The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading Optics Leupold 4x32 discontinuedGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Leupold 4x32 discontinued | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
Leupold discontinued the most practical big game scope ever made...IMHO. I have been a 100% Leupold guy for 50 years. That just changed. Who else is making a reasonably priced bullet proof 4X today? I want, Duplex, 1" tube, no lighted crosshairs or other BS features. Thanks | ||
|
One of Us |
No young guy would ever buy a 4x scope these days. You and I are from a time when 6x was a high power varmint scope, 4x was perfect and 2.5x was widely used in the East. I, and you do too, remember when the 3-9x and the duplex reticle were invented; the market has not been the same since. Supply and, demand thing. | |||
|
One of Us |
Sad to hear Leupold has discontinued the 4x scope. For many years that's all I had or needed to hunt anywhere with. Roger ___________________________ I'm a trophy hunter - until something better comes along. *we band of 45-70ers* | |||
|
One of Us |
This is a pity for several reasons. Considering virtually all scopes have articulated erector tubes these days, the simpler and lighter they can be, the better. And, because variable erector tubes have to be more complicated, brass components are indicated - to give gall-free movement without lubricant that might smudge lenses. For general hunting in the western states and here in Australia, 4x is low enough for closer shots and high enough for hunting big game within point-blank range and a bit beyond. Once you get much farther than that hunting becomes assassination, where sportsmanship is replaced with unstoppable electronic technology that makes a joke of traditional fair-chase concepts. Variables can give lower powers with wider fields of view but with the 35 feet Leupold 4x scopes gave before 1964, the need was minimal. With no slot in the outer tube linking the power ring with the scroll inside, fixed powers should also be more waterproof. So, realising that fixed-powers are of interest mainly to purists, I wish Leupold would return to that pre-'64, reticle-movement design for the 2.5x, 3x and 4x scopes, explaining they are for hunters who don't mind taking some time to mount their scopes. (Considering the time we spend working up handloads, a few more minutes mounting a scope should really be no big deal. And, with no suspended erector tube assembly to go wrong, time lost in scope mounting trumps waiting weeks for a new scope to come back from warranty.) | |||
|
| One of Us |
Ain't going to happen; they would sell, like 3. | |||
|
| One of Us |
... and I'd buy two of them  The reason they mightn't sell too many would probably be because they could not be marketed well without cruelling sales of the other models. PS: Thinking about this, dpcd, yet another reason why serious hunters should applaud any return to reticle-movement scopes has just occurred to me. You may recall me mentioning the modern obsession with mounting scopes without bending the tube. Optically this is a commendable concern but is really a bit of a joke in the context of constantly centred reticles - because bending the light path is that art's whole stock in trade. IMHO the problem of bent tubes comes mainly from American makers changing from steel to alloy tubes while sticking with the one-inch diameter. European makers knew 90 years ago that if you abandoned steel something else was needed to stiffen the scope. Their answer was usually to add millimetres to the diameter and a mounting rail. (Steel scopes were generally 26mm but my old dural variables have 30mm tubes even though massive adjustment was irrelevant since the reticle had to be kept more-or-less centred.) So why do I think reticle-movement strengthens the scope? Because the erector set has to be lodged firmly in the rear half of the tube. The lenses in this part of the scope have always been of reduced diameter (according to any illustration you ever see) but in old scopes their housing needed to fill the space. While being just as sensitive to any outer bending, this erector housing did help to combat it. As a gunsmith, old boy, you should join me in this crusade. While even klutzes can mount reticle-movement scopes adequately (using windage mounts and shims) it is a job made in heaven for those who understand the issues and can replace shims with a bit of base milling. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I've got a recent one Specified FOV is significantly less than that of the M8 4x, although the glass/coatings are better. Glass is only VX2, not VX3 Coast me damn near as much as a VX3 when I bought it IIRC, but I wanted something simple and light, mainly as a backup, which to date I have not needed. Here's hoping they don't can the 2.5x Compact as well, although that one also has a reduced field of view compared to the old M8 3x (actually 2.75 not 3) Maybe I should buy a 2.5 Compact just in case ? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Within the realm of modern image-movement scope, secondtry, reductions in FoV are likely to be a reciprocol of longer eye relief or smaller ocular-lens diameter. The concept of constantly centred reticles encourages the maker to use a restrictive second-focal-plane field stop, of course (in order to make the centering obvious), and some makers overdo it, adding increased tunnel vision to that often brought by fat, rubber eyepieces. Obviously, a restrictive field stop will also reduce FoV. I'm glad to say that Leupold is less guilty of these sins, though, and in observations made when writing my scope book I found the country blotted out by their field stop and ocular housing was much less than with other brands I tested. Ray Atkinson seems to think the 2.5x 'Compact' line is better than other models, though the scope Leupold sent him to put on his elephant numbers was, by their own description, apparently some sort of reticle-movement version cobbled up to withstand the heavy recoil of his rifles. | |||
|
| one of us |
