under no circumstances do these folks want any of the issues that fell unto Gibbs and the guys that bought Gibbs. I know a man that won one three years ago and still is waiting to receive it (Gibbs)
I have experience with two Gibbs rifles, both were pieces of junk as far as optics were concerned, one had the "parkerization" coming off, one of the bolts looked like it was painted, both rifles had discoloration at the cut off, neither rifle would allow for scope adjustment could turn the thing all day long and nothing happened. one man won a gibbs rifle at perry and is still waiting. rifle to stock fit was atrocious, and was almost laughable..
why did all this happen, maybe rush to market before rifle really ready? I also remember the "sniper class" at the cmp games three years ago where the sniper class was really a advertising promo to buy Gibbs, two years ago i asked about the scope issue and was told that the rifles were never meant to shoot over 100 yards, and i asked "where in the advertising did it say that" got a dagger type stare for a answer
but i only have handled two of them.
I built my own 'clone' original rem receiver, rem barrel, original (never used still in cosmo) redfield jr base, (milled for the lyman alaskan bell) lyman alaskan scope from 1942, vintgage "C" stock, and had a great gunsmith do parkerization, first seven shots at 600 hit X (hornady a max 168 grain ammo)
Last edited by pelago; 06-25-2012 at 12:59.
FWIW l just sent my 8x hi lux sniper copy back, curious to see how they handle it.New CMP stock,new barrel and hi lux scope.Rifle shot 5 to 6 inch groups,changed stock,relieved hand guard,tried all the tricks I know with same results.Finally tried an origional 8x Unertl I bought from a shooter friend,same load,similiar conditions groups shrunk to 1.5 inch at 100 yds. Shot a 500 yd. F class match with the unertl, scored a 181 5 x which l consider good since the target is not very forgiving.I hope they address the problem of the scope not holding zero and coming loose after a few shots.
this is not good, did you get this from creedmore?
Last edited by pelago; 06-26-2012 at 05:10.
Got it from another source,not critical of the scope or quality of the optics but suspect of the mounts/mounting system.Many people who buy this scope will log alot of rounds in practice, load development and actual competition. As it stands now I`m going to see what Hi Lux has to say.Received an email today saying scope was received and is being examined by their tech dept.While at the Eastern games another shooter stated he too was having a hard time getting a rifle known as a good shooter to group.The last thing I suspected was the scope since it was new.
gettin' rather nervous now
cuz i have a standing order for complete rifle from creedmore
I built one 03A4 and it is a winner, perfect in every way, but it is all original US made and all the pieces and parts are from the correct era, heck even the junior mount was in a box with fed stock number and was dated '42 and even had the portion of the mount milled down for the bell on the scope.
i have good shooting 03's and considered building one but always the scope was a issue and probably still is, if one can even be found
Like Dave in PA, I also suspect the mounts/blocks/screws. My rifle came with a side mounted Weaver 330 and it will shoot MOA all day with it. With the Leatherwood, it will start off well but after 30-40 rounds the front mount loosens up. You notice it when you start with vertical flyers, up or down, about 3 MOA off zero. Tighten up the mount screw and it's back to MOA. I replaced the block screws with American steel and got new mount screws from Leatherwood, supposedly with harder steel. I'm thinking part of the problem was me as the first time I mounted the scope, I didn't get things lined up quite right and that's how I bent the mount screws (and they're soft steel, too!). These screws are also held in by a set screw you can't see until you remove the mounts from the scope. This is easy enough by removing the eyepiece and the cross hair ring. I tried to get some blocks from Steve Earle, he has some real pretty case hardened ones for the 1903 but the rear block holes don't match the Leatherwood block. If I was to do this again, I'd start with Steve's blocks. I have to leave town for a week, when I get back, I want to shoot a hundred rounds or so and really stress test the system.
From talking to the designer of the new 8X Malcom at the Eastern Games, there is nothing on this scope that is interchangeable from the Unertl. This had to be done to avoid any legal ramifications. These scopes merely resembles the style, and function of a Unertl type scope. Everything from thread pitches, rail thickness, and mount design was purposely made to not match the Unertl.
So you cannot swap the eyepiece over to a 10X Unertl. People that are having problems with the scopes usually do not have the mounts perfectly centered on the blocks before tightening the screws. Another problem is mistakenly thinking that the thumb screw is the only screw that needs to be tight, as with the Unertl. These mounts are basically copied from the Lyman Super that have an inner slotted screw that contacts the block, and the outer thumb screw merely locks onto the the inner screw that really does the work of securing the scope. When I figured this out, my scope performed as it should.
Regarding my scope it was mounted properly.Everything was centered.My feeling is the the plunger spring in the rear mount and in the front is not applying sufficient pressure and is allowing point of impact to shift.
Check one more thing. On my scope when the eye relief was set where I wanted it it put the rear adjuster over a screw used to hold some internal part together. The windage adjuster was sitting on the edge of this screw hole and if it fell into it it was a 5moa shift left and 2moa up. That screw should have been located another 90 degrees down. I had to push the scope forward another 3/8" to get away from this screw hole. Eye relief is touch too far forward but I can live with it.
Greg, The original Hi-Lux design was to use this center screw only as threads for the thumb screw. In fact they put a set screw in the mount so that the center screw's depth could be adjusted to allow the thumb screw to move far enough clear the mount. I didn't know about the center screw until I talked to John Wu. That explains the buggered up center screws when they are removed. I replaced mine with m4.7-16 allen head screws after running a tap through the base to clean up what I though was bad threads. Now that the set screw is no longer in the picture I will use a 3mm allen wrench to provide additional torque to the thumb screw just as you are suggesting.
I agree that the mounts are a pile a stinking dog poo! It would be worth a few more bucks to provide some better mounts. I can see the shop that produces the mounts in my minds eye.
Smoky blacksmith looking shop in a corner of a barn with chickens and pigs running around. Parts laying in a bed of cow dung coals after beeing rough shapened with a hammer and file. Not a machine tool in sight. Holes drilled with a brace and bit. Color created by using a special blend of goat and chicken dung. Springs are made from rolling tie wire around a pencil and then thrown in the dung fire for heat treat.
Last edited by wolley; 06-29-2012 at 04:20.