In 45 years of hunting and shooting, I never recall one time have classic weaver split rings fail or cause any issue. I never attempted to lap them or do any other mods.

Anyone here had a bad experience with vintage weaver split rings or have good reasons not to use them?

I’ve never had an issue.

Still use them. No problems.

Aside from the need to lead a bit when tightening them down to compensate for the movement, the only trouble I’ve had is oil creeping between the ring and a steel-tubed scope. Not many of those around.

The new ones that copy the Leupold QRW ring tops are better, but they need to go to Torx-head screws. I’d gladly pay a bit more. Have two sets of those on hand, one spoken for and going on an old Marlin. Can’t beat the price for certain.

I detest the Weaver rings w the steel strap for an upper.

Hate them about as much as Ruger rings.

Could see the Weaver used for period correctness, but continue to see folks run them on newer pretty rifles and it just makes me SMH.

Burris zees I like.

Interesting, I don’t like zee rings but do like and still use the original Weavers

Me too. I've been using the Weavers for about 40 years. Never had a problem with them. They are about the lightest around too.

They were always cheaper than others giving the impression they were not as good. I have some on several vintage rifles and they have been rock solid I don’t particularly like there look but they sure fit on a vintage setup.

Also I am unaware of any Weaver or Picatinny type rings that are lower than classic Weavers. (If you know of any, please correct me)

The Burris Zee lows are not the lowest but low enough for me

Weaver base w Zee lows are on my Rem 760. Its doable LOL

I had a set on a Model 700 for close to 40 years worked great no problems and always held zero. I did change them out recently because I put a new scope on the rifle, but went with Leupold Dual Dovetail Mounts and Burris Dual Dovetail Rings as I think it looks better.

The only one I know of for sure that is lower than the Weavers is the old Burris Super Lows. I bought three sets of them a very long time ago, did not like them due to their mounting design as I need QD and these are anything but that.

Burris's Part Number is 420091.

They're great, especially the older ones with the big steel knobs.

Wish they made em in 30mm for alpha glass

I've never had a problem with them, but I don't care for the aesthetics, so I prefer Leupold PRWs, Warne Maximas, and on lower tier rifles B-Square Sport Utilities

I wouldn't call it a bad experiience but a learning experience on the first time I installed a scope in the rings. The scope was centered but when rings were tightened it was pulled off center.

Yeah, I don't know why they changed them.

Those big knobs are a thing of beauty.

They just look right on a old rifle. My dads pre 64 fetherweight had them and a steel tube Weaver for 30 years at least. Always got his deer without having to mess with the scope.

I prefer the old weaver rings above most others, but then I prefer 98 Mausers over any other rifle.

Thanks.

Looks like they are discontinued. Ah, well...

I have three sets I am not going to be using...

DOUBLE WINNER!!!

Agreed on both counts with the addition of the Savage 99 to cover the lever-action base which is a necessity.