Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Weaver K6 6x38 vs. Leupold M8 6x42

Didn't have to go far to find a major flaw. Some here said the eye relief was too short. K6 is about 1-3/8" shorter than the 6x42 for me. That's with the 6x42 just on the edge of being too far from the eye. Seems the K6 doesn't have as much forgiveness either (eye box). But it's a nice scope for the money for a non-heavy kicker and probably best on a short action. Length of tube for mounting is about the same between the two.

Brightness of the K6 is great....but would want to compare them in the field.

Not sure what I'm going to mount it on. Picked up a Montana 308 today, but had a Swaro Z3 3-9x36 in the safe and used that. But I want to try it out on something.

Pic shows both scopes placed representative of where the eye relief was for me. Again....difference is about 1-3/8".

I moved the K6 I had around to quite a few rifles trying to find one I could get enough eye relief on. At the time, I didn't have any short action rifles but it did work fine on a couple of rimfires. It was disappointing because I liked the scope - very clear/bright view. I eventually sold it and now have a short action Kimber 257 Roberts that it probably would've worked on. Another thought where it might work well is on an AR of some flavor...

257,

You hit that review dead-on! That is exactly how they compare/function.

The Weaver K6 goes perfectly on a Model Seven, can be wiggled onto a short 700, but is about useless on even a short Ruger or Winchester. Long action is a no go. BUT, on a Seven, they shine brightly!

It's a shame they won't work well with a long action. I have a 98 Mauser in 257 Roberts that would be about perfect for this. Thanks for the comparison.

I stuck one on a T/C Omega muzzleloader and was pretty impressed with it for the $.

I've got a vz-24 with a new yugo barrel that's getting a K4(same dimensions)...thinking it will work in std Leupold mounts(will need to check to be sure...

IMO, from a sample of one, the K6 is inferior compared to the Leupy, not even close.

I would definitely agree from what I've observed. For the cost, for those that maybe can't afford a Leupold yet, they're good scopes. But applications are very limited as far as I'm concerned.

I got a K4 as well when I ordered the K6. Not a bad scope for $122 or so. And a little more eye relief than the K6.

I have had a 6x weaver for about 20 years now (I think). I like it alot but I do wish Weaver would put the microtrac in a fixed 6, fix the eye-relief and eye-box issue and then compete with loopie at a much lower price.

If wishes was horses beggers would ride...

I used a picatinny rail on my Charles Daly Mauser to get the eye relief I needed with my K6. The front ring is nearly over the center of the action.

That being said....the scope works very well. Jumped through some hoops to get it to work for me but I'm happy with the whole setup.

Dan

I like the Weaver on a short-action 700. No issues.
Bob

I stuck a K6 on a .243 Montana a few years ago, as it was handy. I had ordered a Leupy 2.5-8 to use on it.

Well the K6 is still on there and works just fine.

I have one on a Cz .223-527 Carbine and I love it for that little rifle.

Seems like I always have a couple on the shelf for, "random rifles", that follow me home.

After having both I can safely say I will never own another friction adjustment scope.

Why not?

Shod

I dunno if anybody remembers the Nikon 6x40 (or was it 6x42?) they offered for quite a while. It was fine optically, and the adjustments were good too. But it not only had short eye relief (maybe 3", at most) and a VERY short tube. I had one for several years and kept trying it on different rifles, never really getting it to work right, and finally sold the thing. In comparison, the Weaver K6 is EASY to mount!

Headline

"Montana hunter declares Nikon even worse than Weaver!"

Perhaps I blame the scopes for my tracking inability but I had a Vx1 and M8 and would take the precise clicks of the Weaver over those any day. It seems everyone has ditched the friction adjustments and think there is a reason for that. Bottom line is if I am going to buy a scope it would be a newer one because the recent crop are just that much better overall so no reason for me to have friction adjustments.

Are you talking about getting sighted in, or more adjustment use in the field?

What? According to Shodd 3" of eye-relief is all you need, unless you are a retard.

Getting sighted in. The M8 was trickier than the Vx-1. I would never have thought of ever touching it in the field. Once I got it set they stayed good to go but I certainly prefer good repeatable clicks. Weaver, Sightron and Meopta I had were a lot easier for me to deal with.

RGK other than the handle being on the wrong side that looks like my 6mm did for ages.

I love the friction adjustments. They seem to be spot on and I've never had any problem sighting one in.

I have a K6 Weaver on a Tikka t3 lite in .300 wm and on a Remington 700 in .243. and no scope related issues. The .300 kicks a bit ,but the eye relief has not been an issue. I have a 19.5 neck so my head tends to follow my shoulder fairly close behind in recoil!

Other seem to like them too. Just not for me I guess. Problem could have been the nut behind the nut in my case. Is anyone still making scopes without click adjustments?

I'd rather have the Weaver since it is click adjustments, fully multicoated lenses and it is normally found for less money.