Leupold bought Redfield in 2008.

I saw in a magazine the debute scope is a 3-9X40 for $149.99.

Wondering what type of reticle they have?

It would be nice to get a 4-12 X 40 with the Leupold LR reticle for about $220.00 and a life time warranty.

http://www.redfield.com/

Hi AR Corey,
Read the same article. These scopes will be the bottom end to compete with the inexpensive scopes brought from over seas.

Leupold doesn't even offer the optional reticles in their entry level Rifleman scopes so very unlikely you will get any options in the new even lower price range Redfields. It will likely be a "take or leave it as is" list of zero options. I do have take my hat off to Leupold for doing 2 things: keeping the Redfield name alive for those of us old enough to hold it in high regard and to take on the overseas import scopes with one made in North America. Well done Leupold!

Also when you see the $149 price that is US pricing. Think of it the same way that Wholesale sports charges $1080 CDN for a VX-3 that you can buy in the US for $670 US. (We are trading CDN at about 95 cents US at the moment) My guess is that we will see a $275 to $300 CDN price tag on these. And based on the last the 20 or so scopes I have purchased, the $149 Redfield will probably be brighter and clearer that the Bushnell 6500 Tactical I just wasted $1100 on.

I bet they will closely resemble and perform like the Rifleman line (which is excellent when taking the cost into account).

Happy Gnu Year!

Find a used Redfield. They were top notch American scopes in their day. I have two of the cheaper Redfield 3x9 "Tracker" scopes one on each of my two son's 270s. They are 20 years old, have been hunted hard and are still fine in every way. The more expensive ones were the WideFields and the AccuTrac.



Chuck

quote:

Originally posted by JoeP17:

$149 Redfield will probably be brighter and clearer that the Bushnell 6500 Tactical I just wasted $1100 on.

I bet they will closely resemble and perform like the Rifleman line (which is excellent when taking the cost into account)

Few points on the new scopes:

- They will be offered in 3-9 X 40 and 4-12 X 40. $149.99 is the price of the 3-9 X 40.
- They will have both the Leupold plex and the Accurange Ballistic reticle option. I am guessing the $149.99 scope is the plex reticle and I am hoping the Ballistic would be available around $170.00 US.
- Close up picture in a magazine I saw showed the good pinkish hue sheen from the front lens like the Leupold's have.
- When I compare the Rifleman to the VX-I, I see the major difference being 1/4 MOA vs. 1/2 MOA. The glass is good on both.
- Eye relief on the Redfield 3-9 is : 3.7-4.2 This is the good Leupold glass.
- Tracking is perfect based on a magazine article I read. 5 shots on, 5 left, 5 up, 5 right etc. centered perfect.
- Finish is exactly the same as Leupold except slightly different bead composition blasting results in slightly matte-r finish.

With the CDN. $ doing well right now, I would expect to see $199.00 CDN. intro price.

I wouldn't be surprised if the first few scopes were made extremely well or with better glass than in the future. This is perhaps cynical

I find the Leupold glass with its pink hue coatings impart a natural "blue" tinge to the view and therefore much brighter than any Bushnell. The 6500 still has a neutral "orange" view and I prefer Leupold glass.

I have an old Redfield Widefield dangerous game scop on my trusty .375 H & H, 1 X 5 X 20. It's made several hunts to Africa and the only drawback is the light transmission in low light. This is because of the 20mm lens more than the scope quality I suppose.

I would consider selling this piece if someone really wants one. I am switching to the Trijicons for my DG rifles these days.

Glad to see Leupy carrying on the tradition of Redfield.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Purchase a " NEW " Redfield and help out Leupold .

Instead of buying those cheap Chinese junk scopes, STEP UP and purchase a real " AMERICAN MADE "

by Americans for Americans made in Leupold's own factory !. Stimulate America's Economy !.


Price is more than Right for the quality CHECK THEM OUT You'll be SURPRISED !!!.

For any who care...

The new Redfields by Leupold are also available in 2-7 X variables, with either the Accu-range reticule, or the Duplex reticule.

Opticsplanet currently has them online for $129.99 with the Duplex, and $139.99 with the Accu-range, AND that's also with FREE shipping.