I very recently ran into problem when I was looking for a simple, low power scope for a small rifle for a young shooter. Howa Mini in 6.5 Grendel. The father and I thought a little 4X scope would be perfect...only to find Leupold didn't offer it anymore. Sooo, what the hell is out there NOW that fits this bill????? Simple duplex reticle, small footprint, bright, and LIGHT. I would prefer US or Japan manufacture. Shoot straight, shoot often. Matt | |||
|
| one of us |
I haven't bought a new Leupold in years. So long as a scope hasn't been abused and its cosmetics are acceptable, a used Leupold is just as good (assuming they continue their lifetime warranty on them.) They are one of the few items that you can usually find worth the money at gun shows. As to magnification, what kind of game animal at what absurd distance is it that you can't see well enough to shoot when magnified four times? Few Texas deer hunters, most of whom hunt from an enclosed blind over a corn feeder, will shoot at more than 80 yards -- but those same guys will swear they are handicapped if their variable doesn't go to at least 12X. And, of course, a 50mm objective is minimal, with 56 being much preferred. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Stonecreek is right, of course, the younger generation have forgotten or ignore the lessons previous ones knew. If you can't find a small Leupold in the gunshops, Matt, look for one in pawn shops etc. Then, if what you buy is no good, send it back to Beaverton and they might find a new one for you. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Leupold 2.5 Ultralight. This appears to be simply the old 2.5 Compact renamed. Leupold assured me that it is definitely 375H&H capable. | |||
|
One of Us |
It looks like they discontinued the fx-ii 6x36 as well. What a shame "Let me start off with two words: Made in America" | |||
|
| One of Us |
My guess would be that the FXIII 6x42 massively outsold the 6x36 VXII | |||
|
| One of Us |
Go to the 2-7 Leupolds; same size as the 4 and 6, but with wider application. | |||
|
| one of us |
Think goodness I have about 4 4Xs, 3 3Xs AND 3 OF THE EARLY 2x7x28, all Leupolds except my pretty little Leupold Alaskan on my RJ Remmer 7x57, that's my go to deer and sometimes elk rifle..I just can't abide by complicated, needless, huge varibles, most of which can't hold a zero if you REALLY use them out side of your deer stand for perfect broadside shots!  Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
I've got to agree with you about scope size, Ray. For 33 years I had a little 2.3-7x32 Kahles on my .338WM. The scope was held in the lowest Redfield Standard swing-out mounts. The scope's objective was cradled in the inverted, front extension ring and hardly protruded beyond the rifle's receiver. Despite the extension ring, the scope sat rock solid for 25 years, until I slipped down that greasy cascade and used it for a brake. Even then the damage only moved it about two MoA. Though it still works fine I replaced it with another old scope eight years later, a Nickel Supra 1.5-6x36 with rails, just for the hell of it. Though the 'new' scope is extremely tough, beautiful to look through and has no tunnel vision whatsoever, the length and high rail mounting are a problem. Any significant bump to the objective wrenches it out of whack, so I need to take extra care when I take it out in the woods. | |||
|
| one of us |
Oh great, now every dude in the USA will want one and my honey hole will go by the wayside.. If you want to make an item popular in the gun world all you have to do is discontinue it and in two weeks it will double in price at least twice a year or better..Bad news indeed. Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
The truth, eloquently phrased! While I do have a couple of high-magnification scopes, they are not mounted on my hunting rifles. My 4x Leupold will stay a prized posession. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thanks Peter, PM me your address and I'll send you a copy of my book*, which explains the matter further. - Sam *Unlike Jared Diamond, I don't have the advertising chutzpah to mention its name at every reference. | |||
|
| one of us |
Over the years Ive bought a number of Leupold 3X's long since discontinued, all mine had center focus..Sambarman doesn't like that feature and makes a good case for them not being up to snuff, but in todays world I see then as the best thing since sliced white bread..I always hated shimming up scopes and grinding bases to get the cross hair in the middle, and then you were stuck with what you stuck on the gun..It was a hassle...I personally have had a few problems with the system, but only a few in 40 or more years is a pretty good trade off. The problems Ive had have never been with fixed scopes until I got into big recoiling big bores 458 Lott and up, and I got it fixed by Leupold with the 2.5X compact, they did some changes ??? that worked on all big bores, they still produce that scope Im pretty sure, but with more changes.. Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yeah, Ray, I guess I'm just more old-school than you. As I said in the book, I hate automatic 4x4s with electric windows but no crank handle for when all the decadent features flatten the battery. I hate to think of walking around the woods with something delicate as an iPhone screen. At least if your cellphone cracks you know you've got a problem - not so obvious when the mini-me in your scope gives up the ghost. I get as much fun from mounting scopes straight as I do from reloading, and it's much quicker to do. But lately my amateur-gunsmith buddy has been setting them up for me because the shutdown left him looking for reasons to get out of his wife's way. You may recall he mounted the Supra 2.5x on my 'new' Zastava 9.3x62 using Burris rings with the eccentric inserts? Well, now he's made up special low dovetails to fit the rail on an old Hensoldt 1.5-6x and connected them to swing-out Redfield bases on my 338 magnum. That scope only has an elevation turret but it doesn't matter because I can do the windage in the mounts. Now he's lengthening the throat on my Winoku 86 .45-70, so I can get some velocities even you might respect | |||
|
One of Us |
