Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner

#2 Weatherby XXII, Anschutz Bolt-Action Version

5K views 37 replies 2 participants last post by  LoneWolfSS454 
#1 ·
I think I got hooked upon buying my 1st Weatherby XXII, a Howa made tube-fed semi-automatic with it's beautiful chatoyancy infused stock. Initially I resisted the urge of buying a bolt-action model due to the prices they command, but eventually I gave in. I must admit now, I don't regret the decision at all. At this time it's true accuracy potential is somewhat unknown because I'm still working on a (personal) lack of consistency, besides I've only fired it once - in winds that were well above what was forecast. Additionally, my recently built and highly unconventional bench has a slight stability issue with the rear leg, but a fix is in the works. Having two XXII's now, I wanted a bench "worthy of the rifles" (a bench that also looked nice), so I made the looks a priority. With that said, I still managed a couple of dime sized (or smaller) groups using SK Rifle Match late last week. All things considered, this rifle seems to have excellent accuracy potential, and like most, if not all of the XXII rifles, it looks good too, although not quite as nice as my other one (Which is Here: https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1190349)





Note: the 2 lower coins are Quarters...
 

Attachments

See less See more
6
#2 ·
BTW, I'd be glad to respond to any questions about building a similar "unconventional bench" if anyone is interested. That is, provided no one objects and no admin's stop it. I can't tell you every single thing, but I can help you avoid some major issues...
 
#3 ·
and like most, if not all of the XXII rifles, it looks good too, although not quite as nice as my other one (Which is Here: https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1190349
That's because your other one has Rosewood instead of African Mahogany for grip cap and forend tip wood. ;) :D

Just kidding....I really like my German MKXXII which has proven good accuracy oh ya and looks.

Covering your groups with a dime is cool! :cool:

I like the way your bench top shows the grain. :t
 
#4 ·
Thanks NIB. I went to great lengths to showcase the wood (grain) of the tabletop, to the detriment of the benches strength and stability. But it's coming around with some modifications. I wish I had better "dime sized consistency", but that too may improve with more practice (and less Wind!). I guess that's one of the negatives of living and shooting in the NV high desert, crazy winds that almost never match the forecasts, with ever changing wind gusts. Although it may be a little too soon to be certain, I believe this rifle has an accuracy edge over my other "accurate" 22 BA rifles, which includes a CZ-457-V, Browning T-Bolt T/V, Ruger RAR-Talo Edition, and a Savage MK-II BV.
I really like (or love?) both of my XXII's, this one more for it's accuracy, the other more for it's looks and the semi-auto "fun advantage". I know you were just kidding, but truthfully it's the chatoyancy on the other rifle that stands out for me. This German version does have a little chatoyancy here and there, it's just not as obvious and doesn't cover as large an area like the other one. But that's OK, as both are great rifles in their own ways. What's kind of weird (but maybe not?) is, now that I've finally fired this Anschutz XXII rifle, I'm seriously thinking about thinning the herd of some "lesser .22 rifles", including the Savage MK-II BV, along with a Marlin or two, even my first 22 rifle, an old 10/22 sporter that my (late) brother gave me - well used. I'll still have plenty of .22 rifles left over if I do eliminate some. One thing is certain, I do need to free up safe space (badly)!
 
#5 ·
Chatoyancy, now you're talking! If you saw my Bolt MKXXII stock you'd see a Chatoyant piece of wood, I get differing reflections with darn near every turn in the sunshine! I promise I will post a pic in the near future. I adjusted the trigger and changed out the spring. Mine is definitely capable of some fine accuracy. I'm sure that the thinner forearm and somewhat light weight of the rifle makes this a bit more challenging but that's where the fun is! :D

P.S. Good for you on getting the German version and nice semi-auto. :bthumb:
 
#6 ·
I'd love to see your XXII and it's chatoyancy NIB. I agree the light weight and thinness of these rifles add to the complexity of shooting tiny groups. Speaking of tiny groups, I failed to mention that my groups above were all shot from 50 yards, measured with a laser rangefinder.
I'm glad you mentioned the trigger, I need to adjust mine down from the 2-lbs it came at, to my preferred pull weight of 1.75-lbs (a "standard" I use based on my late fathers High Standard Supermatic pistols 1.75-lb trigger, for consistency throughout my collection).

