Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I have this old gun… :). Too typical situation. A “but for…”
Standard grade 30-06 Winchester prewar SN 422xx. Wearing a period correct Lyman Alaskan All Weather scope in Stith (no drill) mounts. (Aft secured to receiver sight holes and fore, with scope tube dovetailed to barrel boss.) The entire rifle is in great shape ‘overall’. Good blue & presents well, but for… A pronounced divot in the bolt handle absolutely necessary to clear the scope eyepiece. Structurally insignificant, but wondering where such significant originality hit leaves this otherwise nice rifle. Pointedly, perhaps of greater value for its components than as a whole? I have absolutely no plans for it, but wondering.
Opinions gratefully accepted!
iskra/John
Hi Iskra/John-
I can only reply as a collector of these (expletive deleted) things… To me, an altered bolt handle is equivalent to a drilled bridge insofar as it represents an alteration to the original gun that cannot be”restored” without a bit of tomfoolery. I know… I have a nice-ish type I-1 standard with a one-hole drilled bridge (done for a period Redfield JR mount) and ground bolt handle that I’m working on making into the coolest hunting gun in your average deer camp. But it isn’t ever going to be a collector piece.
FWIW… The one thing I’d say is unless you plan to ‘fix’ the gun (replace the bolt or repair the handle), it’s better to keep it period correct ‘as altered’… It will not appeal to purist collector types, but still has significant appeal to vintage shooters…
Just my opinion 
, Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
iskra said
Wearing a period correct Lyman Alaskan All Weather scope in Stith (no drill) mounts.
Must be the position of the scope required to make it fit the Stith mounts…because I have the same scope in Redfield Jr. mounts on a pre-war that clears the bolt handle without the necessity of that divot.
Handle can be restored fairly easily, if you’re willing to live without the scope, but I’d NEVER replace the correct numbered bolt!
Thanks Louis! I really didn’t present my question well. But I do hear you and you’ve essentially provided a valid answer. One position, between ‘collector’ and mere ‘shooter’, concerning ‘orphan grade’ pre 64; the basis for custom gun. I think this action yet with such possibility, but that also not exactly relevant here.
If I could cast the matter differently, could you or others: 1. Provide an opinion concerning the value of the Lyman Alaskan scope and Stith mounts? 2. suggest who might do a decent restoration on the bolt?
In any event, thanks much. I do particularly value your ‘pre’ Model 70 expertise!
iskra/John
(Clarence, I hear you! My suspicion that some owner perhaps purchased the wrong mount and ‘made it work’ at the expense of the bolt!) I have one of these Stiths on a nice little Savage 99 Carbine and works beautifully in same no-drill context. Of course the lever a much easier workaround, only ejection a concern.
iskra said
1. Provide an opinion concerning the value of the Lyman Alaskan scope and Stith mounts? 2. suggest who might do a decent restoration on the bolt?
Excellent market for Alaskans ($200+), thanks to all those putting together fake sniper-rifles…a growth industry.
A correct M70 Stith would likewise be highly desirable, but you’d first have to verify its proper application. If it has a code marked on it, you might check it against a Stith application chart.
Any competent gunsmith can weld up the divot & reblue it. One out of many: John Taylor, Puyallup, Wa.; of course, any competent smith stays VERY busy!
Hi Iskra-
As usual I agree with Clarence… Regular civilian Lyman Alaskans seem to sell readily on Ebay in the $200-300 range due to the interest in sniper rifle builds for vintage match competition, among other things…
Complete and intact Stith Install-It-Yourself or Q.E.D. mounts with good finish on them can be $100-125, with the ones for 7/8″ (like yours) and 1″ scopes maybe being more in demand than the 3/4″ versions. An advantage of your Stith mount is that it could be used to mount one of the Lyman Alaskan repros (from Leupold) on an undrilled pre-war rifle for field use (that way the hunter gets a constantly centered reticle and actual weatherproofing along with the vintage look).
Many gunsmiths can do the repair job on the bolt handle. You could try Justin Hale (pre64win.com) as they are building some very nice custom rifles on pre-64 M70 actions and I suspect are fully capable of doing what you want done.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
An advantage of your Stith mount is that it could be used to mount one of the Lyman Alaskan repros (from Leupold)…
Lou
Holy Smoke, the Alaskan is being reproduced? Had no idea! Though I’m a bit surprised if Leupold can make them at a price that isn’t well above an original.
