Husqvarna Scope Mount Chart-Apeture Sights Updated January 15, 2011 - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 46 to 69 of 69

Thread: Husqvarna Scope Mount Chart-Apeture Sights Updated January 15, 2011

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    The Hammer
    Posts
    97

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    I have acuired my first potato chip-er-Swedish Mauser. It's a 1949-ish 648 w/Swedish/Euro side mount. In examining the upper part of the mount, I discovered several screws ("scruver"?). Are these windage/elevation fine tuning (they are on the rearward ring)?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Mount 1.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	218.7 KB 
ID:	702609Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Mount 2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	126.8 KB 
ID:	702610Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Mount 3.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	132.6 KB 
ID:	702611
    Any info on how to work them would be appreciated. The metal is great (bore VERY nice), but the stock, while externally well executed, appears to have some loose inletting-I may bed it.

  3. #48

    Default

    I recently acquired a 1640 Husqvarna in 30-06 made about 1954. I want to add a peep sight. This model has a the so-called "improved" mauser action. The receiver just in front of the bolt is drilled and taped. The shape of it is not perfectly round as in older mausers. It has two curves to it.

    My question is will a Lyman 57 SME fit it since it just has a simple curve to it.? Or what about a Lyman FN or HVA? If I can find a Lyman 48 which one fits 48M or 48 FN?

    Thanks for any help!

  4. Remove Advertisements
    GunBoards.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Winterland, Canada
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    älgjägare,
    With today's scopes, the possibility you need to adjust from the base are thin. These adjustments screws should only be used used to align the scope. If it's already aligned, don't touch it, it will be much easier for you.

    marshgillie,
    The "correct" receiver sight would be the 57HVA and it does not need stock alteration. The 1640 have the same rear receiver shape as the "commercial" FN.
    Coagula / Solve

    Baribal; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baribal

  6. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    41

    Default

    I have a set of Buehler 'H' marked bases that I recently nabbed off eBay. They were advertised as 'FN98' bases. Am I correct to believe that these are intended for the Husqvarna 1600 action? Otherwise known as 'H2' bases?
    X

  7. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Winterland, Canada
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    If it's for a FN 98, it should be for a large ring action. 1640/1600 are small ring actions. Check Under the base, you chould see some letters stamped, usually, it's H V for HVA actions. If they really are for 98 action, it's not a big deal for a good gunsmith to make them fit (need some milling, though). Let us know what you finally got..
    Coagula / Solve

    Baribal; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baribal

  8. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Yup, I know that already. The question is what does the code mean? This was an eBay purchase and the seller did not know too much about the rings and bases. They came with code '10' medium 26mm rings, and not the 1" high rings as indicated. Which was surprise as I now have Buehler rings to mount my 60s Kahles scope.

    Code 'H' for Husqvarna? or Browning High-Power with FN action.

    I have seen 'F' codes before, But not 'H'. The look exactly like the FN bases.
    Last edited by BeaverMeat; 01-03-2014 at 07:46 PM.
    X

  9. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Winterland, Canada
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    I have orignal boxes and I don't know what "H" code means. If it fits on a FN 98, then, it's not the right mount. There is a guy on e-bay who makes repro Buehler mounts, maybe he knows.
    Coagula / Solve

    Baribal; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baribal

  10. #54

    Default

    So, I bought a two-piece Buehler mount (H2 rear base and 89 front base) for my JC Higgins 51L's 1640 action, and Bob Ray of Buehler in Orinda, CA verified that this is indeed the correct bases from his chart, should fit 1640's and 1900's. The front base fit like a glove, the rear base isn't even close . . . the radius is wrong and it sits proud of the front base. My receiver's rear base area has two radius' to it, while the Buehler mount has one.

    I also bought two-piece S & K bases, and Brian from S & K said, yes, the 1640's rear base is not a simple arc of a circle, but has two radius, and has in effect a small hump at the top where the screws attach. So, I received them, and S & K's rear base fit ok but actually protruded to the rear such that it interfered (barely) with raising the bolt handle (no, you can't turn them around, either), and the rear base sits proud of the front base.

