Weaver XR Series

Steelhead1 said:
Lee,
Thats what I'm going to settle on is the Leupold 45! Between Leupold, Nightforce, and March, these are being shot with the most sucess!
Click to expand...

One reason why I did not but a Leupold 45X is that I have read reports of issues with side focus Leupolds not holding stable parallax settings (lash). There has also been a problem with off axis crosshairs. Here is what was reported on Accurate Shooter:

Leupold Competition Series 35x, 40x, 45x
Pros: The best resolution, brightness, contrast, and largest exit pupil of any high-magnification fixed-power scope you can buy. Better lens geometry and clarity than any zoom. Turret covers and screw-in lens caps standard. Very good warranty service, not limited to original owner. 30mm tube offers more elevation adjustment than older 1″ Leupold Target Scopes or B&L 36x.
Cons: Unstable wire reticle may require after-market modification. Leupold is shipping too many with off-axis cross-hairs–look before you buy. Lash issue with side focus.
OVERALL: BEST FIXED-POWER SCOPE under $1200. Even with its flaws, still the best fixed-power competition scope you can buy, short of the $2150 March. Leupold needs to do some technical re-design and ensure the scopes ship with plumb cross-hairs.

But then I have owned several scopes that had off-axis crosshairs, including a Weaver T-36 that I sent to Weaver for a fix. I bought the Weaver XR T-36 for several reasons, including budget issues. I cannot pay $1000+ only to find problems that require sending the NIB scope for repairs.

As to other fixed power scopes, the March scope has gotten the best reviews of any:

March 40×52 BR
Pros: Benchmark level resolution, lack of distortion and brightness out to the edges. Noticeably superior and brighter at the edges of image to the Leupold Comp BR scopes. Tracking reliability may be the best ever offered to the public in a scope with active internal adjustments. Many of the top benchresters have switched to the March because, so far, it holds zero like nothing else. For long-range use the March 40x can often resolve 6mm bullet holes at 600 yards when viewing conditions are very good. No scope out of the box does a better job at that (until the Schmidt & Bender 12-50×56 arrives in 2008).
Cons: Extremely expensive. Kelbly’s is currently the one and only supplier in USA. Long-term reliablity is a question mark. No USA service facility.
OVERALL: BEST FIXED-POWER SCOPE, bar none. Very bright, very sharp, reasonable weight, excellent image quality.

If some shooters are getting better results with the Leupold, I would say that other factors, including load development, the wind reading skill of the shooter and other high end equipment are probably cause, rather than the scope. I know my SEB NEO rest has caused a greater obvious improvement in my results than any scope ever did.

Once again, other than someone with a disability like mine, that makes side focus for me a necessity, I cannot see any advantage for side focus scopes. If I could adjust parallax without side focus, I would still own the Leupold BR 36 (bumped to 50X) that I sold to but the Weaver XR T-36. All of my best results are still with that old Leupold.
 
Slowshot,
I am not sure were you come up with your statistics, but the Leupold Competition is in its 3rd generation, and the few intial problems it had have been corrected! If and when you start going to short range benchrest match's, you will quicly realize that there are a bunch of shooters that are and have been very successful with Leupolds past and present models! March and Nightforce are very exceptioal scopes both optically& mechanically! That is why they command the price they do, i base my opions and findings at the range in matchs and during discussions with actual shooters, not from people that don't attend regular short range benchrest match's.
 
Yep....check the equipment lists for major short range events and you'll see a lot of Leupolds. I went the March route but wouldn't hesitate to buy a Comp. My dad has a couple 36x's and they've held up beautifully.

-Lee
www.singleactions.com
 
A month ago my XR 46 was fine. Today I put that rifle on the blocks and the entire scope is covered in spots. Looks like Weaver will be buying back another one. bob
 
Slowshot said:
One reason why I did not but a Leupold 45X is that I have read reports of issues with side focus Leupolds not holding stable parallax settings (lash). There has also been a problem with off axis crosshairs. Here is what was reported on Accurate Shooter:

Leupold Competition Series 35x, 40x, 45x
Pros: The best resolution, brightness, contrast, and largest exit pupil of any high-magnification fixed-power scope you can buy. Better lens geometry and clarity than any zoom. Turret covers and screw-in lens caps standard. Very good warranty service, not limited to original owner. 30mm tube offers more elevation adjustment than older 1″ Leupold Target Scopes or B&L 36x.
Cons: Unstable wire reticle may require after-market modification. Leupold is shipping too many with off-axis cross-hairs–look before you buy. Lash issue with side focus.
OVERALL: BEST FIXED-POWER SCOPE under $1200. Even with its flaws, still the best fixed-power competition scope you can buy, short of the $2150 March. Leupold needs to do some technical re-design and ensure the scopes ship with plumb cross-hairs.