NIB, do you (or does anyone else) have the factory recommended action screw torque spec's? I downloaded the Weatherby pdf manual for the BA XXII versions, but didn't see anything about it. I can't believe what I did on this a while back. I did a "pre-shooting cleaning" many weeks ago where I removed the barreled-action from the stock in the process. When I reassembled the rifle I "guess torqued" the 2 action screws (on the light side) with the intention of finding the factory spec's later on, but I completely forgot about it. At the range last Thursday, somewhere around 4 or 5 (5-rnd - Wisner) magazines into shooting it, I started getting fliers, that turned into bad fliers. Soon afterwards I noticed the cross-hairs droping lower on my 1/2" target dots as I slowly squeezed the trigger. I kept looking for movement between the barreled-action and stock but couldn't see any (even when putting the safety on & squeezing pretty hard). Once I finally dug out the right sized screwdriver from it's hard to get at location, my instincts were correct, both screws were super loose. Duh! I feel just as bad for also forgetting about using a learned "trigger technique" from earlier in the year. This involves using my thumb on the back side of the trigger guard, with my trigger finger, only. Up until I found and fixed the loose action screws, I had been using more of a typical "full hand grip" with my hand around the stock, thumb up high, as most typical shooters do. Remembering and using the "thumb and trigger finger only method", along with getting the action screws tight, greatly helped with those later dime sized groups, both of which did come after getting the screws tight!
At the rate my memory keeps failing me these days (passing age 61 a few months ago hasn't helped anything either) I may need to start and keep a Word document in my phone with "Shooting Related information" to remind me of these things I'm likely to forget! Lol
 
#7 · (Edited)
I don't know an inch pound setting? The Weatherby MKXXII Bolt is of course a sightless, taper barrel 1416 which uses the Anschutz 54's (17XX) models trigger guard. But its stock (S&K) is a totally different (Ed Weatherby) design. :)

The manual says tighten front screw first before rear screw. The manual only says "Firmly" whatever inch pound that is?

I'd follow their direction (for screw sequence), reason being I tried this experiment myself....leave the front screw very loose (or out) then screw the rear in (it won't seat) but rather it will drive the barrel and action into the air! I make sure the front is the first secured down and the rear last. I have basically enough force to keep the action in place, not much more. And I believe it's better to have less force on the rear screw than the front, as equaling the force or worse having greater force on the rear will only serve to create stress on the action.

It's a 22 rimfire LR so I don't think much force is needed and what screw/bolt ever removes with the same force it took to secure it? A low amount of inch pounds will be a higher amount of inch pounds at disassembly time.

I get five easily under a dime at 52 yards with mine using a 3x-9x scope. I need to mount higher power so I can work on precision shooting as I don't feel the fatter cross hairs of the 9x at 50yds are much good for that.
 
#8 · (Edited)
Thanks for the response and details NIB.
I suppose you're right about the action screws, although I didn't notice my action doing anything weird (such as the barrel going up in the front) upon reassembly (after my initial pre-shooting cleaning, or at the range last week). Since you mentioned it, I will be looking at things very closely when I get around to doing a light cleaning before I shoot it again. I'll also bore-scope the bore and chamber (again) at the same time.

It's kind of funny in a way (the lack of published torque specs for the action screws), I had already decided to add a small drop of blue Loctite on the action screws, just as a precaution to prevent them from coming loose again. Hearing your thoughts have only reinforced this decision.

And, yes, it's only a .22lr so not much torque is needed to keep things secure (assuming there's a fairly "decent" action to stock fit from the factory).

