I have recently been reading about Leupold VX3 scopes. What is the main complaint with them? What did the VX3i improve?

Also I was wanting to find a Leupold Vari-XIIc scope in 2-7. Gees they must be made of gold or something! How does a VX-1 in 2-7 stack up to a Vari-XIIc? I see them very reasonable.

Keep an eye on ebay and the forum classifieds. Those old Vari-X IIIs are still great scopes.

I can't answer those questions, airgun1, but suspect it's all been compromise since Leupold abandoned reticle-movement in 1964, replacing the M7 line with the M8.

Veteran AR member Ray Atkinson sent back so many image-movement scopes he'd wrecked on his elephant rifles that they made him a special one, saying that he wouldn't wreck that one because the reticle was under the turrets.

Though modern scopes can have reticles in the first focal plane, that alone won't make them stronger - and may even add to leverage mass at the front of the erector tube. So, basically Leupold was admitting they made Ray a reticle-movement scope, possibly from bits left over in 1965. Anyway, he reported that that scope withstood about 1500 rounds on 458 Lott and 505 Gibbs rifles before he retired it to a .375 mag. He thought this scope had a constantly centred reticle but I think either it had a Pecar Champion-type field stop to give that illusion or his mounts were so well aligned that he never needed to find out.

Ray likes Leupolds and reckons their M8-period 2.5x Compact was reasonably reliable but that their variables are less so. You might not shoot big calibres and thus think resistance to recoil is irrelevant but I know of small-bore target shooters who have added Tucker conversions to strengthen the stability of their scopes' erector tubes. Also, I see guys selling scopes often emphasise that theirs has only been on a .22LR ...

The Leupold Vari-X 3-9x made between 1961 and 1964 is probably reticle-movement, so despite its size, that might be the most stable possibility if you can find one in good condition. If you could countenance a fixed power, the 1950s 'Riflescope', Pioneer and Mountaineer came in 2.5x (the '60s M7, 3x) and 4x and, because they didn't need a heavy field stop to mask light reflections from crooked erector tubes, the 4x versions boasted 35-foot fields of view without sacrificing eye relief. The M8 4x scope somehow lost five feet of that field of view but didn't seem to gain any eye relief, and I blame image-movement.

quote:

Originally posted by airgun1:
I have recently been reading about Leupold VX3 scopes. What is the main complaint with them? What did the VX3i improve?

Also I was wanting to find a Leupold Vari-XIIc scope in 2-7. Gees they must be made of gold or something! How does a VX-1 in 2-7 stack up to a Vari-XIIc? I see them very reasonable.

There is nothing new under the sun with Leupold. The names of the various lines change as their marketing consultants direct, but the scopes stay pretty much the same.

The VXI essentially took the place of the Vari-XIIc. The differences would be in the mechanics of how they are manufactured (more of the VX-I can be automated) and the (marginally) improved quality of the lenses. Optical glass has become cheaper and cheaper to make and has also gotten better with automated grinding, so the glass is a tad better in the later line. Fundamentally, everything else is the same -- other than the fact that it's hard to find a matte finish in the Vari-X and hard to find a gloss finish in the VX.

The VX line was replaced with the "Freedom" line. The VX-3i and VX-3 are pretty much the same scope as the others with the exception of having a lens coating that emphasizes the red end of the spectrum to fool you into thinking it is "brighter", and a higher price tag to pay for full-page magazine ads.

Unfortunately, somewhere along the way some marketing idiot prevailed on them to put a big, square bump on the power ring on the later models, supposedly for old farts who have lost both feeling and grip in their fingers. It's in the way and its sharp edges are distracting when my delicate pinkies go to change the power setting.

In terms of serviceability they are all the same -- very, very good. If they have a fault it is in inconsistent reticle adjustment -- but once you have it where you want it the zero holds.

I have a lot of old 3X with centered reticles as I like that feature and eye relief. They are good scopes up to the 404 and 416 Rem, for the real big bores go with the old 2.5 compact to handle excessive amounts or recoil, or better yet a receiver sight..

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

In terms of serviceability they are all the same -- very, very good. If they have a fault it is in inconsistent reticle adjustment -- but once you have it where you want it the zero holds.

The practice of modern reviewers shooting a square of groups intrigues me.

I doubt that many of my old-timey scopes would be all that good at it but, as Stonecreek says of those Leupolds, once I get them zeroed, they tend to stay (and will function long after the modern scopes have gone back for their forever-warranty claims or been trashed).

I am a Leupold fan. I do like the older and smaller sized (external) scopes. The new ones won't find a home on my old guns and I am not into the new guns either.

I am also in the club that it takes a lot of shots to dial in a Leupold but find it stays put when zeroed in. I use Kentuckey Windage and Tennessee Elevation in the field. I gave up on that tracking square exercise years ago as well.


My original question remains unanswered. What change/modification/improvement was the VX-3 to the VX-3i?

I had at least one VX-3i before; I think 1.75-6 and possibly a 2.5-8. I can't remember. I currently have a VX-III in 1.75-6 on my 375 H&H and am not needing an upgrade.

Here is a link to an article on the change from the Leupold discontinued VX3i scope to the Freedom VX3-HD scope. While the article is not specifically related to the the change from the original VX3 to the VX3i, it does give insight into Leupolds marketing of improved versions of their original VX3 scope.

I acquired a VX3i scope on a rifle I purchased and to be honest I struggle to appreciate any optical difference between the VX3i 3.5-10x40 scope and a VX1 3-9x40 scope I have on another rifle. Both trouble free scopes, both perform the same really.

https://www.outdoorlife.com/st...cope-replaces-vx-3i/

Never bought from this group, but they seem to offer quite a few vintage and refurbished scopes.
https://www.vintagegunscopes.com/

quote:

I acquired a VX3i scope on a rifle I purchased and to be honest I struggle to appreciate any optical difference between the VX3i 3.5-10x40 scope and a VX1 3-9x40 scope I have on another rifle.

No duh, as my kids would say as surly teenagers.

The optical difference in the most expensive and least expensive in the Leupold line is only in a slight shift in "coloring" due to the lens coatings. The more expensive ones use a red shift coating so that the sight picture highlights reds over blues. This tricks your eye into thinking the sight picture is "brighter", simply because the eye is more sensitive to that end of the spectrum. The design, assembly, lenses, and virtually everything else is the same whether the scope is the leader line or the priciest they sell.

I have a 1965 model Vari-X 3-9. Its lens coatings don't minimize flare (looking toward a light source, ie., setting sun) as well as later coatings, but otherwise it is optically the same as today's $2,000 mega scopes.

I shoot mostly Leupold M8 8 3X & 4X and variX2 2x7x28 (same dimensions as the 4x) I hate oversize heavy overly long scopes that have nothing to offer in a hunting rifle..Maybe a 3x9 for varmints.

quote:

Originally posted by Uncle Grinch:
Never bought from this group, but they seem to offer quite a few vintage and refurbished scopes.
https://www.vintagegunscopes.com/

If I lived in the US, UG, I might be tempted by their Lyman Alaska and Leupold Mountaineer, if only to put in my cutlery 'canteens', as those wooden boxes are called here.