Given my preference for a std. plex (not wide like Leupold insists on installing in 6x Matte models) wondering how the glass in a Weaver 6x38 compares to an FX-II 6x36?

I know the K6 Dual X has a reticle spec:

0.340 - thin
1.300 - thick
11.90 - opening


Has anyone done a side by side comparison and can comment on glass quality, etc.?

Thanks.

If not a comparison, any owners want to give the newest K6 a thumbs up or down?

the custom shop is your friend...order whatever reticle you like. given what we all spend on things like recoil lugs and flush cups, spending an extra $50 on the reticle you want shouldn't cause much heartburn...

shortmag, I have bought K6's and an M8 6x42 but I had the reticle changed on the M8 so don't want to try and compare that. The K6 has got to be the best buy in the scope world. I bought one to replace a VX-1 costing twice as much and was so much happier with it's brightness and click adjustments. Weavers are known for tracking well too -so thumbs up. By the way, are you talking 6x36 or 6x42 on the FX? The difference between any FXII and Weaver is going to be the reticle options on the Leupold and of course the rather large divide in amount of cash spent. For me, the reticle really matters and I would save up and get an FX II 6x42 with a #4 if possible. If straight duplex between a K6 and an FX 6x36 - I would not spend the extra doe and cheerfully come home with the Weaver. YMMV

I've owned both and still have the FXII. Optics and tracking were good on both. The main difference to me was eye relief. I've usually got to mount my scopes as far back as possible and don't like extended bases or dog leg rings. The FXII works better for me on a long action rifle with standard bases and rings. Otherwise there's nothing wrong with the K6 for a lot less money. YMMV.

Eye relief is why I ended up selling the weaver.. I tend to build things that go backwards quickly..

W

I have had at the same time the Weaver k6, the Leupold FX-II 6x36 and FX-III 6x42.

Eye relief and brightest were the key factors and to me the FX-II was the best and replaced the other two with Leupold 6x36's.

The nearest comparison I have for you is Leupold M8 and VX3 6x42 and the K4. I'm happy with the K4, and would buy another one if needed. I was not happy with the way the eye relief fit me when I had it on a long action 700 with DD rings. I got a new scope for the 700, put the K4 on a 760. It works well for me on that rifle.

Good comments gang, I was referring to the FxII as stated in the subject line, those are all 36mm. The ER may be less an issue for me running mostly short actions.

Sounds like the K6 is a fine scope in its own right, but perhaps trumped in ways by the also fine FXII.

Someone w/clout ask the CEO of Leupold - Who decided to NOT offer a std. reticle in the FX Matte scopes.

If I am going to spend a custom charge, I might as well just buy a 2-8 VX3 but heck a Nikon 2-8 or Weaver K6 sure is tempting to save $$ and have a regular 'plex' reticle.

No doubt one can retrofit, but shortmag, my dilema is I have been directly affected w/this 'Global Economic Recession' and I have to save every penny where I can....

So Willy, interesting, sounds like the latest 36mm trumped the 6x42 FX-III in brightness? Good to know.

No doubt, the 6x42 w/#4 as mentioned above is a good one, had one. Just prefer the 36s as they are no doubt very good, have one now w/CDS.......just never grabs my eye to center of FOV w/WD as other reticles do.

IF Leupold EVER puts etched Z plex spec reticles in their scopes, I will have no need for much else

Then again, IF Conquest ever mfg. a 6x....it's game over! LOL.

+100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

At least you can get a matte LR Duplex in a 6x42 or 6x36. No such option (except from the CS) in the 2.5x or 4x.

Not the Z-Plex, but I'd bet you could get them to put a Mil-Dot reticle in a 6X42 as they make an AO version with target knobs with that choice. Their Mil-Dot reticles are etched reticles. Heck, maybe they could even do a 6X36. E

I've got several K6's and they work very well.
I even put one on my Montana in .243. Left it on there too.

Just ordered my second FXII 6x36 with the LR reticle. Works for me! Light, great eye relief and plenty bright for my hunts.

For a budget scope the Weaver K series are great, I may order one someday. I always wanted to order a K6 and take it along as a spare for those far away from home hunts.

MtnHtr

I'm thinking about setting up three rifles for my son... SPS Compact Remington 700s in .243 and 7-08 and an SPS Camo in .223. I would love to be able to do the easy thing and just put matte standard duplex 4x33s on the .243 and 7-08 and a standard duplex 6x36 on the .223, but Leupold has to make things hard on me. I suppose the LR dotz are not that confusing for a beginner, but the 4x still chaps my hide.

What the heck, he's only two now, I can hope Beaverton will see the error in their ways.

anyone have a german #4 installed into the 6 x 36 FXII? That to me would be the cats meow.

I'm hot on the German #4. I'm kicking myself for not discovering them sooner.

I've killed more animals with a Leupold 6x36 than any other scope.