I just ordered one of each. Don't need them (yet), but Hey!,...a guy can never tell...and I like to keep the guys 160 miles north of here in Beaverton working like...well, like little Beavers.

Here's a link which will take you there:

http://www.opticsplanet.net/?g...uDjJ8CFSgtawodhjs1Zw

That sounds great! Hopefully they are solid performing good value scopes. It will be nice to have both the Win M70 and Redfield back in business.

I have a older redfield on another rifle a 4 power wideview.I think my next but will be one of the 3x9,just to see how good they work.

From what I have been able to find out (or think I've found out), the "Redfield" will basically be the old Vari-XII innards, using the less-expensive-to-build two-piece tube of the pre IIc. It will have an outward facade resembling the old Redfield with three knurled rings around the ocular bell to elicit the look of the Denver product. As with most optical products these days (both American and European) the lenses are ground in Asia, but it should be pretty good glass since good optical glass is relatively cheap these days. My bet is that the line will be an excellent value, but only actual use in the field will tell that tale.

quote:

My bet is that the line will be an excellent value, but only actual use in the field will tell that tale.

True. But at least they have the Leupold warranty, unlike many of the imports!

Leupold Charges For there Rifleman scopes $209.00. Leupold Isn't cheap

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
Find a used Redfield. They were top notch American scopes in their day. I have two of the cheaper Redfield 3x9 "Tracker" scopes one on each of my two son's 270s. They are 20 years old, have been hunted hard and are still fine in every way. The more expensive ones were the WideFields and the AccuTrac.

They are one of the best scopes to use on vintage rifles if you're not using modern glass.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
From what I have been able to find out (or think I've found out), the "Redfield" will basically be the old Vari-XII innards, using the less-expensive-to-build two-piece tube of the pre IIc. It will have an outward facade resembling the old Redfield with three knurled rings around the ocular bell to elicit the look of the Denver product. As with most optical products these days (both American and European) the lenses are ground in Asia, but it should be pretty good glass since good optical glass is relatively cheap these days. My bet is that the line will be an excellent value, but only actual use in the field will tell that tale.

Well, guess we'll see what it is pretty quick. My "duplex" one is enroute by Brown Truck as we speak. The "Accu-range" one is back-ordered, with estimated shipping within a week. Apparently the demand is high enough they are having trouble keeping them in stock.

(If a guy is planning to get one in the near future, I'd suggest getting with the ordering program....with the demand strong, I suspect the intrductory pricing won't last too long.)

Anyway, if they are using the Vari-X II innards, I suspect it is the older, more premium, version of the Vari-XII (comparable to the current Vari-X III), as these have audible and felt click adjustments for elevation and windage, like the Vari-X IIIs of the current generation Leupolds do.

My own suspicion is that they're making a clone of the 2-7X older premium lightweight Leupold Vari-X II which they discontinued a while back,but with Redfield-clone exteriors. I was really unhappy to see that scope go away, so I hope that's what they are doing.

Magnification specs of these new Redfield "2-7X" scopes shows actual magnification to be 2.5X to 6.5X, with up to 4.9" of eye relief on the 2.5 magnifcation setting! Perfect for big-boomer hunting rifles IMO.

If they proove to actually be what I think they MAY be, then I'll have to order at least 4 more of them...got a bunch of lever-action Marlins sitting in my vault they'd be ideal for.

quote:

My own suspicion is that they're making a clone of the 2-7X older premium lightweight Leupold Vari-X II which they discontinued a while back,but with Redfield-clone exteriors. I was really unhappy to see that scope go away, so I hope that's what they are doing.

Are you talking about the one with the 28mm objective? That was about the first truly compact scope and is a great performer on lightweight guns. I have a Sako .308 Mannlicher which requires the smaller 28mm objective in order to mount as low as I like. It took a while to find one of the older 28mm 2-7 Leupold scopes, but the wait was worth it. Apparently, lots of other shooters feel the same way. Whenever one of them comes up on ebay, it gets bid up past my tolerance point pretty quickly.

No, Stoney, this is the 33 m/m objective bell 2-7. But it is definitely a lightweight, and short, too.

If this link works, it will take you to full specs. When you get there (IF you get there) scroll clear to the bottom of the page and you'll get a ton of info about it.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/re...u-range-reticle.html

The first of my ordered new Redfields arrived this a.m. It looks moderately nice and is quite clear optically.