I had heard the Weaver 330 was being reproed in China for the benefit of sniper-fakers, but I believe its quality leaves much to be desired.
Have owned several Alaskans over the yrs, but now down to just one–the very first model, with an aluminum tube & pre “All Weather.” Quite scarce, but I’m probably the only crackpot who’d want one!
Hi Clarence:
Yes… Leupold did recently (for a while) manufacture a modernized Lyman Alaskan (7/8″ tube) although I think it is not in current production. They also made a special set of current Leupold style 7/8″ rings for it:
This eBay seller (note scope is marked “Leupold Alaskan”) seems a bit off the mark price wise ($800!!!!), but yes, I’m sure the retail price is/was notably above the price of an excellent original. You’d really have to want the reliability advantage of a “modern” scope to pay the premium over an original (meaning somebody who was REALLY going hunting with an old rifle in “All Weather” conditions)… I’m pretty sure the Leupold version would work in a vintage Stith mount.
I think I still have at least a couple Lyman Alaskans, one is the early pre-All Weather with exposed adjustments like you are describing and the other(s) is/are the more conventional All Weather variety. Not sure what I’ll ever do with them but they’re there if I ever decide.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
I think I still have at least a couple Lyman Alaskans, one is the early pre-All Weather with exposed adjustments like you are describing and the other(s) is/are the more conventional All Weather variety.
Find it very odd that Lyman’s ads for the first model made no reference at all to the aluminum tube, when all their other scopes had steel tubes. (Not mentioned in Lyman Centennial Hand Book, either.) If aluminum was used to reduce weight, or for any other hypothetical advantage, you’d think something favorable would have been said about it. No reason to think cost-cutting had anything to do with it, as the Alaskan was a relatively expensive scope.
In fact, I knew nothing about the aluminum when I bought mine on ebay–nor did the seller mention it.
Hi Clarence-
I do not know much about these early Lyman Alaskans. The one I have has an aluminum tube and steel ocular bell. Picture below is of the scope, which you can tell I am currently using to hold together a Miller Kodiak Dreamount (a true Rube Goldberg contraption from the ’40s that was billed as a ‘universal’ no-drill scope mount):
Looking closely at the markings on the scope (using my 3X Optivisor on top of my bifocals) I can make out a VERY TINY stamped number on the tube (behind the word ‘ALASKAN’ in the location where the easier to read serial numbers were stamped on later Lyman scopes). Even with all the magnification I can readily bring to bear I cannot be sure, but I think is says ‘490’ stamped very lightly with individual number stamps (so numerals are slightly misaligned).
Does yours have what appears to be a serial number on it?
Thanks, Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
Even with all the magnification I can readily bring to bear I cannot be sure, but I think is says ‘490’ stamped very lightly with individual number stamps (so numerals are slightly misaligned).
#867 is the number on mine–hand-stamped in echelon. Required a 5x glass to make them out. This one has old leather lens covers that wore off the anodizing on the objective end; nothing to be done about that.
Intended to remove ocular lens to clean the inner surface, until noticing that, rather than being retained by a tube-nut, it’s burnished in, a method usually seen only on lower cost optics. No doubt Lyman employed a special tool to remove it, but not possible without it.
Thanks to you both gentlemen! Just the net, net, facts trying to get at! Sorry not more articulate! I have a couple of other 70 models with Lymans, I believe. Also a Weaver in the mix too or some such marked “330”, which may be some kind of Jurassic sniper scope. Really not into that stuff!
Again thanks!
John
iskra said
Also a Weaver in the mix too or some such marked “330”, which may be some kind of Jurassic sniper scope. Really not into that stuff!
You struck gold…because plenty of others are! List it on ebay as a “SNIPER SCOPE”! Whether it is, or is not, is somewhat irrelevant to many sniper-fakers.
The Internet has brought to my home the great experts such as the folks in this forum. Ironically too, the great scam artists. Yet also a class who seem to almost enjoy being fooled. Their gig, to buy enthusiastically into the scams and eventually trying to pass the ‘stuff’ off with perhaps a few touches and additional hype.
I’m just happily outside all that. Little time for actual collection ‘hands on’ fondling. Were it not for my file photos and XL spreadsheet, not sufficient time/data to intelligently blog, much less providing basis as here, for seeking sage advice.
Again super thanks. I enjoy my moments here. Just need to be a bit more articulate in my blogs 🙂
My take
1 Guest(s)
