I'm in the market for a new scope and I hear a lot of good things about the Weaver Grand Slam....I have about 15 Leupolds in Vari-X III or the VX III. I've never owened other scopes although I've looked thru some of them from time to time.....I would appreciate your comments and advice on the Weaver compared to the Leupolds.....

I called Weaver just a few weeks ago as I needed a scope in a unique size to fit an old mount and rifle. The "Weaver" operator answered "Simmons Optics". Soon I had another lady on the phone who did not understand the objective from the ocular nor any other questions. She did call back a day later with most of the data.

Next I called Leupold. The lady there was prepared with every answer and they came right away. She even offered custom work! I complimented her. I bought a Leupold and it's the best compromise for that rifle.

Stonecreek is right. However the Zeiss Conquest line does offer superior optics at the expense of a slightly larger scope. If this is something that would fit one of your rifles take a look at them.

Since you own so many leuys, why not just use one of those? Surely you don't take all 15 or 20 of them with you when you go hunting.

Well said Stonecreek.

I have a Weaver Grand Slam 6 x 20 on my dog blaster rifle. Its a great scope and I'm really glad to own it. Last year I compared it side by side with my friends Leupold VXIII 8x25 (I think) while shooting prairie dogs and the Weaver was at least as good, if not better.

However, I agree with everyone above. I bought my Weaver used because the price was right. If the $ were there I'd have a Leupold. They are made in the USA (other than the glass), the people know what they are talking about and its a great company. Compare that to a bunch of investors simply buying the name and re-selling forgein built optics, staffing the office with people who don't know hunting or scopes.

If Leupold's quality or service sucked I'd buy foreign made optics with no guilt. However, this is a company that has successfully gone against the "offshore" mentality and has done well. We should reward them.

IMHO, Dance with who brung ya!

I have a bunch of Leupolds, it's all I used to buy. Then I bought 2 of the 8.5X25X40MM's sight unseen on Leupolds reputation, hard to see em where I live. As it turns out those scopes had some serious problems, (bad cross over point according to one of Leupolds own techs), since discontinued. Long story short after two trips each for new lenses to Leupold I asked them to take these two hardly used (not a mark on em) 8.5X25's back and swap me two of the less expensive but proven 6X20's. "Nothing doing! You bought em, you own em"! The final straw was when after one of their own techs was honest enough to tell me about the bad cross over point on these scopes, I talked to a supervisor who denied I'd been told that ("it would be against policy to tell me that so it couldn't of happened"). That's what I was told, no gray areas! The guy implied I was lying!! I was fried!!!!

I became a shopper at that time.
My last 6 varmint scopes have been 6X20 Weaver Grand Slams. $340.00 on my porch from Graf&Sons. Excellent repeatability, left side read for power and parallax (excellent for bench off the hood of a pickup on p-dogs)good glass.
Best glass for the money on the market in my opinion. I don't know about service I've never had a problem with 6 of em.
Are some of the Leupolds fine scopes? without question. Will I buy another one? Sure I will, as soon as they call me on the phone and offer to replace the $1,300.00 worth of crap glass I've got setting on the shelf in my gun room!!! Think I oughta hold my breath?
I'll never buy another one!

A companies reputation often has more to do with how it ACTED IN THE PAST rther than the right here and now.

Everything in this world is subject to change.So is Leupold.
I do NOT consider the SPECULATION that Leupold will anymore be able to service it's scopes 10 years from now than I would Simmons,Weaver,Redfield.

You know why? History.

The old W.R. Weaver co in El Paso was the General Motors of scopes in the 50's 60's and 70's.By the 1980's they were kaput.Same with Redfield..

Leupold will stay in business as long as they TRULY deserve our business.I would say in years past that was true.I am not so sure now.

Anyone with a brain and a set of eyeballs can tell that Leupold scopes have been terribly overpriced for many years now.Look through a current Weaver or Bushnell 4200 Elite and you will see what I mean.

