Weaver 6.5-20x44. Won't adjust v er ticle.

[model70hunter]

My SIL asked me to go with him to pick out a good deer rifle. Years ago I bought my daughter a Rem 700 ADL in 243 and taught her how to shoot. She has bagged deer.


My SIL is not a gun guy, he can shoot but grew up with other interests. His Dad and Grandfather are hunters.

SIL found an ad for some rifles at an estate auction. 2 were german mausers sporter zed and in 06.

SIL asked me to go over his Dad, some kind of old trust issues there.

I looked them over, the 1st up was a very poor conversion but had a 19 dollar scope on it. It brought 270ish. The other Mauser was nice. It had been done correctly and was glass bedded. We got it for 170. The ejector was bent and I ordered a new one for him. It is super accurate, he needs to save up for a nice scope. I let him use my spare, a 19 dollar tasco or simmons.

The real reasons he wanted his own deer rifle were, he doesn't have to borrow one AND when my daughter can't go he uses her 243. His 1st deer was last year, a huge wall hangar, yep beginners luck but he and the 243 got it.

He gave out too much info to the guys he works with, when asked what rifle/caliber did he use to get the monster, he should have said, Rem 243.

Nope he said my wife's rifle. The kidding is non stop in the vein of, going hunting this year? Using the missus' 243, HA, HA.

His Dad is in that mode too.

SIL has not yet bagged a deer this year but he will with his own rifle. I'm proud of him.

The Weaver connection, at the sale was a Rem 700 ADL in 22-250. It caught my fancy. I got it and the Weaver scope in the 350 range. Both looked new.

I decided to use my FN in 300 win mag and it brought home a nice buck. And did not mess with the 22 250.

I checked zero on the 22 250 this week and it is 1.5" low at 25 yards. It did not matter if I adjusted up or down I got a nice group 1.5 inches low.

I found it had one shim under the rear scope ring. Looks like the old feller before me had worked on this. I verified it has the correct Leupold bases and rings. I'm going to try another cheap scope after xmas.

If it works I'll send the Weaver back.

I read all I could on this scope, non working vertices adjustment came up often. Weaver replaced those scopes. I'll see how they handle this.

So my Christmas present to me for coyotes shoots well except for that zero thing.

 

[Drm50]

I have had a little experience with Weavers that won't take adjustment.
Some times you can tap gently around turret area with a wooden dowel
or plastic handle of a screw driver and it " breaks" it loose, and will take
the adjustments. I don't know what sticks in them. On scopes I go by
Jack Oconnar book on rifles. Chapter on scopes says there are two kinds
of people who take apart scopes. Experts & fools, being neither I don't
take them apart.

 

[weatherby]

I must be in touch with my feminine side.
I went looking for a 243

 

[Drm50]

I must be in touch with my feminine side.
I went looking for a 243

There is nothing wrong with a 243. I have shot a lot of deer with
about every caliber you can think of. While some are marginal
for deer a 243 is not one of them. I have had some nice sporter
wieght 243s and had no trouble scoring deer with them. Presently
the only 243 I own is a custom on a 98 action, Douglas barrel
Canjar trigger on a Varmit stock. /10x scope. To heavy for a
deer rifle but deadly on Groundhogs.

 

[model70hunter]

I too have bagged deer with a 243.

My SIL. Wants an 06 and has for a long time.

Don't know what he sees in an 06. Old school technology left in the dust by New magic calibers.

In my mind nothing in the 06 or 270 Win group has improved since 1925.

Bullets have improved.

For a long time my deer rifle was a pre war M 70 Super Grade in 06.

Ive had many post mortim interviews with deer over the effectiveness of the 06 and 270 W. None of them had one word to say.

 

[Bill Bates]

I'm a huge fan of the .243 Win. as a deer cartridge. I have an old tang safety Ruger M77 .243 that I bought in 1975. That rifle has put a lot of deer in the freezer over the years. Most were dead in their tracks on the first shot.

Did you determine why there was a shim used with the scope base? Was the objective bell touching the barrel or was the vertical adjustment maxed out.

Give that scope a few light wraps with a dowel or screw driver handle on the vertical turret adjustment knob. Also, remember to move the point of impact up 1 inch at 25 yards will be 32 clicks up.

When mounting a scope I like to turn the adjustment from stop to stop, top to bottom and side to side. This will help you center the reticle plus it will distribute the lube on the screws in the erector assembly. If you count the clicks and divide that in half you can move the reticle to center. Also, if you know the amount of adjustment allowed by the scope you can count clicks and center the reticle.

Another method to center the reticle is using a good mirror. If you have a really good mirror and some light you can set the objective bell on the mirror and look inside and see the erector tube and tell if it is center in the tube.

To check and see if the reticle is not moving; you could just set the rifle on some sand bags or a device like a lead sled and turn the vertical turret and watch to see if the reticle moves up or down. If the reticle is moving then you may need to look for other reasons for a lack of change in the point of impact.

Anyway good luck with the scope. Sometimes figuring out these kinds of things is half the fun of shooting.

 

[H Richard]

If you want reliability, the words "cheap" and "scope" should never me mentioned in the same sentence. I was told years ago the standard was the price of the scope should be about the same price as the rifle it goes on. Now in the last 30 years they have made some great strides in computer design for scopes, but the ruggedness that keeps a scope on target is still what costs.

If your rifle only goes to the range, there are many that will work just fine. If it goes into the woods or hunting fields, it needs something that will stand up to bumps.