I don't know your age, or eyesight abilities, but I feel "somewhat blind" shooting 1/2" target dots at 50 yards with anything under about 16X magnification. I typically set my Weaver 5-20 x 50mm GS scope (Dual-X reticle) at 18X when shooting from 50 yards. The Dual-X are pretty fine cross-hairs so they have not been an issue for me. I do have quite a few (8-each, discontinued) Bushnell Trophy Xtreme scopes (#7562458, DOA LR 800 Reticle, 6-24x50mm, SF - 10 yards to infinity, SFP, 30mm Tube) which have less than ideal and somewhat fat cross-hairs, but I really can't complain with only paying about $200 a piece for them (with an original MSRP close to $400). I'm also using them on my less accurate (mostly) .22lr ("plinking") rifles as well, so they haven't presented much of an issue so far. I ended up buying 6 total of the same model Weaver GS scopes, so I'm pretty well covered for my 50-yd target shooting rifles. I only wish I could find some "reliable" (with no oil spots on the glass - Weaver...) fixed power scopes to try out (at reasonable prices). Something around a fixed 20X might be ideal for 50-yd target shooting, but there's nothing out there, at least not at reasonable prices, if any? Too bad Nikon (scopes) are not still in business and making such a scope. After all they've always had Fantastic Glass in all of their products (camera lenses and scopes)!
 
#9 ·
When I mentioned the barrel going up, I guess the bedding under that section must be hogged out some? Could possibly be the same on most all MKXXII's? You'd only notice this happening if you hold the base plate (trigger guard) in place and as I said leave the front screw very loose then turn in the rear screw further and you'll probably see this barrel rise as I said happen. I wouldn't put any locktite on the action screws. Even at a low inch pound tightness the "Breaking Torque" necessary to loosen them will be above this low inch pound setting. Blue Locktite takes a good deal of force to break loose, Purple Locktite is less than Blue or for that matter Nail Polish must be less than Purple but I'd leave those Action Screws alone!

I've never had the Action Screws come loose? Maybe you are too low on torque settings?

I hear ya L.W. that's what I am blind with the 9x at 50 yards. As far as precision shooting goes.
 
#10 ·
NIB, thanks again for the responses.

I know I need to take a very close look at how well, or not, my action is "bedded" in the stock (or whatever it has to stabilize things). Not that I was looking excessively hard for issues, but I didn't see anything noticeably wrong when I did have it apart the one time. I hope there isn't a widespread issue with these BA rifles having problems in this area. I'll let you know what I find once apart and looked over closely.

I mean zero offense NIB, but I don't understand your concerns of the torque required to remove the action screws, if using Loctite? Blue Loctite (I don't have any purple, yet) typically prevents unwanted screw loosing with minimal side effects. True, the screw may take a little more effort to loosen, but that doesn't change the actual torque loading the screws puts on the assembly (or on the stock/action, in this situation). In the many decades I've worked with Loctite, I've never seen it cause a fastener to actually get tighter, where it increased the torque load it had on any assembly. If your concern is of stripping the screw heads after the fact, a good driver set normally overcomes that possibility, which I have and always use.

As for my action screws coming loose, I just can't remember if I failed to get them tight enough, or if something else caused them to loosen. More than likely it was me, but further evaluation is needed. I keep some blue Loctite in a little bottle eye-drops originally came in, so I may just take the small bottle to the range with me next time, but not use any unless the screws loosen up a 2nd time...?

I think many of us here (a group of us?) should get together and write to several of the "major scope makers", and try to make a good case for some new, good quality, but reasonably priced, fixed power scopes, an 18X - 20X at a minimum, possibly higher magnifications for those who like 100+ yard target shooting (Night Force has a 36X-fixed scope, but I've read bad things related to turret adjustment issues). Personally, I think rim-fire target shooting has grown a lot in the last decade or so, likely due in large part to higher ammo prices, yet it seems the scope market hasn't kept up with this growth.
 
#11 ·
I never really took a close look at how well or not mine is bedded? A lot may have to do with the location of the rear screw, right on the end of the action whereas the front screw spreads its pull out over a much greater area.

No offence taken. Loctite or not? Of course it does not increase screw torque. The main reason I mention the Locktite is that I just feel it is unwarranted. IMHO. However when the Loctite is still wet it could act as a lubricant causing you to turn your action screws in further than you would otherwise and if this were to happen then the Loctite use could contribute to higher torque settings. But...have at her if you wish Loctite put it on. Whomever purchases it from you will just have to remove the adhesive from the screw threads if they don't want it. That's no problem to remove it from blued screws and not muck up the blued threads is it? :rolleyes: :)

Scopes? How about the Sightron SII36X42BRD with 1/8 MOA Dot. Very similar to the discontinued Weaver T36, 36x40 AO with 1/8 Dot, a couple on RFC have said better glass. https://sightronusa.com/sii-target-series/
 