Not counting Montdoug's problems ,I have heard many horror stories lately about Leupold NOT honoring their Lifetime gaurantee on scopes.Go to Benchrest.com and see what the BR shooters who have layed out almost ONE THOUSAND dollars to own Leupolds new BR scopes REALLY think about the POOR product and the LACK of service they have gotten from Leupold lately.It is pretty damn sad.

Made in Amercia or not ,Leupold WILL ,DEFINITELY be OUT of the scope business in 10 years if they do not get their act together...

Montdoug, I too bought one of the 8.5 X 25 X 40 scopes, along with a friend of mine about 4 years ago....We experienced the same problems you had and we were able to sell them both. Most of my scopes are the 4.5 X 14 X 40 or the 6.5 X 20 X 40, and they have been perfect! I do believe that the Leupold scopes are over priced and getting more so.....
Stonecreek, I have always thought your comments held a lot of wisdom and I appreciate your thoughts very much....I'm concerned that Leupold is "slipping" into the same mold that Redfield, and Weaver did several years ago....
Shaprsman, Your wise council is always welcomed and I agree with you completely....
I have a rifle now that I am working on for a friend and it has a Ziess 4.5 X 14 X 44 on it....Optics are good, the crosshair is a little too large for me but probably ok for a hunting scope....
I do feel that there might be (or probably is) something "out there" at least as good or maybe a little better than what Leupold is offering now, (Price vs. Quality) and I was just wondering what kind of suggestions you fellows might have....Guys on this forum us a wide variety of scopes and I was trying to get the benefit of your experience...thanks for your hlep....

Sharpsman is right. At one time Weaver had a cradle to the grave warrenty.
If you go onto Ebay and look at some Leuy scopes, one of the big deals that the sellers make is if anything IS wrong with the scope YOU can send it to Leupold to have it fixed. And then they want 95 cents on the dollar (retail) for them. I see guys bidding more for a used scope than a dealer pays for them new.
Leupold makes good scopes and I have some. But I also have several others that do exactly what I need them to do. I find the idea of mounting a $900.00 scope on a $300 model 788 kinda ludicrous. If I made my living using a scope, I'd have at least a Leupold. But, I think you don't have to have a Leuy to kill a deer nor elk nor bear, etc.

Gents,



The reason why I brought up the Weaver example is that I am in the process of putting together a book about Weaver scopes.I have accumulated just about EVERY known piece of factory literature the company put out(catalogues flyers etc.) from 1930 to 1984.Also,I have realized that there are enough variations of the Japanese made Weaver scopes made since 1984 ,that I am acquiring those catalogs as well..



I bring this stuff up because you get one heck of an historical perspective analizing the progression of their products and thinking about how those products were recieved by shooters.



Leupold still has a LOT going for it as a brand.They DO have to get their SH%$ together in their marketing and service depts,though.They MUST realize that they CAN NOT compete in the middle to lower price points(even $200 scopes)in the long term.



IMHO,The Rifleman line is a TERRIBLE blunder.Weaver did the same thing in the 1960s and 1970s when they offered their Marksman and Challanger scopes.They screwed themselves by being more concerned about keeping market share with offering cheap scopes than quality and profitablity.Weaver was a GREAT name in American optics,but by always portraying themselves as a good CHEAP scope,they had really worked themselves into a corner when the lower end scope market was taken over by Tasco and Bushnell in the 1970s.



Leupold and Burris are in the same boat right now,They HAVE to pretty much postion themselves FIRMLY amoung the TOP end scopes World wide.They also MUST be serviced as well,too.



The other problem with the Rifleman line is Leupold used it as a lame excuse to give a volume deal to WALMART.Every gun industry wholesaler and stocking dealer in the country saw through that trick immediately.Leupold lost a LOT of good will(and loyalty)amoungst gunshop owners with that move.



