Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Anybody have experience with the Weaver fixed power scopes or the 1-3 straight tube?

  1. #1
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default Anybody have experience with the Weaver fixed power scopes or the 1-3 straight tube?

    I'm curious how they've held up and on what caliber rifles............................

  2. #2
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,056

    Default

    A friend of mine has used a steel tubed K4 on an old Sako .358 for about 25 years... Its hunted a lot and shot just a little so I don't know if that has answered your questions or not.

  3. #3
    Member Bsj425's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Pole, Alaska
    Posts
    1,060

    Default

    I had the 1-3x20 on my AR 15 for a while it is compact and fairly light at 8.5oz but after about a season of predator hunting it would not make adjustments anymore I thought maybe the cold had something to do with it since it was usually between 0 and -30 when I was out. I had a hard time getting a hold of them for warranty work and when I finally did they said it was like a 3 month turn around time and I had to pay shipping both ways. So when I finally got it back (5 months later) I just sold it because I got a replacement in the mean time.

    I replaced it with a fixed 4x burris timberline and it has been AWESOME good glass pretty bright for only having a 20mm tube I zeroed it and havent had to touch it and it takes a good beating strapped on the wheeler or snow machine and they are identically priced.

    http://swfa.com/Weaver-1-3x20-Classi...ope-P2864.aspx
    ^^ weaver

    http://swfa.com/Burris-4x20-Timberli...pe-P10998.aspx
    ^^burris

  4. #4
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,218

    Default

    Have never been a Weaver owner so can't speak directly to that question. But, +1 for Burris. I have a couple Burris fixed power scopes and can only say good things about them. Unfortunately, good quality fixed power scopes are getting harder and harder to come by. The high end European manufacturers have stopped marketing them, at least in the U.S. where bells and whistles tend to substitute for competence, and the better U.S. manufacturers aren't producing them either. Try the fixed 4 Burris that Bsj425 recommended. You'll like it. Better act fast though before Burris stops making that one too.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Arizona Baby!
    Posts
    485

    Default

    I had a T16 I used on a 7-08 and shot High Power Silhouette with it for 3 years. Probably shot 2500 rounds through a 10# 3oz rifle and never had a lick of trouble.
    It was constantly being adjusted for shots from 200-500 Meters and always went to zero each time. This was in the early 90's.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fairview Loop
    Posts
    81

    Default

    I have an old K4 that is my slap on scope when I buy a new gun and just want to get shooting. I have had it on my .270, .300win mag, and it is currently sitting on my .223. I usually set it up on a gun and then between gun builds I'll buy a new scope and swap it out. Only reason I swap it is to put a variable power on. I have never had a problem with it and it has seen its fair share of shooting both on the .270 as well as the .300. FWIW

  7. #7

    Default

    Weaver 2.5 on a 375 H&H, never had a problem, 1X3 Weaver currently on the 375 H&H and on a Ruger 416 with no problems to date. A former gun shop owner in my home town had the 1X3 Weaver on his 416 Remington and swore by it, thus my purchases. For what it's worth!

  8. #8
    Member The Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    1,089

    Default

    I've had a slew of old steeltube fixed powers over the years. I've had mostly 2.5 and 3 powers with a couple of 4s thrown in as well. All of them held up okay and adjusted pretty reliably, however. They tend to be rather dim and the older ones are not fog proof and the reticle moves in the sight picture when you zero them. The newer steel tubes, like from the 70s have the constantly centered crosshair and might be gas filled, though I doubt it.

    I keep a couple around for loaners and to put on guns I make gifts of, but there are definately better more modern options.

  9. #9
    Member pinehavensredrocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    wisconsin
    Posts
    759

    Default

    hi kid; i currently own two weaver fixed 4X scopes....but they are newer models with japanese optics. i think the lens system is high quality, and the coatings are consistant with more expensive scopes. frankly, the 4X is just about all i use ( i like the 6X too ), although it is getting harder to find fixed power scopes these days.

    i owned a steel tube 3X for years but finally "blew out" the reticle. it was for the best as the new models are a lot brighter!
    happy trails.
    jh

  10. #10
    Member The Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    1,089

    Default

    Gotta agree with the fixed powers of any quality getting hard to find. Seems everyone needs at least 14 power these days. I used nothing but fixed 4s for a long time and have went to 2.5 for alot of my hunting lately as I have them on two of my rifles. With fixed power glass getting rarer these days I have started buying the 1.5-5 and most recently a 1-4. But it seems like they never leave the 3x setting.