    So, does anyone have the specs relevant to these receivers/bases? Do you know what the radius(s) should be at the rear base and front base, and how much taller the rear base needs to be than the front base? Thanks in advance!

  11. #55

    Default Very happy with S & K bases/rings

    After working with S & K on some fitment issues, the new S & K bases are shimmed and epoxy bedded to my HVA action and I am one happy camper. I was looking for a lightweight, strong set of steel bases/rings and I think this setup not only looks good, but it is significantly lighter than the Buehler bases/rings that I chose not to install.

    I don't have an accurate weight on the entire setup, but the combination of the HVA action, 560mm barrel, S & K bases/rings, and the Leupold 1.5x5 Vari-X III feels well-balanced and is definitely easier on this 60 year old hunter when climbing steep hills. I don't pant quite as hard as I used to.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails a.jpg   b.jpg  

  12. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    In my WVA mind!
    Posts
    26,886

  13. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pointability View Post
    Have recently seen 2 HVA 1640 actions that had Weaver #25 bases on rear and #35 on front. Checking the dimensions on a specs sheet from Weaver, looks like #25 would be 0.062" lower than a #55 and the #35 would be 0.075" lower than the #46. A 0.013" shim under the #35 base would bring both bases to level at a point 0.062" lower than the standard 46-55 combo. This might be too low for a Millet or Leupold Rifleman low ring? I'm looking to mount a Nikon Pro-staff 2-7 and the eyebell and not the objective will be the problem regards to clearances. Anybody have any experience with the 25-35 bases and low rings?

    The HVA M1640 Ser. 26X,XXX (Simpson LTD Import) that I just purchased came with Weaver #25 and #35 bases on it. There was no shim under the front #35. I removed them and I'm looking for classic/vintage bases and rings that will allow me to mount a Leupold Vari-X III 2.5-8x 36mm w/1" tube.

  14. #58
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    In my WVA mind!
    Posts
    26,886

    Default

    Never saw a 25 / 35 combination...?

    Hitting scope bell with bolt handle stem is a common problem....
    Older Germanic style scope configurations...like fixed powers 1 x 5 x 28's....or fixed...in same styles....
    Or 6 x 36 fixed...
    Large bells front ...or big knuckle power adjustments..
    .I went through a bag of old newish scopes take offs....that just didn't fit....length width back to front...

  15. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    25

    Default

    I'm assuming that regular M96 small ring scope mounts aren't going to work? I really like the look of the Talley one piece ring mount..could they be machined to fit?

  16. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Winterland, Canada
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    On what miodel? Large rings have a different front ring size and the 1640 is longer than a m/94/96/38 action.
    Leupold one piece # 51623 have the correct profile for a 1640m, but the rear base have a different bolt pattern than the standard #55 Weaver base which is what is intended to be used on the 1640.
    Coagula / Solve

    Baribal; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baribal

  17. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Baribal View Post
    On what miodel? Large rings have a different front ring size and the 1640 is longer than a m/94/96/38 action.
    Leupold one piece # 51623 have the correct profile for a 1640m, but the rear base have a different bolt pattern than the standard #55 Weaver base which is what is intended to be used on the 1640.
    HVA 1640 action, I forgot to mention. Thanks

  18. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    25

    Default

    http://hgfirearms.dk/shop/husqvarna-1640-1900-231p.html

    Does anyone have any information regarding North American (Canada) availability of this product? Please move or delete if not in the realm of this thread..

