Why doesn't anyone here talk about Redfield scopes?  Has their quality suffered in the past several years?

I have several old Redfields on many of my rifles. Never had a problem with them.

The new ones are made by Blount and are different. I can't comment on their quality....Blount also makes the new Weaver scopes.

Redfield is not "Tactical" enough for this website [;)]

yea, i can go with that.
not cheap enough to be a bargain or or durable enough to be tactical.
they are good scopes for a deer rifle but if you want a piece of glass to bet your life on redfield is not the way to go.  but they are all my dad shoots.  he has never had a problem.  but then he shoots 2 rounds a year.  one is a paper target bulleseye and one is a buck deer heart shot.

can u seriuosly make that claim? Redfield scopes have allways been good. They are'nt a leupold or a pentax but last time i checked  people use scopes to hunt game. Who the hell needs an illuminated rectile or 1/4 inch clicks to go hunt deer during the day?

The Redfield of today has no resemblence to the old 'original' Redfield scope. Redfield manufactured a top of the line series of hunting , target, and yes, even tactical scopes when they were located on Jewell Ave. in Denver.

There was some kind of chemical pollution mess that took place on Redfield's old site, and it seems that it was so serious that the company went under. Their name, and probably some remaining inventory was purchased by that big fish (that eats little fish) company named Blount, in case you want to know why RCBS went to hell!

Blount now imports scopes made in Asia under the Redfield name, much as Tasco contracted their crap out to some third-world country. The only thing that the presently manufactured Redfield scope has in common with the great old Redfield scopes is the name.

A few facts - Don (I think) Burris, who started the scope manufacturing company in Greely, Colorado that bears his name was a high level executive with the old Redfield Company before he went out on his own. The first issue scope for the USMC M40 sniper rifle was the Redfield 3-9X Accurange. The Redfield 3200 and 6400 series target scopes once held all major benchrest records. Redfield, in its day, sold more top-of-the-line hunting scopes than its competitors combined.

Now, which Redfield are you talking about?

Hummm... I still have an old Redfield LE-9 (the "head shot" model) that is very popular with a lot of shooters -- I never did care too much for the ranging system myself, but used a LE-12 Police (Mil-Dot) and it was a fantastic piece of glass, seemed tactical enough anyway...

I had a NIB "old" Redfiled 3-9X scope for sale in the EE for a month and noone bought it.  I fianlly sold it for $200 delivered on gunsamerica.  Was it worth more than that?  It was the Illuminator series, the highest grade.

You don't see a lot of old Redfields around for sale, the only ones I really have any experience with are the LE models, which Redfield was sort of picky about who they sold them to... they went for around 350 to 550. The old "green scopes" that Redfield supplied to the USMC are collectors today and fetch a pretty good price.

The LE series offered a reticle design that was an improvement on a design submitted to the USMC, it used rings to range the target, and stadia lines for windage hold-off. The LE series was also available with Mil-Dots.

Another scope that is often overlooked because it does not have a tactical reputation is the good old T-10... That scope was a popular choice to replace Redfield on the M40A1, but Weaver would not make it with a subdued finish?

Don't hold me to this, but I believe that Unertl was the first scope to use Mil-Dots... having agreed to make them for the Misguided Children. The Mil-Dot (once you learn to use it) is by far my favorite reticle, I like the "football" pattern -- the hollow balls (like NightForce uses) are rockstar... I just don't care for "busy" patterns... S&B Bryant Reticle anyone?

The Mil-Dot reticle was in fact designed by the USMCMTU, made by Truline Instruments (Englewood CO), and shipped to the John Unertl Co. for installation in their USMC Sniper Scope, with the first 25 units being delivered to the Corps early in 1980.

USMC 2nd Force Recon requested the MTU to test the Weaver T10 in 1978, and six were procured and mounted on the M40A1 Sniper rifle. It is suspected that the unwillingness of Weaver to provide these scopes in matte finish was only the tip of the iceburg. Weaver was in financial trouble by then, and was probably unwilling to put themselves through the designing and re-designing process that inevitabley came with a Marine Corps contract. Especially for the relatively small amount of scopes that the Corps was expected to order. Add that to the fact that Weavers bean-counters were already driving cost-cutting proceedures on management (such as the aluminum scope tube) and you'll understand why the T10/USMC marriage never was consummated.

According to the book "Old Rifle Scopes" by Nick Stroebel, the Redfield Illuminator Traditional and Widefield 3-9X scopes are valued at $200-$275 with an add'l $25 for those equipped with the rangefinder. The really valuable Redfields are the aforementioned Tactical models and Target models, both relatively rare, and the most valuable of all - the "true" USMC 3-9X Traditional Accurange scope in its original Marine contract anodized green finish. There were many 3-9X Redfields in Traditional and Widefield forms, both in matte and gloss finish that were purchased by the Corps due to the inability of Redfield to supply more of the contract version, the need spurred by the escalation of the VN war. The value of these would also be high, providing that they came with the correct provenance. Otherwise they would only be as valuable as the common Redfield scope of that model!