    I remember as a young kid my Grandad telling me his buddies thought he was crazy buying a 4 power Leupold as they said he would just see hair in the scope with all that magnification.
    Ahh, how times have changed.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default

    Aren't most Modern scopes better than the Older ones?

    I have a Weaver K 2.5 from 1961, and it still works, but doesn't compare well to the two Weaver K4s I have. They are brighter, and the cross hairs are bigger.

    I used one K4 on a 338 for a while.

    The only gripe I have with the K4s is that the Bell on the front end is such, that it limits the mounting surface.

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  12. #12
    Member pinehavensredrocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    wisconsin
    Posts
    759

    Default

    hi smitty! i think the bell is 38mm or 40mm which should still easily mount on "LOW" rings. like you, i find it important (and natural) for proper stock fit and cheek weld.

    the large (to my way of thinking) outsize, objective lens is overrated. exit pupil at 5mm-6mm can only use that amount of light...the rest is wasted on me. it's like carrying a scope with a rifle attached. hahaha.
    '"
    happy trails.
    jh

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Between two lakes in Alaska
    Posts
    952

    Default

    Some years ago I bought a 6X to do some load development for an AR. I was very impressed with how bright and clear the scope was. Based on that scope, I bought a 1-3X for a TCR87 slug barrel to shoot 3" mag. slugs. The scope is not nearly as bright and clear as the 6X, but it gets the job done. The rifle is very light and the recoil gets one's attention. No problems with either scope.

    I bought a 2.5-7 Weaver scope for a 10/22 and after some time the "guts" could be seen floating around inside the scope. I sent it in and they sent me a new scope within a short time. No problems with the newer scope.

  14. #14
    Moderator Paul H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    I had an old steel tubed weaver K-6 that held up fine on my 350 rigby, 250 gr @ 2700 fps. I also got a newer weaver K-6 that has been on a lightweight .308 and held up fine.

    That said, I don't like the new K-6, it has very little eye relief, and I don't care for the proportions of the plex reticle. I've standardized on the leupold 6X42 for my fixed hunting scopes, excellent scopes.

    I've relegated the K-6 to 22rf service, I can live with the eye relief on a plinker.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pinehavensredrocket View Post
    hi smitty! i think the bell is 38mm or 40mm which should still easily mount on "LOW" rings. like you, i find it important (and natural) for proper stock fit and cheek weld.

    the large (to my way of thinking) outsize, objective lens is overrated. exit pupil at 5mm-6mm can only use that amount of light...the rest is wasted on me. it's like carrying a scope with a rifle attached. hahaha.
    '"
    I was referring to the length of the tube between the Bell and the Eye Piece, (or the ocular end of the scope).

    For example, I have a cupla rifles that need about 6 inches, for mounting with rings that are wide like, the Weaver rings for example.

    If there is not enough mounting surface on a scope, you hafta get offset rings, or maybe narrower rings.

    Offset rings make the scope mounting higher on the rifle.

    Just because you can fit the scope between the rings on the mount, doesn't mean that the scope can be mounted far enough forward or backards' for proper eye relief.

    Of course, it's not always best to mount the scope as low as possible. That depends on the stock, and sometimes a higher scope is more comfortable, and better all around.

    IME, limited as it is, a stock without much drop, and a very low mounted scope makes me hafta bend my head forward into the stock and look at the cross hairs through my eyebrows, while I get banged in the jaw by the stock. (That's an exaggeration.)

    Back to the original issue, (with me.) The short mounting surface on the tube means I've had to make special provision, to mount it, on some of the LA rifles I wanted to put it on.

    Mounting surface is a consideration, and at least one manufacturer tells you the mounting surface on their scopes, which is fine, if they'd tell the truth.

    I agree with you on the Huge objectives. They don't look right, like they're out of balance.

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  16. #16

    Default

    I have 3. Two of them are 4 power; one on a 308, the other on a 7X57. The other is a 6 power on a 6mm Remington.
    All were installed before 1975 and I have had zero problems of any kind with them. Last I knew the one on a late uncles 300 Savage was still on it and it was installed sometime in the 1960's (I think), it also has had zero problems.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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