#12 ·
NIB, it's not that I want to use Loctite, it's that the situation may require it? In reality it's still an unknown. After I do a light cleaning, I need to make sure (for a change) that I fully tighten the action screws (w/o going over-torqued) upon reassembly of the action to the stock, something I'm just not sure about the last time I had it apart. In addition, like you, I need to see what's going on at the rear screw (while also checking the front), making sure the action is comfortably resting on something reasonably-solid inside the stock, which if it isn't (and I fix it) could also solve any screw(s) from loosening. Hopefully I won't find anything major to deal with, and won't feel the need for using Loctite either? BTW, I've no plans to ever sell this rifle. Whoever gets it after I'm gone can have fun figuring out what may, or may not, be going on with it. If I'm anywhere close to "as good" with mechanical things of this nature as I think I am, there should be nothing but good accuracy with this rifle from here on out?

I've looked at the Sightron 36X, both the Big Sky and "regular S-II", but it's more magnification than I need or would like for 50 yard target shooting. The "1/2-inch at 100 yard dot reticle" would also be a hair over 1/4" at 50 yards, if my math and knowledge of this stuff is correct (?), so it would nearly half cover my 1/2" target dots. Granted, I could adjust my hold, or make different targets, but that doesn't seem ideal. I will say, if the 36X was available with fine cross-hairs, I'd likely be willing to give one a try.

An 18X, up to a 22X fixed scope (20X) would be ideal to me, with fine cross-hairs, possibly even fine cross-hairs with a series of short, fine, vertical-lines running across the horizontal cross-hair, for attempting to deal with the cross-winds here, but I'd easily settle for fine cross-hairs. FWIW, with the winds here, I've no intentions of ever going to 100 yard shooting with any of my .22 rifles, so a 36X scope would be on the excessive side.

When do you think photos of your BA Weatherby XXII will be coming?
 
#13 ·
I had a hard time finding the Big Sky, discontinued. Better glass...I Like.
You're off by a good margin on the dot? That 36x42 fixed power scope has 1/8MOA dot.

1MOA = 1 inch @ 100YD
1/8MOA = .125 @ 100YD so that dot should be .0625 at 50YD much smaller than a .22 rimfire bullet.

I'll see what I can do on those pictures.
 
#14 ·
NIB, thanks for the correction. I don't remember what review I saw the 36X mentioned with a .5-MOA dot, but I'm really glad it's wrong. So, now knowing it's actually a .125 MOA dot has me thinking I should try one out, that was until I discovered there aren't any available. It seems they're all on back order, maybe not that many were ever made, or possibly they're just so popular no one's able to keep them in stock? Whatever the case is, I'll keep trying to find one, especially since there really aren't any other good choices in fixed scopes right now.

The Weaver (#800670) 5-20x50mm Grand Slam's I currently have on both XXII's are 13.4" long, verses the 36X which is 15.3" long. In the event I do end up finding an available 36X Sightron, I was initially concerned of it's almost "extra 2-inches of length", but after doing some measurements the extra length should end up forward of the receiver, thank goodness!
 
#15 ·
NIB, I can't believe my luck, which is typically "average", not good, not usually bad either. But anyway, I was looking at the RFC classifieds last night and found an "As New" Weaver T-24 fixed 24X (x 40mm, 1" tube) scope for sale! This is where I wanted to be with magnification, so I think I'm going to be a happy camper, I mean, very happy target shooter! I just hope I can see the ultra fine cross-hairs and dot on my red (Sharpie colored) target dots? In a worst case, I'll print up some new targets? Once again (with a "new toy on the way") I feel like a little kid waiting for Christmas day...
 
#16 ·
Good for you LW. Those Japanese manufactured T Series Weavers are nicely made. I own a couple crosshair/dot T36's. Wally World does have and/or perhaps a Dollar Store may have Florescent adhesive labeling dots in various sizes, such as 1/2 inch, if the red Sharpie isn't bright enough. :bthumb:
 
#17 ·
Thanks NIB, I'm very happy to have found it. If I remember things I read correctly (about these scopes), people said they were able to easily see white dots (w/black outlines) so I can always print new targets without the red. I believe they couldn't see black targets including steel plates, again IIRC? I should find out soon enough as it's supposed to arrive Monday...
 