WTF happens if WALMART decides NOT to sell guns anymore??

Who will sell Leupold's Rifleman line then? It won't be your local gunshop, I bet!



IMHO, leupold would have been MUCH smarter if they had come out with a "Wind River" line of Imported scopes(with a limited warranty) that were ONLY sold to WALMART and left the Leupold line ONLY to stocking gun dealers..



Those high magnification Leupold Variables that Mondoug spoke of were NOT cheap scopes!That same money would have bought an American pattern Zeiss,Swarovski or Kahles scope.I think part of Leupold's problem is they are no longer running the lean,mean corporate structure they had when Jack Slack ran the show.They have TOO much overhead and folks who are more concerned with CYA than than simply doing the job right for the CUSTOMER..



Harley Davidson learned their lesson the HARD way thirty years ago.Leupold will have to RELEARN that SAME lesson in the coming years..

Unfortunately, lean mean corporations don't stay lean and mean. Not in any industry. The very nature of the beast is to gain weight: excess personal; use those tidy profits to line pockets instead of upgrading eq and tech. Staff and eq grow old, worn. And lets don't even talk about unions.
And, of course, its the popular thing to blame Wally. I guess at one time Sears was the culprit. Just as A&P caused the demise of the neighborhood grocery store so Sears spelled finish to hardware stores that couldn't compete. It continues now, companies, stores, shops, even towns that can't compete scream because a competitor is providing a quality product at a reasonable price. Its always been that way, it always will. The comsumer's allegiance is to the provider that offers the best product at the best price.

You guys all bring up great points. In the buisness world it's survival of the fittest. Lets face it, there are a lot of real nice optics to spend your money on, the major difference aside from a few features is service.
When Leupold brought out those 8.5X25X40's and realized (which they did) they had a bum product if instead of haulin back and shouting "Emptor Caveat" (and calling me a liar, which still pisses me off) they'd of taken em back and made it right I'd still be in their corner. Over the years since that screwing I've bought probably 12 or 15 scopes, not a one of em is packing a gold ring nor will it be. On top of which I go out of my way every time the subject of scopes comes up to shout my experience's with Leupold to the roof tops. It ain't $1,300.00 but maybe I can stop some other poor sap from thinking that just cause Leupold used to be the worlds best service they still are. "They Ain't"!!!
Since that time I've bought some Burris's I like, I've heard their customer service stinks and they are getting too expensive but the ones I've got work well (I love their 3X12 BallisticPlex handgun scope on Varmint handguns). And I've bought a bunch of Weavers (a buddy of mine whos daughter is a National champion rimfire silhouette shooter tells me their repeatability is better than Leupolds). If I have a problem with one of those and they don't take care of me I'll again "vote with my feet"!
Just like politics, if they don't work for you don't suffer in silence, put em out of business. Vote your dollars somewhere else.

MD and all,

The ONE inescapable factor that Leupold MUST come to terms with is that ANY scope MADE in this country CAN NOT compete on price alone anymore.The cost of labor is too high.Unless a product made here can be fabricated totally on machinery(nearly zero man hours to make) imports simply are the only way you can make profit at lower price points.

Leupold should quit screwing around and deal with the fact that their future is selling LESS scopes for MORE $$.They are really in the same boat as the German/Austrian scope makers in terms of what their scopes must sell for(when made properly) and don't seem to realize it yet.Also ,by still trying to sell a decent,cheap scope,their warranty will cost them $$$ and customers in them end due to warranty problems on those cheap scopes..

Montdoug,

As to Weavers adjustments,The Grand Slams and the "T" Model target scopes have better traking that Leupolds do to their DESIGN.The 4 point ball bearing/spring "MICROTRAC" adjustment mechanism was developed in the late 1970s for all Weavers and the newer Jap Weavers have nearly the same system in them.

