I am trying to figuire out which scope to put on my 30-06.
Is there any benefit to moving up to the VX III for the average shooter. I would be looking for a scope somewhere around 3-9 or 3.5-10.
Just wondering if I should put up the extra cash for the VX III.
THanks in advance,
W.

I have both of the scopes you mention,
And a few other leupolds.
I might recomend the 2.5X8 Vx3.
The 3.5X10 is a little better fit length wise.
The 3X9 is a quality scope, for 300.00.
But I have a 2.5X8 on one of my 30,06s.
I really like it a bit better.
The eye relief is such that the shortness in length is not a real handicap.
I have a 3.5X10 on my .338 win mag.
Its an older version, but its a veri good scope.
But the new ones are a bunch more money than the 3X9. VX2.
I supose, it would come down to the type of hunting you are likly to do most.
2.5X8 is enough magnifacation for anything I would use an ,06 for.
I Think that is a great choice.
But there are really no bad choices mentioned in your post.
...tj3006

Personally, I don't see much need even for a 3-9x scope on an average hunting rifle. In my 40+ years hunting Alaska, I've never felt the need for anything larger (physically and optically) than a 2-7x. The one exception I've made on my hunting rifles is my .338 Mag. which wears a Leupold Vari-x III, 1.5-5x. The reason for that is that we oftentimes are moose hunting along rivers bordered by thick timber. Shots can be several hundred yards or as short as 50 or so.
My other hunting rifles all wear Leupold 2-7x Vari-xII scopes and have never needed more even caribou hunting.
Personally, I'd go with the Vari-x II in 2-7x if I were you. JMHO tho. Bear in Fairbanks

You guys are going to think I am an idiot, but I have a VX-III 2.5-8 36mm in my closet. I was thinking (uneducated of course) that I would do better with a scope with the 40mm diameter.
I have one of these(2.5-8) on my .300 winnie that I used for my spot and stack bear hunt.
Maybe I should just stick with the one I already have of that. (I have an extra one for some reason)
W..

quote:

Originally posted by woodsie:
You guys are going to think I am an idiot, but I have a VX-III 2.5-8 36mm in my closet. I was thinking (uneducated of course) that I would do better with a scope with the 40mm diameter.
I have one of these(2.5-8) on my .300 winnie that I used for my spot and stack bear hunt.
Maybe I should just stick with the one I already have of that. (I have an extra one for some reason)
W..

Firstly!! Nope! I don't think you're an idiot. Secondly, I wasn't aware you had something stashed away. Since you already have one, I would use it. I thought you had to get a new one. Bear in Fairbanks

I think the 2.5x8 is perfect for a 30-06 unless you are hunting long-distance varmints. That's what I have on my 8mm-06. Like was mentioned earlier, the only drawback is it requires extended mounts to fit on a long-action, at least on the Remington 700 I have.

I own VX Is, IIs and IIIs and have had good luck with all of them. Other than the click adjustments, the VX Is work very well. They are an improved version of the old VX II that was the benchmark scope for several decades. Lou

Leupold scopes work. If it has, or can have installed, coin click adjutments, I will shoot it on SOMETHING. Leupold's customer service is top shelf and their prices reasonable. Can't beat that with a stick!

looking through a VX II and III side by side, I cannot tell allot if any difference. The new VX3 is supposed to have beefier erector system but for an 06, I doubt it is a big deal.
I gave my son a old Sako deluxe 243 that belonged to my father and it had an old redfield scope that was all fogged up. I replaced the Sako rings with controls and ended up putting a VX II 3 X 9 on it for him. I just could not see $200.00 difference for the III.
It drives tacks!

I would also use the 2.5-8x Leupold VariX-lll - I have it on several guns and it is one of my favorites for big game hunting.

Go to samplelist.com - lots of Leupolds.

I have a compact 2-7 VX II on my -06 and it has worked wonderfully for 25+ years. When I built this rifle, I was backpack hunting and the whole rig comes in at 7LB 2oz - not light by todays standards but it was a lot lighter than the rifle it replaced. The 2.5-8 should be fine on your rifle and you can't beat Leupold customer service. One Leupold that I bought on ebay went south about the 3rd shot thru my 375. I sent it in to Leupold and they sent me a brand new scope!

I used a vari-x III 2.5x8 on my .280 for over ten years - I switched to a Zeiss Conquest and was dissatisfied with the Zeiss. Sold it on ARbay.

I like the 2.5x8 and have another on my .375 H&H.

As far as VX II vs. VX III - my eyes see a very slight difference in brightness. I have both and use the VX III on my "go to" guns.

In truth, both are fine and will do whatever you need. I would not buy a new 40mm just to have one.

I think the better glass and coatings on the VX3 2.5X8 should more than make up for the small difference in diamiter.
I didnt mention that I have 2 of the VX2 2X7s and am quite happy with them.
I also have a ziess conquest 2.5X8.
I like it real well too, but for some reason my bifocals work better with the leupolds.
...tj3006

I put a VX3 2.5-8x on my son's 308 Kimber but I use a plain old M8 4x or the 6x 42mm MC4 on my 30'06.

You've got a great scope in the 2.5-8 Leupold. It's perhaps one of the best balanced hunting scope available -- wide available field of view, plenty of objective diameter for its magnification, enough magnification for game animals at any distance, and ample magnification for accurate bench sighting and load development. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a 3-9 or 3.5-10 for an '06, but you really gain little but size and weight.

I own Vari-X II's, VX-I's, VX-II's, Vari-X-III's and VX-III's. I could have chosen any of them for my trip to Africa. I was happy with the VX-I that was mounted on my .338, so I took it and it performed perfectly -- right up until the time I dismounted it to leave with my PH after he begged to buy it from me by trading 600 Euros in trophy fees.

I have a VXI 2-7,VXII 1-4 and VXIII 2.5-8.All are very good but the VXIII is my favorite.

quote:

Originally posted by duckboat:
I think the 2.5x8 is perfect for a 30-06 unless you are hunting long-distance varmints. That's what I have on my 8mm-06. Like was mentioned earlier, the only drawback is it requires extended mounts to fit on a long-action, at least on the Remington 700 I have.

That is what I have on most of my big game rigs. I think there is quite a diff. in the VXII & III at lower light levels & of course the click adjusments of the III. If you have the 2.5x8, it's a perfect match for the 06 IMO.

I have a 2.5-8X Leupold VX-III on my 375 H&H magnum. It worked pefectly on my trip to Namibia last year for shots to 300 yards.

The newer (last 5 years at least) VX-IIs have click adjustments.

Not Leupolds, but.. I use a 4x38mm on a 6.5x55 and a 2-10x38mm on a 7mm Rem mag. I like the low scope hight on these rifles, for their purpose. You need good glass, But Leupold may not be the "one". JP

I'll put in another plug for the 2.5-8x36 VX-III. Great FOV, excellent eye relief, compact size, and decent optics. I don't know what rifle you'll be mounting it on, but mine went right on a Ruger MKII in 338O and one of my hunting partners has one on a Sako Finnbear.

For a 30-06, I think 3-9x40 or 3.5-10x40 is a lot of scope. Mine (Rem. 700) carries a 2-7x33 Vari-X II, that I must admit has let me down a time or 2 in dark timber. There has never been a lack of magnification, only light limitation. I'm sure that the brighter 2.5-8x36 VX-III would have been a better choice for those situations.

Absolutley, put your cash in the VXIII or Zeiss Conquest. You can't shot any better than you can see.

i've read that the only difference between the vx2 and vx3 was the lens coating. internal parts were the same. one might call leupy might confirm it.