Leupold VS. Sightron VS. Weaver???

Good Grouper

Back when I was freezing some sightron 36x scopes, (we stopped freezing them because you couldn'y get most of them apart), we did have both Weavers and Sightrons together at Tomball. Having both set up side by side on the bench, the sightrons had a very 'bright" look to them. But, when you tried to read the lettering on the target, they actually looked more blurred than the ones through the Weaver, even though it appeared that the Weaver was not as clear.
I don't know how many scopes I looked through while I was freezing them. As I said before, you can take two brand new Weavers out of the box, and one will look like it has $2500 glass in it, and the other $25 glass.
A noted shooting supply house sent us two brand new Weavers in boxes to freeze for a customer, and this very thing happened. They were both brand new, in the wrapper. One was about as good as you could ask for, the other was so bad I asked Gene if maybe we should call the customer and be sure he wanted to use it......jackie
 
Scopes

As a dealer for over 30 years, I returned more Sightrons than all other brands combined. 2nd worst was leupold. Never did have a bad Weaver.
 
eww1350 said:
If you cannot see a 30 caliber bullet hole at 200 yards with a Sightron or Weaver, you have serious eye problems
Click to expand...

I have seen days when nobody could see bullet holes at 200 yards one time was at Fairchance and Tony Boyer was one of many big time shooters who could not see lines on target or bullet holes either, all you could see was the big black aiming square dancing around. So don't ever say a scope with higher resolving power is a waste. You want the best you can get, now Weaver and Sightron give you the best bang for your buck on that I will agree.
 
jackie schmidt said:
Back when I was freezing some sightron 36x scopes, (we stopped freezing them because you couldn'y get most of them apart), we did have both Weavers and Sightrons together at Tomball. Having both set up side by side on the bench, the sightrons had a very 'bright" look to them. But, when you tried to read the lettering on the target, they actually looked more blurred than the ones through the Weaver, even though it appeared that the Weaver was not as clear.
I don't know how many scopes I looked through while I was freezing them. As I said before, you can take two brand new Weavers out of the box, and one will look like it has $2500 glass in it, and the other $25 glass.
A noted shooting supply house sent us two brand new Weavers in boxes to freeze for a customer, and this very thing happened. They were both brand new, in the wrapper. One was about as good as you could ask for, the other was so bad I asked Gene if maybe we should call the customer and be sure he wanted to use it......jackie
Click to expand...



Very interesting Jackie. I too have noticed that problem with Weavers. Some look great and others not so much. I have yet to see any Sightrons that looked good. Several years ago, I was trying to help a friend get in the VHA's 1000 yard club and he had a Sightron III 6.5-20x on his rifle. I kept telling him there was a rockchuck perched on a rock right where he had his gun pointed at about 1250 yards. He kept telling me I was halucinating. Then I went over to his rifle and tried to get it set up on the chuck. But low and behold, I could not see the chuck at all! I had to quickly go back to my rifle with the Leupold 6.5-20x to confirm the chuck was still there. Well, he was! We just simply could not get enough color distinction and texture resolution to seperate the chuck from the rock with the SIghtron. Within hours of returning home from the hunt, a Leupold was on order and the next summer he used it to kill a rockchuck pup no less at 1302 yards.

Now, I know bullet holes in paper targets at 100 and 200 yards is nothing like a red chuck on a red rock at 1300 yards, but I still believe you have to see what your aiming at!;)
 
The Weaver T-36 is in My Budget But....

I have about a $400 optics budget to spend on my venture into some informal match shooting. I just purchased a Nikon Buckmaster 6-18 SF and really like it, but shooting 100 yard BR with this scope is going to be difficult at best so it will go on another gun.

I have an XR 100 .308 and a copuple of the guys at the club shoot the Weavers and like them. There are two NIB T-36 Weavers I am looking at from individuals, but I can't verify if they have the sales receipt for warranty work so I will probably buy a new one from a dealer to be safe.

I know the Weaver is not a NF or a March, but I am not ready to spend that kind of money just yet to shoot factory class anyway. I was initially scared off the Weaver, but I think I will roll the dice. Who has the best deals on them new?
 
I don't know if it was th "BEST" price but Brunos always had good prices on them.