SIGHTRON uses the same vendor in Japan to make their scopes and they have the same adjustment system only it is called"EXACTRAC".I would put EITHER brand of scope on a Competition rifle before I would use a new Leupold right now...

I couldn't agree more sharpsman and don't get me wrong, even though I can get 2 Weaver Grand Slam 6X20's for one Leupold I'm not opposed to paying more money for a better product. But the issue is "It has to be better"!!!
In my gun safe I have Coopers, Anschutz's, Sakos and I have a Dakota Predator on order. In my opinion they are better enough to be worth the $$$ difference so I'll pay the difference.
In truth I actually think the Leupold 6X20's have just slightly (and I mean slightly) better glass than the Weaver, but as mentioned the Weavers have better repeatability so for $50.00 or $75.00 more I might buy a Leupold (if they hadn't called me a liar and stiffed me) but certainly not twice as much.
Plus which for me as a right hander I really like the side read feature etc of the Weaver, I also really like the finger adjustable turrets that aren't 2 inches tall and don't get in the way in the safe and make it hard to get em in a guncase.
I did buy one Sightron 6x20 with a dot not long after they hit the market, it's quite grainy at the upper end of things. At that time the price was a lot better and I didn't figure it ought to be as clear as a scope costing twice as much so I shut up and put up with it. I wonder what they would do if I sent it in to em? You guy's got me thinkin. Hmmmm?

"I'm not opposed to paying more IF I GET A BETTER PRODUCT". That sez it all and I do think it reflects the attitude of many American buyers. HOWEVER, too many consumers equate price with quality. That is not always the case.
The diminishing returns rule applies to all goods and services. That said, I will pay more for better quality but I'm not gonna pay double the price for a 5% increase in quality.

I have one Weaver scope - 6-20x40 Grand Slam. I like it. Bright and clear, repeatable and handy on my CZ-527. I also have Leupold scopes, but not in the same category, most being VXIII 3-9, or older compacts. They are great scopes, too. Fortunately, I have yet to have to send any scope back to the manufacturer - knock on wood. I am in the market now for a scope - I want something a little more powerful than a 3-9, but I don't want a huge or even adjustable objective. Personally, I don't think it is needed on a big game scope.

Now you've got me curious, why did he have to have a bore brush in order to shoot his new .204 ????

The reason he needed it is for breakin prior to shooting. VarmintGuy is a knowlegable shooter who knows that breaking a rifle in right has a lot to do with how it treats you for the rest of the time you own it.
He had a rifle he wanted to shoot and as .20 cal brushes are hard to find he was in limbo, I sent him a brush.
It was absolutely no big deal, I'd do the same for any one. And I've had guy's do similar things for me.
Because I shoot a lot of wildcat small calibers you can't get anything for locally I buy those brushes and such mail order in volume. Sending him the brush was just one gun nut helping another to get his new toy up and running. It has nothing whatsoever to do with anything.

R. Walter: Welcome to the site and make no mistake I will not hesitate to correct YOU or Mountdoug or anyone that is making a mistake!
If you can not stomach seeing someone corrected when correction is needed than I suggest YOU are the little old lady.
I Hunt Varmints year round morning noon and night and have done so for nearly 50 years! I have Hunted Varmints in most all the western states and my next planned Varmint outing is planned to coincide with the near full moon on December 23rd (actual full moon is 12/26 but Christmas festivities preclude Hunting that night. We will be Hunting Coyotes (and various other Varmints) and also scouting for Mt. Lion and Bobcat from before sunset to after sunrise the next day! I will let you know R. Walter how we do! By the way night Hunting of Mt. Lion and Bobcat is illegal in Montana but nights are great for scouting and spotting their tracks in the powder snow that often falls at night in my area. then we return and Hunt the cats during legal hours. The Coyotes can be Hunted all hours of the day and spotlights and electronic calls are legal for Hunting and taking them (and Raccoons).
By the way R. Walter do YOU Hunt Varmints or do you just lurk around on web sites trying to take cheap shots at folks! If you have something to add to the exchange of ideas on Leupold high power variables please do so.
If not - stick to your knitting!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Doug: Don't you dare try and diminish me by claiming I somehow am not qualified to express my opinions and relay my experiences because I have moved about in the United States!

