Small Fish, the point was to see what everyone shot.

I am a big fan of Euro scopes, but tired of paying so much for most of them.

Burris' Euro line is really looking good. Nikon's monarch is also exceptional value for the money. I also like Ziess Conquest.

With this poll I wanted to know how big a hold Leupold had on the market. I figured it was 20-30 percent and I was right.

125 people have taken the poll. I wouldn't consider this to be enough for a true estimate. But it does give an idea of what's going on out there.

Small fish sorry I have taken so long to get back to ya,computer problems.I presently own 9 Leupolds and bought them from the 70's till a few months ago and thats been the only problem to date.The oldest was bought in late 69 and still works flawlessly so I can't see where the ongoing problems you speak of being too bad.I own several other scopes from Nikon,Sightron and an old Tasco that won't seem to die and an old Redfield.I have broken 2 scopes(non-leupold) and will never buy that brand again,I won't mention the name as I have another rifle wearing the same brand that hasn't died yet and is probely going to last longer than the first 2 did.None are worth the hard working money I had to spend for them but all will work well,I know folks that can't get a Chevrolet to last very long and others that never had problems with them,scopes are like that I feel,what works for me may not work well for you,for me Leupolds work just fine.Drop-Shot

Jay while I own more Leupolds than any other make I have to say the Burris Signature scopes are super bright and I almost bought a fullfield ll 3-9x40 on sale for 159.00,it was bright and held up against the Nikon Monarch I could not see a measureable difference and when I buy my Thompson Encore before next season I will think about the fullfield no-matter where they are made,I like to stay american made when I can but its hard,my binos are Nikon Japan,my custom knife is made from ats34 steel Japan,my backpack is from who knows where,point is I'm happy buying from an american supplier and I have to be content with that I guess.I own 9 Leupolds and 4 other makes not counting the redfield I loaned my brother 20 years ago but the Burris looks like a good buy.Drop-Shot

I voted for the Burris, as I have two of the Fullfield II 3x9 Ballistic Plex reticles that are made in the Phillipines. Both of them have performed just fine for about two years. But my next scope will probably be a Nikon 4.5-14 Buckmasters, also made in the Phillipines. In comparing it side by side to a Leupold VXIII of the same magnification, I liked it better. Eye relief didn't seem as critical with the Nikon. It also won out over my comparisons to the Burris 4.5-14, the Sightron SII 4-16, Weaver V16, Weaver GS and Bushnell 3200 Elite. It also won out price-wise, too. My only question about it is durablility, and early forum feedback appears quite positive. Hopefully I will have one within a week or two. May have to change my vote after I try it out.
I still think the Burris Fullfield II 3x9 is a very good scope for a very reasonable price, no matter where it is manufactured, and am planning on keeping mine for a future to be determined rifle.

If a guy has hundreds of guns and is cheap, it is the favorite guns that get Leupold.

If gun collecting could be controlled, better scopes might be possible.

tnekkcc,

I don't have hundreds but I have close to 50. I still don't own but 3 Leupolds. I am not rich either, in fact I am an enlisted man in the Navy.

If it was up to me I would own 100% Schmidt and Bender Zeniths. But wow that would be some cash eh?

D99 thanks for serving,I looked through most all scopes over all the years I've been hunting but have never looked through a Schmidt and Bender,are they that much clearer?I've had only 1 Leupold go tits up after 34 or 35 years of hard usage,mabe I never looked objectively at other scopes and feel certain I have never looked through a S&B,a little better or alot better?Drop-Shot

If you look through a S&B, Swaro PH, or a Zeiss Diavari then you will see a huge difference. They are the best scopes out there. But of course now you're paying $1500+ for you scopes.

MontMike I plan on going to Missoula in awhile and will look at the S&B,I have looked through the Swaro A-line and Zeiss Conquest and couldn't see a great difference between the Leupolds and Nikons but mabe I need to look again.The fact that the military has S&B making their sniper scopes makes me want to check them out.The biggest problem I have is I'm getting older and don't know how many years I have left to hunt,spending 1500.00 on a scope may not be cost effective for me.I'll check them out anyway.Drop-Shot

The A-line and Conquests are both middle of the raod scopes for these companies. I've never looked through the A-line, but I really like the Conquests. These were built to compete against most American scopes. (Leupy, Burris) The other models I listed are the top of the line Euro models , I've looked through the S&B and Swaro's and there really is no better. Havean't had the chance to look through the Diavari's, but from what I've been told they are just as good as the Swaro and S&B.

I feel that Schmidt and Bender uses the best glass in the business, is the toughest, and the ugliest, and the heaviest.

I think Swaorvski makes the best looking scopes made, but I don't think they are as nice as Schmidt and Bender.

Zeiss and Swarovski put plastic turret covers on scopes costing $1500. That's BS!