You think anyone will ever produce thease again? The old guns look funny with those new ones on them. JerryW

Good news, but they'd better check the quality of their sand for their lenses. The superior quality of the old-time Pennsylvania sand deposits is one of the main things that made Unertls famous. Some, but I emphasize only some, of the present-day Austrian sand is adequate, but only just. Scarcity of good sand is one of the main reasons that modern quality optics are so expensive, believe it or not.
Good luck, Joe

The principle reason B&L was considered top dog was because of their ownership of the finest know deposit of quartz sand on the planet.

I thought that was in Minnesota?

One of the reasons Leica's are so expensive (other than being hand built) is they have the finest quality lenses.  It is readily apparent - you can take any other camera with the same focal length lense and take the same picture (from the same tripod) on the same type of film - develop the films - you don't have to ask which one is which, the difference is obvious.

What Brent said. And I'm a guy who likes Unertls above all others, and it's still what Brent said.

My good friend Fearless Frank made an excellent point recently. He owns a few thousand acres of (deer hunting) land with a lot of long shooting vistas, out to over 1000 yds, as well as lots of narrow and poorly-lit shooting lanes and woods. We were discussing hunting glass and our poor experiences with some brands and preferences for others. I lamented that I had never read or even heard of a credible side-by-side comparison of a representative variety of scopes by someone I'd consider reliable, so I really didn't know how much I was giving up by using Leupolds on most of my hunting rifles.

Frank is an experienced and widely-traveled hunter and clays shooter, owns & shoots many serious target rifles with Unertl, Swarovski, Zeiss, etc optics, and I therefore value his opinion. His opinion ain't always gospel but I always value it 'cause he's a smart & experienced outdoorsman. His words eventually turned into a kind of epiphany for me when I tried what he said and saw he was right.

He said "If you can see it with your binoculars, you can kill it with your Leupold scope." I repeat, I tried it and he was right. I use Leica Geovids, I've found nothing better, and their superiority to the Leupold glass was very apparent, but the less-sharp & less-bright Leupold scopes were still perfectly adequate for any animal spotted, no matter how poorly-lit or far away.

And 200-yd target shooting with a spotting scope handy sure makes for a whole lot easier viewing than a poorly-lit animal at extended range. So, what Brent said. But I still like my Unertls for braggin' rights, they just kinda go with a rifle of a certain quality. (VBG)
Regards, Joe

Just like the thing about just which American car really is an AMERICAN car these days, one must be careful about comparing rifle scopes, binoculars, cameras, etc. on the basis of optical quality. Very few scopes or cameras made ANYWHERE these days use glass made anywhere other than Japan. To my understanding this includes some of the buggest names in European optics. 
As for USA made rifle scopes (there are only 2 makes other than small semi-custom operations) as recently as 2000, only one of them made their own glass. It wasn't Leupold. The acquisition of the other American scope manufacturer by Beretta may have changed where their glass comes from. Owning and using Burris scopes has never held the stauts thing like Leupold but those who have used them generally say (as have some Leupold users) they are brighter than Leupold. They are as rugged and reliable.

None of the above has much to do with why I like Unertl or other external adjustment scopes. I like them because of their ease of repeatability and their greater range of adjustment which in some cases allows them to do what no internal adjustment scope can do. For instance, I cannot see any modern scope accommodating the trajectory of a BPCR much past 200 - 300 yards, if that far. The amount of elevation change required to add 100 yards shooting disrtance  with a BP velocity often is nearly enough to use up the total range of elevation adjustment in a modern scope. Not many of them will go to a thousand yards with a modern high velocity rifle.

Besides all that, Unertl types just LOOK right on old rifles. Almost as right as Malcolms.

JMH(?)O

Quote:


It's my understanding that most of the good sand now comes from several places in SE Asia, now in somewhat of a state of political flux. I believe that's where Leupold gets most of their glass.

I avoided Burris scopes in the past because of their (tenuous, ancient) connection to the truly pitiful Redfield brand, but did purchase one of their small Scout scopes for my Win 1890. I've been extremely pleased and will probably buy Burris again.
Regards, Joe

I don't have iron sights on my heavy 300 Mag, nor on the 223 and 219 Improved and 22-250 varminters. All others including all 22LRs have iron sights and most also have quick-detach scopes of either the Unertl or Leupold style, or in one case both. Irons are still fine in my book but my old eyes require a scope for most game shooting, to be sporting and fair to the game. Probably won't be long until a scope will be all I can use, unfortunatetly.

BTW Brent is right about the Lyman 17, I like 'em a lot and enjoy the wide variety of inserts available.
Regards, Joe