That is simply assinine!

I have moved for your information exactly ONCE in my life! My wife and I moved from the Puget Sound area of Washington State - where we were both born - to Montana in 1997!

But regard this Doug, I began Hunting in Montana in 1969 for both Big Game and Varmints. I have also Hunted Big Game and/or Varmints in Washington, Wyoming, Oregon, California, Utah, Idaho, South Dakota, Alaska and Alberta!

I often Hunted three states in a year. I been around, so to speak.

Now for what I see is your real problem! You simply will not tolerate being corrected!

That is your problem alone - deal with it or not!

I will not hesitate to correct you Doug, when need be! And when I think your error is important enough to need be corrected in public I won't hesitate to do so! Now you just are gonna have to deal with being corrected when necessary or NOT. Again that is your choice but I am not going to let the many readers of this forum to be influenced by what I consider as your mistake and not interject MY experiences and opinions - ESPECIALLY - when it concerns products that I have significant experience with and own three of!

For me to do otherwise would be inappropriate!

Go ahead lose your temper on occassion thats human! But do not try and diminish me and my experiences by claiming I am NEW to Montana!

What in the fuck does that have to do with ANYTHING?

I have been a dedicated and year round Game and Varmint Hunter since I first grew pubic hair!

To tell the truth Doug some of the best and most dedicated Varmint and Big Game Hunters I know and have Hunted with do not live in Big Game or Varmint country! They have to travel sometimes significant distances to partake in these ventures! Their need or choice to live where they do has no bearing what so ever on their enjoyment, their success's or their knowledge about and proficiency of their chosen Hunting ventures! Perhaps you have misspoken?

Yes sharing and gathering information is what brings me here and that is what I am doing now! Sharing a view that is opposing to yours! Deal with it in a more mature manner please!

Doug please do not join the "little old lady name calling crowd" and declare my correcting you (or put it another way as our having diametrically opposed opinions!) as a fight or an argument - its not!

I agree with your statement that each of us will certainly have differing views and opinions and I accept that emphatically! But when I see postings (not just this one of yours) that are so exactly opposite of what I know to be correct then I am gonna speak up!

So be it!

Deal with it however you choose or ignore me if you choose but I will not be hampered in any way by anyone in expressing my views.

You're statement regarding SOMEONE (you are not specific in your posting) bullying SOMEONE else may or may not be directed at me! I will address it as if it were!

I do not define correcting someone or stating an opposing opinion as bullying! You can define it thusly if you want. I will not accept as valid your "complaint" regarding bullying as being valid.

Anyone that can be bullied via the internet has problems way beyond the occassional error in evaluating optics!

The real issue is (in my opinion) how people respond when corrected! You have not responded in a positive manner - oh well!

But Doug do not try to demean me in any way shape or form. You sir, do not have the horsepower, the intellect or the knowledge to do so!

Having said that I am perfectly willing to keep reading your posts and garnering information from and evaluating your opinions as I have done for some time.

I am simply amazed at your inference that a United States citizen is somehow "diminished" by having moved from one state to another! Doug does that, in your eyes, hold true for the legions of young people that were born in Montana and who then move out of Montana? Are their experiences or opinions less valid or worthy of consideration because they moved?

Yeah I think you misspoke!

More later - headed for the range (wind has finally calmed down!).

Hold into the wind

VarmintGuy

Sure not the response I'd hoped for but I must admit it was the one I expected.
For the record some of my best friends are transplants, I fear you missed my point.

Dale my friend the rage you express and your complete inability to allow others there own feelings and opinions, that "extreme need to control" speaks volumes about your inner turmoil. I have nothing but compassion and sympathy for you. Have a great Holiday season.