But then I have owned several scopes that had off-axis crosshairs, including a Weaver T-36 that I sent to Weaver for a fix. I bought the Weaver XR T-36 for several reasons, including budget issues. I cannot pay $1000+ only to find problems that require sending the NIB scope for repairs.

As to other fixed power scopes, the March scope has gotten the best reviews of any:

March 40×52 BR
Pros: Benchmark level resolution, lack of distortion and brightness out to the edges. Noticeably superior and brighter at the edges of image to the Leupold Comp BR scopes. Tracking reliability may be the best ever offered to the public in a scope with active internal adjustments. Many of the top benchresters have switched to the March because, so far, it holds zero like nothing else. For long-range use the March 40x can often resolve 6mm bullet holes at 600 yards when viewing conditions are very good. No scope out of the box does a better job at that (until the Schmidt & Bender 12-50×56 arrives in 2008).
Cons: Extremely expensive. Kelbly’s is currently the one and only supplier in USA. Long-term reliablity is a question mark. No USA service facility.
OVERALL: BEST FIXED-POWER SCOPE, bar none. Very bright, very sharp, reasonable weight, excellent image quality.

If some shooters are getting better results with the Leupold, I would say that other factors, including load development, the wind reading skill of the shooter and other high end equipment are probably cause, rather than the scope. I know my SEB NEO rest has caused a greater obvious improvement in my results than any scope ever did.

Once again, other than someone with a disability like mine, that makes side focus for me a necessity, I cannot see any advantage for side focus scopes. If I could adjust parallax without side focus, I would still own the Leupold BR 36 (bumped to 50X) that I sold to but the Weaver XR T-36. All of my best results are still with that old Leupold.
Click to expand...

Less typing.....more learning about scopes. Posting some BS that some nitwit puts on a forum is foolish. Read a few match reports.
The March's have now been out for years.
 
tim said:
Less typing.....more learning about scopes. Posting some BS that some nitwit puts on a forum is foolish. Read a few match reports.
The March's have now been out for years.
Click to expand...

The information in my reply is not something I wrote, it comes from a truly useful site. I just copied and pasted the information from the long detailed article on target scopes (see the links below) I found on my favorite shooting site that is actually reliable.

Obviously, you are not familiar with accurateshooter.com. Though they have a forum, that is not where I got the information I posted. In fact, I am unlikely to post any information based on some forum member's unsubstantiated opinions.

The main site (not the forum) is the only site I have found operated by professionals who have real world data to back up their reviews and comments. It was there that I learned about SEB rests for example. It was their information on the SEB NEO that helped me decide to buy one. It proved to be exactly as they described it, the easiest to use and most stable rest I have ever seen. Now everyone at my home club Tacoma Rifle and Revolver who has seen and felt it's smooth repeatable operation wants one. It is expensive and requires a year wait but it is well worth the wait and the cash.

Their cartridge description section is the most detailed I have ever seen:
http://www.accurateshooter.com/category/cartridge-guides/

Here is where I got the information, I copied, regarding scopes:
http://www.accurateshooter.com/optics/target-scopes/

My other main source of information on all shooting equipment is my friend, Russ Haydon. Unlike many of the ignorant but opinionated idiots, who write their useless information, Accurate Shooter and Russ Haydon, along with other truly experienced BR competition and varmint shooters I have met regularly give me useful information that I share when it seems appropriate.

By the way, I am so satisfied with the Weaver XR T-36 I bought for the BAT action 222 Rem. rifle Russ built for me that I (just today) traded one of my Nikon side focus 6-18X40mm Buckmasters + some cash for a second Weaver XR T-36 for the Ruger 1V in 222 Rem. that Regan Nonneman is putting together for me right now.
 
Last edited:
slowshot,
Since the folks here have no beneficial information that you can utilize why don't you just go over to Accurate shooter? By the way the gent that runs that sight is a yuppie lawyer from Ca., so much for a professional shooter!Why don't you tell us how you finished in lets say your last 3 matches? If you were really a benchrest shooter and listened to the wisdom of Russ Haydon, and you were a newbe to benchrest shooting, you would have a 6ppc. not a .222! If you attended regular benchrest matches you wouldn't have had to read about Seb rests on the internet, he has been making rest for about 10 years! I just looked at a well attended match result from Dec.2014, 37 Competitors, 15 Leupolds, 7 Weavers, 7 Night Force, 6 March, 1 Sightron! Instead of relying on some pre printed data on Accurate shooter, lets see you do a few matches, and you will quickly figure out that the information your posting about scopes is wrong! Right now all you appear to be is a keyboard commando, that bought a custom action and had a top notch benchrest shooter build you a gun(in the wrong caliber) probably because you were too hard headed to listen to Russ, and now wants to be an expert on all things, Benchrest. Have you joined the NBRSA yet? if you do you will be able to view match reports and equipment list's. I really hope you come to the 4th of July Sniper King match at Tacoma, and show us all how to shoot, looking forward to it how about you!
 
