I am looking for a scope to be mounted on a marlin 1895 in 45-70 ...
Alternatives had been reduced either to the waver�s Grand Slam 1.5 - 5 X 32 or Leupold�s Vari X III 1.75 - 6 X 32 ....

My primary concern is about glass quality ... can anyone tell me which is better ??

Mostly for close up works and night hunting (legal where I live)

Thank you all in advance

One of the reasons I love the Leupolds is their light gathering capabilities.

Lots of other reasons too, but this is the topic that best suits your question/use. The Vari-X III is really superior, IMHO.

Not having used a Weaver Grand Slam, I can't really comment on it except to say that most of the user reports are very good. However, the Leupold is the standard by which all other scopes are judged, and you certainly will not be disappointed with the Leupold. I don't know what prices you're finding on the two scopes, but if they are similar, then the Leupold would be by far the better choice. If, for some reason you don't like it or end up wanting to sell the gun, then the Leupold will bring a lot more in resale than the Weaver just because that's how the market is.

Have you considered a fixed scope? I have a Leupold 2.5 fixed on my 1895 45-70 and it works great. Don't feel I need anymore scope and it is stronger scope because on no moving parts.

I've got a Leupold Vari-X III 1.5x5 on my Guide Gun and it has served me well. I changed the reticle to a 4-A style from Premier as I tended to loose the crosshairs when it got dim (old, tired eyes) and this solved my problem. I'm building a 416 Rem and am considering the Leupold you are talking about because of the larger objective lens, if I do I'll have the 4-A reticle put on it. I have shot well over 800 rounds through my 45-70 with no Problems from this scope.
I have a Grand Slam 3.5-10 I put on my 338 Win Mag and the light gathering, clairity, and tracking are superior to any Leupold I have. It started spraying bullets all over the target after 600 rounds, a week before a Montana elk hunt, so I sent it back to the factory for repairs which were accomplished in short order. I haven't mounted it since I got it back but will try it out on the 416 when it is ready for a real durability test. I haven't heard of too many of these scopes failing so perhaps I was just unlucky, or perhaps I just shoot more than most.

I own both Weaver GS and Leupold Vari XIII. I find both to be equally great scopes. I really like the quick focus on the GS and it's less expensive. I am not sure about Weaver's warranty policy, but I have heard that Leupold's is second to none; fortunately, I have never had to return either for repair. If you plan on keeping it, I would purchase the less expensive of the two. If you plan on selling or trading it in the future, Leupold will be the way to go. They have a bigger following in the second-hand market, partially because they've been around much longer than the GS.

One other thing to concider may be the eye relief, if there is any difference between the two. I know that the eye relief on my Leupolds are generous.

I have a cut across my nose from a Bushnell scope on the same rifle you mentioned as I type this

I own 3 Grand Slams and a whole bunch of Leupolds! They're both great scopes. I have a 1.75-6 Leupold on my Guide Gun in 45-70. It's the older, shorter tubed version. It works out really well. I don't think you could go wrong with either scope. More depends on the amount you have to spend. Compare both of them together, outside if possible.

Bob257

I am a die hard Leupy fan so their is only one answer from me I would use something with a much larger exit pupil for any night use.