Weaver Scopes

[newton]

I have always bought the cheapest, but usable, scope I could find. Never paying over $50. I have never had an issue with them, but I only have ever used them out to 100 yards max, and have dealt with the fact they are not the clearest or best for low light. For hunting purposes, and hunting purposes alone, they have always served me well.

Now that I am doing some shooting with a .223, target shooting and shooting some longer ranges, I now can see the need for a "better" scope. I bought a Vortex last year, 3x9x50, and it was sweet. I ended up giving/putting it on my sons 308. The M700 in .223 I have came with a Simmons 4x12x44. It is "ok", but the cross hairs are thick, adjustments are old school, and it is gets blurry toward the edges especially at longer ranges. Its very usable, and I decided I would stick with it till I found a scope that had everything I wanted - not so much worrying about brand names or anything.

I was checking emails today and had one from Midway. They had some clearance optics so I decided to browse. I ran across this:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/147...be-6-18-x-44mm

For $140 shipped I could not pass it up. I read some reviews before buying, but I wanted to see if there were any other people on here that had experience with them. Maybe what I should look for out of the box to decide if its worth it or not. One of those things about buying online, just never know exactly what its like.

It had every thing that I had decided I want when I upgraded my current scope. 6x18 magnification, finger adjust and zero reset turrets(which are 1/8 MOA to boot), AO(my current scope has it, but this one is on the side not front), and a fine set of cross hairs. Says it comes with a 3" sun shade too. Should be interesting to see if that's true or not, it does not show it in the picture.

Other than its not one of the "name" brand scopes, I have to say its around $100 less than I thought I would have to spend. Anyone have experience with these?

[Vann]

I've never tried the Kaspa line but I have a Grand Slam 4.5x14 and a Classic Extreme 4x16 and love both of them. The Kaspa is one of Weaver's lower end scopes so it's either made in the Philippines or China. I'm not big on Chinese optics, but I had a 30-30 I was trying to set up for my daughter and my 20 year old Bushnell Sportview gave out while sighting it in on the 30-30, being that I was in a hurry and couldn't wait on mail order I bought a Bushnell Banner from Walmart, I believe it was a 4x14x50 and was quite impressed.

Both Weaver and Bushnell and owned buy the same company so I would imagine that they are the same quality with the Weaver being slightly better.

[newton]

Thanks, I am not big on China stuff either, but I was super impressed with the Vortex scope I got which was made in China.

Should be interesting to see. I have not found any negative stuff yet online, about this particular scope anyways. Should be here just in time to test my new boolit mold in the .223. I am hoping it helps a lot with being able to zoom in on the target. I've never had anything over a 9x before the 12x on my current scope. I am hoping that 18x will make it even that much better.

Of course, it only helps if you can hold the gun still I imagine, but when I am target shooting/testing I always use a solid rest to put the gun in.

[MT Chambers]

Are some of the Weaver scopes not made by Simmons or vise versa?? I have a Weaver 36X target scope and have had no problems but it is on a rifle with very little recoil.

[newton]

Without actually going to the factory and watching I don't know if anyone could be 100% positive of the relationship of China made scopes. It does make you wonder though when they look similar, function similar, and all the rest. I have heard that a lot of the China scopes are made by the same companies over there then just branded different and use some different parts. While it would be interesting to see how they make scopes, I don't think I ever see myself going to China for any reason.

I kind of thought the same thing about this buy. Its going on a .223, so recoil is going to be minimal. Unless its a complete pile of junk, I don't think I could have found a better deal for the magnification and adjustments I was looking for. One thing I like, which I am starting to see more and more on lower end scopes, is the ability to reset the zero on the turret and be able to turn them with your fingers. It makes things very easy to go from shooting light cast loads to full power jacketed stuff.

The Vortex on my sons 308 is like this. His cast loads are a whopping 20" lower than the full power jacketed rounds. It is easy to move the crosshairs down without having to count the number of clicks, then reset it back knowing where the zero is.

One thing I'll be curious of is the ability to hold the sight picture. Some of my cheap cheap scopes you have to hold very still or the sight picture becomes blurry and stuff. With the Vortex, just as soon as you pull up the gun the sight picture is clear and you can even move your head around a little and not loose it. The Simmons I have on the gun is about mid range between the two. Not sure if this is directly related to the stated eye relief of the scope? If so, then it should be good as it has just a hair(less than 1/4") of longer eye relief, numbers wise, than the Vortex.

[Vann]

If I remember correctly Bushnell, Weaver, and Simons all are part of ATK which also owns Savage, Federal, and a few others.

My Grand Slam and Weaver Classic Extreme are both made in Japan, they are really top notch scopes. I'm planning on a Super Slam next.

[lefty o]

weaver and simmons are not related!

[Vann]

http://vistaoutdoor.com/brands/ not related but part of the same company plus Alliant, RCBS, CCI, Speer and a whole bunch more.

