OK... Some of you might remember that I bought a Leupy UltraLight scope for my 5.75 pound Model 7 KS. You might also remember that I didn't like it...
Here's The Topic

Well.... I've decided that not only do I intensely dislike the dang thing but I just can't stand to have it on my rifle. I need a wider field of view and a brighter scope and I still need a VERY lightweight and good quality scope.

Sooooo.... I went looking and it appears that there are VERY few lightweight scopes made. Leupold seems to have cornered the market in the ultralight category with the 8.8 oz UltraLight models.

I started looking at the well known and established manufacturer's scopes and voila... It appears that Swarovski makes a 3-9x36 American Riflescope that only weighs 11.6 oz which is heavier but reasonably so.

It should be quite good although I've never paid that much for a 3-9 scope before.

It has good field of view at 100yds and I imagine that the glass will be immensely clear and will have an excellent coating on it?

Anyway... If anyone else is aware of a scope that's as light or lighter than the Swaro I've found please let me know.

I looked at the Zeiss scopes and they're about half the price and nearly as light but field of view wasn't as good.

This is so dang frustrating... I'm surprized that when people will pay thousands of dollars extra for a lightweight rifle that scope manufacturers haven't gotten the hint and made more ultralight scopes...

OH... Here's the Swaro I found but I imagine that I'll buy it from one of our esteemed optics vendors here unless I get pure lucky like I've been doing lately with a good deal on a used one.
Swaro American 3-9

$bob$

I'm using that scope this year and have been VERYwith it so far. I don't know of anything better in the lightweight dept that will give better performance.

I did the ultralight thing too and wasn't happy either.

Terry

you might as well just get a regular 3x9 I have an elite, that lists as 13 oz. to me 1.4 ounces is not enough weight savings to get orgasimic over, get a lighter pocket knife, lift weights to get stronger or something, or you could just get a 2x7 standard model and be happy. is your leupold ultralight the new model with MC4 on all lenses?? it could be an older model without the new coatings, because leupold about 2 years ago, relabeled all their scopes and updated the coatings,
I can't understand if the scope is the latest VX 2 and you keep the scope set on 3 or 4x in low light why it wouldn't be just as bright as a regular VX2

Terry,

VERY what? You seem to have forgotten a critical word...

CC... Yep.. It's the new model with the new coatings... If you have looked through one and then an Elite 4200 right after you would likely see what I mean. Leupold scopes and especially this one are exceedingly dim at best to my critical eyes.

I'm pretty strong and I DO lift weights. It's not total weight I carry that's the problem. I carry heavy binoculars, GPS, Extra Ammo, Water, Food, Maps... etc.

There's really no way to carry a rifle that I know of through a lot of brush, while having it readily available, and for several hours other than on your shoulder, with a sling or just in your hand. An ounce of weight in a rifle when you have to carry/hold it for several hours is like a several pounds on your belt, in your pocket or in a pack.

That's why people pay several thousand dollars for rifles that weigh a few ounces less than rifles that are very similar but weigh a few ounces more.

btw... I'm no stranger to Elite scopes I probably have 10 of them and they're my favorite but none qualify as lightweight or ultralight in my book unless they offer less magnification than a 3-9 and I need at least that much for my hunting.

$bob$

CC,

Perhaps I should clarify further. I could easily hump a heavy rifle for a day or two of hunting and I'd be just fine.

I hunt around 60-80 days per year and carry my rifle on my shoulder and in my hands about 4-6 hours a day during that time.

Near the end of season I often get a form of tendonitis in my shoulders. It's like a muscle ache that won't go away. I've talked to several other hunters that have experienced this.

That may make more sense to you....

Also... You're right... The Elite 3200 3-9x40 with Firefly only weighs 13oz and that AIN'T bad at all... In fact I own several of them now. I might just try one of those on the rifle and see how I like it but I'd sure like a Swarovski on it... It'd be my first Swaro.