Give it up, Doug. You'll never get thru to VG that your (or someone else's) fact based opinion is worthy of consideration, not ridicule.

He could have an alternate career as a political consultant (especially for the Dems), as he can take things never said (or typed), put them into his own mindset, and completely ignore the original comments.

You never criticized the entire line of Leupold scopes, and your main issue, if I recall, was their corporate policy, not their products in general.

If someone gave you a Loopy 6-20x, you would likely say "thanks, great scope".



And I managed to type the entire message with nary an exclamation point....

Thanks Mulerider. Probably got 9 of em already, Leupold is the only scope I'd buy for 25 years. That's where my upset began, I didn't feel the 8.5X25's were as good as the 6X20's and they cost more.
That's also why Leupold discontinued that model after just a few years, I was told the crossover point on the higher power didn't jibe with a 40MM and needed a larger objective to function to full advantage. That's why the the 50MM in that scope is so nice, better light at higher magnification.
We never did get to discuss the real interesting part of the 8.5X25X40 cause it got too fired up. If Leupold would have swapped me out of those two scopes and into 6X20's when they should of that's still all I'd have. Glad they didn't cause they introduced me to Weaver and it's 2 for one, my kinda deal.
I'd still buy a 6X20 used, just not from Leupold, the old financial boycott as it were. Not that they care.
You have a good one. Ever get that MachIV tweaked?

The 17 Mach IV is still an open book, due to what I consider an unreasonably long throat. But it will now shoot reliably into 0.5-0.6" (5@100yds) with one load using 20 Bergers and Benchmark. But that load requires seating so shallow, I actually had bullet tip in a round I carried in my pants pocket.
I have annealed and prepped 60 fireformed cases, loaded 3 recipes/20 rounds each, to see if this rifle will benefit from that extra step. If not, I have to decide if I'm satisfied to be tied to one load, or if Cooper needs to try again.
Plus I just mounted a B&L 4000 6x24 on it (came from Brooks). The Leupold 4.5x14 it replaced is a great scope (like most Leupolds ), but I just wanted the extra mag.

Mountdoug: How typical of you to again try and cast aspersions on someone who has a proven opinion that is different from yours.

I did not miss your point at all Doug - I thought it was assinine and erroneous and told you so!

Your introspection regarding turmoil says nothing about your erroneous condemnation of the fine Leupold 8.5x25x40's! I have no turmoil in or out of me! I simply will not let YOU or anyone making a glaringly erroneous posting regarding Leupold scopes go uncorrected!

I will shoot many Varmints and hopefully one or two head of Big Game with the ones that grace some of my Rifles this coming year (just like I have done for several years now!) with the scopes you undeservedly deride!

I will therefore make it a point when I do achieve these intended goals to let you and any other interested Hunter/shooter know about it. And to be fair I will also appraise you and others the moment I become aware of any shortcoming or failure with these very scopes!

I don't need nor want your compassion or sympathy! I do need for you to admit your mistakes or misuse regarding these scopes. I have given you suggestions and opinion and still apparently you are content to let those (useless!) Leupold scopes sit on your shelf!

That also puzzles me as I know for a fact you could easily sell those scopes or trade them for something you prefer!

I hate to say this but I am beginning to - naw I won't say it, I am not intending to further enrage you.

I just see an easy way out of your perceived dilemma and that is sell the scopes! Or trade them! Or take them back to where you bought them and ask for your money back!

Good luck and the seasons best to you!

The damn wind came back the minute I got to my range and I could not fire my Leupold scoped Rifle today!

If any of the Leupold bashers on this site are correct it all would have been futile anyway as the "hazy image" and "crooked crosshairs" and "inability to hold zero" and all the other things Leupold scopes have built into them (according to the bashers anyway!) would certainly not allowed me to verify the zero of this Rifle! I mean according to some it would just not be possible to trust a Leupold! LOL!

