S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
1 members (Fudd),
473
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,499
Posts545,462
Members14,414
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719 Likes: 416
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719 Likes: 416 |
But why is the Weaver K-4 "the least desirable of all the scopes of that period"???? Yeah, I second that question. They seem pretty bombproof and more than adequately bright and clear. I've never used one, but a friend likes to collect them for his rifles. Seems like a darn good scope to me.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan)
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
But why is the Weaver K-4 "the least desirable of all the scopes of that period"???? Yeah, I second that question. They seem pretty bombproof and more than adequately bright and clear. I've never used one, but a friend likes to collect them for his rifles. Seems like a darn good scope to me. I wondered also. On my 14th birthday, my Granddad gave me a Winchester M63- .22LR- 23" barrel and grooved top for scope- When I was 16 he had a older Weaver 4x 3/4" scope set up on it, and I used it, along with several other good .22LR's in the family- for dump rats, rabbits and squirrels a plenty. About 10 years ago I replaced the 3/4" Weaver with a El Paso steel tube blued Weaver 4 power 1" scope, and rings, and that has been on the M63 ever since- bulletproof, reasonably priced when made in El Paso (before Weaver went out and let the Chinks make some of their scopes) and well worth the money. Glad to see Weaver and Redfield are back in business-good quality in a market for hunting optics that has many "contenders" for our $'s..
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,153
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,153 |
But why is the Weaver K-4 "the least desirable of all the scopes of that period"???? Yeah, I second that question. They seem pretty bombproof and more than adequately bright and clear. I've never used one, but a friend likes to collect them for his rifles. Seems like a darn good scope to me. They aren't bad but again they aren't the best. On the examples I've used, the Weaver optics have DEFINITELY deteriorated over time while the Unertl and Lyman optics have remained clearer by a substantial margin. As far as being the least desirable, I emphatically disagree and would rank Bushnell and very early Leupold as less desirable than Weaver. IMO Stith, Kollmorgen and Redfield fall somewhere in the middle. JMOFWIW. None of these scopes were waterproof and IMO their weatherproofing is iffy sometimes. For instance I've seen fogged-up Weavers and Bushnells and yet they were supposed to be weatherproof, while I've not yet seen any fogged-up Unertls or Lymans. And none of these period scopes had coated lenses as we know them today. Regards, Joe
You can lead a man to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 674 Likes: 13
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 674 Likes: 13 |
Save your nickels or swap some stuff and get a Lyman Alaskan, and don't look back. You'll thank me later!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 141
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 141 |
Highest prices do not always mean best item but here are some prices from the 1954 Gun Digest.
B & L Balfor $65.00 Bushnell Scopemaster 54 49.50 Hensoldt Dural-Dialytan 4x 86.00 Leopold Pioneer 4X 75.00 Lyman Challenger 4X 89.50 Lyman Alaskan 2 1/2X 69.50 Unertl Hawk 4X 52.00 Weaver K4 4X 45.00
Last edited by Herschel; 12/09/12 02:29 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,153
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,153 |
Many of these earlier Weavers seem to have problems with the cement holding the (erector?) lenses together, rather than a fogging problem per se. Not particularly difficult or expensive to repair but a PITA nevertheless.
Most underestimated scopes in my experience and opinion? Lyman All-Americans and Perma-Centers. Slightly later time period than the rifle in question though.
I like scopes and have owned/used a lot of different brands over the years. The only scopes I actually seek today are vintage Lymans and Unertls since they seem to retain their optical clarity longer than the others. Regards, Joe
You can lead a man to logic but you can't make him think. NRA Life since 1976. God bless America!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,224 Likes: 3
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,224 Likes: 3 |
It wasn't a rhetorical question since my experience with that vintage of Weavers has been excellent, but I've only owned the "straight tube" versions: J2.5x, K1.5X, 2.5x, and 3X. Wondered if the higher powered ones had some basic flaw or if they were just so common as to be boring.
Haven't used these in extreme conditions, tho. Lowest temp in the 20s and seldom in driving rain, either. And I always reserve the irons, just in case.
My own favorites of the period are Lyman All-American and Redfield "straight-tube" low powered, fixed scopes. But I won't kick a similar Weaver out of bed if the price is right, especially the K1.5X.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 502
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 502 |
Hi Mike et. al.:
My beef with the weaver K4 scope and the other Weaver scopes of that period was the lack of a anti reflecting coating on the lenses. Other scopes were brighter and without the annoying "flare" inside the scope I would see if I were aiming towards the Sun. One other thing that I noticed with the Weavers was that while hunting in bright sunlight, I could see the reflection on my eye/face in the eyepiece. Very distracting!
When I went scopes like Lyman,Redfield, Kollmorgen and Leupold, I did not have these problems. They were brighter and more user friendly. Even the Bushnells were brighter.
Perhaps this answers your question.
The K4 probably outsold all other scopes combined in the 50's.
Stay well,
Zeke
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 74
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 74 |
I won't badmouth the '50's Weavers 'cuz I used too many back then, but if you are wondering what was wrong with them, take a look through one at the next gunshow.
If I were doing this project and actually going to shoot the gun much, I'd think hard about a B&L, although maybe in someone else's mount. The Stith Doubles are kinda scarce from what I've seen.
Have fun with the project and good shooting!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,224 Likes: 3
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,224 Likes: 3 |
Thanks, Zeke. That does answer my question. I haven't used the old Weavers in real tough conditions or for high stakes/high dollar big game. Would probably go with "the Gold Ring" if I did. And a NEW one.
|
|
|
|
|