$bob$

You know there is a direct link between field-of-view and eye-relief. Conquest has a little less fov but a longer eye-relief...like you I prefer the eye-relief although I prefer the 3-10x42mm Swarovski AV over the 3-9

Its too bad that ultra lite is such a dog, I am having a rifle built to have a #5 krieger barrel cut to 22" the rig should weigh in just a bit over 8#'s I was planning on one of those ultra lites to bring my overall weight back down to a standard weight rig, I guess I better plan on using a 2-7 if I do that, I have shot coyotes at 400 yards with my scope on 3x.

quote:

Originally posted by DB Bill:
You know there is a direct link between field-of-view and eye-relief. Conquest has a little less fov but a longer eye-relief...like you I prefer the eye-relief although I prefer the 3-10x42mm Swarovski AV over the 3-9

+1 on the 3-10x42

They are both good scopes but I think the 3-10x42 is enough better to justify the extra ounce. I have one on my Kimber Montana and it works superbly. I really like the TDS reticle but just noticed that you can now get it on either scope.
Back when I could only afford 1 rifle and scope Leupolds made more sense, but if you've got several rifles IMO it is usually worth selling one in order to upgrade your optics on your favorite. You might not ever need the extra few minutes of light or the extra resolution you get with a high end scope, but then again it might be your only chance at the trophy of a lifetime that you need to separate out during the last few minutes of legal light. If the latter ever happens you'll be darn glad you bought the best scope you could.
LD, Believe me you are going to be pissed when you can see an animal in those fine new Zeiss FL's that you bought but can't see them to shoot at in your older Leupold scope! Maybe the new VX-III's are better but I had a deer I could see through my Swaro EL's and my naked eyes but couldn't see it well enough to shoot with a Vari-X III 3.5-10x50! I've hunted with Swaro's ever since.
BTW the Bushnell Elite 4200 1" 2.5-10x40 weighs more than Swaro's 30mm 2.5-10x42 )PH! The Elites are a really good scope especially considering their low price but lightweight they are not........................DJ

quote:

Terry,

VERY what? You seem to have forgotten a critical word...

Hey Bob, sorry about that. I should read this stuff before I hit the post button. I'm very pleased with the scope.
In my case the 3.5-10X42 wasn't an option because of a very tight fit on the rifle. The 3-9X36 just barely fits. Mine is on a BRNO 21H with low rings. The rifle weighs right around 6lbs before optics and the little AV fits right into the scheme of things.

I trust DJ and DB's opinion. If they say the bigger scope is optically better I believe them, but I feel totally comfortable with the smaller one and don't think I'm giving up too much with it.

Here is a picture of the rifle wearing a 4x36. You can see there isn't much room for anything bigger and the stock has so much drop I really didn't want to step up to the tall Talley's on this rifle.

Terry

Have you tried a luepold 2x7 vx1 or 2 ?

DJ, Bill, and TC1 (and others),

OK... You have me sold on the Swarovski scopes... I've always wanted one but couldn't justify the cost difference between the Elite 4200's, which I agree are EXCELLENT scopes for the money, and the Swaro's.

I was also convinced that the extra ounce that the 3-10x42 carried was worth it until I started staring at the Swarovski comparison chart and a glaring problem (for me) jumped out. The 3-9x36 has a field of view of 39ft at 100yds and the 3-10x42 is only 33ft at 100yds.

For me FOV is highly critical because often our deer are encountered at halitosis range or even worse are running before we actually see them. The wide FOV of the Elite 4200 2.5-10 has me spoiled in that regard and is pointedly necessary for this rifle and type of hunting.

Sooooo.... At least for this rifle it looks like the 3-9x36 Swarovski gets the nod. It's compact, very lightweight, has wide FOV, good eye relief, and of course... it's a Swarovski and has Swarovski glass and quality...

Now if I can just stop myself from thinking that I need to replace ALL my scopes with Swarovskis when I start hunting with this one and realize what I've been missing...

Yes... Those Zeiss 10x56 FL binoculars were a rude awakening for me. I expected them to be better than anything I'd ever owned but I wasn't prepared for the whole new world I was exposed to the first day I used them. They probe far deeper into the dark recesses of the NW Florida Piney woods than I've ever seen and I'm sure to be seeing much more game than I ever did before. Plus the clarity is phenomenal and they're quite simply a PLEASURE to use!