#18 ·
After getting the Weaver 24X T-series scope this past Monday, I was very indecisive about installing it on this rifle. There were a number of different reasons for this, one was the fact I already had the GS perfectly dialed in for the SK-RM ammo, with another being the long turrets and potential damage inside a very overcrowded safe. The fixed-power T-Series is also extremely sensitive about where your eye is. Trying to look thru it, fine tune the focus, and checking out the super fine cross-hairs/dot - over a target, is nearly impossible without a good cheek-weld. This morning I realized I needed to use my "pistol tri-pod", which is an old camera tri-pod that has a 7.5" x 7.5" 2-by on it, with a lightly padded, slightly smaller, 1-by attached to that. I used one hand to adjust the focus, while using the thumb of the other hand (which was holding the scope to the tri-pod) to keep my head, thus my eye, at the correct distance from the ocular lens. Being able to do everything with the improvised cheek-weld made a huge difference, as it finally gave me the confidence I needed to go ahead and swap scopes. As long as the turret adjustments work as they should, and it holds zero, I think I'm really going to enjoy using this scope. The sad thing is, at the rate I've been going lately, I won't get this rifle back to the range until next spring, yet, I hope I'm mistaken? I'm also starting to regret not getting more than the one case of SK-RM, especially now that I know how freaking accurate this thing is (along with my T-Bolt, and 457-Varmint)!

The "Pistol Tri-Pod":
 

Attachments

#19 ·
Nice LW.
I honestly like the looks of the mounted T24x40 Weaver over the 5x20x50 GS on your MKXXII Wby/Ann. IMO its front end tube shape/taper and those knurls added to the adjustable objective combine for a sharp looking scope! :bthumb: Is the mount height where you like it? Not that it's too high at all, just wondering how it would be lower? I hope your SK :gun4: holds out :D, no telling how long before supplies get back to normal?
 
#20 · (Edited)
NIB, Thanks. It's funny you mentioned how it looks. Another part of my indecision was how it'd look installed. I even tried holding the T-24X along side the GS (trying to "block out" the GS in the process) to see how it might look. In the end, I too like the looks of it much better, but possibly for some (additional) different reasons? The GS has more of a (flat) "dark-gray appearance" verses the T's somewhat (50% - 75% ?) closer to a gloss finish, and true dark black color. Also, I've always been slightly put-off by the angled-design of the grip surfaces of the magnification rings on the GS scopes. That said, the GS scopes do look good on a number of different rifles.
You should SEE how the rifle looks with the (4" long) sunshade installed on the scope! The shade goes just past the front end of the stock.
As far as the scope's height (I think the camera angle makes it appear higher than it really is, but...), I was constrained by not having any other (spare) rings to try out, thanks mostly to the raised dovetail design of both of my XXII's. But, I also prefer to shoot (from a bench) with my head up higher than some, or many, mostly due to an old lower-neck injury which can cause lots of pain. I also discovered something else not long ago, my "good headphones" (electronic Howard Leight's with an Mp3/Aux/phone jack) typically interfere with the stock on many of my rifles. So I "went back" and tried out foam ear plugs recently (since sub-sonic 22's have so little report) but then I couldn't hear squat around me (like the electronics do), which I don't like at a public range (the electronics have spoiled me, I suppose). I'd get some of the thinner-can electronics, but they just don't have the same protection level ratings as the larger ones (I also have an LR-308 w/loud brake, a 30-06 1903 Sporter, 44-Mag, etc). So I'm at an impasse, unless I raise all of my scopes somehow, or buy yet another set of expensive headphones?
Yes, the ammo situation sucks, again. I'd done really good at getting stocked up, way ahead of time, but then some unexpected things caused me to fall a little behind, but only with certain "good stuff". I do have plenty of lesser ammo, in all calibers. Sadly, I may have to ration the SK-RM if none is available in the next year or two?
This is one (incomplete) part, of my two-part stash:
 

