Spotting scope

[Harold_V]

Guys,
I, after about 50 years, have a rifle ready to use. I had P.O. Ackley make me a 17-222 back in the early 70's, along with a .223. I finished the .223 shortly after it was received, but the 17-222 went on the back burner, then life got in the way. Anyway, today I fired it for the first time and it's a sheer pleasure to use. The recoil is slightly more than that from a long rifle 22 rimfire, and it ejects a 20 grain bullet at around 4,000 fps. Talk about a fun gun to shoot!

Ok, now my purpose. I'd like to get a spotting scope so I don't have to travel endlessly back and forth to the target. Unfortunately, I have no experience with them. The amount of money one can spend ranges from about $50 to several thousand dollars. I am willing to spend a moderate amount, but don't want to buy more than I need. From extended reading, I've gotten the idea that the cost escalates greatly when range increases, and that makes sense. I do NOT foresee using it much beyond 100 yards, if even that. The short range I have at home allows for about 63 yards, and there's a (man made) berm into which I can shoot. Shooting is legal where I live. I can shoot from the comfort of my back porch, which is fully shaded, and I have a shooting bench. So this makes sense, the ultimate goal is to determine a good load for high precision (I hand load).

Anyone have any advice to offer? I'm willing to spend up to about a thousand bucks, if that helps with an opinion you may offer.

Thanks!

H

[Bill Shields]

I have a Tasco that I purchased 55 years ago for archery spotting that can see what you want at 100 yards. In the end I use my Questar because it was rock split on a surveyors tripod ( but then I was standing not prone)

Or there are the swarovski (jewelry company) scopes that the modern birders all seem to love...but may be a bit out of your $ range

Bushnell and Celestron make good units, as does leupold

Plan on spending a bit on the mount.

[Bob D.]

Hitting up Pawn shops can often turn up nice spotting scopes for good deals. Bonus is you can look thru them before buying.
For a home range you might want to look at using a camera target side and a screen on the porch. Either wired or wireless. Should be able to do that for cheap money. A lot more electronics out there versus precision optics…..

[earlgo]

Harold, I bought a BSA action from Herters and had a fellow in NJ put a 17-222 barrel on it, after which I made a cherry stock. Greatest woodchuck rifle I ever had. No noise, to fear of ricochets and whatever you hit was done.

17222#1.JPG (312.65 KiB) Viewed 3222 times

17222#2.JPG (304.88 KiB) Viewed 3222 times

17222#3.JPG (178.65 KiB) Viewed 3222 times

You will really like yours, too.
--earlgo

[Harold_V]

Thanks, Bill. I hadn't considered the mount, but it would be quite important, especially at high magnification. Rigidity would be quite important. I suspect a surveyor's type of tripod would be desirable. I happen to own one which most likely can be slightly modified to sit well on the cement surface of the porch. It's equipped with pointed steel tips for use in soil. I could easily make some adapters that would be better suited for concrete and held in place with some setscrews.

Scopes used by birders are concerned with color correction as well as a wide field of view. The premium price that one might have to pay may not translate in to a better scope for shooting, although I have not eliminated anything at this point.

Bob D---thanks for that thought. I hadn't even considered the use of a camera and monitor, although it may be more cumbersome than a scope. I'll explore that idea before making a decision, though. I'm not as concerned about the cost as I am the convenience of use.

Earlgo---that's a beautiful rifle! Real pretty stock with excellent checkering.

I'm experiencing something that I feared. My load is light, but I'm blowing up a few bullets. Don't have a clue why. I started out with 15 grains of 4198 pushing a 20 grain Nosler bullet. I have yet to try a hotter load, but it's next. I expect I'll lose a higher percentage of bullets. I am now considering moving to a little heavier bullet (25 grains). I'd appeciate your comments if you have any to offer.

I went a little different direction with my rifle. I had owned a 218 Bee with a 10X Unertl scope, which I really liked. I didn't like the fact the case life was limited (belted cartridge), so I got rid of the Bee in favor of the 17-222 as well as a .223, both of which are equipped with a 12X Unertl scope with a 2" objective lense, and each has a Harry Lawson thumbhole stock. Here's a picture of the 17-222.

DSC00034.JPG (224.19 KiB) Viewed 3169 times

H

[earlgo]

Harold wrote:I had owned a 218 Bee ..... case life was limited (belted cartridge)

I don't like to be annoying but the only 218 Bee cartridges I ever saw were not belted. I built a 218 Mashburn Bee when I was in the trade school, on a Wesley Richards small Martini action.

218 MB cases b.jpg (10.63 KiB) Viewed 3128 times

218 MB WR Stock .jpg (40.78 KiB) Viewed 3128 times

When I was loading the 17-222 I used 17 1/2 gr of 3031 and a 25 gr Hornaday hollow point bullet. Worked well, but the woodchucks didn't like it although I never heard a complaint. Here is my other 17-222 built on a Remington Rolling block #1-1/2 action with a factory set trigger. It uses Rimmed 222 cases that were only available from Australia in the 70''s.

17-222R RRB small.jpg (77.67 KiB) Viewed 3128 times

Super 222 loaded 17_222.jpg (74.07 KiB) Viewed 3128 times

Super 222 reverse small.jpg (99.29 KiB) Viewed 3128 times

Fun stuff long ago.
--earlgo

[JackF]

I have a cheaper grade Vortex 20-60X80. I use it with a Vortex lite tripod, (got it for back packing to use while hunting). I use the same setup at the range and although you have to be carful not to bump it I use it out to 200 yards. I like it, has saved me a lot of walking, especially when shooting at 200 yards.
The combo set me back less than $300.00.

[Harold_V]

Harold wrote:I had owned a 218 Bee ..... case life was limited (belted cartridge)

I don't like to be annoying but the only 218 Bee cartridges I ever saw were not belted.

Heavy, heavy sigh!
Not annoying at all, earlgo. That was stupid on my part. What I meant to say is rimmed, not belted. Head spacing on the rim allowed the brass to stretch and separate at the base. As few as three reloadings would lead to case failure. Thanks for catching my mistake.

Considering the correction here, I'll leave the original comments in my post rather than edit, so your post makes sense.

H

[JSH]

If you are shooting from a bench, consider building your own mount. I have a 24X by 63mm Unertl old style spotting scope, and I started with a wood base and a column made of a 1 inch piece of ground tool grade round stock. The mount for the scope itself slides up and down the round stock and is hinged for adjustment.

[SteveM]

My dad had a Tasco back in the 60's. I think my brother has it.

While it wasn't as clear as anything made by Leica, it was perfectly usable at 100 yards.

Whatever you get, look through it at something distant. Do that on a clear day so that the weather is not getting in the way of seeing a clear picture.

Steve

[NP317]

I haven'y yet figured out how to mount my 10" Schmidt-Cassegrain 'scope on my pistol...
RussN

[Bill Shields]

it would not like the shock...