Re: Whats an AR-TEL M21 scope actually worth?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Redfield with the window rangefinder is nowhere near what the original GI ART did with the external cam.
The Redfield's internal "Rangefinder" (as the Marines and Air Force used on the M40) just gave a rough distance-to-target and I do not believe it compensated for drop as the ART.
GI vernacular gave us the "ART." ART II was a Leatherwood designation (possibly big Army as well).
The USAMU had original ARTs on the school M21s through at least December 1982, while the ones I had in my scout platoon in Korea (December 1982 - August 83) were ART IIs.
Half didn't work and had condensation on the inside of the eyepiece and objective lenses.
I didn't like the ART II nearly as much as the original ART -- the ranging feature had changed to use the thickness of the external duplex cross hair "Bar," as it was supposed to be E-type silhouette or 1 Meter high.
While most M21s had the epoxy impregnated wood stock some had McMillans. This photo was from a long time ago:
</div></div>
That makes sense then. The AR Tel, being Redfield, and the "ART" being Leatherwood. They would not have called it an ART I unless they knew there was to be an ART II to come along. Which, they didn't.