S&W Model 41 with Bushnell Scope

Discuss .22 pistols.

Moderators: Bullseye, Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
jstanfield103
Regular contributor
Regular contributor
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:03 am
Location: Kentucky

S&W Model 41 with Bushnell Scope

Post by jstanfield103 » Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:08 am

As many of you now I started a thread that was called Worst Ammo Ever. I was having trouble grouping my rounds with CCI SV. After listening to everyone here and on other sights, I realized it had to be the Red Dot scope othat I just put on. I could never get it to hold "0". I sent it to the factory for repair and ordered a Bushnell Elite handgun scope. I really like this scope, the only problem is the eye relief is 20" exactly. I have shorter arms so I really have to keep my arms as striaght almost as I can get them. But here is a picture of the gun scoped with it and a target at 25 yards, I was using Federal Bulk Ammo from Wally Wourld. I can't wait to try the CCI SV again and see what it does. Now I have to steady my self a little more. I was also using a bench rest that I made. The 6 power you see every little move meant. That Target is 3.75" across, need some more practice, I will only get better. I hope.

Image
By jstanfield at 2011-11-15

Image
By jstanfield at 2011-11-15

User avatar
Bullseye
Site Admin/Host
Site Admin/Host
Posts: 6382
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: USA

Post by Bullseye » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:39 am

20" is about right for a "one arm extended hold " eye relief.

R,
Bullseye
Image

stork
Advanced contributor
Advanced contributor
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:12 am
Location: North Dakota

Post by stork » Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:20 am

Before putting the CCI on paper remember to scrub the bore with a nylon brush, otherwise your first few shots may be out of the group.

I'm thinking the CCI will be a ragged hole.
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” – George Washington

User avatar
blue68f100
Master contributor
Master contributor
Posts: 1997
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 10:31 pm
Location: Piney Woods of East Texas

Post by blue68f100 » Tue Nov 15, 2011 2:45 pm

A bad scope will drive you nuts, if they are not holding Zero.

With good ammo you should be able to shoot some very nice groups/hole.

Eye relief on most scopes are not near long enough for my long arms. I had some one measure me and I needed 28+" depending on scope placement on the gun. This is one reason I bring it up when shooter start talking about scopes for handguns.
David

SS MKIII 6 7/8" Fluted Hunter. Mueller Quick Shot, Bushnell 2x Scope, Hogue Rubber Grips
Custom Built 1911

User avatar
jstanfield103
Regular contributor
Regular contributor
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:03 am
Location: Kentucky

Post by jstanfield103 » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:33 pm

I found several scopes for hand guns with less eye relief, I am only 5' 5" tall or short depending on how you look at things. Bullseye with the bench rest I am using 2 hands, 1 on the grips and 1 under the grips to flex up and down for "0". With the 20" eye relief it is comfortable but I really have my arms at full length ( almost). I am going to cut some more cross slots in my weaver rail this coming week end to get the scope a little more towards the front muzzel. It should help me a little bit more. Love the scope though it's great!

User avatar
Hardball
Regular contributor
Regular contributor
Posts: 147
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:37 am
Location: Oregon

Post by Hardball » Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:28 am

Take off the comp.

User avatar
jstanfield103
Regular contributor
Regular contributor
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:03 am
Location: Kentucky

Post by jstanfield103 » Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:17 am

Hardball, I kind of like the compensator. It doesn't bother the scope in any manner and I just like it. Don't know why, I know it's not needed but I like it.

stork
Advanced contributor
Advanced contributor
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:12 am
Location: North Dakota

Comps

Post by stork » Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:57 am

Jstan,
While I agree with your assessment of looks of compensators (I like their looks too), Hardball is right. Remove it if you want to get the best accuracy from your 41.

I have 4 Hi Standards that I've tried the factory compensator on and every one shoots worse with it than without. I also have a Marvel Unit one, with a compensator that I bought used. It shot like cr@p at 50' (over 1"). I removed the comp and reshot it with the same box of ammo,... a ragged hole. In the Marvels case it turned out to be a huge buildup of lead deposits from the prior owner, who it turns out didn't know they have to be cleaned. I had to scrape out nearly an 1/8" of lead to get to steel. As I prefer the balance without it, I've never reinstalled it. I am too anal about accuracy and with the exception of the Marvel (just haven't had the time) I Ransom Rest every combination of barrels/bullets/powder I can concoct. In many cases I wind up reinventing the wheel and then feel like a putz because I squandered components needlessly, but at least I proved it to myself. And, occasionally I stumble across an unknown.

If you keep it clean and are willing to put up with the sacrifice in accuracy, go for it. As long as you are aware of their shortcomings and can live with them, they do look neat.

FWIW
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” – George Washington

User avatar
jstanfield103
Regular contributor
Regular contributor
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:03 am
Location: Kentucky

Post by jstanfield103 » Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:04 pm

Stork, I had another person on Rimfirecentral tell me the same thing. After hearing three people with the same opinion. I believe I will try it without the compensator.
Thanks

Post Reply