Hello all.

ATM my pet scopes are WIDE DUPLEX VX11 2-7x33's.
It has everything I need but I was wondering if the VX3 1.75-6x32 would be a better option with the 'diamond coat 2' & the 'indexed matched lenses'???

How is the 'eyebox' on this scope???
I have glassed the 2.5-8x36, nice but my 2-7x33 has a bigger eyebox & is less eye critical. I have also glassed the VX3 3.5-10x40, again nice, but it's a little too long & bulky for me. Eyebox was bigger than the 2-7x33 but not by much. I cannot remember if it was less 'eye critical' but I highly doubt it. Those VX11 2-7x33's really shine in this area IMO & to my eye.

So if anyone here has glassed or owns a VX3/VX111 in 1.75-6x32 & knows what I mean by 'eyebox' & 'eye critical' please comment.

Thanks again

I read a write up somewhere that stated the generous eyebox they've always had is also on the new Leupold lines. I know my VX-III eyebox is quite generous and it's one of the things I like about Leupold scopes.

Ken....

340 Wea,

I have looked at this scope but veered away. Reason being is I was looking for it on a big rifle and the eye relief on the high side of the zoom is only 3.3 inches. I like at least another 1/2" of eye relief. This is lowest of about all Leu. variables.
I am a Leupold fan!

EZ

quote:

ATM my pet scopes are WIDE DUPLEX VX11 2-7x33's.
It has everything I need but I was wondering if the VX3 1.75-6x32 would be a better option with the 'diamond coat 2' & the 'indexed matched lenses'???

Leupold hunting scopes have the best combination of features needed on a hunting scope of any brand on the market. Brand "A" may have 2% higher resolution, and Brand "B" may have .7% greater light transmission efficiency, etc. But the Leupold will typically incorporate the best set of compromises (all optical instruments are limited by physics to compromises) for hunting use. One of those compromises is to sacrifice a small amount of field of view in favor of wide latitude in eye placement. I don't think you'll find much difference in the various Leupold lines in this area, an area you have appropriately found to be very important.

The area you'll also find there to be negligible difference in the Leupold lines is in optical quality. Virtually all of the difference in this area is in the imagination of advertising copy writers. Terms like "Diamond Coat" and "Index Matched Lenses" are full of air. There is essentially no difference optically in the VX-II and the VX-III/3 (or whatever they now call their Caddilac line) -- save and except the VX-II lenses usually do not have a filtering coating that is used on the VX-III to enhance certain colors, thus tricking the eye into perceiving the image as "brighter". The VX-II actually provides a truer image in terms of color than the VX-III. However, most people will say the "like" the VX-III image better, just as they prefer to turn up the color intensity on their television set despite that setting providing a color-skewed image.

Bottom line: If you like your VX-II there's no need to go to the expense of swaping it for a VX-III/3. The VX-II is just as waterproof, just as recoil resistant, and the optical resolution provided by either will, as far as your eye is concerned, be identical.

I would agree with stonecreek plus you can get a wider array of reticles std with a VX II.
My favorite (Leupold Dot).

quote:

Originally posted by 340Wby:
Hello all.

ATM my pet scopes are WIDE DUPLEX VX11 2-7x33's.
It has everything I need but I was wondering if the VX3 1.75-6x32 would be a better option with the 'diamond coat 2' & the 'indexed matched lenses'???

How is the 'eyebox' on this scope???
I have glassed the 2.5-8x36, nice but my 2-7x33 has a bigger eyebox & is less eye critical. I have also glassed the VX3 3.5-10x40, again nice, but it's a little too long & bulky for me. Eyebox was bigger than the 2-7x33 but not by much. I cannot remember if it was less 'eye critical' but I highly doubt it. Those VX11 2-7x33's really shine in this area IMO & to my eye.

So if anyone here has glassed or owns a VX3/VX111 in 1.75-6x32 & knows what I mean by 'eyebox' & 'eye critical' please comment.

Thanks again

What's an "eyebox"??????

im real picky about eye relief and correct positioning for my scopes offhand
i use this scope on my 416 rem. ive had this gun since 89 and had loepld fixed 2-1/2, 1.5 - 5,2x7 nikon maybe couple other burris cant remember , the 1.75-6 is by far the best scope and i have 2-7 leo on another gun but i rate the 1.75-6 the best low power scope for eye relief an clarity and will never even try another. i use weaver ext bases and weaver rings ive never found any better only prettier
in fact i think weavers are the only ones i havnt broke or wrecked a scope with. i use this gun almost ever weekend from aug tru dec. be taking it tomorrow.
ten yrs ago killed a charging broun bear at about 12 ft using this gun an scope
my lop and eye relief are for offhand shooting i think this is where this scope (and all leoplds)make the difference, they dont restrict eye relief when it cant be perfect

One thing not mentioned here is the 1.75-6x has the smallest amount of reticle adjustment of any Leupold scope. Tried to mount one on my Ruger and ran out of windage adjustment. Had to buy rings that could give me addtl range. Now, this could be a Ruger problem, but I didn't like it. Since then, I put a 2-7x Leup on the rifle (a .395 max, yep .395) and all problems are gone.

I have the 2-7x33 on all my hunting rifles. Some VX1 and some VX11. Don't see any difference. I've owned more expensive scopes and bigger scopes but none of them suit me as well