Maybe I will have a Leupold report tomorrow for you bashers to reflect upon!

Hold into the wind

VarmintGuy

Dale for future reference I'm not ignoring you, you are however on my blocked people list so I won't be reading your posts. Have a nice day.

On reading this after posting I discovered I wasn't telling the whole truth, actually I am ignoring you. Dale quite frankly, you bore me!

I put a Weaver V16 w/ a target dot on my .17 remington, what a sweet scope.

Are leupolds good scopes, yes.

But your paying for a name anymore.

Weaver is currently,by far,the best bang for the buck, IMO.

I ran into some guy at the range with a leupold spotting scope, it's the 2nd one he's had that was totally screwed up, foggy,distorted, etc. he sent one back, it (not sure if it was the same one or a new one) came back ok, then went bad on him again, he told me he'd never buy another leupold, but since they have the lifetime warranty he's kinda stuck with the one he's got, he'll keep sending it back, but i could tell he wasn't a really happy camper.

Mountdog; I honestly did not mean to hurt your delicate feeling! I did mean to correct you though and I am glad I did! Not just for your future benefit but for others as well!
You do not bore me doug you amaze me! A grown man that has his feelings hurt when corrected!
You have some more growing up to do doug!
Hurry up please!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I had two Weaver 2x7 "Classic" scopes back in the early 1970s, and both of them leaked and fogged badly. Obviously, Weaver products are crap, and I'll never own another, ever ever. Why anyone buys them is a mystery to me, they are all crap and have always been crap!

I have one Leupold scope, it has never been mounted but it is the finest scope I've ever owned. Never a problem, never! Why anyone buys scopes other than Leupold is a mystery to me.









If you believe all that, I have a nice old bridge to sell ya.....

I bought one of those 8.5-25x Leupolds when SWFA had them on sale for $429, put it on my Swift. It was kinda dark and fuzzy at 25x compared to my 6.5-20x Leupolds at 20x. So I sent it to Leupold explaining the problem and asked them to check it out and put a target dot reticle in it right away. I got it back and it had the dot installed, but it was still dark and fuzzy. Called Premier Reticles and was told that Leupold had problems with those scopes and I was put in touch with a guy(don't remember his name any more) at Leupold. This guy told me they had problems with the 8.5-25x, would I be interested in a trade for a 6.5-20x, told him as long as he put a target dot reticle in it, he did. I'm happy!

Same experience I had except I was told to take a hike. Has to do with the crossoverpoint at higher magnification in a 40MM objective.
Looks like I'll take another run at Leupold, if they change their position I'd sure change mine. Thanks for sharing that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AK Nimrod:
I had two Weaver 2x7 "Classic" scopes back in the early 1970s, and both of them leaked and fogged badly. Obviously, Weaver products are crap, and I'll never own another, ever ever. Why anyone buys them is a mystery to me, they are all crap and have always been crap!<br /><br />I have one Leupold scope, it has never been mounted but it is the finest scope I've ever owned. Never a problem, never! Why anyone buys scopes other than Leupold is a mystery to me.

---

What a ridiculous statement !!! I changed to Leupolds in the 80's after a bad experience with a lesser scope on a Texas hunt. I was pretty happy over the years with them until I bought a Weaver (Japanese) to try. The optics on those scopes is incredible for the money. They are better than a Vari XII, better than a VX II, and as good as if not better than some models of VX III !!! The new Grand Slams are even better. I now have several Weavers on my rifles and they have never let me down.The adjustments are precise and the glass wonderfully bright and clear. Just because you tried something 35 years ago and it leaked (old El Paso Weaver) doesn't mean they aren't better now. Likewise, just because something used to be tops 35 years ago (Leupold) doesn't mean they are the best now. Besides, how can you tell how good your Leupy is if it's never been on a gun ???