Sorry to Have Offended You

Steelhead1 said:
slowshot,
Since the folks here have no beneficial information that you can utilize why don't you just go over to Accurate shooter? By the way the gent that runs that sight is a yuppie lawyer from Ca., so much for a professional shooter!Why don't you tell us how you finished in lets say your last 3 matches? If you were really a benchrest shooter and listened to the wisdom of Russ Haydon, and you were a newbe to benchrest shooting, you would have a 6ppc. not a .222! If you attended regular benchrest matches you wouldn't have had to read about Seb rests on the internet, he has been making rest for about 10 years! I just looked at a well attended match result from Dec.2014, 37 Competitors, 15 Leupolds, 7 Weavers, 7 Night Force, 6 March, 1 Sightron! Instead of relying on some pre printed data on Accurate shooter, lets see you do a few matches, and you will quickly figure out that the information your posting about scopes is wrong! Right now all you appear to be is a keyboard commando, that bought a custom action and had a top notch benchrest shooter build you a gun(in the wrong caliber) probably because you were too hard headed to listen to Russ, and now wants to be an expert on all things, Benchrest. Have you joined the NBRSA yet? if you do you will be able to view match reports and equipment list's. I really hope you come to the 4th of July Sniper King match at Tacoma, and show us all how to shoot, looking forward to it how about you!
Click to expand...

I think you have missed my point. First of all, I am not an expert on anything, except building motorcycle controls for disabled riders. Second, I listen to experts all the time. I read the information on sites like this to gather information from different sources. While remaining respectful of more knowledgeable and experienced shooters, I share any information I have gathered, from reliable sources when it seems appropriate. The information I share is intended to stimulate discussion, not end it. If you would prefer that I do not share the information I gather from different sources, fine. I am getting bored with these long discussions that wander away from the original topic anyhow. Weren't we talking about the Weaver XR series of scopes?

Because I am an old guy late into shooting, I do not expect to win anything. I am just having fun shooting and learning about firearms. Russ and I discussed cartridge options. In the end he suggested and I agreed 222 Rem. fits my intended use more than 6 PPC. While I originally planned on getting seriously into Centerfire BR, I came to realize my eyes and my budget are not strong enough to get serious like you obviously are. Correct me if I am wrong but I understand all I need to convert my BAT rifle from 222 Rem. to 6 PPC is a 6 PPC bolt from BAT Machine and a barrel. Am I wrong?

If you wish to meet me, when you get to Tacoma, write me a PM and I would be glad to meet you. You are obviously a lot more experienced and skilled than I could ever be. You might have a chance to chew me out in person, or decide I am not such a know it all as you assume. As to my plans on future active competition, I have none. I have discovered that competition does not interest me any more. While I enjoy learning about the sport and find load development, reading wind and the other skills needed to shoot well, both challenging and fun, I am long past the age where I need to compare myself with others to have a good time. I began shooting very few years ago as something new to learn and as a way to meet new people my age, now that I am retired and have the time. If I type long posts, it is because I have so many questions and try to bring up information that seems contradictory for clarification by the more knowledgeable shooters such as you.

PS: I am rather surprised to see your list has 6 March and 7 Nightforce scopes. At their premium cost, I would not expect them to be so common. I have seen a only one Nightforce at TRRC and I have never seen a March in person. As I mentioned, my best two scopes ever were two Leuopold BR 36 scopes. I sold both because I cannot adjust the AO without assistance on a scope that does not have side focus and that is why I am trying the affordable Weaver XR-T36.

One more note. If anyone actually read the article that I quoted, the author did not exactly trash the Leupold. He said, in his opinion, it is the best BR scope other than the far more expensive March and well worth the cost. Once again I quote: OVERALL: BEST FIXED-POWER SCOPE under $1200. Even with its flaws, still the best fixed-power competition scope you can buy, short of the $2150 March.
 
Last edited:
slowshot, I'm also an old fart late to the BR game and this web site. I have found the "ignore list" to be a valuable tool to avoid being tempted to read posts from some obnoxious know-it-alls. Give it a try.
 