Attachments

#21 ·
LW......
You got me to look at my T36, sun shining thru window today, not an everyday occurrence in my neck of the woods. I see a reflective sparkle to the T's Matte Black finish. Seems to be (sparkly) although slightly dusty look to the tube finish however I do not believe this is dust. The tube has a fine turning over its surface and I think that the finishes reflectivity changes as it is applied over this surface. Still think they're decent looking scopes.
Yes there isn't a whole lot of head/eye movement (3" eye relief, T36) to get a clear view of the entire sight picture. Seems about par for the course with these higher power "Target" scopes. Yes the added sunshade makes for a much heftier look! :eek: :D The electronic hearing protection sounds like something I should try. I have an old pair of blue muffs (not electric) that are good at knocking down sound although I occasionally use foam plugs because the muff can sometimes interfere by making stock contact.
Hey' looks like you've got some Italian ammo in there. Never tried any but I've read that it is also inertly loaded similar to Eley, SK/Lapua. Some of your ammo must be on its side..can't tell what it is but it looks as if you're nicely supplied! :bthumb: (Possibly, except) for the good shoot'in SK-RM. :) :gun4: If you can find it SK-Pistol Match is one you should also try in your rifles.
 
#22 ·
Yes, I've got a lot of Fiocchi ammo. My local (warehouse style - ASW) ammo supplier always carried a lot of Fiocchi ammo (before the current shortage) which is one reason why I ended up with so much, but Target Sports also supplied much of it. The Fiocchi 22lr ammo isn't anything special as far as being highly accurate, it's just average and no comparison to SK products (including the F sub-sonic and SV I have) , so it's mostly practice ammo (to stretch my limited SK supply if need be?), or plinking ammo for me (the plastic ammo cans w/bulk HV).

I do love the accuracy of Fiocchi's Sierra Match King 223 CF ammo, because it's been extremely accurate (in my Rock River Arms 24"-HBAR LAR-15 Varmint A4). With their 69g SMK ammo in the LAR-15 I took my first ever 200-yd shots this past spring. My first 4 shots were practice and to get the elevation hold needed (it's 6-24x50mm Nikon Black FX-1000 scope was zeroed at 100-yds), the 5th and final shot can be seen below (next to the 1/2" target dot aiming point), along with the rifle (w/added Magpul Gen-3 PRS stock), and how I made the shots that day - prone in the bed of my 68 El Camino (which kills my neck). I was thrilled with both the rifle and the ammo.

I did get (and still have most of) one brick of SK Pistol Match at the same time as the case of SK-RM. I tried some in this rifle, but other than a slightly different point of impact, there wasn't much difference. I was planning to see if it's any better in other rifles I have, that may not care as much for the SK-RM. That was the original plan anyway. With the shortage, it may not matter if it's fantastic out of something, I may not be able to get any more for ages?

The old T-Series scopes may technically have a matte finish, but to me, mine looks more like a semi-gloss, at least compared to the GS scopes. You're right though, they are nice looking, and they have a weird finish over the way the metal was machined. Now that I have the T-Series scope, I still can't help but dream and wonder what a (Japanese made Glass equipped) Nikon fixed power scope could have been like, or another (non-existent) model from some other good company? I wouldn't want to pay NF (March, etc?) prices for something around 20X, but it'd be nice to have something that's a good value (and has noticeably better, more modern optics than the old T-Series scopes). I guess it's impossible, but a longer eye box would be nice too, one like the average variable scope set on the lowest power, verses how bad things get at the highest power. That subject is over my head and knowledge level of scope engineering...

I don't know if it matters in your case, and where you live (?), but the electronic muffs are great if you want or need to hear things going on around you, things that traditional muffs tend to muffle out. It's also a safety issue at pay-to-play, and other ranges, being able to hear commands, or "unintentional targets" (dummies) who may end up somewhere in front of your weapon. In other cases, your personal safety (from assorted "predators", human or otherwise) is greatly enhanced being able to hear...
 

Attachments

#23 ·
I still can't help but dream and wonder what a (Japanese made Glass equipped) Nikon fixed power scope could have been like, or another (non-existent) model from some other good company? I wouldn't want to pay NF (March, etc?) prices for something around 20X, but it'd be nice to have something that's a good value (and has noticeably better, more modern optics than the old T-Series scopes).
The T-Series scopes aren't all that old? The T-Series are said to be about equal (glass wise) to the normal fixed power Sightron's. I say normal meaning not the "Big Sky" model (better glass). But this model must have been extra cash over the Weaver?

