Testing, Testing . . . My Pedersoli Sharps Buffalo Rifle now has a historically semi-authentic fully

[JimGnitecki]

First I have ever heard a Unertl called not precise. Mine does very well. But it is the original, the copy you show looks rough by comparison.

Yes, the one I show is a copy, not the original. But even the original was designed for hunting at reasonable hunting ranges, not 500 to 1000 yard target shots. The Unertl geometry works fine for hunting - it's all that's usually needed. But for long range target shooting, you need more precision. a .010" error at the rear sight in either elevation or windage, even on a long 21.5" sight mount radius I have, results in a .010/21.5 x 100 yards x 36 inches/yard = 1.67" error at 100 yards, but that becomes 16.7" at 1000 yards.

Jim G

 

[Jim Watson]

I don’t know where you are getting that stuff. For many years, Unertl scopes and mounts were pretty much the definition of target scopes. Internal adjustments took a good while to get competitive. And when Unertl came out the real Malcolm design was obsolete.

This one shot by Wimbledon winner Ben Comfort, “hunting” the thousand yard target with the competing Lyman Targetspot.

 

[JimGnitecki]

I don’t know where you are getting that stuff. For many years, Unertl scopes and mounts were pretty much the definition of target scopes. Internal adjustments took a good while to get competitive. And when Unertl came out the real Malcolm design was obsolete.

This one shot by Wimbledon winner Ben Comfort, “hunting” the thousand yard target with the competing Lyman Targetspot.



View attachment 1158613

Notice the short sight mount radius on that setup. That means each incremental move of the rear sight has a larger effect than a longer radius would have. It's of course a LONG sight mount radius compared to the internally controlled scopes of today.

Do you have a closeup photo of the rear sight on that rifle, Jim? I'd like to see how they did that one.

Also, were there any provisions for sliding the scope? Probably not, because the caliber used had a lighter bullet but moving quite a bit faster, so recoil was less sof an issue?

Jim G

 

[Jim Watson]

Here is a catalog cut of Lyman Targetspot scopes and mounts. Note that with a 7.2" spacing, it gives 1/4 MOA per click.
Unertl has the same movement. You can stretch the spacing to 10" and get 1/6 MOA per click.

Yes, the scopes slide in recoil. You could get springs for automatic reset but most shooters preferred to pull it back into position manually.




Here are a couple of Unertls with springs.




Here is some general information and a base chart.
https://scatteredshots.com/2018/07/19/unertl-scope-base-chart/

You would pick the base heights to get you in the ballpark for range, since the mount does not have a lot of adjustment. I have seen stepped bases for a reasonably quick gross change in elevation.
Note that a click is .0005" of movement for 1/4 MOA at 7.2" spacing.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Here is a catalog cut of Lyman Targetspot scopes and mounts. Note that with a 7.2" spacing, it gives 1/4 MOA per click.
Unertl has the same movement. You can stretch the spacing to 10" and get 1/6 MOA per click.

Yes, the scopes slide in recoil. You could get springs for automatic reset but most shooters preferred to pull it back into position manually.

View attachment 1158630


Here are a couple of Unertls with springs.

View attachment 1158631

1/4 MOA achieved with those tiny knobs is impressive. 1/4 MOA on a 7.2" sight mount radius means 0.25" at 100 yards = 3600 inches, which means a movement of only .0000694 x 7.2" = .0005" (i.e. half of a thousandth of an inch) at the rear sight scale! For the time period, that was impressive machining and scale visibility design.

Jim G

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

My neighbor had his swift out a few weeks ago. He put 5 shots in the same hole at 100 yards. That rifle is awesome. He got it from a guy who was going to jail for 600.00 with dies and ammo and components.

 

[Jim Watson]

1/4 MOA achieved with those tiny knobs is impressive. 1/4 MOA on a 7.2" sight mount radius means 0.25" at 100 yards = 3600 inches, which means a movement of only .0000694 x 7.2" = .0005" (i.e. half of a thousandth of an inch) at the rear sight scale! For the time period, that was impressive machining and scale visibility design.

Right. Consider how small the movement of the erector tube in an internal adjustment scope must be. It took a long time to achieve target scope standards.

There used to be a brass tubed scope sold for cooking grade reproductions. They were made by Hakko in Japan with good glass but the mounts looked like something out of the plumbing department. I saw a set of better mounts made by a company near me. They were a rough copy of the Winchester A5 mount. But that was years ago, before the BPCR revival.

 

[JimGnitecki]

My neighbor had his swift out a few weeks ago. He put 5 shots in the same hole at 100 yards. That rifle is awesome . . .

Now THAT's what a shooter likes to see!

Jim G

 

[JimGnitecki]

Right. Consider how small the movement of the erector tube in an internal adjustment scope must be. It took a long time to achieve target scope standards.