I have also bought a Swarovski STS65 spotting scope with a 20-60 zoom now that I've gone so optics nuts...

I'm very appreciative of the help and guidance I've received from y'all on this forum.

Now... I guess I'd better collect my cool toys and head for the piney woods. Daylight is just a couple hours around the corner and my hunting buddies killed a nice 6pt and 8pt yesterday right near when I've been hunting....

OH... If anyone want's to sell a good used 3-9x36 Swaro please let me know right away. I'll likely be ordering one in a day or two if I don't find a good used one by then.

And one parting shot (pun intended)... The plex reticle looks just about right for my purposes. Agreed? Other choices or comments?

$bob$

I've got a brand new 3-9 Swaro with the TDS reticle on ebay right now. It has never been mounted. I have mixed feelings about selling it...

Hey LD

You might consider the TDS reticle. You could make the trajectory work on a 7-08 and it will give you more to drive yourself crazy with.

I've never owned a Swarov because of the price, but I have a set of their binos - "awesome" in a word (a gift from my wife). I've had a Zeiss conquest and they are tough to beat for the price.

However, if you really have to be "lite" (and I understand that w/ my 700 Ti) and don't want to spend that much money on a scope. I have a Vari-X-III 2.5-8 on mine. I've hunted all over BC, New Mexico, and Kalifornia. Even elk hunting in timber, it has always allowed me to see to shoot past legal shooting time. I know this sight has it's Leupy detractors and it isn't European (if status is important), but it is a quality glass.

LD, Your first really good pair of Binoculars is a revalation isnt' it? People never realize what they've been missing until they use them in the feild.
IMO the 2 best reticles for hunting are the 4a nd the TDS. The TDS is awesome for where you might be taking longer shots. The 4a is the best all around and is especially good for low-light tight in shots. You can really see the wide lower bars. If I were hunting in "Piney Woods" it would likely be with a 4a reticle.
LD, another scope you might look into is the Kahles 2-7. It's reasonably light, optically very good and has a much wider FOV than either of the 2 Swaro's we've been talking about.
All that being said if rdelius has a good deal on the 3-9x36 TDS, Jump on it..............DJ

LD Hunter,

I can understand being upset that the scope you paid several hundred dollars for wasn't what you expected. Last year I ordered a Burris compact 3-9 scope for my wife's gun. I never noticed that the glass wasn't as clear as it could be until I looked through it at the range on a foggy morning side by side with a couple of my other scopes. But don't rule out Leupolds as having junk for glass. I've looked at a lot of game through a lot of different glass, and I love the Leupolds.

Now, I have not looked through an Elite 4200 3-9x40, but I also know that a 3-9x40 can't be compared apples to apples with a 3-9x33 that is two thirds the weight of the larger scope.

I'll bet if you compare the 4200 to a VXII 3-9x40 that they will be very similar in optical quality and price. Before I spent $1000+ on a Swarovski, I'd look at the VXIII 2.5-8x36 less than half the price with Great glass.

Good Luck in your decisions!

Guys,

I've owned SEVERAL Leupold scopes through the years and have never seen even one of them that was as clear and bright as an Elite 4200. Thanks for the offers but I'll stick with better glass/coatings than Leupold.

rdelius... If you want to sell me your Swarovski please PM me.

$bob$

dj,

Yep... The TDS would be fun but for this rifle and application I'll stick with a thicker and simpler reticle....

I guess you're trying to confuse me... No problem... Everybody does it...

$bob$

LD, If you like a thicker reticle you really should check into the 4a. The bottom of the posts are much wider and easier to pick up than on a plex reticle even a "heavy duplex". But the middle thinner lines of the 4a still allow for precise shooting. The 4a is like fine optics, once you try them you won't go back.................DJ

dj,

I'm sure you're right but I don't like to change reticles in hunting rifles. I like for them to be similar if possible. Saves confusion in the heat of the moment.