Even back when Weaver was good ol USA,El Paso,Tx,I had a bad experience. They had cheapened their product in that the ring in front of the lens was now plastic--had been metal. I was using Weaver brand lens protectors and when I removed it,it broke the plastic and I had a fogged scope. Sent it back to El Paso--with Weaver lens protector intact,so they could see how it happened. Their protective equipment had wrecked it. They charged me to fix it. Now several ownership changes later and who knows who makes them,would I consider a Weaver over a Leupold?

Last weekend I shot one of my 243's that had a 3-9X Weaver on it that I bought brand new in 1975. At the first shot it looked like black snow inside with little particles floating down. I wasn't sure what I was seeing so I shot it again and the same thing happened. Now I see that the horizontal stadia looks furry and if you shake the scope the stuff floats around. I'm not too mad about it, the scope had worked well for almost 30 years, on a dozen different guns and is still tight and leak free. The optics are clear as a bell until you shoot it.
I guess it gets a well deserved retirement and I just hope that the Weaver V-16 on my 22.250 that I bought a couple of years ago, does as well.

FJOLD,

Your scope just needs a good cleaning inside.Clean room facilities for scope manufacture of 30years ago were not what they are today.Also, lense cements and the paints they used to blacken the scope tubes inside are not as good either.It would not shock me if the scope coating inside had flaked a bit over time and was now causing problems.That 1970s Weaver scope is worth sending to El Paso the Weaver Service center to get cleaned.

As to some posters claiming ALL Weaver scopes being crap? NOT HARDLY!!!!
Many hunters in Africa and Alaska still swear by older K model Weavers,so do many silhouette and target shooters who still swear by Weaver's T Models(both old and new).

The whole "fogging issue" with some Weaver scopes is due to one of the great design mistakes of the Weaver company in the 1960s and 1970s.It can be traced to the fact that they used PLASTIC lense cells(end caps) on ALL of their scopes from 1965 to 1972....YEP,freakin' plastic!Plastics were thought of as a being a "Wonder Material" during the 1960s, and I am sure when Bill Weaver was sold on the idea,the company thought is was just a cheaper way to make a serviceable scope -right?

WRONG!

Plastics are fine on a $20 Rimfire plinking scope that will get no more use than a stroll through a woodlot after squirrels or an afternoon of plinking.However,it became obvious that the brittle plastic used in the Weaver parts could NOT stand up to the bumps and bruises endured by the end caps of a centerfire rifle scope- the area most likely to get dinged up with use.

It was all sort of silly because in the early 1950s' Weaver had gone from Brass end bells to Aluminum,which was perfect.For 15 years until 1965 Weaver had garnered a rep as a good tough scope.Once the pastics were used in 1965 howver,the end caps would crack under heavy use,letting the nitrogen fog proofing gas escape, moisture in,and VOILA ! A fogged up, POS *&^%$# Weaver scope!

The Weaver "Clasic" scopes lineup came out in 1970.It was a smart move on their part to replace the steel tubes with alumuminum which is stiffer and, of coarse can not rust.The bad part was,Weaver STILL made the BONEHEADED move of using the crappy plastic end caps on those NEW scopes!

Thus, the "cycle of suffering" continued until Weaver began using steel end caps in 1973.The prblem with those was twofold. First,they would often rust right up to the glass lenses,not exactly easy to remove with a little oil and steel wool if negelcted.Also, the all steel Weavers were heavy as lead.A K-4 Weaver of 1973 to 1976 Vintage will weigh MORE than what a normal 3 x9 aluminum tubed scope will today.

Mercifully,in 1977,Weaver began using Aluminum end caps on their scopes again,taking them BACK to where they were in 1964(which should make perfect sense to anyone with knowlede of US gunmaking history of the 20th century as from 1969 to 1983,Weaver was owned wholly by OLIN CHEMICAL,the parent company of Winchester who presided over THAT company's troubles during the same period.