Charlie
 
I have two Weavers they are rock solid, their warranty is rock solid. I druelled over a Leupold for years, got a 45x45 with fine crosshairs, shot one match and sold it, I thought the resolution wasn't any better than the Weaver which was leas than half the price. When I sold the Leupold I bought a NightForce 12-42x56 BR, I love it , it is heavy but that is OK when shooting score, the resolution is wonderful. The NightForce is my choice, it is a little pricey.

Dan Honert
 
...and I bought Dan's 45x-45mm LCS. Noticed the ocular lens was waayyy out. I adjusted it per instructions and the X dot is now clear and crisp at 200 yards. That's true of my son's NightForce, but it was $300 more.

It is certainly not true of my T-36 which appears clear, but you have a hard time making out the dot. That same T-36 has, otherwise, served me very well. I'm keeping it as a backup or to put it on a RF.

Greg J.
 
Last edited:
Hey Greg,

Are you coming down to Buck Creek next month for that money shoot? It's anybody's game at 300 yards.
I still love the NightForce, when the people shooting Leupold's on the first and second relay last Sunday morning at the Shamrock were moaning about it not being light enough I could read the numbers on my target. The reason I had the NightForce on was we were shooting heavy varment, and it is all about the dot for me still don't like the fine crosshairs.

Dan Honert
 
strange paralax

As Jackie said previously, some weavers have better glass. On a day
with heavy mirage, bullet holes could not be seen with a high grade
spotting scope, but I could see them vaguely with a weaver. On the other
side of this, in my scope testing, I have a weaver which when adjustments
are made to the objective end, the crosshairs climb or fall. My guess is that the front lens is tilted in its seat. It also has horizontal paralax and no verticle when at optimum setting. Quite odd.
 
Dan H said:
Hey Greg,

Are you coming down to Buck Creek next month for that money shoot? It's anybody's game at 300 yards.
I still love the NightForce, when the people shooting Leupold's on the first and second relay last Sunday morning at the Shamrock were moaning about it not being light enough I could read the numbers on my target. The reason I had the NightForce on was we were shooting heavy varment, and it is all about the dot for me still don't like the fine crosshairs.

Dan Honert
Click to expand...

There is no question that my son's NF is brighter.

My rifle, with the 20.3 oz LCS, is set up so that I can swap the LV PPC barrel on, pull the weight system and make 10.5 lbs. I wouldn't have a prayer of doing that with the 36 oz NF or with the new Sightron at 26.9 oz.

I'm lucky to have 20-20 vision uncorrected. I suspect that when I dial in the lenses, I'm correcting the -0.25 diopter in my right eye and I'm getting the 20-15 that I had as a younger man. I can see the dot at 200 easily. No problemo. I even like to think that I see "fuzz" on the sighter target at 100.

I can only shoot on Sundays through the end of May due to my kids' lacrosse games. So I can't be there for the long-range shoot. I'm also going to be splittling the Sundays field trialing my younger bird dog till it gets hot.

Other than that, you'll see me at Wilmore, Buck Creek and some at Gallatin.

Greg J.
 
I wish NF would make a reticle that was like the NP-2DD but with the upper dot the size of the lower dot. I don't care about the lower dot.
 
SGJennings said:
I wish NF would make a reticle that was like the NP-2DD but with the upper dot the size of the lower dot. I don't care about the lower dot.
Click to expand...

Ya mean there is a dot down there? Yea, it is kinda small but if you just use the post as a reference it's ok.

Dan Honert
 
Dan H said:
Ya mean there is a dot down there? Yea, it is kinda small but if you just use the post as a reference it's ok.

Dan Honert
Click to expand...

I like the NP-2DD being uncluttered. That top dot, though, is just too big. That's why I got my son's with the CH-3 reticle.

I guess that's why I like the FCH. I just don't like the clutter of the cross hairs. They're useful in getting it lined up, though, so I guess I need to shut up and color.

Greg J.
 
Last edited:
Having just spent 2 hours testing a nightforce 8-32, I'm impressed.
It was a great picture, and I could not get it to move as many
of the others have. Just wish they would make it in a straight 40 X
and just a touch lighter. I have sent an email to NF and hope they
respond.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top