Weaver Non-detachable rings?

[Texas by God]

I recently aquired the oldest K6 Weaver that I’ve ever seen. It’s in Very Nice condition.
Worried that the rings were too low, I proceeded to remove the ring tension screws.
Then I noticed that these rings appear to be solid.
What am I missing here?
The Weaver rings I’ve used all my life slide apart after you remove the screws. These don’t- unless the seam is fine and I can’t see it.
Regardless, the set up fit my 91 Mauser with no problems.
Looks proper on there, too.


https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240218/8fd5224eef1ad8c867df25ecaaf95569.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240218/e9195ec52e2b73c15d70f326942e3283.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Winger Ed.]

Then I noticed that these rings appear to be solid.

Yeah they are.
Awhile back I ended up with a K4 from the early 60s like that.

[Texas by God]

Thanks, Ed.
I’m still trying to figure out how they put them on the scope……[emoji848]
It seems that they would break if you tried to pry them open enough to snap over the scope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tatume]

Perhaps Weaver installed the rings during assembly of the scope?

[schutzen-jager]

they had to be installed on tube before assembly - i have broken them off to install standard split rings - measure tube first on older vintage models, could be 3/4", 7/8', or 1" on U.S models or non domestic sizes in mm. -

[beemer]

I have a set of Redfield style turn rings that are solid but clamp at the top. They came on an old 3/4" Weaver that was on a Savage 25-20. I had to remove the adjustment turret and the back lens bell to slid them off. Some of the scopes of that era were not sealed or nitrogen filled so I didn't mater if you took then apart, nothing was lost.

Several years back I bought a Weaver K4 that looked new. Turned out it had a non centered cross hairs. When I zeroed it in the cross hair was way off center, guess that's where those Redfield style mounts come in handy.

[Bazoo]

I've never seen rings like that, thanks for sharing. I like them, if they fit my application, I'd be very happy.

[Texas by God]

I looked at it again and noticed that the rings are all aluminum-see the screwdriver scars-unlike the common Weaver rings that have steel and aluminum construction.
How was the front ring installed? The objective end is seamless. Were the adjustment bosses removed along with the ocular end?
That’s what it seems like.
Thanks for the replies.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240219/27d9b80c42731f681cc77acc9acb9fe3.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240219/bb1a90b22b3ea455f41aa1f8ca3a393f.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240219/9313c1c40f173aca780394adb86d6798.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Winger Ed.]

Maybe they slid the ring on before the tube was installed in the turret.

[Czech_too]

There are rings like those on a Marlin branded 4x scope, believe it's 3/4" tube. Also there is one ring, on the front of another 3/4" scope. There isn't one on the back! This one is a 6X. Nearest I can figure is that the rings were put on during assembly.

[pertnear]

Hey Texas-by-God, are you checking these out with your glasses on? Perhaps what ya have there is a set of them there fancy Conetrol rings! [smilie=l:

[Texas by God]

Hey Texas-by-God, are you checking these out with your glasses on? Perhaps what ya have there is a set of them there fancy Conetrol rings! [smilie=l:

[emoji848][emoji16]
I wish. Conetrol mounts are top shelf!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[405grain]

Check out this website: https://www.vintagegunscopes.com/

A couple of years ago I picked up a Redfield standard base for a Mauser 98 from there. They carry lots of old school scopes and accessories.

[M-Tecs]

I owned one ring like that. It was on the front side of a scope with a straight 1" objective. The back ring was a normal split ring. Got it in a trade. I have read claims that they will bend far enough to install but that was just what I read?

[Texas by God]

It doesn’t like the 91 Mauser-it ran out of adjustment but it likes the 93 Mauser- sighted right in!
I didn’t drill and tap either one but they both seem straight.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240219/1fc62d2b5e8f043039b0e5d4bf8fcc22.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kootne]

Time frame reference on those rings, A 1903 Springfield built by my Grampa has a 2.5X Weaver, it has the "one piece" type rings. He passed in January of 1953 and the rifle was in Gramma's possession til my Dad got it in the early '60's. This scope has the old brass showing at the ends, not aluminum like most old Weavers. I also have Dad's old Model 70 he bought in '54 after returning from a couple years in Korea. He bought it brand new at Bob Ward's in Missoula and they put the 3x Weaver on at that time. That scope has the aluminum ends and split rings. So that's my reference points, I'm guessing the change at 1954 or earlier. I suppose I could go dig through Grampa's old American Rifleman advertisements for more exact data but will wait for a snowy day and hope I remember. Anyway those old Weaver scopes have been stellar for me, when the gun goes bang, something always goes flop.

[quack1]

[QUOTE=Texas by God;5690768]
How was the front ring installed? The objective end is seamless. Were the adjustment bosses removed along with the ocular end?
That’s what it seems like.

That is exactly what was done. Back then, not all scopes were nitrogen filled. Taking off the ocular and adjustment bosses to slide the rings on didn't hurt anything.