Leupold having problem leading their scopes further into the future

[Captcurt]

Being a poor hillbilly in a right to work state I never could justify spending a butt load of money on a scope. When I bought my 300 WSM I stuck a 2-7X VariX-2 set in Leupold base & rings and never touched it again for 15 years. I figured that the Leupold would handle the recoil in this rifle and I was right.

Lately I've tried several different brands. There is a Vortex Crossfire 2 6-18X on my Bergara Creedmoor. It works ok but the eye relief varies with the power. My Rem. 700 243 has a 4-14X Bushnell Legend on it and no complaints with it and a 3-9X Legend rides the CZ 455. The last scopes that I ordered for resale were Sig Sauer Whiskey 3's. Most of my customers won't spend over $200 on scope and these had great reviews. I bought 5, installed one on a T/C Compass and sighted it in for a friend. It is pretty impressive for the price point.

One thing that I do like about Leupold is the Made in USA. Most of the others come from China, Korea, or the Philippines.

 

[Gtscotty]

As far as knob twisting scopes go, Leupold was pretty much off in left field before they rolled out the MK5 HD series, I don't know if they are the best value in that price range, but they are at least competitive.

As far as set it and forget it style hunting scopes go, I like my VX-3i quite a bit. I had them put a B&C reticle in it and it's a nice LIGHT useable rig. I'd like to pick up a VX-3i with the CDS turret, but I've heard mixed reviews on the reliability of the CDS system.

This is the “harsh” reality an unfortunately large number of folks have been convinced to ignore. They’re never bad scopes, but at their respective price points, buyers can get more for their money - better optics with better features for the same or less cost.

Buying one brand and avoiding others is a subversive means of plausible deniability. It’s not untruthful for someone to say, “Leupold are the best scope I have ever used,” when they’re also the ONLY scope they’ve ever used. It just sucks to watch new shooters get unwittingly lured to crash on the shore by the Leupold Sirens when their application is a little more demanding than “doesn’t fog and holds zero.”

Serious question, as far as a 3-9x or 2-10x range set it and forget it hunting scope, what option do you think is better than the VX-3i at the same cost and weight?

I've been considering picking up one of the clearanced FFP Bushnell Nitros with the Deploy Mil reticles available for <$300 recently for a prarie dog AR, but haven't pulled the trigger yet.

 

[earlthegoat2]

As far as “modern” reticles are concerned, that is a big reason why I buy Leupold. Give me a standard duplex and let me shoot MPBR. I hate goofy reticles.

I might have to give Zeiss Conquests a try. I gave Vortex a try based on virtual universal praise and not only was I unimpressed, I was mad I spent actual money on something so similar to a $30 Simmons.

The main thing is that I like low power scopes. 2-7x33 and 2-8x36 and smaller. Not a ton of makers have great offerings in this range in the $200-$400 range. Many have infinite offering of 4-12x40 and above. I don’t give a rats about that power range.

 

[Varminterror]

Serious question, as far as a 3-9x or 2-10x range set it and forget it hunting scope, what option do you think is better than the VX-3i at the same cost and weight?

I shift a little from here - I typically use 4-16x ish, so slide UP in magnification from the 3-9x, instead of down to the 2-7x or 2.5-10x...

I’m not familiar with the Nitros yet but from what I have handled of them at SHOT and NRAAM last year, I’d rather have a Nitro than a VX3i. “Historically” the Elite 4200 then 4500 could be bought for $100-150 less than the VX3, and had better tracking, less color aberration, and better brightness in low light conditions. Hitting sales, a guy could even get the 4.5-30x or 2.5-16x Elite 6500’s for the same price as the VX3’s (the price drop moving to the VX3i and the discontinuance of that Bushnell line has my current water a little muddy). It WAS easier to find VX3’s in a Mil-dot reticle, while the Bushnells were usually plain Jane multiplex reticles, which was why I ultimately ended up buying four 4.5-14x50 VX3’s at one point for my hunting rifles, but when it came to killing coyotes by moon and star light, the Leupold’s didn’t keep up with the Bushnells, so they eventually went packing, except for one which still rides a Savage 12 BVSS 223.

I’m excited about the Nitros and Forges too.