$bob$

Kimber204: I also have used several Leupold 2.5x8x36mm VX-III's over the years and they leave NOTHING to be desired by the SERIOUS and unbiased Big Game and Varmint Hunter!
I have used mine for Hunting Mt. Goat, Blacktailed Deer, Mule Deer, Black Bear, Elk, Antelope and mostly for Whitetailed Deer in willows and other thick cover as well as for virtually every type of Varmint in the U.S!
Again NOTHING is lacking in this scope, for Big Game Hunting or for Varminting.
Kimber204, one simply has to learn to ignore the blather so often put forth by the Leupold haters and get on with life, by continuing to use Leupold scopes successfully and reliably - no muss no fuss.
And don't forget all the wonderful other attributes of the Leupold scopes like... - well you know'em and most all other fair minded, unprejudiced Big Game Hunters give the Leupold line their proper accolades!
I Hunt year round myself not just in the warm south by the way, and I have as yet to have a Leupold fail me! I Hunt in some of the harshest and quickest changing and roughest conditions in North America - I Hunt, successfully, with my Leupolds!
I often have to take the Leupold detractors to task and indeed I relish doing so, whenever time permits!
This year was NO exception - all my Leupolds performed perfectly and without so much as a glitch!
Right now I am working on a project, blowing out of the water a Leupold detractor that claims Leupold scopes blow his eyeballs out of alignment and cause snow blindness when pointed anywhere near the rising or setting sun!
My first salvo of reality shut that clown up pretty well - he has been awful quiet for some time now. Maybe he has been trying to figure out how many people see through HIS crap and he's trying to figure out just how stupid, people think he is?
I will give you a hint on this project that is nearly finished! It has to do with the low winter sun, a protractor, the winter solstice, the herds of Antelope and Mule Deer in the fields adjacent to my home AND Zeiss vs. Leupold scopes!
Look for my report soon on that one!
Yeah be wary, VERY WARY of self described experts who bemoan the use of the Leupold line of scopes in this regard or that regard blah blah blah!
In ALL the weeks and months I spent afield Hunting Big Game and Spring Bear this year - I Hunted with, and came across, literally dozens of successful Hunters that were using Leupold scopes!
Never saw a one that was using a Swarovski scope!
Not ONE!
Saw a couple of Zeiss users but they were not successful, as yet at least when I came across them.
In my side by side comparisons with similar powered Leupolds and Swarovski scopes I see NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING, that even tends to want to make me spend the significant amount of extra money for a Swarovski!
I can get it done reliably and for a lot less money, with a Leupold!
So for ANY self professed expert to fly in the face of reality and declare the Leupold line as dark or inept or prone to causing Hunting shortcomings or any other such blather - just laugh at them.
Thats all they have earned.
Long live the wonderful line of Leupold scopes!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

VarmintGuy, Let me give a simple reply to your long post.

Leupold makes good scopes. Swarovski makes better scopes than Leupold does but they cost more. It's really that simple................DJ

Hey VarmintGuru

I thought you were beginning to see the light!

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1421043/m/473101925

Quoting from your post

quote:

I mounted the Zeiss on a new to me, Remington 700 BDL in caliber 17 Remington.
My first range session REALLY got my attention and impressed me (with the scope AND the Rifle!).
I was able to shoot rather small groups at 100 yards with the Zeiss even though I am used to and normally "demand" more scope power than the Zeiss has.
This model has the "American" style fine duplex reticle with the small thin portion opening. I am going to test in the near future using the "point" of the thick portion of the lower vertical crosshair for use as an aim point. I am interested to see at what range this "aim point" will be sighted in at. Again the small section of the duplex reticle is such a narrow (and preferrable to me) opening that I am sure I can make use of this feature in my ranging estimations and compensations somehow!
The adjustments were fluid and on time and corresponded to the listed movement claims correctly.
I have had the Zeiss to the range once more and it has gone on 2 Varmint Hunts since then as well and is already packed for another upcoming combination Varmint Hunting/Moose scouting trip starting a few hours from now.
I made a point of bringing the Zeiss out on my last two Varminting ventures at dawn and dusk each time! It brought in lots of light and definition during the dim light tests was impressive.

Did you think we would forget so soon?

quote:

Yeah be wary, VERY WARY of self described experts who bemoan the use of the Leupold line of scopes in this regard or that regard blah blah blah!

If you change the word "bemoan" to "condone" you would be right on.