatched configuration for target< not BR either, just a LR steel blaster.

Save

Milo 2.5

· #30 · 3 mo ago

Rimfireraptor said:
Hmmmmmm...... I'm not sure I fully understand the comment "How long has it been since Leupold offered Gloss" ? I didn't check but just assumed getting a gloss set of Leupold rings would be easier than ordering a single scoop vanilla ice cream cone. shocked at "Going period correct could be a chore". Maybe I overstated my "hunting" aspect of this rifle...... as it would be a very very rare occasion. Lastly the comment "asking too much"....... again a puzzling comment. I am trying to get as small a group as humanly possible for what I have...... not putting myself up against true BR heavy barrel/gun competitors. OK...... you guys have been doing this for a lot longer than me so let me toss this question to all...... what do you honestly believe the best groups this sporter / scope can should off benchrest with LOTS of ammo testing, serious trigger work and diligence at 100 yards.

First off, I quoted another poster, not you. And yes, getting gloss rings is not an issue, and neither is over paying for a used gloss Leupold scope.
"Period correct" comment again, to another poster, who sounds like a purist, and by what you want to accomplish, it is apparent you are not, both aspects are fine.
On the "asking too much", to me, having been around people, and myself included who have tried to turn a rifle into something it is not, it is self explanatory. Instead of me trying to change your mind, why don't you rig up the way you want, shoot the rifle as intended, and in a year, get back to us and tell us what you found out. If you are happy, that is all that counts, my opinion should mean nothing to you.
As far as accuracy at 100, your skill level and ammo choice may be the deciding factor.

Save

Milo 2.5

· #32 · 3 mo ago

Rimfireraptor said:
Hmmmmmm...... I'm not sure I fully understand the comment

I hope my above response did not sound crass, not my intention. Honestly, scoping a 22LR IMO is about as hard as it gets. I have had rifles built around a scope purchase. Need a real specific purpose with 22LR to do this, again, IMO.

Your budget is not mine, your requirements are not mine, etc... down the line.

This is me,
I have 2 high end target rifles that i shoot from 50 yards to failure. Scoping these rifles was easy, need maximum scope travel, acceptable parallax adjustments, extreme clarity to pick up shots, and functions great.
I also have 2 Kidd rifles, more perplexing here, but thanks to a retailer I like, I found a couple demo scopes for reasonable prices, and they ended up doing all that I ask.
Then I have 2 - 10/22's, way more thought needed here, what are they capable of, define the goal, what am I willing to pay for ammo, blah, blah. I don't mind dumping coin to an extent, but always end up Settling with 10/22 optics, some days I am happy with the scope, other days dr. phil is in my ear, "what were you thinking".
Which brings us here, and I am in a similar conundrum at the moment, and will need a sporter optic next week, looking now. I'm not buying a 1" tube, nor am I concerned about putting a matte scope on a highly blued, high gloss stock, that ship has sailed. It will get a 30 moa pic rail, chopped in the center to aid extraction, with NF ultra light tactical rings.
I feel the struggle, and your rifle only needs to please you, as mine only needs to please me!

See less See more

Save

1 - 7 of 75 Posts

Need help in trying to scope a new Winchester 52 B repro

Rimfireraptor

Attachments

Milo 2.5

Milo 2.5

Milo 2.5

Milo 2.5

Milo 2.5

Milo 2.5

Milo 2.5

Top Contributors this Month