If it’s any consolation for those folks who seem personally offended by the fact I don’t drink the Gold Ring koolaid, I will say, the turrets on a Burris XTRII feel just as bad as the VX3i’s, and although the Burris does track better, it just feels terrible - with an MSRP almost twice that of the VX3i. If I wouldn’t have won it, I would be asking for my money back for the XTRII. The Leupolds aren’t bad scopes, which I can say I believe other brands to actually be bad... but for the money, they’re not the best.

 

[jmorris]

I have a number of them that I like, have gotten rid or even returned a few others. I have better quality glass and some that are not as great that I use often as well.

I couldn’t begin to fault anyone’s opinion of “better” when I don’t even have a concrete definition myself.

Some dirt cheap optics have really impressed me and others that were well into 4 figures didn’t leave a positive impression at all.

 

[Pat Riot]

If it’s any consolation for those folks who seem personally offended by the fact I don’t drink the Gold Ring koolaid,

You seem offended that people like what they like.

 

[Alaskan Ironworker]

I see no real competition in the budget price range. Ive had a vortex 3x9 thats fine, and I like vortex binoculars; but can you honestly say if you only had $200 you would really buy a vortex over a leupold? One of the few quality things still made with pride in the U.S.A. and they build their scopes learning from the destruction of their competition’s products. Different things in scopes are important to different consumers, for me, I want the reliability of iron sights in a scope. Leupold has been able to give me that for $200-$400. Personally I see no reason to spend $1000 dollars or more on a Zeiss or swarovski that I fully intend to drag through the mud and alders or possibly lose on a boat trip. It reminds me of so many north slope workers you see up here with jacked up super duty trucks with winches and snorkels but have never seen a ditch or a drop of mud.

 

[LoonWulf]

I see no real competition in the budget price range. Ive had a vortex 3x9 thats fine, and I like vortex binoculars; but can you honestly say if you only had $200 you would really buy a vortex over a leupold? One of the few quality things still made with pride in the U.S.A. and they build their scopes learning from the destruction of their competition’s products. Different things in scopes are important to different consumers, for me, I want the reliability of iron sights in a scope. Leupold has been able to give me that for $200-$400. Personally I see no reason to spend $1000 dollars or more on a Zeiss or swarovski that I fully intend to drag through the mud and alders or possibly lose on a boat trip. It reminds me of so many north slope workers you see up here with jacked up super duty trucks with winches and snorkels but have never seen a ditch or a drop of mud.

Its taken me a long time ( comparatively, ive only been buying my own crap for 20 years or so now lol) to get to the point where Im willing to spend more than 100-200 bucks on a scope, hell its taken me this long to be willing to spend more than 3-400 bucks on a rifle. I still dont feel like i NEED the "expensive" rig i carry mostly now, but I enjoy it.
So I certainly understand that standpoint, and as long as your happy with what your using thats all that really maters.
I will say this tho, ill put a Burris FF2 up against ANY similar scope under 400 bucks, in terms of optics and durability. The only reason the one on my .375 ruger got swapped for the leupy Vx-3i was the 3i offered juuuuust enough more eye relief to make a difference, and I like having the easy dial turret.....I dont necessarily TRUST the turret yet, but I like it.

 

[Gtscotty]

I shift a little from here - I typically use 4-16x ish, so slide UP in magnification from the 3-9x, instead of down to the 2-7x or 2.5-10x...

I’m not familiar with the Nitros yet but from what I have handled of them at SHOT and NRAAM last year, I’d rather have a Nitro than a VX3i. “Historically” the Elite 4200 then 4500 could be bought for $100-150 less than the VX3, and had better tracking, less color aberration, and better brightness in low light conditions. Hitting sales, a guy could even get the 4.5-30x or 2.5-16x Elite 6500’s for the same price as the VX3’s (the price drop moving to the VX3i and the discontinuance of that Bushnell line has my current water a little muddy). It WAS easier to find VX3’s in a Mil-dot reticle, while the Bushnells were usually plain Jane multiplex reticles, which was why I ultimately ended up buying four 4.5-14x50 VX3’s at one point for my hunting rifles, but when it came to killing coyotes by moon and star light, the Leupold’s didn’t keep up with the Bushnells, so they eventually went packing, except for one which still rides a Savage 12 BVSS 223.

I’m excited about the Nitros and Forges too.