I can never get used to the modern matte finishes, which are apparently often a baked-on finish. I don't like baked-on inishes (or ones which LOOK baked-on). I much prefer the older matte finishes, which involved much less polishing of the tubes, and bluing that semi-unpolished or bead-blasted surface. But, hey, for the price "baked-on" is okay.

I also don't like the dark red printing which Redfield has splattered on the new scopes. I guess that's because it makes them look like "Simmons" scopes at first glance, and I hate the cheaper series of Simmons scopes. But that's a really picky criticism, so I won't go on about it.

The adjustments of the new Redfields are indeed "click" adjustments, but not "deep" clicks, and are very close together, so one has to be careful not to get two or three of them when only wanting one or two.

The adjustment knobs don't stick way out like "target" knobs, are "finger-adjustable" (no coin or anything else needed to turn them), and the dials are printed with white markings on a black background, which makes them very easy to read. If a guy records his settings for various individual loads, he should find it easy to go back to those settings any time he needs to.

The warranty, according to the paperwork inside the box, is indeed the standard full-service, ANY failure life-time warranty as Leupold offers in their own brand name, and each scope is serial numbered just like the Leupold-branded ones. That, for a $130 scope out-the-door & delivered to my house, is a real "+" for me.

The user instructions which come with the scope are outstanding. They are well-written from a technical-writer point of view, and they cover lots of little things about actually mounting or using the scopes which many other manufacturers do not even touch on in THEIR instructions.

Still, the instructions do not get overcomplicated, too long, or in any way difficult to understand for the average Joe. I give Redfield/Leupold top marks for these instructions.

Will hopefully be at the range with this new Redfield next Sunday. If I get there, I'll try to report back next Monday on how it performed there.

The poor country girl is just a moonshine whiskey maker...but I love her still!

Here is a good paint job to go with your new Redfield scope. Will match the label.

In Saskatchewan where I live, matches scarlet red hunting jacket law.

It is a black base with lots of red spider webbing:

The reticle isn't bad. I would have prefered 2 simple lines instead of the dot and circle.

Good news is the Accurange on the 3-9 is only $10.00 more.

Leupold doesn't care where you got it or what you did to it. If the scope has their name on it they'll make it new for you or replace it. I expect the same warranty w/ the Redfield. That's the story I get from the Leupold emails.

Corey -

Is that the 4x12-X? It doesn't look anything like my 2-7-X. Yours has the "target" style knobs, while mine has much smaller (much lower) "hunter" style knobs. Mine also has a LARGE red Redfield logo on top of the objective bell. (Yours may have one too, but it isn't visible in your photos.)

I didn't get to the range today to try mine out as I had planned. Was raining all day, so I didn't even wake up for breakfast until almost 11 a.m. Am beginning to consider hibernating for a month or two. But can't...need to do some prep work for varmint season which will likely start in mid-March, possibly even a week or two earlier. That's only 6-8 weeks away.

Of course, that's one of the reasons I miss Saskatchewan. Even when it's colder than a twitch's wit there, it is still bright, brilliant, sunshiney. Here winter is about like living in a running shower stall in the lower races of a coal mine.

No

That is not my scope. That is a picture I found.

I am still deciding between the 3-9 and 4-12. The field of view is 20 ft. and 33 ft. difference. Might just go 4-12 and forget about it. They are supposed to have good window called RTA or "sweet spot" That can be just as important in close quarter bush as a bit wider FOV.


That is a Bushnell 10X40mm Elite 3200.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:

I didn't get to the range today to try mine out as I had planned. Was raining all day, so I didn't even wake up for breakfast until almost 11 a.m.

In the Shooting Times where I found the scope, the guy froze his 3-9 in a tub of water and showed a picture of it as a solid block of ice.

He thawed it out and did the full tracking tests. It performed flawlessly.

No doubt Leupold is building a VX-I or VX-II scope for $150.00 to gain market share and reclaim the Redfield name. Whether the quality and the price will stay that low remains.

BTW, why go 2-7? Are you sticking with a retro DGR look?

