I have a likely mid 60s Weaver K4 with the approx. 28mm objective and two dot reticle. This scope was on a Rem. 721 30-06 nearly all its life although likely fired less than 5 rounds a year. Knobs still crisp in clicks. Now mounted on another rifle. Reticle may be loose. Grouped yesterday nicely above the bull but today hitting about 3 inches right, same ammo. One or two other inconsistent sessions. Adjustments are not consistently tracking on target.

Were these early Weaver dials 1/4 inch per click?

Was there any parallax compensation in these early scopes?

This scope may have been made before the constantly centered reticle came out. The crosshairs are not centered in the field of view, although not very noticeable.

Any info appreciated.

Thanks!

Pretty sure they were 1/4" click.

Not sure about Parallax correction and I don't think they had a centered reticle.

I have one on a Remington 722 in .300 Savage. The reticle broke about a year and a half ago, and I sent it to Iron Sight LLC to be rebuilt. They did a very nice job rebuilding it. If your adjustments aren't tracking you may want to send it to them for a rebuild.

Iron Site, LLC
4814 S. Elwood Avenue
Tulsa, OK 74107
918-445-2001 or 918-521-7736
scopeservice@tulsacoxmail.com
www.ironsightinc.com

Parallax compensation does not mean anything. Any scope with a fixed objective will have a parallax neutral range, typically from 100 to 150 yards. An adjustable objective, which does the same thing that side focus does, will adjust the parallax out of your sight picture as needed for the distance to the object of interest. It's just not really "compensation."

Thanks. If the scope parallax was set for 100 yards, what would be the effect on targets at say, 50 yards and 200 yards? Does this result in moving the point of impact at those ranges?

The focus will not move the POI as much as the trajectory of the bullet.

Often, due to sight offset, a 200 yard zero is also a 50 yard zero. And your POI will be high at 100 yards, of course.

+1 for Ironsite refurb. I'm a big fan of the old Weaver & Redfields & they have done several for me, but be forewarned, they are very slow on turn-around.

My opinion of the early Weavers is that they didn't track too well on adjustments but once you got them zeroed they were rock solid.

That depends on the scope itself and how consistently you get into the eye box. If you could achieve perfect cheek weld and perfect positioning every time, then you would not have much error come into play no matter the range.

I have had scopes that differ. One in particular was a 3x or 3.5-10x50, and I noticed quite a bit of parallax at 200 yards. I got rid of it and went with another 3.5-10x50, and while it shows some parallax error at 200 it is not near as pronounced as the one I sent down the road. I do not recall which scopes they were. The difference may have been due to optical design or it may have been because of the parallax setting from the factory.

Good info. And there is also astigmatism in some eyes and for eyeglass wearers, I have noticed significant image distortion from center to edges of some lenses, likely from lens maker errors.

I will re-test the old Weaver with more consistent eye position.

If you want to figure out the parallax setting on the scope, set up targets at likely distances (100, 125, and 150 yards) and then set up the rifle on a rest. Line it up on those targets one at a time. Get behind the scope without touching the rifle. Move your head around and see if the crosshair remains in one spot or if it appears to wander around as you move your head. When looking at a target from a distance equal to the parallax setting the crosshair will appear to not move at all.

Rimfire scopes are often sold with parallax set to 50 yards. Some rimfire scopes are specifically designed for rimfire use only, but some are the very same as the centerfire model except for the parallax setting. I always though it made more sense for a rimfire scope to be set at 65 or even 75 yards, but I don't think it really matters much at all for hunting purposes. For target, it could, but for hunting, no.

Testing not complete but a more consistent "cheekweld" improved groups.