If it’s any consolation for those folks who seem personally offended by the fact I don’t drink the Gold Ring koolaid, I will say, the turrets on a Burris XTRII feel just as bad as the VX3i’s, and although the Burris does track better, it just feels terrible - with an MSRP almost twice that of the VX3i. If I wouldn’t have won it, I would be asking for my money back for the XTRII. The Leupolds aren’t bad scopes, which I can say I believe other brands to actually be bad... but for the money, they’re not the best.

I have higher magnification scopes for LR range work, but I don't like them for big game hunting (especially SFP), just like I don't like/need an exposed turret, dialing type scope for big game hunting. My limit on game is 400 yds, and the furthest I've actually shot on meat was this year's elk at 375 yds. For that kind of hunting I prefer a lightweight capped turret scope with a simple graduated reticle and a max magnification of 8-10x.

To me Leupold offers a good value in that niche, there's nothing out there I've found that matches both the weight and price of Leupolds. The Nitro I've been looking at, for example is 24.2 oz, 11 oz heavier than a 3.5-10x40 VX-3i and nearly 13 oz heavier than my 2.5-8x36. The Zeiss HD5 I used to have and the Monarch 5 I still have are both nice scopes, but they're also both a quarter pound heavier than an equivalent Leupold, and in the case of the Zeiss, twice the price. Same for the basic Conquest I used to have.

If you're looking for a lightweight hunting scope, the Leupys strike a nice balance for the price without having to jump up to something like a Swaro Z3, that's where they make sense to me.

 

[LoonWulf]

I have higher magnification scopes for LR range work, but I don't like them for big game hunting (especially SFP), just like I don't like/need an exposed turret, dialing type scope for big game hunting. My limit on game is 400 yds, and the furthest I've actually shot on meat was this year's elk at 375 yds. For that kind of hunting I prefer a lightweight capped turret scope with a simple graduated reticle and a max magnification of 8-10x.

To me Leupold offers a good value in that niche, there's nothing out there I've found that matches both the weight and price of Leupolds. The Nitro I've been looking at, for example is 24.2 oz, 11 oz heavier than a 3.5-10x40 VX-3i and nearly 13 oz heavier than my 2.5-8x36. The Zeiss HD5 I used to have and the Monarch 5 I still have are both nice scopes, but they're also both a quarter pound heavier than an equivalent Leupold, and in the case of the Zeiss, twice the price. Same for the basic Conquest I used to have.

If you're looking for a lightweight hunting scope, the Leupys strike a nice balance for the price without having to jump up to something like a Swaro Z3, that's where they make sense to me.

Take a look at the GPO 3-9x42, besides having a shorter eye relief I like it just as well if not better than my vx-3i.

 

[Elkins45]

Leupold is to riflescopes like Rolex is to watches. You can get a better one for less money, but lay 10 different brands on a sale table and see which one gets picked up first. That golden ring on a Leopold is like the little crown on the dial of a Rolex. It attracts people like a flame attracts moths. Everybody has heard of them and everybody knows they hold their value.

Joe Schmoe is probably never going to own a Swarovski or a Zeiss, but if he saves his pennies he just might one day replace his Bushnell or Simmons with a genuine Leopold. And gun people are traditionalists, so the "Made in USA" things carries some weight as well. I'm not at all opposed to foreign-made goods but I don't own a Vortex because all the ones in my price range are made in China. At least some guy in Oregon got a paycheck for putting my score together.

 

[otisrush]

I'm 59. Grew up doing some hunting. I definitely was taught "Zero your scope and leave it alone." My old .270 from when I was a teenager has a Bushnell scope on it with yardage-marked elevation turret. But I don't remember messing with it much.

Fast forward to the last couple of years. I don't hunt. For me the fun part is shooting. Over the last couple of years I decided to get into target shooting at some longer-ish distances. Bought a 700 in .243 and wanted "good glass" - so I bought a Leupold.....my first. Got the Varmint Hunter's reticle because I figured I want to move around distance wise. BUT....as I got into reloading and refining loads and using different bullets for different scenarios.....the bullet drop markings became a hindrance rather than a help. The first time I shot with a friend who was really into it and dialing in all these elevation changes at will....back and forth.....talking MOA....etc etc. And if I wanted to do something like that I was removing dust covers, getting a dime or screwdriver out to make a change, counting revolutions so I could get my VX3-i back to zero, etc. etc. And it hit me: I had the wrong scope.