Jerry,
I started the thread for people to be aware of a problem that exists with a particular scope, all of my response' s have been positive and I would hope helpful! This gentlemen has never owned one of the XR 46 series of scopes although at first he was thinking of buying one. Then he started posting reports of scopes like the Leupold Competition, march and Nightforce, scopes which you and I both know perform extremly well! How do I know that you know, because you loadednext to me at the Cactus a few years ago, so I know your a shooter! I am not a young guy, trying to be a smart A$$, just trying to be helpful until someone that is NOT a Benchrest shooter starts blathering about which scopes are better than other scope, which he has never ever owned or shot!
 
One last comment and then I am done with this thread.

I do not make up anything. Either I report personal experiences or I quote resources that seem reliable and seek comments from the experienced. On more than one occasion I have asked very specific questions on this and other sites. Frequently I start my question with these words: "Does anyone here have experience with...?" As often as not many responses start with, "I have never tried one of those but...." I generally find those replies unhelpful. Often I post links to the source of information I am trying to verify. Just as often other members respond to that which I have posted as though the information was original to me. These replies show the person replying either did not read my question, did not understand that I am quoting another source or just wants to argue.

For the past few months, I have been shooting every Wednesday, with two very experienced shooters, who act as unpaid instructors for me. Most days we shoot either rimfire or centerfire BR at TRRC. Other days we head up into the mountains to shoot. Without the free instructions I have received, I probably could not hit a barn door at 50 yards. Though I am not a competitor, I actually shoot pretty decent groups for a novice and have managed a few pretty decent rimfire point scores. I have attended a few matches, as an observer, not a shooter. I am very impressed with the skills I see displayed at those matches. I have learned a lot just by watching truly skilled shooters. I will continue to do so, though I have come to realize I could never be competitive for several reasons. My BAT gun was intended as a learning tool and that is all. It has taught me a lot.

As to the Weaver XR scopes, I never intended to buy the 46X version. In another thread, I asked about the 36X before buying. I now own two. One for my BAT gun and one for my Ruger No, 1 (also 222 Rem.) that I plan to shoot in the mountains, off a shooting stick, at ranges 200 yards and beyond. I seem to have antagonized some by reporting mixed reviews that led me to shy away from specific equipment. Sorry if I upset anyone, I am just a reporter on this and was seeking counter responses from those with real world experience.

I do not understand why Steelhead1 became so angry. Do I need to begin every sentence with, "I am a novice shooter and this is what I read, or this is what I was told?"

Oh well, that's enough. I think I will just keep asking questions and researching through many sources. That's how I have learned nearly everything I know.
 
Slowshot,
I am not angry at what you posted, I am frustrated that you take for granted everything that you read over on accurate shooter! I looked at what you read, heres why I do not unsterstand, 1. Your belief in that article that has no author! Who wrote it, 2. The information is generic in nature! 3. It appears it was written by a scope company thats competeing for sales! 4. How long ago was it written? Now I would never buy a scope based on the article, I want the opportunity to go to a match and look through a few and then decide! I will probably never buy a March, unless I hit the lottery, I have looked through a half a dozen Marchs and the higher power ones seemed dark to me, but they have no Issues as to repeatabilty when you start turning the knobs! Nightforce is a fantastic scope, but they weigh more so harder to use on a LV gun! You would be aware of this stuff if you shot regularly. Thats great that you have a couple of mentors helping you along, i am glad that you have this opportunity at this time in your life.
In your previous post you mentioned chewing you out in person, thats not who I am, or how I handle meeting new people!
 
For what it is worth a BIG problem with camera lenses (including $10K Canons) is the internal growth of mold/fungus on the lens surfaces. Most likely what these scopes are experiencing.
 
Steelhead1 said:
Jerry,
I started the thread for people to be aware of a problem that exists with a particular scope, all of my response' s have been positive and I would hope helpful! This gentlemen has never owned one of the XR 46 series of scopes although at first he was thinking of buying one. Then he started posting reports of scopes like the Leupold Competition, march and Nightforce, scopes which you and I both know perform extremly well! How do I know that you know, because you loadednext to me at the Cactus a few years ago, so I know your a shooter! I am not a young guy, trying to be a smart A$$, just trying to be helpful until someone that is NOT a Benchrest shooter starts blathering about which scopes are better than other scope, which he has never ever owned or shot!
Click to expand...

Well, I do own five Leupold Competition 45Xs and my most recent purchase is a Nightforce Completion 15-55X. I'd have to say that I don't have enough lifetime left to hone my shooting skills to the point that just using a March scope would make the difference in my scores to any significant degree. The Leupolds are just fine.

