Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has anyone tried using this Weaver base (#02, I think) to mount a scope on a Model 121.

Weaver says it's for a 121 but it would only take a single ring from what I can see. I've never seen anything like it.

Would one ring hold a scope well enough to do the job?

Here are some pics to illiustrate what I'm talking about:

 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,029 Posts
Mike, I think you may be misreading the Weaver reference list. The #1 & #2 Weavers are side mount for the Rem 121 & come as a set with rings & sub-base in either long or short length. The rings are a one piece affair & are matched to the sub-base.

The base you show is one of a 'set' of 2-piece bases that are made so the concave portion matches the contour of a rifle receiver and/or barrel. The Rem 121's with 3/4" dia barrels use Weaver #18 on the receiver & #13 on the barrel. The 121's with 13/16" dia barrels use Weaver #18 & #17 bases.

Both the 1-piece & 2-piece sets require drilling & tapping either the side of the receiver or the top of receiver & barrel. None of the 121's (to my knowledge) were factory D&T for scope mounting as they were last mfg'd in 1954 & as far as I can find out, Remington didn't begin 'grooving' receivers until 1955 or later. I've never seen or heard of one but a grooved 121 would be a rare bird indeed.

I just recently acquired a 1940 mfg 121 that someone apparently tried to mount some kind of sight or base on the barrel. It has 2 holes D&T in the barrel, one just forward & one just behind the rear sight. Apparently didn't work very well as they've been plugged with screws that have been 'filed' down very sloppily & left 'in-the-white'. They protrude slightly above the surface of the barrel & I plan to 'dress' them down to match the barrel contour & probably touch that area up with cold blue (Brownells Oxpho-Blue or Blue Wonder). Rifle still won't be 'collector' quality but it'll look better & I'll feel better ;) .
 

· Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Nobody,

Thanks for that very educational reply. I have knowledge to work with now.

Do you think it's possible that the base in the picture uses the same size screws and aligns with those two screws that hold the rear sight?

And if it did, do you think just one ring would produce a sufficient hold on a scope?

Man, I'm realllllllllly stretching it, aren't I? Aw, I know it's not feasible, but I can hope, can't I?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,029 Posts
If that base aligns & fits the sight screw holes, it's a new one on me. All Weaver bases I've ever seen use 6-48 or 8-40 screws (some older side mounts use 10-32 screws). I may be disremembering a little but I believe the sight screws on the Remington rear sight are 4-48 or something in that neighborhood.

I'd never trust a single base that short, I think BKL or someone like them has a set of 'unitary' 1-piece 'cantilever' type rings that fit a short rimfire dovetail but even then they have (I believe) 2 or 3 'clamp' screws to 'lock' on the receiver dovetail. The base you show is simply a single part of a set & uses the standard Weaver ring with a crossbolt in the slot for clamping.

I know this ain't what you want to hear but if that's your 121 in the pic & you insist on mounting a scope, I'd 'pay the freight' & have it D&T by a good gunsmith, either for one of the modern Weaver side mounts or the 2-piece top mounted Weavers.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks for the help with this fellas.

The 121 in the pic is not mine. I saw one in a shop today and it was in real nice shape. I was (obviously) looking for a way to mount a scope without having to do the drill and tap to it. I like to keep things as original as I can.

This is making me lean rather heavily now towards a Rem. 572.

Would someone explain the difference between the 572 and the 572 BDL?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
I like it on the 121. It looks like it belongs there. I picked it up on ebay for around $35, its worn just like the gun.
The KV is a nice scope. Its an early variable power either 2.75x or 5x. The only thing I dont care for, is when you double the magification you double the thickness of the cross hairs. I'd like thinner cross hairs at 5x. A steel tube, real glass and built like a tank. Weaver quality all the way.:bthumb:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,281 Posts
This is making me lean rather heavily now towards a Rem. 572.

Would someone explain the difference between the 572 and the 572 BDL?
The 572 is a pretty "plain Jane" early version and the BDL is a fancier and later version. Sights are probably better on the later BDL version, but I kind of like the simpler early model.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top