The Weaver k6 and Burris FFII6x are good scopes but the reticles need to be thicker. That's my only complaint. I want a Leupy 6x42 with a #1 reticle and M1 knob next.

Jimmy, a #4 or #1 is what I'd order if I did a custom conversion, yet for less $$, I can get a Burris 3-9x40 3P#$ w/a great reticle and glass.....it sucks being a minority liking fixed powers

I think Burris quit making the 6x40 right? Or at least the 3P#4 model.

E - I asked long ago, and the answer was no mil-dot in the 6x, PERHAPS it's available in the AO model, not positive, but thinking not.

If I had my druthers, I'd take an M2 w/a #4/#1 or consider a few other choices, the LAST would be a Wide Duplex.

Yet no doubt, SU35, I have killed 79% of all my deer w/a 2x, 2.5x, 4x, or 6x......the other 21% I was carring a variable or open sights.

I would put the weaver as my favorite muzzleloader scope of all time.. I dont invest much in the BP thing but for the money the 6x cant be beat IMO.....

Woofer

I've got em both, and for the moolah if the K6 came with dotz or a short turret I'd be buying a whole lot more K6's...

Dober

The Weaver K4 & K6 are probably the best bang for the buck scopes on the market. They are very clear optically.

I agree with that.

They are the cheapest scopes I recommend. Bought one for my old hunting partner when he retired. About time he replaced the old Swift he's been using with the busted reticle leg.
If they insist on a variable, I recommend the Burris FFII. E

For me, the K4/K6 works good on a short-action, but the tube legnth and eye relief makes them a little tight on a long-action. The 6x36 is my favorite, but I am about to buy a k6 for my 7mm-08 and move the Leupie on that rifle over to a long-action gun.

I have both and like both. +1 to dober's comments.

I also don't like a Weaver on a LA.

65BR I also have one of those Burris 6x40 specifically because of that reticle. I still see them for sale occasionally. Hey how are the adjustments on yours? 1/2"? Mine are I believe -and just a little on the mushy side but manageable.

Yes I do...also have one with a Leupold Dot...

I also have about 5 of the Weaver K 6s, and 3 or 4 of the Weaver K 4s...

I love the Weavers, but they still are no Leupold...yet neither is their price...

I sold two Gloss K6s on the Classifieds a few years ago and they went QUICK! Same with a pair of K 2.5 and a V-3...

Shootinurse bought one of the K 6s...

Ken, if you are asking about my CDS on my FX2, I sent it BACK to Leupold AFTER they first did it, as soon as I got it, it was mushy and they forgot to laser a line to line up the marks - the line missing from the scope body, not turret.

It got done right......the 2nd time.

I tell you, I wonder if they have some illegals working for them. Seems their QC may be going the way of Remington....

I think I will try one of those K-6s.

Since I use scopes as a sighting device, having Alpha glass is not essential, but a durable scope that will hold zero and have good glass is....

E- I ran a Pro-Staff Nikon 4x32 on a 7BR and can recommend it for a general 4x, though may not run in on a big magnum, or a real fly weight that has fast recoil impulse. It did fine...shame they don't have a 6x option.

Thanks guys.

I'll keep that in mind 65BR. Nikon has been known to make good stuff. I'm relying heavily on one of their 8X32LX binoculars and one of their 50mmED spotting scopes as I scout for elk. Never heard anything bad about their rifle scopes.
What's it's eye relief and eye box like ? E

I thought 3 inches of eye relief was unacceptable for the professional hunter..

Eye relief seemed fine, the fov is not what an FXII is, but at 1/3 of the price, you can't have it all BTW, I dropped a running doe at 200 yds in a snap shot, as she ran away from me, hitting her backbone.

Never had time to worry about anything but aim/fire as she was getting to the edge of the field and about to hit timber. BTW, I think that scope is a rimfire set up, PA set for maybe 75 yds?? None the less, I shot a .4 group at 100 yds for 3 shots of 139 SSTs in a 7BR M7 custom I had Pacnor build.

Sometimes just keeping optics simple works great!

I heard good things on the LX - let us know how you like them, and good luck elk hunting.

I tend to mount scopes pretty far forward, but even so---on a Ruger 223 I could not use a Weaver K6 without feeling like I had to crawl halfway up the stock. Too short of eye relief and a large front bell that doesn't allow one to push the scope back very far.

I'd go reversible front mounts if running the Weaver on most anything except a Model Seven (on which it fits fine BTW).

My first scope was a Weaver 6 power on a Remington 788 in 222 Remington I think I was 16 or 17 at the time. The rifle was heavy, but accurate, funny how you go full circle in life...

DD - maybe I will use a K6 where ER is not as critical...thanks for input.

Jimmy, the NEW K6 should be all be better...assuming you are not too young The older El Paso models were not to today's coatings, etc.