[Tenbender]

Simmons use wax paper for lens !

[EDG]

I am as cheap as there is when it comes to scopes.
Most of the problems I have seen have been mechanical. The scope will not zero, will not hold zero or some lens comes loose on the inside.

After seeing a local dealer with about 20 employees drop Simmons for too many returns and having a few problems with other used scopes I promised myself that I would only buy used Leupolds. I have never had a problem and I have been able to get them at decent prices. I know as long as Leupold is in business that I will be able to get full service or replacement.

[Lloyd Smale]

if I remember right natchez had some kaspas closed out even cheaper.

[newton]

if I remember right natchez had some kaspas closed out even cheaper.

If they did, I missed the sale. I checked around other places before buying. I figure seeing how its their bottom line they probably run sales every now and then. I'll admit, it was an impulse buy, and the free shipping was the hookset.

[newton]

I am as cheap as there is when it comes to scopes.
Most of the problems I have seen have been mechanical. The scope will not zero, will not hold zero or some lens comes loose on the inside.

After seeing a local dealer with about 20 employees drop Simmons for too many returns and having a few problems with other used scopes I promised myself that I would only buy used Leupolds. I have never had a problem and I have been able to get them at decent prices. I know as long as Leupold is in business that I will be able to get full service or replacement.

After I bought the Vortex, which was not near as cheap(even though it was on sale and inexpensive - don't remember the price), I told myself it was worth it to spend a little more for good scopes.

I have to say, I did think it out before buying, and if I were putting it on any other gun other than a .22 caliber I would not have done it. If it comes in bad I'll send it back. I would love to buy Leupolds, but in order to get good stuff you have to buy their higher end scopes. I have done a LOT of research into scopes over the years, and I find way too many people who are not pleased with the money they spend on the name brand scopes with their low end lines. I bought a pair of Leupold binoculars one time. Not cheap, but not real expensive. I was completely unimpressed. They were nice, and better than Tasco or some others, but not much more. Maybe they would hold up to more abuse than others but I guess I am one of those that tries not to abuse anything no matter the cost.

I get that higher end scopes are "more" weather proof, shock proof, etc. And if I were to be looking for a scope to put on a rifle I was going to take on a safari hunt, or be using in the mountains of Colorado, I could see the peace of mind coming from high end scopes. For target work, and fair weather shooting, I am hoping this scope will do. Like I said, I had a criteria list for what I wanted and this scope met all of the requirements plus. I'm surprised with the price that more guys on here don't have one, even if it was just a buy to try it. I know that I cannot expect to have bought this and try to compare it to anything that costs any more than it did. I figure I bought a $140 scope, and I'll get no more than a $140 value from it.

Now, once you get into the $400+ range, then you start weeding through the different looks and working of a scope to base a decision on whether to buy. I do see the value of the higher end scopes, but never had a gun I felt like needed one. This is the first gun I feel like I could put one on, but that kind of cash is just not an option. I figure this will at least let me see if the higher magnification is something I want.

If I had read some bad reviews on it I would not have bought it. Of course, there are not many out there to begin with. All of the reviews I read were either people feeling they got a more scope for their money, or the scope was on par for the money. I'll for sure let you all know my impressions when I get it.

[Hickok]

Simmons use wax paper for lens !

That right there is funny, I don't care who you are!

[MostlyLeverGuns]

Cheap scopes on rifles that are shot many rounds, carried often, kept in rough country vehicles or on rifles with significant recoil cost in lack of reliability, ammunition costs in sighting, re-sighting, wondering why the rifle is not shooting right, enlarged groups. Cheap scopes can get very expensive. Even 'expensive' scopes fail. It is just a matter of time, round count, recoil level, rough roads and conditions that matter. I have some 30yr-old $15 Bushnell's that are fine on .22s, others just fail after a 40 or 50 shots on light .45-70s, .300 Magnums, and my .358's. A couple pizza deliveries, packs of cigarettes, or fast food meals can pay for better scopes. Scope failures are very expensive - time, ammo, lost game, worse - wounded game, trips to the range, figuring out why the rifle won't shoot..

[atr]

I will not knowingly buy anything from China !

[newton]

Cheap scopes on rifles that are shot many rounds, carried often, kept in rough country vehicles or on rifles with significant recoil cost in lack of reliability, ammunition costs in sighting, re-sighting, wondering why the rifle is not shooting right, enlarged groups. Cheap scopes can get very expensive. Even 'expensive' scopes fail. It is just a matter of time, round count, recoil level, rough roads and conditions that matter. I have some 30yr-old $15 Bushnell's that are fine on .22s, others just fail after a 40 or 50 shots on light .45-70s, .300 Magnums, and my .358's. A couple pizza deliveries, packs of cigarettes, or fast food meals can pay for better scopes. Scope failures are very expensive - time, ammo, lost game, worse - wounded game, trips to the range, figuring out why the rifle won't shoot..