I understand your feelings when you think someone is just parroting misinformation, no matter how well intentioned. But we don't always have to call them out on it. I think most of the guys here know better and would not be misinformed on this. Also, sometimes when you're a relatively new guy in a group you want to be accepted and say things to cover your ignorance. I've been guilty of that in the past. Perhaps a gentler response and milder rebuff would elicit better behavior. Now I know that there are some people that you can't treat that way because they have a track record of loud mouthed arrogance that speaks for itself. We know how to deal with those.
 
Last edited:
Dan Hackett...rest his soul...

Dan came here to begin with for the sole purpose of arguing. We had a big thread or two about it and found that Dan really didn't know how to post on a forum. He turned out fairly well and ended up being a pretty darn good source for a lot of stuff. I wrote that to say this....things change for the good most times.
 
adamsgt said:
Well, I do own five Leupold Competition 45Xs and my most recent purchase is a Nightforce Completion 15-55X. I'd have to say that I don't have enough lifetime left to hone my shooting skills to the point that just using a March scope would make the difference in my scores to any significant degree. The Leupolds are just fine.

I understand your feelings when you think someone is just parroting misinformation, no matter how well intentioned. But we don't always have to call them out on it. I think most of the guys here know better and would not be misinformed on this. Also, sometimes when you're a relatively new guy in a group you want to be accepted and say things to cover your ignorance. I've been guilty of that in the past. Perhaps a gentler response and milder rebuff would elicit better behavior. Now I know that there are some people that you can't treat that way because they have a track record of loud mouthed arrogance that speaks for itself. We know how to deal with those.
Click to expand...

I did not join this or any other forum to argue with anyone. Nor did I join to spend my days parroting misinformation. When my source of information is an article from a trusted shooting magazine, a friendly gunsmith or a book by a well known writer such as Jack O'Conner, I copy and post what I read and ask for comments from actual users of the equipment. This is how I learn much of what I then try to apply to the real world. When I first posted my reply regarding my most recent scope choice, I made reference to a specific source I often find very detailed and reliable. I mentioned that it made me shy away from specific equipment. I then told what I did buy (a Weaver XR T-36) and said I am pleased with my purchase, particularly at the price. In another reply in this same thread, I commented how satisfied I am with the SEB NEO that I bought for several reasons, one of which was a great review in the same source. Here is that source. Take a look and see if you think it is a junk site: http://www.accurateshooter.com/

Why anyone got his hackles up over that is still mystery to me. To say that one's own real world experience contradicts what was written seems appropriate. To attack another member and call names seems childish.
 
Slowshot said:
I did not join this or any other forum to argue with anyone. Nor did I join to spend my days parroting misinformation. When my source of information is an article from a trusted shooting magazine, a friendly gunsmith or a book by a well known writer such as Jack O'Conner, I copy and post what I read and ask for comments from actual users of the equipment. This is how I learn much of what I then try to apply to the real world. When I first posted my reply regarding my most recent scope choice, I made reference to a specific source I often find very detailed and reliable. I mentioned that it made me shy away from specific equipment. I then told what I did buy (a Weaver XR T-36) and said I am pleased with my purchase, particularly at the price. In another reply in this same thread, I commented how satisfied I am with the SEB NEO that I bought for several reasons, one of which was a great review in the same source. Here is that source. Take a look and see if you think it is a junk site: http://www.accurateshooter.com/

Why anyone got his hackles up over that is still mystery to me. To say that one's own real world experience contradicts what was written seems appropriate. To attack another member and call names seems childish.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's the "copy and post" aspect of your method for obtaining information. You're asking the site members to judge a third party's opinion. If you have questions, then ask them outright yourself without involving anyone else. This is about my 7th year in this sport and I'm just now starting to feel a little comfortable in the depth of my knowledge in most aspects of benchrest shooting. However, I frequently encounter issues that leave me puzzled so I come her to ask for information, advice, criticism, and help. I freely confess my ignorance in many areas and endeavor to learn as much as I can from what is offered to me by members on this site. I usually get a lot of help. Sometimes it's difficult to sift through all the opinions but that's the beauty of education. You can learn more from too much information that you can from too little. While sometimes daunting, it's doable.

I noticed that you quoted my post that was a response to someone else, not you. I certainly did not accuse you of "parroting misinformation". I instead, noted that someone could interpret your actions that way and that could explain their response. It's unfortunate that the written word is such a poor vehicle to convey true meaning in a discussion or even an argument. You're missing the crucial elements of tone of voice, body language, and visual expression. So much communication is lost when we can't see or hear the other person during a discussion and this frequently leads to misunderstanding and hurt feelings.

Well, that's my soliloquy for this month and I leave the discussion as I have no more to offer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top