I'm shooting Vortex now. ON PAPER they, too, have a lifetime no-questions-asked warranty. But I won't for a moment try to claim they're in the same league as Leupold in this regard. I have another friend who was having an issue (ended up being the gun....but at the time it wasn't obvious) and Vortex was not helpful. I don't know how they'd be if actual work needed to be done. But that experience sure makes me wonder how well things would go with them.

But my overall point is that for use cases like what I'm doing now my gun(s) go from safe to range and back. They're not being knocked around at all. While I might certainly drop them or there might be an accident, the chance of damaging the scope is very low. As contrasted with hunting, where you might knock the scope on a tree. Or it gets wet or something like that.

If I were to get back into hunting I wouldn't even give a thought to what I'd buy: I'd get a Leupold. But even accepting that Leupold is "better" (toughness, customer service when warranty work needs doing) Vortex is "good enough" for what I'm doing target shooting. And their feature set is much more aligned with the target shooter's needs from what I've seen. (I recently got a nicer Vortex and I browsed through the Leupold offering in case they had something I'd consider. I don't recall details but I was left with the impression that they had something close feature wise, but for A LOT more money.)

OR

 

[Offfhand]

This is the “harsh” reality an unfortunately large number of folks have been convinced to ignore. They’re never bad scopes, but at their respective price points, buyers can get more for their money - better optics with better features for the same or less cost.
Buying one brand and avoiding others is a subversive means of plausible deniability. It’s not untruthful for someone to say, “Leupold are the best scope I have ever used,” when they’re also the ONLY scope they’ve ever used. It just sucks to watch new shooters get unwittingly lured to crash on the shore by the Leupold Sirens when their application is a little more demanding than “doesn’t fog and holds zero.”

Au contraire mon frere there are a few innocent Pilgrims like me who routinely use and compare different brands and models and even ages of scopes and base our conclusions on results. Sometimes we have extremely rigorous demands, such as the white heat of National and International rifle competitions. Here are a few hunting rifles, each fitted with different brands of scopes, all of which have performed as expected. But for the extreme optical and mechanical demands of benchrest competition nothing has succeeded for me like the Leupolds mounted on this quartet of benchrest rifles. I'm not saying I always win because of the Leupolds, but by and large, the shooters who beat me are also using Leupolds. .

 

[Captcurt]

Au contraire mon frere there are a few innocent Pilgrims like me who routinely use and compare different brands and models and even ages of scopes and base our conclusions on results. Sometimes we have extremely rigorous demands, such as the white heat of National and International rifle competitions. Here are a few hunting rifles, each fitted with different brands of scopes, all of which have performed as expected. But for the extreme optical and mechanical demands of benchrest competition nothing has succeeded for me like the Leupolds mounted on this quartet of benchrest rifles. I'm not saying I always win because of the Leupolds, but by and large, the shooters who beat me are also using Leupolds. .View attachment 883723 View attachment 883724 View attachment 883725

Sorry for the drool but that Mauser wearing the Swarovski is nice. That is my kind of rifle.

 

[<*(((><]

Sorry for the drool but that Mauser wearing the Swarovski is nice. That is my kind of rifle.

yes, that one has gorgeous wood.

 

[WVRJ]

I bought my first Leupold in 1980.It's a 2X7 Vari-X 2.I put it on a custom 280 and after it was zero'd I didn't remove the turret caps for 28 years.I had the mindset that I wanted one good all around hunting rig,and I'm just now waiting for a new Shilen 280AI barrel to be made for that rifle.It'll probably be wearing one of my Mark 4's after I get it put together.I have 15 Leupold scopes,along with Tasco,Bushnell,Vortex and Nikon scopes.The Mark 4's I have are,to me,better than the comparable higher end Vortexes(aka Philipiner weiners)I have.They gather more light,and have a better field of view.The 4's turrets are spot on as far as tracking goes,but if Vortex does anything better,it is the tracking.The Asian scopes don't come close.Most of their eye relief is dangerously close,their field of view is small and the optics don't come close.I've had four instances where I had a problem with Leupold products and the issues were resolved quickly and the repairs were done right.I even dropped a pair of their binoculars out of a tree,and because they didn't make that model any more and because they said mine needed to be replaced,the sent me a new pair that were the next step up in their line.Their hunting scopes are no nonsense reliable and affordable products.Vortex and Tasco both tout a no BS lifetime warranty and Tasco flat out told me it was no use to send their junk in for repair because I didn't have a problem and the line of BS I got from Vortex has assured me that I won't even consider any more of their junk.I have seen the adjustment knobs be balky to move,but I just tap them a little with an empty case and they move.I may be older and foolish,but I'm probably at the top of my shooting game and I just haven't found a product line of optics that do as well for the money.Most of my scopes are VX 3's with a lot of variation as far as magnification,objective lens size,adjustment and focus types.They also have a winner with their Mark 5HD,which I think is the ultimate scope,hands down for the money.They aren't playing catch up,in my opinion,because they never got behind.