I agree, but what you speak of is strictly mechanical failures. You can have an expensive scope fail mechanically, although you expect them not too for the price.

Sometimes cheap just means the glass is more prone to scratching, or the fit/finish is not as smooth, or its a little more blurry around the edges, or the color quality is not as crisp.

Other times you just do not get the same kind of adjusting ability - zero reset, finger adjust, shorter MOA span, and AO.

Don't get me wrong, I believe there is a place, and reason, for expensive scopes. But as long as they are mechanically sound, with normal use(I don't keep my gun in rough country vehicles), then I don't see why a lower cost, giving up some bells and whistles, scope is not fine. There is a significant difference between $150 and $400.

The same can be said of guns in general. Just because a gun does not cost as much as another one of the same caliber does not mean it wont work, yet most guys wont pass up some of the less expensive guns to buy one that costs hundreds more. For instance, I have a 1911 that cost me $400. Once I got a load figured out for it I have not had ONE hiccup with it. It shoots very nice groups and I would put it against another 1911 that cost twice as much. Sure, it might not look as pretty, or feel as smooth, or it may not even eat the same kind of ammo. But it still does what its supposed too.

I'll be the first to tell you guys whether or not this scope works. I am not afraid to make it known that it broke if it does. It will see a lot of use in the coming months so I'll be able to have a pretty good idea of the quality. That's one thing that's nice about lower cost items in general. A guy only has X amount of money. If I tied it up in a wiz bang super duper brag on the name brand scope, then I would not have as much to spend on stuff to feed the gun it sits on. A high dollar scope does me no good if all I can do is look through it.

I know that this is one of those topics that gets guys with all kinds of opinions. Nothing wrong with it, as long as it stays civil I guess. I have thick skin myself. I just like to look at things objectively. I did not buy this scope because it was cheap. I bought it because for the cost, it had everything I wanted, and I could afford it. I could have saved up for a few years, bought another brand of scope, but who is to say it would have been any better for my use? I guess I could have felt good about owning a expensive scope, or felt good that if it broke I would receive good service, or felt good that it probably was better than the cheaper one I passed up - but in my short life I have learned that feelings are fickle.

[Vann]

I agree with MostlyLeverGuns, my 3 most used hunting rifles are 2 .338 Win mags and a 7MM Ultra mag.

The Bushnell Sportsveiw that I posted about earlier cane off of one of the .338's. I bought that rifle when I was 16 and put that scope on it. It lasted on that rifle for 15 years before it started getting fuzzy and I replaced it with a Leopold. It's final death stroke was a 4 wheeler ride to my back field so I could sight it in on the 30-30, after 2 trips one of the lenses fell over inside.

.338 number 2 got a Nikon Prostaff on it the day I bought it. I never had a problem with that scope and it now lives on a 209x50 magnum Encore barrel that sees a fair amount of use. One thing that I did notice was that the Nikon was made in the Philippines, I has always thought that it was a Japanese made scope. I replaced it with a Weaver Grand Slam 4.5x14, not because I had to I just wanted a bit more magnification than the 3x9 Nikon gave.

The 7mm ultra mag came with a Simmons ATV on it, after a little research I found that this was Simmons one time dip into the higher quality scope line. I'm not sure exactly how many rounds has been fired in this rifle but when I bought it it came with 260 pieces of fired brass which is now on its third firing. I thought I killed it last year but it turned out just to be the windage adjustable Leopold base had worked lose. I replaced that with a one piece base.

I have 3 of these new Chinese made Simmons sitting on my junk shelf they are all 3x9 scopes that came on package guns and they are complete junk. I'm not trying to be a scope snob but the last Simmons scope that I actually purchased was a Simmons Aetec, but after seeing the quality of the China made glass in a friend's 44 Mag scope I was really disappointed, I'm not sure which scope it was exactly, but when turned up to full magnification it went fuzzy. At the lower powers it was wonderful. All Simmons did was shoot their self in the foot by trying to produce a high magnification scope with low quality glass.

I guess you win some and you lose some.

[newton]

I guess I am just one of those guys that likes to give people/things a second chance. In reality, while something may be built/made in a particular place, that does not mean all the parts for it came from there.

things from China can be a flip of the coin. But just because something is inexpensive does not mean it won't work as good as something expensive. Same can be said the other way around.

There are a lot of things these days that are half or more the price they were just 10 years ago. Some things are more expensive than they were. But 9 times out of 10 they work the same.

The one thing that is also true, but many will deny, is that over the years China has upped their quality. Another thing people don't get is the main, not only but main, reason things from China cost less is because of labor costs.

Some guys won't buy for that reason. But how is that any different than buying something from America made by a minimum wage employee, who has a boss sitting in the office making billions? Same thing, different place.

[GabbyM]

Last Weaver scope I purchased was just a few years ago. Classic 1x3. It was made in Japan. Rings were made in USA. I have a couple of the old made in America steel tube scopes that are still going strong. Never had any Weaver fail on me.