Enjoy your Leupold's!!

http://www.chuckhawks.com/redf...volution_4-12x40.htm

Chuck Hawks.com reviews new Leupold/Redfield 4-12X40mm

Jeff Quinn reviews 3-9x50mm:

http://www.gunblast.com/Redfield.htm

quote:

Originally posted by ar corey:
BTW, why go 2-7? Are you sticking with a retro DGR look?

Enjoy your Leupold's!!

Well, several reasons:

1) I don't like top-heavy hunting rifles, and with really low mounts like some of my older Stiths, the scope really isn't much higher than iron sights. Because they are also nice and light, that makes for easy carrying, and easy swinging.

2) I shot my first deer 50-some years ago (almost 60 years ago) with a Weaver 330, which was basically a 2-1/2 power scope (though called a 3-X) with a 3/4" tube. I can still get the same sneak put on a deer, so I don't need higher than maybe 4-X power for deer.

My first moose, in the 1960s, a medium large Canadian bull in Alberta, using a 7x57 Brno ZKK and a 2.5-X Meopta scope in a Brno mount, at 180 yards. It didn't move 5 feet!

I shot my first Oregon antelope with a Ruger Redhawk .44 Mag 19 years ago at 200 yards. I had a Leupold 2-X pistol scope on it and it worked fine. One shot, one antelope buck. It has small horns (maybe 15"), but if anything that means it was a smaller target. I have since taken the scope completely off of that pistol. Don't need it out to 200 yards.

When I earned my DCRA Master rating in full bore (high power), I used iron sights and didn't have much trouble hitting a 12" bull more often than not at 1,000 yards with a .308 Winchester and 147-grain military ball ammo.

So, 7 power is probably more than I will ever need for hunting, and I am putting these scopes on hunting rifles.

3) When hunting, I like to carry the rifle with the scope on the lowest possible setting. With a 2-7 X, I'll have a good field of view if/when something close gets up. If it's farther out, I always have time to move the scope to a higher magnification.

4) Why pay for more magnification if I'm not gonna use it?

5) Ditto with the unhandiness and additional weight of a higher powered scope on a hunting rifle...why have it if I don't have to pay that penalty to get something that works for me?

6) I don't need a scope at all out to 200 yards with any of my guns. At 2-X an animal or other target 200 yards away will look as if it is only 100 yards out. For that matter, an animal 700 yards away will look 100 yards out at 7-X. I don't shoot animals past 300 yards if I can help it, and I almost always can. At 300 yards on 7-X they will appear approximately 43 yards away. How much closer do I need to see them, detail-wise and aiming-wise?

I mean, heck, I can hit a chipmunk (SP? doesn't look right to me) at 35-50 yards with an H&R .22 LR Sportsman revolver as often as not.
And the iron sights on it aren't the greatest made for pistols anyway.

So, I guess the real answer is

1) Because that's enough, and
2) I'm lazy, and
3) I'm parsiminous, frugal, (cheap), whatever ya wanna call it. If I was gonna stick to Regina Plains crows at 350-400 yards with a BR rifle converted to varmint use, I'd probably go to the 4-12X just because I could. But I might not need to.....


Best wishes to you Corey. Keep your chin up...only 4 more months 'til Spring up there. I really miss Saskatchewan all the way from the Churchill river to the Climax border crossing, but somehow I don't miss the 8 months of winter (every year except the cold ones when winter is longer).

Alberta:

You have expressed my sentiments on scope magnification even better than I could myself.

Every year I see people (mostly 30-somethings) mounting 6.5-20X50mm variables on their deer rifles. These are people hunting in the Texas Hill Country and South Texas from box blinds over feeders -- and their feeders are typically fifty yards or less from their blinds. Not only is the scope bigger than the rifle, but the high mounting makes it difficult to acquire the sight picture, then once they do finally find the sight picture they can't find the deer in the tiny field of view. And for the privilege of having a scope that does poorly for the intended purpose they pay hundreds of extra dollars over what the RIGHT scope would cost them. But if it's bigger and it cost more, it must be better, right?

I enjoy higher magnification for target shooting, and for hunting where truly long shots may be called for, a full-size variable with an upper magnification of 9X or 10X can be helpful (though it won't do much to help you actually hit the animal that a straight 6x wouldn't do).

Besides, those scopes the size of an aluminum baseball bat with each end cut out and replaced with a glass lens are just a totally tasteless thing to do to a light sporter rifle.