 

[Varminterror]

But for the extreme optical and mechanical demands of benchrest competition nothing has succeeded for me like the Leupolds mounted on this quartet of benchrest rifles.

The Leupold Competition scopes aren’t the VX3’s.

 

[d2wing]

This has been an interesting read. I had been shooting for around 20 years before I even used a scope. In the military I was able to hit 100% of targets at 400 meters and some at 600 meters without a scope. I happened to have superior vision at the time. I was still using my first scope, a Tasco from around 1980 until my son insisted I upgrade a few years ago for his use. As I get older I need a scope for rifle use. I understand the need for high end target scopes. I can't afford them or need them although I am interested. I am in my seventies one day I might give up my Harley's and spend the time and money on shooting. As it is a few months ago I won a pistol match using a stock unscoped pistol against guys half my age some shooting custom guns they use in competition. I guess I trying to say use what makes you happy. I am pretty sure Leupolds will be around as long as I shoot and they will be my first choice.

 

[d2wing]

The Leupold Competition scopes aren’t the VX3’s.

Leupold makes a lot more scopes than the VX3.

 

[Ks5shooter]

Never had a problem with the many Leupold scopes,binos,spotting scope, rangefinders and red dots I own. Never had to use their warranty. No need to change or try something new for me personally.

 

[351 WINCHESTER]

I used to frequent our local gun shop inside a hardware store. A guy brought in a Leupold scope that he took hunting out west and his horse went off the side of a cliff and the scope was broken beyond repair. Steve called Leupold and told them the story. The told him to give the guy another scope if he had one in stock, if not they would send him a replacement free of charge. I don't know if they would do that today, but it left a lasting impression with me.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I'm not under the impression that they are the best out there, but I like them.
I don't ask much of a scope though.
I'm a deer hunter that hunts from box blinds over corn piles. All I need is for it to not fog up and for the bullet to land where the cross hairs rest.
Leupold does those things just fine, so like Ks5shooter, I don't see a reason to fix something that aint broke.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

Just remember that us "younger" folk get lots of info from Instagram and YouTube, where the small and up-and-coming brands flourish.

Just like the micro-brew beers... New tactical buyers like boutique brands or just shopping around.

Brand recognition and loyalty don't mean the same as it used to.

 

[Laphroaig]

This thread is following the path of so many other subjective comparisons on this board. Like rifle cartridges, use .270 Win for example. One group claims they have been hunting with one all of their life and its killed everything they've shot at. The other group says its obsolete and the 6.5 whatever shoots higher BC bullets that result in better performance at 700 yards.

There might be examples of "better" scopes for hunting, although I sense the improvements are relatively minor and the options are scattered across several brands. When it comes to light weight, dependability, and the security of a rock solid warranty, Leupolds are hard to beat.

 

[lastofthebreed]

I, too, like Leupolds. However, I am not one of those "Leupold or nothing" guys. I have a plethora of scopes on various rifles as I find no single manufacturer makes one scope line that embodies all of the traits that I may be looking for at any one particular time. Various applications require various scopes, that's just the way it is.

I have found a lot of scopes that do what I want them to do. I have found very few that were totally inadequate for the purpose they were bought for. Have I bought a few "stinkers"? Yes, I have. I won't name them on an open forum as YMMV.

One brand that has been a surprise to me has been the Swift line of scopes. They work!! And work well.

Buy what you want but don't be afraid to experiment. You may be pleasantly surprised.