There used to be a brass tubed scope sold for cooking grade reproductions. They were made by Hakko in Japan with good glass but the mounts looked like something out of the plumbing department. I saw a set of better mounts made by a company near me. They were a rough copy of the Winchester A5 mount. But that was years ago, before the BPCR revival.

Montana Vintage Arms does offer a modernized version of the A5!

Jim G

 

[Jim Watson]

I know. HiLux has one somewhat similar, their "short scope," although they have gone to mounts similar to Targetspot.

 

[highlander 5]

The company is out of business but I got a Malcolm style scope and mounts from RHO Instruments. Mounted it on my Sharps Long Range Express.

 

[JimGnitecki]

If you are wondering what the range of elevation adjustment might be, well . . .



In this photo, that rear sight has been elevated by 1.25 inches from its lowest position. With my specific sight mount radius, that is just over 200 MOA.

That may look and sound ridiculous to you, but remember:

1. All adjustments on an Old West era scope are EXternal.

2. Buffalo rifle calibers have incredibly high trajectories at long ranges. Remember the height of the tang mounted ladder sights you have seen? They have the same "issue" as my full barrel length scope: the longer the radius of the front and rear sight mounts, the finer the adjustability, but the higher the rear sight has to be able to elevate to get large MOA adjustments.

Time for a little quality control story:

At the rear sight, notice in this photo the U-shaped frame that carries the block of steel that holds the scope tube:



The block labeled "Malcolm" slides up and down in the U-frame to change the elevation.

The first U-frame that came with my Sliding Mount kit was slightly out of tolerance. Its "ears" are supposed to be a consistent distance apart that has just enough clearance between it and the scope tube block to enable the block to slide up and down smooooothly as you turn the elevation screw turret. My first assembly did not slide smoothly when I got above about 1" (160 MOA) of elevation. I measured the distance between the ears, and sure enough, it was slightly smaller at the top of the ears than at the bottom. Someone made a CNC setup error.

I informed hi-Lux, and sen them photos of the discrepancy. They immediately said they would send a replacement U-frame. Somehow that initially-promised U-frame had not yet shipped when I followed up 2 or 3 days later. Hi-Lux was a bit embarassed, but their remedy was dramatic: They then sent the replacement U-frame out via FEDEX 2-DAY service! They sent it on a Wednesday from California, and I received it early Friday afternoon in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada! And the replacement U-bracket made the movement properly smoooooth throughout the entire 1.25" adjustment range.

Talk about great customer service. THAT's the kind of warranty service you like to receive, but so seldom do.

Jim G

 

[Jim Watson]

I will look for my old BPCR notebook and see what the sight change to 500 metres and 600 yards is; those are my longest ranges.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Ok, THIS is why 200 MOA of elevation adjustment ranghe is NOT excessive when shooting a 45-70 buffalo rifle:



This chart is for the actual Lyman 457125 mold bullet which weighs 500g and has a BC of 0.391. That mold is enroute to me (I found one of the few remaining ones for sale in North America).

I set the online ballistic calculator to reflect the actual altitude, relative humidity, and crosswind typical around here.

The local range only goes to 600 yards, but I want to be able to at least TRY longer ranges elsewhere, so I specified the chart to go to 1000 yards.

At the local 600 yard range, I will need 91.41 MOA of elevation and typically 10.31 MOA of windage, and we OFTEN get way more wind than 15 mph (We get Chinook winds off the Rocky Mountains that many time per year exceed 50 mph. You have to hold your car doors FIRMLY on such days or they get ripped off their hinges).

Note that at 1000 yards and 15 MPH crosswind I would need 183.67 MOA of elevation and 16.37 MOA of windage.

When set to hit at 1000 yards, this is what the trajectory apparently looks like:



Note that the bullet reaches a flight height of FIFTY FEET (i.e. 5 to 6 stories) on the way to the 1000 yard target at ground level.

Note that both confederate and Union soldiers during the Civil War, and U.S. soldiers in the 1880s, were taught to shoot either "sniper shots" or "volley fire" at enemy combatants at 1000 yards, and buffalo hunters in the same time period made 500 to 1000 yard shots. Some of the buffalo hunters undoubtedly had scopes similar in concept to the one I now have, but the soldiers did NOT. They fired with open sights. I am in awe of their skill.

Jim G

 

[JimGnitecki]

Note also that the handload as plotted above never has to deal with going through the sound barrier.

And note that the shot to 1000 yards takes 3.5 seconds to arrive there. Then, if shooting at a metallic buffalo target, the shooter would not hear the "clang" for 1000 yards x 3 feet/ yard = 3000 feet / 1116 fps for sound travel = 2.7 MORE seconds, so would hear the clang about 6.2 seconds after firing the shot.

But that 500g bullet would still have 609 ft lb of energy - about the MUZZLE energy of a 357 Magnum revolver bullet. MORE than enough to be effective.

Jim G