I want Zeiss to make a target model with their coatings and Fluoride/Fluorite glass but, yes a lot of $$$$$$.
 
#24 · (Edited)
My Weaver knowledge/history is lacking, but I thought the (original) T-Series, like the one I recently got, came long before (1999 thru-?) the later "Classic T-Series" scopes?

I wish I could compare this 24X to the fixed Sightron, in person. I have an S-III 10-50x60mm, but it's nearly useless much over 30X or so (hurts my eyes)...

Such a Zeiss would be nice, and you're right on the money, also very Expensive! I guess that's partly why I thought a fixed-Nikon would be a good compromise of high-quality (glass) verses the price? With the high popularity of rim-fire's today (22lr especially), I'm surprised the fixed scopes aren't making a big comeback. Maybe it's just too soon, and I need to be more patient? I've always needed more patience anyway...

This past Wednesday I finally got the other XXII (the Howa Tube-fed SA) to the range, again. The weather was nuts with ever changing high winds. I knew this the day before, so I only took some cheap "coppered" plinking ammo (Aguila SE HV). As expected, my groups were horrible, so much so that my last rapid fired (5-shot, 50-yd) group, was the exact same size (1") as my best slow fired group! That gave me a good laugh while measuring them at home!
 
#25 ·
LW...I purchased two new T36's about a year prior to their discontinuance. Both of the box's say "T-Seres" nothing at all printed about (Classic)? I certainly hope Natchez didn't sell me old merchandise? I pretty much doubt it.

If you could date your scope somehow then you'd know newer/older, certainly glass must have been upgraded at various times during the T-Series production? I guess for mine I'd hope it's better glass than say 1999?

Note: Quote from Weaver T-Series Scope Booklet.
Weaver T-Series Scopes are a re-introduction of the legendary W.R. Weaver T-Models first produced in 1977 using the patented Micro-Trac system. Now with refined mechanics and modern optical systems , the T-Series Scopes have become a precise, tough shooting instrument that all Benchrest and Silhouette marksmen can rely on for consistency and repeatability.
As for recent production glass quality Weaver could have used whatever their hearts desired (of course within their bean counter limits$$) :( One good thing may be the Japanese overall construction. As I had understood it the Japanese people are generally picky about things and as such hopefully these scopes will be trouble free for some time. :t

Fancy Glass.....

Would Ziess be the best of the best for glass? Once in my life I'd like to own the best "glass" scope. Their coating seems to be tailored to the glass. I wonder if other's such as Nightforce do this? I'm thinking that theirs is less science as far as glass is concerned (Ziess and Schott were somewhat connected). As far as I know (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) there is NO GLASS manufacturer for rifle scopes in the USA. Nightforce would hopefully coat their lenses themselves although I don't know for sure?
ZEISS T* coating is a guarantee of the brilliant, high-contrast images which you will experience above all in adverse light conditions and in the twilight. Behind it, however, there is no specific formula for building up the layers. Instead, it is a technology that is constantly adjusted to suit new glass materials and requirements, which varies from lens to lens.
This combined with Fluoride German Schott glass. :bthumb:

I find it interesting that Ziess claims 92% light transmission for their Victory scopes and (some) lesser scope companies claim over 92%....hmm? Are others over rating their scopes? :confused:

Ziess is something I'm dreaming about, well...at least it's fun to dream. :D
 
#26 ·
Yes, I doubt it also, that Natchez would sell you old products, at least not very old. Are either of yours considered, or marked, XR? I may be wrong, but thought the XR line were the last fixed models they made, or were just ahead or behind the "Classic T-Series"? Like I said earlier, I really don't know all that much about Weaver but did read they first started the T-Series fixed scope in 1999 when Meade bought/owned Weaver, or so the article said.

I wish I knew how to date mine. I don't know if it's just the nature of fixed scopes to be "difficult" to look through, and - in my case, glass that seems "less than very clear", giving an almost "grainy appearance", or if mine is some early (older) model before better glass was available? I do need to get it to the range to get a better idea of how it really looks. I don't want to scare any neighbors, or worse, get arrested, by looking around the neighborhood with the scope mounted. Looking out a window with the scope loosely hand-held on a tripod left a lot to be desired in terms of stability...