  19. #63
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Winterland, Canada
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    Contact them, you will see... Sweden sell to Canada, but sometimes the prices are just over the moon...
    Coagula / Solve

    Baribal; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baribal

  20. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    13

    Default

    I just picked up a M-1951 Husqvarna Hi-Power, and wanted a peep sight that fit onto the predrilled receiver holes on the side for an aperture sight. The seller had a Lyman 57FN with the target knobs which he said would fit the receiver. Well, it didn't quite fit. The holes on the sight are set farther apart. When mounted with a single screw the sight clears the stock and no notching is required. What receiver sight would have the narrower hole spacing required for this receiver?? The rifle came with Weaver mounts and rings which were added after coming from the factory BTW. I will use the sight with a single screw held in with Locktite until I find the proper receiver sight.
    I guess I should sell what I have and look around. I prefer the steel sights which are period appropriate, but I'll make do with aluminum if I have to.

  21. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    In my WVA mind!
    Posts
    26,886

    Default

    I have 1951, 1,000, 1,200 all with peeps I put on May self years ago?
    Late 1978 earlie 80's?
    1951 second one I use to own...stock not cut for peep...
    the very accurate one I own is cut....wouldn't sale it for the world.
    Redfield and Lyman on them all fit right up.
    Had Husky with peep too...in 270 sold it because of the cal !
    I do 30 cals mostly.

  22. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Winterland, Canada
    Posts
    1,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigUke View Post
    I just picked up a M-1951 Husqvarna Hi-Power, and wanted a peep sight that fit onto the predrilled receiver holes on the side for an aperture sight. The seller had a Lyman 57FN with the target knobs which he said would fit the receiver. Well, it didn't quite fit. The holes on the sight are set farther apart. When mounted with a single screw the sight clears the stock and no notching is required. What receiver sight would have the narrower hole spacing required for this receiver?? The rifle came with Weaver mounts and rings which were added after coming from the factory BTW. I will use the sight with a single screw held in with Locktite until I find the proper receiver sight.
    I guess I should sell what I have and look around. I prefer the steel sights which are period appropriate, but I'll make do with aluminum if I have to.
    Well, who knows what it was drilled for? What you will have to do is to find a sight matching the bolt pattern on your receiver or have one more hole drilled and tapped to fit.....
    The 640 were not d&t at the factory, so they are found with so many different patterns. The 1000/1100 and the 1640/1600 were d&t for both scope and receiver sight.
    Coagula / Solve

    Baribal; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baribal

  23. #67
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    147

    Default

    BigUke,

    Your receiver may have been drilled and tapped for any number of sights but, it may very well require a Lyman 57HVA. I have had people tell me that Lyman FN sights will work on Husqvarnas but I have always run into the same problem as you. Both the Lyman HVA and Lyman FN are the right shape to fit the receiver but the hole spacing on a Lyman FN is approximately .630" center to center. The hole spacing on a Lyman HVA is approximately .600" center to center. I had a Husqvarna 649 that I honestly believed to be drilled and tapped at the factory. I put a Lyman 57HVA on it and it worked great. The Lyman 57FN did not fit due to hole spacing. The Lyman 57FN will not work on a 1640 Husqvarna either. This is just my experiences on the topic. As Baribal suggested caliper your hole spacing and see what you come up with. The Lyman 48HVA and Lyman 57HVA do come up for sale once and a while but, not like the FN's. I believe the later variations have more clearance for the stocks but, since Husqvarna sanded their stocks on a one by one basis it is hit and miss whether you have to sand a little wood to fit a receiver sight to them. The Lyman 48's sometimes need inletting for the elevation adjustment screw as well. Once again just my experience. Hope this helps.
    Regards,
    Kirkp
    Last edited by KirkP; 03-20-2017 at 08:45 PM.

  24. #68
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    In my WVA mind!
    Posts
    26,886

    smile

    Sounds like I had the correct ones by accident and did not experience problems...
    Well put KirkP....clear and should be put up,in the stickys...
    If they still do such things any more?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	5 
Size:	307.0 KB 
ID:	2064354

  25. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    25

    Default

    For the mean time, I've gone with weaver mounts #46 and #55. I also have created a solid model of the top of the 1640 receiver in plans of milling my own Picatinny rail. Is this something anyone would be interested in if I make a batch? Move/delete if this kind of thing is not allowed..

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •