Please educate me on the relative strength/ quality of riflescopes, with particular reference to Leupolds.
Are the cheaper models cheaper because they are less rugged, or because their optics are not as clear in terms of light and longevity?
Example:
Does a VX 1 scope withstand the recoil of a 375 exactly the same as a VX 3 scope, all else being equal?
I have a couple of older VX 1 and 2 models lying around and don't want to buy a new VX3 if the old ones will work, but cannot take a chance that the scope will shift zero.
This is also a hypothetical question for all uses.

I have only had a VX-1 and it seems resistant to being dropped at least, but all brands of modern scopes now use articulated erector sets, which make them more vulnerable to recoil damage than the pre-1956 technology, on paper at least.

Makers are always telling us what they have done to fix that problem, without explaining the need. Leupold's trump card is a twin-biased beryllium-alloy erector-tube spring, which they may only put in the VX-3 line.

According to another member here who has rattled the guts out of many modern scopes on elephant guns, only the low-power FX Leupolds can be trusted. He grades the different scopes according to calibres, finding one should be good for up to the 375 mag, another up to the 458WM and the best for the 458 Lott and 505.

I prefer to see Ray's experience as destructive testing, in case a scope that can't stand the big calibres lets you down on lesser ones, too. His favorite IIRC is a Leupold Compact 2.5x, a model that may not still be available in the form he likes.

Vic,

I have older XX-II and newer VX2 scopes (7 Mag, 300 Mag, and others) along with VX-III and newer VX3 scopes (375 H&H and 458 Win. M, and others) all of them have been bulletproof.

The differences between the VX1/VX2 and the VX3 scopes are the optical quality of the glass lenses and their coatings and that the VX1 scopes are made with a 2 piece body while the VX3 are one piece.

The one piece body should have a lower failure rate but in real world application I don't know what the risk difference is.

Over the last 50+ years I've owned somewhere in the neighborhood of 12-Bajillion Leupolds of all types and prices going all the way back to the M-7's and original Vari-X (not Vari-X II). Never owned an externally adjusted Pioneer, however.

There are two primary differences in the ascending VX lines: The advertising and the price.

The VX-1 and 2 both use the decades old design of the Vari-X II (updated for manufacturing improvements), which is one reason that they can be made and sold for less money than the higher numbers in the line. Anecdotal evidence indicates that the original design might be just a little more recoil resistant than the newer design (the III's), but I know of no statistical evidence for this -- and Leupold, who certainly would have such statistics through its repair shop, isn't about to share that information!

Starting with the Vari-X III and its successors, Leupold used a very slightly different internal design, but that was not the most important difference: They "shaded" the lenses of the III to shift the image toward the red end of the spectrum. In other words, they provide a very slightly off-color image which looks "brighter" to the human eye since the eye is more sensitive toward this end of the spectrum. The "high end" scopes of most manufacturers use this same color shifting. Some even claim that the color shifting helps highlight objects with the light-reflecting qualities of most game animals. Who knows, maybe so, but I'm the kind of consumer who likes his scopes and binoculars to transmit the same light that hits their objective lenses.

Several design changes have been made over the years to all of the VX line, mostly to simplify manufacture and adapt the scope to modernized production techniques. Most of these changes have been positive for the consumer since they had no negative impact on the performance of the scopes but kept their price in real dollars going down instead of up.

So, why is there such a huge price spread between the I's and the III's and IV's? It's all about marketing and balancing the volume of sales across the price spectrum to maximize market shares and revenue. The practical difference in any of them for typical hunting usage is in the 1% range.

A few years back I took a "once in a lifetime" trip to Africa (turns out it might be since just that since I haven't gotten around to going back yet). I owned rifles with about any kind of Leupold you can name. The one I chose to take (a .338) happened to be mounted with a VX-I in 3-9X. A scope failure would have spoiled the trip. But I had total confidence in the scope to not only serve as an excellent optical gunsight, but to take the bumps and bruises of airport luggage gorillas and jarring hunting cars in stride. Which it did. I could have change out the scope for a II or a III in my inventory, but knowing better I left the "cheap" scope right where it was and brought home almost a dozen trophies with it.

Leupold makes excellent hunting scopes. If you want to reward their advertising copy writers for their efforts, by all means buy one from their more expensive lines.

Thank you all very much for the information provided.
Just the stuff that I needed.

I have some old VariX-1 and 11 on most all my guns and have been using them forever it seems, at least 40 years is my best guess and I hunt all over the world and my guns and scope get very hard use, I wouldn't use any other scope, Ive tried them all and mostly the high dollar scopes are no better except in the buyers mind, since he paid so much for them he won't admit he got scamed...All a scope does IMO is magnify the target some or more than is necessary? and all you are required to do is hold the X on the target, no need to count the hairs or ticks..Use the ones you have and waste your money on ammo to practice shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I have some old VariX-1 and 11 on most all my guns and have been using them forever it seems, at least 40 years is my best guess and I hunt all over the world and my guns and scope get very hard use, I wouldn't use any other scope, Ive tried them all and mostly the high dollar scopes are no better except in the buyers mind, since he paid so much for them he won't admit he got scamed...All a scope does IMO is magnify the target some or more than is necessary? and all you are required to do is hold the X on the target, no need to count the hairs or ticks..Use the ones you have and waste your money on ammo to practice shooting.

Sorry, but when people say they've tried every scope out there. I just gotta call BS.
You've actually put one of these on a full power 416 or 404 and shot the he'll out of it?https://swfa.com/trijicon-1-8x28-accupower-34mm-rifle-scope-7.html
Or the 1-8 NightForce
Or a Vortex Razor 2 1-6×24.
Scopes that are actually designed for True rough use And still function fully.

A scope should function all the time Reguardless of whether its broad daylight or the middle of the night.
It should be as multipurpose as the rifle is and most of all. It shouldn't break down.
Wire hung reticles are just a bad idea. At least now that etched reticles have come into being.

I would like an optics company to come out with a fixed, low 2 , 3 or 4 power 30 mm tube ir with an intelligent etched reticle that is good for fast shooting. And longer distance precision (300-600) yards/meters. With range finding abilities.
A reticle similar to the 1-4×24 SWFA SS Classic.


The biggest problem with the modern low power variable group of scopes is most of them are designed for AR 15s that have limited recoil.
The Vortex has by and large a fixed eye relief , which the SWFA does not sad to say.

Sorry for the derail from Leupold.
I was looking thru a low powered Leupold variable at S.W. a few weeks ago. It was light and bright . had a good eye relief. But, it had a duplex reticle and No illumination. AND it cost over $600.
For the same price a Vortex PST 2 1-6×24 IS all around a better scope.

Vortex....China will appreciate your business.

Well, unlike Ray, I haven't hunted "all over the world" (I have taken Leupolds to MX a few times, Africa a few times, and around NA a bunch), and I haven't "used them all", but for 15 years we did take hunters out for deer, antelope, aoudad, so I got to see and handle a lot of different scopes. Most of these hunters could buy whatever they wanted, as many of them had indeed hunted all over the world. I always found it interesting that the vast majority of them (I'd guess 75%) would have a Leupold of some sort mounted on their rifle, and a Swaro binocular around their neck. I do the same thing most of the time.

I have yet to see the first Vortex anything come into camp. Evidently they (and myself) don't like Chinese crap for optics.

Would seem to me that Leupold standing behind their product the way they do, building a scope that wont stand up to heavy punishment would not be in their best interest. You have a problem with a Leupold scope, it is now Leupolds problem. Buy the cheap one, Leupold believes it will hold up. RCBS and Leupold run neck and neck with the best reviews on the internet in my books.

Yeah, as the scope world is at the mo, I think Leupold is pretty good value.

However, I like to look at mechanical design and have come up with an idea I think could really give conceptual confidence beyond anything seen since constantly centred reticles invaded Earth.

Can't say too much but I'm running a little competition in the Big Bores forum, open to readers who have not read the book yet, to see who can guess what it is. (I.e. it's not cricket to ask those who may have one )

One aspect of the newer Leupolds as that they seem to track better.
Some of my older units would move an 1" when they were supposed to move .25".
Once I was able to get them where they were supposed to be they remained constant.
One my old favorites was a Leupold 6X42 with a Leopold dot reticle.
Would like to have that reticle with an illuminated dot. Light, bright, rugged and long eye relief!
I have a more recent Meopta with a wide German #4 with a dot which is about as good as the Leopold Dot and it is illuminated. The Meopta is a very fine scope not often mentioned.
I currently own:
Leupold
Meopta
Kahles
Swarovski

On a light weight carrying hunting rifle I think I would acquire a Leupold VX3I (3.5 X 10 X 40).Needs some sort of rain guard though.

On a steady heavier deer blind rifle perhaps a Leopold VX5HD, VX6HD or a Meopta R2.
I am not a long range target shooter so would like to keep all scopes at or under 20 oz.

EZ

I think I have nutted the reason scopes don't track evenly - that it is generally to do with the flat erector springs not moving smoothly around the scope tubes. usually they catch on the outer, main tube but, if is not fastened to the erector tube, it may drag against the inner one.

The italics below have been borrowed from a recent post I made in the Swarovski Z3 thread, and explain this matter in more detail.

When a flat spring is attached to the erector tube and the user applies adjustment, the unsecured spring end has to be dragged across the main scope tube, creating a certain amount of friction. With extreme adjustments in some directions, this friction will increase as the engagement becomes tighter and the spring is forced to move along a steeper, more difficult path around the outer wall. It could account for a scope failing to track consistently and perhaps for spring breakages. It is probably why the Z3 spring has a little roundy bit on the end (to cut friction) and another reason they changed to rear-mounted helical springs on the Z5 and Z6. It may also explain why Nightforce feel the need to tumble their springs for two weeks to remove burrs. This could also be a reason the German makers initially preferred to only have elevation turrets in their old reticle-movement scopes, though their springs were possibly not fixed to the reticle 'washer' - it meant the spring had only to flex in and out, not be strained and rubbed laterally as well.

Leupold's answer to the problem is, I think, the use of beryllium-copper alloy in the VX-3 springs. I'm not a metallurgist but I suspect the copper gives a greasiness to the alloy, which lubricates it as the turret screws push it around the tube.

quote:

One aspect of the newer Leupolds as that they seem to track better.
Some of my older units would move an 1" when they were supposed to move .25".

Agreed. The consistency of adjustments in older Leupolds is not the best (even though they stay quite dependably once properly adjusted.) Sambarman has offered an excellent explanation of why. There are several features about the new VX-3i which I don't care for (particularly the large, sharp-cornered lump on the adjustment ring), but if tracking accuracy has improved then that's certainly a good thing.

By the way, while they may not have been optically the very best, the old El Paso Weavers seemed to move exactly a quarter inch for every click, time after time.

In my former career, I used Leupold optics under some very harsh conditions (and Trijicon, and Night Force and many others). I would never hesitate to put a Leupold product on any rifle. Please do not misunderstand use under harsh conditions for abuse. I do not abuse any kit that may be needed to save my life.

I currently have Leupold, Trijicon, Kahles, Swarovski, Meopta, Zeiss and Leica optics. They all have their pros and cons for my uses. With one exception, all of my heavy recoil rifles have Leupold optics.

FYI: Melvin Forbes built me one of his excellent ultra light rifles in 7x57 a few years ago. When we were discussing optics I told him my thoughts were to put a Leupold 3.5x10 VX3 on it. He told me that was the best choice as his ultralight rifles generate a lot of recoil on the optic and most scopes cannot take it, especially ones with high turrets. He even went as far to say he would not stand behind the accuracy of the rifle with a lot of other optics.

I do not claim to be an expert; just sharing my experience.

Safe travels and good shooting...............LL

The very best leupolds for hunting are the VX2 3-9x40 and VX3 3.5-10x40. Imo.
They mount the best on most rifles without extended rings, have the nicest and most forgiving eye box, are durable for any recoil you can throw at them, are properly sized not requiring high rings, and are perfect magnification for dangerous game to mountain sheep.

For many years I have made a point of asking guides what they think is the toughest, most durable trouble free scope. Without exception they have all said Leupold. Totally unscientific and of questionable value, but then again...

One of the guys on the Big Bores forum twigged my answer of what is needed to make 'constantly centred' scopes really reliable - a third screw or locking post at 7.30, across from the turrets. He also alerted me to Burris's use of that idea.

I've since discovered that Nightforce appear to have used that concept on one massive model, and show a customer claiming to have fired 4000 shots through a 20mm Vulcan tactical rifle without scope problems.

That model was only available in 8-32x and 12-42x benchrest scopes so I suggest you look at the Burris Fullfield TAC30 1-4x24 variable.

I have never looked through one but they claim 100 feet FoV at 1x and 32 feet at 4x, along with 3.5-to-four-inch eye relief.

OK, so the Posi-Lock system requires you to release the erector tube before zeroing and lock it again afterwards - but do you want something that will stay where you leave it or not?

I do not have as much experience as some guys here and when I was younger price was a huge factor for me. Still is to a degree but a lesser degree. I cannot afford scopes that cost more than the rifle I am using so especially for me I try to get the best bang for my buck. I have shot some lower end scopes like Simmons, Weaver, and the low end Bushnells. They worked for me because it was the most I could afford.

After all those years, I have found Leupold to be the best in my price range. Cannot afford Swaros, Zeiss, Nightforce, or even the upper end Leupolds.

I have tried Vortex that is comparable in price to the VxII and III. In my opinion the optics are on a lower level. I did not like the eye relief and they did not seem as bright to me. Nikons were about the only other scope I found in the same price range that matched optics clarity.

That Burris scope I mentioned, MNIE, is apparently sold in America for about $300 (but probably twice as much where I come from).

In case you need something tough to go on a heavy-kicker, you could also look at a certain Internet market site for old reticle-movement scopes like Zeiss/Hensoldt, Nickel, Kahles or Pecar from the 1960s or '70s.

The prices are beginning to move up but you might still get a good fixed power or smaller variable under $300. Though cheaper when they were new, scopes with no rails go for more because they are easier/cheaper to mount. The 'market' takes a dim view of people lying on its site, so if you interrogate the seller as to condition, you generally get what you are promised. Some of the scopes have led sheltered lives and are in very good condition.

In my opinion, the best hunting scope for the money is the SWFA 3-9x42 HD. You can get it on sale from SWFA for $450 on Black Friday weekend. The glass is great, it's built like a tank and tracks perfectly. It weighs 19 oz but I'll carry a few extra ounces for reliability.

https://swfa.com/swfa-ss-hd-3-...30mm-riflescope.html

I've had a 2x7 Leuy on a 300WM for about 20 years. It's a very boring rifle (wood, blue). I take it out of the safe where it has been resting for @ a year and shoot it. Maybe a click of correction, maybe not. Point I'm making is that Leuy is like a Timex watch: It'll take a licking and still keep ticking.

And, fwiw, I want a scope with a simple duplex so I can use the duplex as a range finder. I don't want nor need all sorts of signage shit on the lense.

I own quite a number of scope brands.

Many of my hunting rifles have Leupolds and I hold them in high regard. I find them robust and the aftersales service, even out of South Africa, is unbeatable.

Sure they aren't the best optical sharpness, but for most hunting this is not a problem. I've used Vari X, VXII, VXIII, VX2, VX3, VXR's and recently acquired a VX6 secondhand.

I buy many secondhand and sight unseen as if it is not right, Leupold will make it right. What do I have to lose?

Aside from the VXR and VX6 I also favour the 25mm tube and small occular lenses and generally light weight compared to many other brands. Many modern scopes cannot be mounted low over the bore, not because of the objective bell, but because of occular lenses interfering with the bolt handles.

Lastly I like a 3X zoom on variable.

I can confirm that I have experienced issues with click repeatability but echo that once set and left they have held zero.

If I were shooting in poor light I would not choose the lower level Leupolds, but may choose a VX6. THen you get 6X zoom which I'm still not sure about...

I do know FClass shooters who use the bigger VX3's (due to weight saving issues) and that and the Mk4 have a reputation for repeatable clicks.