I'd also think those with Japanese glass would be very good quality, not just because they are "generally picky about things". but because of how good most (or all?) Japanese glass is in general, especially the various Nikon scopes I have.

Zeiss scopes/glass... I Googled them and found this; "Designed and engineered in Germany and manufactured in Japan..." (from an article on the ZEISS Conquest V4 scope, published by Basemap, whoever they are?). Does this mean they use Japanese glass in their scopes? Very likely is my thought. The German's are very good at engineering products, but I personally feel the Japanese are just as good (or better?) at "Glass" manufacturing (for scopes, camera lenses, etc). To me the Zeiss brand sounds like a great combination of engineering and glass.

On the light transmission claims, I'm with you, in that I'm also suspect of many of the claims out there. I've seen many of the same or similar claims before and also Questioned the accuracy of the numbers provided. Maybe some of the higher transmission numbers are from glass with fewer coatings than say Zeiss uses? Maybe it's more about the testing methods or equipment? Who knows? But some of the claims do sound very Fishy or Suspect to me as well.

I haven't heard of any US (scope/camera lens) glass manufactures, but I guess anythings possible? My instincts say there are none, but I never looked...

I've no idea about Nightforce glass/coatings either. Like you, I'd also like to have at least one or two really high end (on Quality - Glass, not necessarily price, if possible) scopes. I keep looking, but pretty much stay partly confused as to which direction to go. I sure as heck don't want to buy (can't afford to buy either) "one of each great brand" (expensive brands thought to be great) just to find out! I guess we'll both have to keep dreaming for a while until we learn a lot more? I'm trying to learn, going online and just reading details of the better brands and their process, models, etc, but that alone doesn't make it much easier to know which brand to buy. Sometimes it makes me even more confused and uncertain on the subject. One of these days I'll get it figured out and buy something high end. I think I first need to thin the herd some (I bought too many 22lr bolt action rifles in 2019, among other new related toys) because I'm spending way too much time trying to get small groups with too darn many different rifles, when I should just be focused on one or two. Now that I know what this Weatherby XXII BA can do (and Browning T-Bolt T/V), choosing (some of) what to sell has become a lot easier!
 
#27 ·
You're right about the XR. It was the last T-Series scope made. The XR is distinguished by its AO side focus and not the previous AO focus on the Objective lens. The side AO (XR) was available at the same time as the regular AO. I'm guessing it was the only fixed T scope for a couple years until the end of the Weaver brand. My scopes are the Objective AO models. The XR was more money and I assumed (possibly incorrectly) that the only thing you were getting for the extra money was side focus and not any different glass?

I looked at the Zeiss site trying to find where I thought I saw "German" glass? I couldn't. It says Schott and Fluoride. Schott has I believe a few locations where they make optical glass so it could very well be that the Zeiss scope aside from their Conquest line may use other than German glass? There Victory 4.8 x 35 model has 4.75 eye relief and a .5cm click adjust at 100M, costing 4,000 $$. A .5cm click is equal to 13/64 or about 3/16 so its over an 1/8 inch for a 4,000 scope. I guess the .5cm works good with adjustment calculations and these certainly are not poor scopes....ya I think I'll dream for awhile longer.

There's definitely some good Japanese glass made but where scope companies get their glass from remains to be seen? Because the Weavers were made in Japan to me it's no guarantee that the glass also comes from there or if it does what the quality of said glass is? Yes you have to get your scope outside and adjusted focus wise to your eyes both the rear focus and the AO front focus for the yardage you'll be shooting.

Vortex is one company that must have taken a lot of market share away from others. Of course they have HD or ED glass on a few of their scopes and not that I'd like to have to send my scope away for repairs at least "IF" there is a problem they've got a good guarantee. Of course there's Leupold and I own a couple one of which has the power ring so tight that you darn near need a vice grips to loosen/move it. I may look elsewhere other than them for my next purchase.

Yep, the next scope will be Extra Low Dispersion (HD) glass just not sure which company?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top