Yeah they discontinued their 6 X 42 a few years ago as well. I'm like you Tom, I remember when we considered that a long-range scope. I did like it though. Never mistake motion for action. | |||
|
| One of Us |
If that's the case, they are taking a while to get it off the web site. https://www.leupold.com/scopes...e-scopes/fx-3-6x42mm | |||
|
| one of us |
Sambarman, I might go your route if I had your scope knowledge, but I don't, a scope is just an X at my house, you put it on the game and grab the trigger as the X floats by, I don't flinch, its a controlled jerk!! I have a different solution to damaged scopes, I don't own a gun without back up iron sights!! Different way to skin a cat I guess! Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
About 21 1/2 years ago, a bunch of us were on our way to the bush. In those days, we used to leave home shortly after midnight, to arrive at the farm reasonably early in the morning. On this particular occasion we didn't get there though. We were a party of two cars, with a friend and I (along with all the rifles and most of the groceries) in one, my dad, brother and another friend in another. We were in a pretty bad crash. To give some idea of the severity, of the four cases of beer in the boot, only one can had not burst. I had two broken femurs, and it would be two years before I walked on my own two legs. However, the point of the story: among the 5 rifles, three had bent foresights, and two had broken stocks. Three of the five had scopes. Not one of the scopes had even shifted zero. Two of those scopes are still in my safe, and working perfectly. The third was sold in a moment of stupidity, but was still in perfect shape at the time. | |||
|
| One of Us |
There is a reason that few new factory rifles have iron sights; they are not used any more. Scopes are very reliable and anything over 150 yards guys aren't going to hit anything anyway. Sure if you are hunting close, maybe. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I guess it's possible that if the rifles were lying sideways across the car, the erector springs could act as a shock absorber in a crash. The problem under recoil is that pressure on the erector tube is both down/up and longitudinal and on a powerful rifle every shot could bring shock analogous with an accident. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I am not for a minute saying that scopes are infallable or unbreakable. However, I do believe that they are a lot more reliable than many people give them credit for. Certainly they have weak points, but considering that a scope is an optical instrument I have been amazed by how tough they are. In all the years I have been shooting, I have only had one scope let me down. I have had far more problems with mounts than with scopes. In fact, I think the one scope failure I have had was probably due to mount problems too. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yeah, there's that in it. As Ray Atkinson points out, the easiest way to knock your scope out of zero is a hard bump, which presumably moves the mounts. The modern one-inch scopes are suspiciously light weight, though, hence people obsessing about lapping rings to prevent the tubes getting bent, and it's possible some scopes get bent in those bumps. I took the forementioned 338WM to the range today to sight in its 'new' 50-year-old Hensoldt Diavari 1.5-6x36. Though it was nearly spot on as mounted by my mate, I did not worry about bending it when moving its windage mounts - the dural scope has a 30mm tube, mostly for strength as massive adjustment ranges were irrelevant at Zeiss then, and the mounting rail adds even more stiffness. | |||
|
| one of us |
Ive always been of the mind that lapping scope rings means you have a looser set of rings..Ive gone for years without lapping rings and without damaging scopes, I do paint the inside of rings with leather glue however..In the gun world there are many imagined problems that are accepted as fact by the printed word, the fix for a non existent problem has made million aires. Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
Also some modern rings are designed to at least partly close around the scope tube as they are tightened, and not simply squeeze down (and up). This greatly aids good grip, but is lost if the rings are lapped. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Are you thinking Weaver and the old B&L rings, secondtry? The big-bore boys at AR seem a bit non-plussed with mounts that tighten across the top, claiming IIRC the bolts can shear off. Maybe a compromise would work: lap the rings and then fill up the space made with Ray's leather glue. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Older eyes need better optics, especially at long range. I have a 3x9, usually kept on the high power. No nostalgia for old technology. Grizz When the horse has been eliminated, human life may be extended an average of five or more years. James R. Doolitle I think they've been misunderstood. Timothy Tredwell | |||
|
| one of us |
I set my variables at 4 power and generally don't change them. Dave | |||
|
| One of Us |
Have you had your eyes or glasses prescription looked at lately, Grizz? I realise these matters can be complex but for safety that is the first place to look. | |||
|
| One of Us |
No. I'm thinking current Blaser rings, Talley lightweights, and maybe some Leupold product in which the screws are angled inward. The Talley screws are vertical but the rings seem (to me) to be super snug around the sides as they are tightened. And yes, they are concentric. | |||
|
| One of Us |
| |||
|
| one of us |
Iron sights only good to 150 yards, C'mon DPCD, you need to come to Idaho and take some shooting lessons, If I couldn't hit a elk or deer standing broadside with a rest and iron sights, Id start shooting more quail with a shotgun... The problem isn't iron sights its the newbies that never learned to shoot them, and just passing gas from what they read in print by "experts", Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
I’ve got a 4X Leupold on a handgun. Other than that application, I want more power and variable. NRA Patron member | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia