2.5-10x40 or 3.5-14x40?

[Formidilosus]

you state some "facts" about Leupold scopes that are pure conjecture, I don't know where you're getting your "Leupold experiences" and I really could care less - I grew up 4 miles from Leupold and have spent a whole bunch of time of all sorts with them or at the factory - If you like a particular brand better than others by all means crow about them but don't go off on tangents stating things that are simply not true - 100,000 rounds ... WOW ! that's a bunch of rounds, so tell us again how that proves your expert statements about Leupold scopes - I'd love to hear you and the owners of Premiere Reticle converse

Facts are simply facts. My Leupold experience comes from using them the last 16 years both personally and professionally. I've been issued and and have used every single Leupold issued to the US military- 10x Ultra M3A and Mark 4 M3 and 16x M1, TS-30and TS-30a1, 3.5-10x40 M3LR, 4.5-14x50 M1, 6.5-20x50 34mm, 3-18x44mm Mark 6, Mark 8 1-8x24mm, etc, etc. The only SWS optic that I don't have thousands of rounds upon is the Marines old Unertle 10x. I've used them, but not enough to talk about.

The fact is Leupold scopes have the highest failure rate of any modern US sniper optic. Cheer up though.... The S&B PSR has the second.


I would be happy to talk with Dick if he were still alive and PR still existed.....




100K rounds might be a lot, then again it might not be.

 

[N2TRKYS]

While I do not consider myself a trophy hunter, I do like to take a good look at the size and shape of a Whitetails rack. Most of the time I am seeing what is in my area for the grandkids. My Leica binos are 7 x 40 and are great most of the time but I can crank the scope up to 14 and see the rack better. I did receive my new scope (VX3i) today and will mount and sight it in the next week. I intend to carry it and a VX3 to the stand and compare the two in low light. Both are 4.5 x 14 x 40 CDS. I paid $450 for the VX3 used a couple of years ago and $395 for the VX3i new this week. Anxious to see if the newer scope does as good in low light. This makes four Leupolds that I own now.

Where did you find that price($395)?

 

[luke moffat]

All scope fail. If one is really that worried about their aiming device just go open sights. I have grown up using mostly all lower end ($400 or less) Nikons, Leupolds, and lately Vortex. I maybe shoot 200-300 rounds a year so maybe thats why my scopes last so long I guess but I certainly don't feel like my butts hanging out there and my scope is going to fail me at a moments notice. Of course I am not worried about the deer shooting back at me either. If that was the case I might change my tune.

Heck I am likely going to be trying hunting with a reflex red dot next year some and I am sure the failure rates on those is higher than most scopes...we shall see. Granted I am not looking at twisting turrets and shooting game at 500 yards either.

 

[GKPrice]

Facts are simply facts. My Leupold experience comes from using them the last 16 years both personally and professionally. I've been issued and and have used every single Leupold issued to the US military- 10x Ultra M3A and Mark 4 M3 and 16x M1, TS-30and TS-30a1, 3.5-10x40 M3LR, 4.5-14x50 M1, 6.5-20x50 34mm, 3-18x44mm Mark 6, Mark 8 1-8x24mm, etc, etc. The only SWS optic that I don't have thousands of rounds upon is the Marines old Unertle 10x. I've used them, but not enough to talk about.

The fact is Leupold scopes have the highest failure rate of any modern US sniper optic. Cheer up though.... The S&B PSR has the second.


I would be happy to talk with Dick if he were still alive and PR still existed.....




100K rounds might be a lot, then again it might not be.

I'm not gonna argue with you because I've the gut feeling I stepped into an area outside my knowledge zone so I'll just respond with this:
You seem to have no compunction about stating openly what is not good, I think it only fair to tell us what IS good and why
I knew John Noveske well and I get the feeling you might have as well, he spoke well of S&B and I was the one who got him "in" with Leupold, he never spoke of any other scope championed by HIS military brethren except Trijicon, why is that ?
In the arena of Hunting vs. military/LE, in the latter there doesn't seem to be much concern regarding weight of optics and firearms yet in Hunting it's all the talk (myself included) so where do we draw the line in equipment specs - I don't see comparisons of a Leupold scope to a NightForce as "apples to apples", so what's your take on that ?

 

[Formidilosus]

I'm not gonna argue with you because I've the gut feeling I stepped into an area outside my knowledge zone so I'll just respond with this:
You seem to have no compunction about stating openly what is not good, I think it only fair to tell us what IS good and why
I knew John Noveske well and I get the feeling you might have as well, he spoke well of S&B and I was the one who got him "in" with Leupold, he never spoke of any other scope championed by HIS military brethren except Trijicon, why is that ?
In the arena of Hunting vs. military/LE, in the latter there doesn't seem to be much concern regarding weight of optics and firearms yet in Hunting it's all the talk (myself included) so where do we draw the line in equipment specs - I don't see comparisons of a Leupold scope to a NightForce as "apples to apples", so what's your take on that ?

GK,


There is nothing personel or "fan boyish" with what I'm saying. I hold loyalty to no company, and will happily drop what I'm using for something better. Leupolds work well enough for lots of people to kill animals. Granted most are the same people who shoot 5-10 rounds a year at a bucket and call it good, but some aren't. However they have significant problems. 15 years ago there wasn't a whole lot better and we were stuck with what we had. Today is different. There are $300 scopes that function fantastically correct. As well on this forum I am coming at it from a hunting perspective and use not a military perspective.




I have had the fortune of working places where ones continued employment is based largely on your measured shooting skill and where measuring and testing equipment is not only allowed but nearly mandatory. I can shoot and use nearly anything made that I want, and it so happens that I'm into hunting. With that I have been generally surrounded by people who's second passion is hunting and shooting outside of work. Combine those and it leads to a lot of hands on with gear. And not one or two samples, but sometimes dozens.




Trying to keep from writing a dissertation, the vast majority of failures with rifles are their optics. There is not even a close second. People will say that "so and so" works great and they've never had a problem. Maybe, maybe not. I had missed lots of shots on the range and in the field usually chalking it up to "I just missed". I had watched others do it thousands of times. Yet the amount of world class shooters that had unexplained shots randomly happen always struck me as odd.


Once the variable TS-30 and 3.5-10x40mm Leupolds started showing up, the whole community started having massive scope failures- so many that no one could ignore them. Before that most were only issued the fixed Mark 4 10x which was a solid scope, and after the 3.5-10's it became almost gospel to never dial for shots and instead just hold with the reticle.


For some that led to testing and isolating the problems. What was found is unlike the fixed power Mark 4's which were absolutely built to dial and take abuse, the variable Leupolds (3.5-10x, 3-9x/2.5-8x, and 4.5-14x) were nothing more than rebadged hunting scopes. At the time only Nightforce offered scopes that were completely built as aiming devices.


Of course there were a variety of reasons that people didn't and still do not notice scope problems. Bad zeroing, switching ammo lots, not tracking their zero, etc.


Personally it struck me as I thought Leupold was great and had one on every rifle I owned. I took all of the scopes and started testing them like we were the work scopes. They showed the exact same issues of the Mark 4's- inability to hold a zero, incorrect tracking, inconsistent tracking, dead spots in travel, failure to return to zero, and POI shift with power changes, etc. which made since as Mark 4 variable scopes ARE Vari-X III/VX3/etc. They are the same scopes inside. It also started showing exactly why some shots "just missed". Lots of those unexplained misses could be directly linked to scope issues.


That led to testing every scope I/we could get our hands on. The discovery, (like a bunch of children finding out santa isn't real) was that no "hunting" scope made was truly reliable and durable. The Classic S&B's and Leupold fixed 6x's were the closest. They still had issues, but less. This isn't a jab at Leupold- literally no hunting scopes are any better.




It continues today. Every time someone gets something new, or a new person comes and brings gear we use the crap out of it. I can positively tell you, having done it numerous times, that if you take 10 brand new Leupold variable scopes, 6-8 will have enough of a mechanical issue within 200-300 rounds to miss a 2 MOA target.


All of those issues and lots more have led to a very systematic way to setup guns, zeroing, grouping, and testing. And you know what? We just don't see those unexplained misses anymore.








I did not know John Noveske on a personel level but did shoot with him and know guys that did know him. He was very found if the S&B Shortdot and for good reason. As for him and Trijicon, etc. Thats pretty easy. The VAST majority in the military, even "special" units only use standard issue gear. The Trijicon ACOG is issued by every branch of the military and especially a decade ago was the most common magnified optic in the mil, and the only one most would have ever seen.








As for scopes that work, that's actually easy and sadly a relatively short list. But first it helps to understand what I mean by "works". A scope is an aiming device. It's first job is to hold the crosshairs statically in the correct spot to allow one to achieve point of aim (POA) to point if impact (POI). It must hold zero no matter the abuse, it must track consistently and correctly every time, it must return to zero without fail. That's it's, full stop. As long as clarity, brightness and resolution are sufficient to see the target- "glass" is mute and all decent scopes have glass good enough for legal hunting hours in the US.
A scope that loses zero because it slid off the side of the truck, or because you tripped and fell is of absolutely no use to you at that point.


Scopes that just plain work and are suitable for normal hunting rifles-


1. Nightforce NXS and SHV 2.5-10x32/42mm
2. SWFA SS's
3. Bushnell 3-12x44mm LRHS
4. And if, and that's a massive if, I just had to have a "hunting" scope it would be as old of a Leupold fixed 6x as I could get. But with the SWFA's there is no reason to ever do so.


That's it. I'm sure that will offend all kinds of people, but you'd be hard pressed to name a scope that I haven't seen used and broken multiple times and I'm happy to let people show me how great their favorite scope works. Though they never leave happy... grin


As far as weight- I get it and I wish that they could make a 12oz scope that really worked, but they can't. The mechanics and build necessary to insure proper function just weigh more. The limit right now seems to be stuck around the 19-20ox range and while it it would be nice to knock some of that off, trading the ability to actually hit things for 4oz less weight is not a good tradeoff.

 

[Formidilosus]

All scope fail. If one is really that worried about their aiming device just go open sights. I have grown up using mostly all lower end ($400 or less) Nikons, Leupolds, and lately Vortex. I maybe shoot 200-300 rounds a year so maybe thats why my scopes last so long I guess but I certainly don't feel like my butts hanging out there and my scope is going to fail me at a moments notice. Of course I am not worried about the deer shooting back at me either. If that was the case I might change my tune.

Heck I am likely going to be trying hunting with a reflex red dot next year some and I am sure the failure rates on those is higher than most scopes...we shall see. Granted I am not looking at twisting turrets and shooting game at 500 yards either.

grin... You are correct, but there are scopes made that are as durable and reliable as the best iron sights. One even explains that fact to the military.


If I were stuck with just about any semi decent scope made I would kill the mess out of animals just like you would and most would too. However, I have had scope failures while hunting and have had multiple buddies have failures while hunting with me, and now that you can buy bombproof optics for less than $300 I seee no reason not to. Risking the only object that steers bullets just isn't a sound policy to me.



On the red dots- Aimpoint.

 

[luke moffat]

I agree why not buy the best choice right??? I guess for me its worked for me and dozens of my buddy's hunting all over the state and our "cheapo" $200-$400 scopes have never had a failure. Is this cause we are really lucky or just don't put the amount of time or rounds shooting with our rigs beating the scope up on top of rigs that many such as yourself do? I don't know but maybe a combination of the two I would guess?

Certainly a case of ignorance is bliss. Until recently we didn't know or had the slightest inkling that were had ticking time bombs on top of our rifles. Though I am not that concerned. Yes I could miss an animal because I do someday have a failure but thats not the end of the world there are more animals to chase and often someone is playing back up anyways.

I know the riflescope comes before anything gear wise for you. For me on many hunts a raft failure, ATV failure, heck even a tent or rain gear failure would be a much bigger deal to me especially on remote hunts. I mean a broken WalMart pack 20 miles back on a sheep hunt with a sheep in it would having me wishing I wouldn't have shot the sheep in the first place in a true "now what" moment.

Rarely is there only one rifle on a trip and if one fails we will share. The reality for me atleast there are indeed pieces of gear more important to me than my "janky" leupold VX-2s and Vortex Viper rifle scopes. If I had to start all over knowing what I know now then yeah some of my rifles might have SWFA or the ilk, but I am already pot committed and will "roll the dice" with what I have. Growing up I shot my first half dozen caribou, a grizzly bear, and 3 moose with a Tasco Pronghorn ($37 at optics planet if anyone is interested )my dad mounted on top of my .308 Model 7. I used that scope until I got a job out of college and I though I was pretty "uptown" with my VX-II 3-9X40.

I do appreciate the advice you give here though in a well thought out manner. Even if I am too dumb/stubborn to heed it its especially helpful to those that haven't already made the "mistake" of buying ticking time bombs.

Oh my red dot I picked up is a Leupold Delta Point Pro. Again I bought before I know better or had someone tell my why its not the best choice....I think my gun safe sounds like the crocodile from Peter Pan it ticks so much. HAHA

 

[Mr Drysdale]

Where did you find that price($395)?

Grabagun.com

 

[N2TRKYS]

Grabagun.com

Thank you. I just bought a Leupold VX3i 4.5-14x40 cds for $410/delivered. I thought that was a good price, until I saw yours. Lol

 

[N2TRKYS]

It's good to know that I've been so lucky for over 20 years with all of my Leupold VX-lll and VX3's without having any failures on my hunting rifles. Lol

 

[mtswampfox]

It's good to know that I've been so lucky for over 20 years with all of my Leupold VX-lll and VX3's without having any failures on my hunting rifles. Lol

Could have wrote this too. Just opened a 4.5x14x50 vx3i with varmint reticle hope it gives me twenty years!

 

[Formidilosus]

Luke,

I imagine you sitting there with a Cheshire Cat grin when you write........

Better clean out your safe- them things are dangerous! grin. The Leupold DO Pro is actually pretty decent as far as red dots go.

The reason that you and a lot of people haven't had a spontaneous combustion of said optics is due to how you use them. Problems show themselves when you start dialing the turrets, start shooting small enough or far away enough targets, start shooting more ammo practicing (generally combining the first two), and if you are rough on gear, drop it, etc.

Iif you do not shoot past MPBR, never adjust using the turrets, do not shoot a lot in practice, and you take care to keep your rifle from bumps and bruises..... You will probably rarely if ever have a problem big enough to miss a deer at 100-300 yards. A catastrophic failure of decent scopes with a complete loss of zero, or total inability to stay zeroed isn't nearly as common- though more common than people think.

Remember I said within 200-300 rounds if you use the dials you will see issues big enough, even if just once or twice in those rounds, to cause a miss on a 2 MOA target. If you think about it that starts coming into play around the 350-400 yard area on a deer. Despite all the talk of LR rifles and shooting and thousands of CDS equipped Leupolds, BTS Swaro's, etc. being bought; very few are actually being used past normal hunting ranges. A small percentage will launch a round or two at a steel plate at 300-500 yards, usually it's a massive plate, and then the call it "good" and believe all they have to do is spin that knob till it says 600 and any deer is dead. The vast majority are getting their ballistic info from the ammo box and sending that to Leupold to get their dial and never actually use it.



GK brought up a point. All the little tricks to zero scopes- you know tapping the turrets after adjustment, dialing past where you want and then back down, giving the rifle a few shots to settle in, etc. those are all caused by faulty erector systems......





I have no axe to grind and people are free to use what they want, all my point has been that if you are going to dial the turrets, shoot past MPBR, and/or want truly rugged optics... Get a scope that is built for it.

 

[luke moffat]

Luke,

I imagine you sitting there with a Cheshire Cat grin when you write........

Better clean out your safe- them things are dangerous! grin. The Leupold DO Pro is actually pretty decent as far as red dots go.

The reason that you and a lot of people haven't had a spontaneous combustion of said optics is due to how you use them. Problems show themselves when you start dialing the turrets, start shooting small enough or far away enough targets, start shooting more ammo practicing (generally combining the first two), and if you are rough on gear, drop it, etc.

Iif you do not shoot past MPBR, never adjust using the turrets, do not shoot a lot in practice, and you take care to keep your rifle from bumps and bruises..... You will probably rarely if ever have a problem big enough to miss a deer at 100-300 yards. A catastrophic failure of decent scopes with a complete loss of zero, or total inability to stay zeroed isn't nearly as common- though more common than people think.

Remember I said within 200-300 rounds if you use the dials you will see issues big enough, even if just once or twice in those rounds, to cause a miss on a 2 MOA target. If you think about it that starts coming into play around the 350-400 yard area on a deer. Despite all the talk of LR rifles and shooting and thousands of CDS equipped Leupolds, BTS Swaro's, etc. being bought; very few are actually being used past normal hunting ranges. A small percentage will launch a round or two at a steel plate at 300-500 yards, usually it's a massive plate, and then the call it "good" and believe all they have to do is spin that knob till it says 600 and any deer is dead. The vast majority are getting their ballistic info from the ammo box and sending that to Leupold to get their dial and never actually use it.



GK brought up a point. All the little tricks to zero scopes- you know tapping the turrets after adjustment, dialing past where you want and then back down, giving the rifle a few shots to settle in, etc. those are all caused by faulty erector systems......





I have no axe to grind and people are free to use what they want, all my point has been that if you are going to dial the turrets, shoot past MPBR, and/or want truly rugged optics... Get a scope that is built for it.

HAHA I am sorry if I came across as having an axe to grind. Thats not my intentions at all. Merely asking questions for good discussion with someone that shoots more in a month than I will in a lifetime likely. Clearly our end goals are similar, dead animals. But how we go about it is different but doesn't make one better than the other. Just one requires better shooting gear and more brain power I'd rather spend my time out hiking, scouting and exploring and such than at the range and thus know my limits. Others spend a lot of time shooting and such. Neither is right just different. Doesn't mean I can't learn a thing or two about shooting and such even though how I take my animals really likely won't change my approach too much. Sorry if I came off as I have a chip on my shoulder.

 

[C Bow]

Lepould Scopes have never failed me from Canada to Mexico and many states in between

 

[Thinkingman]

My buddy once told me that he keeps his scope on the lowest magnification, and cranks it up if need be. The rationale behind this was, if he was far enough away that he had to turn the magnification up, he probably had enough time and cover to do so. I've lived by that rationale since, and, like you, generally end up twisting my magnification up to at least 4, and sometimes up to 7 or 9. If you're busting through thick brush or timber, however, it's nice to have that low magnification available to just pull up for quick target acquisition and relatively intuitive shooting.

Exactly.
I use a Nikon Monarch 3-12x42.
Don't scrimp on boots or glass.

 

[GKPrice]

Lepould Scopes have never failed me from Canada to Mexico and many states in between

there's a lot more to Formidilosus's comments than what's first thought - My reaction was much the same and, if like me, you simply use your scope for a sighting tool and holdover for longer shots, etc ... there's not so much to worry about - I've always been a diehard Leupold guy too - After getting all fired up about someone "having a audacity to challenge the quality of Leupold scopes" I settled down and actually thought about what was being said then asked him to elaborate, which he did, now I "get it" - I sincerely doubt I'll ever "spin turrets" to shoot long range but those who do, and those who do a lot, have found weaknesses in not only Leupolds but other even more expensive and highly regarded systems when using that approach - I'm a good example of stubborn simplicity, I've been using VX3/VX3i 3.5x10x40mm's for a long time (6 x 42's before that) with Wide Duplex reticles, they are either on 3.5 or 10x , rifle zero'd for 300 yd - I don't shoot at animals beyond 600 yards PERIOD, see no need or sense in it (BUT THAT'S JUST ME) I seriously doubt I'll ever quit Leupold for any of MY shooting, or find the need to consider it - If I were a military or LE "operator" those statements would not hold water I expect

 

[Southern Lights]

Scopes that just plain work and are suitable for normal hunting rifles-


1. Nightforce NXS and SHV 2.5-10x32/42mm
2. SWFA SS's
3. Bushnell 3-12x44mm LRHS
4. And if, and that's a massive if, I just had to have a "hunting" scope it would be as old of a Leupold fixed 6x as I could get. But with the SWFA's there is no reason to ever do so.


That's it. I'm sure that will offend all kinds of people, but you'd be hard pressed to name a scope that I haven't seen used and broken multiple times and I'm happy to let people show me how great their favorite scope works. Though they never leave happy... grin

As far as weight- I get it and I wish that they could make a 12oz scope that really worked, but they can't. The mechanics and build necessary to insure proper function just weigh more. The limit right now seems to be stuck around the 19-20ox range and while it it would be nice to knock some of that off, trading the ability to actually hit things for 4oz less weight is not a good tradeoff.

I'm resurrecting an old thread, as I am considering upgrading my Zeiss HD5 to a SHV 3-10. Does the above still reflect the general consensus on reliable scopes?

The HD5 has worked well in the limited use it's had, but I always get the feeling that the Nightforce would be more reliable under hard and varied hunting conditions.

My requirements are:

1) Reliable in all weather, but could get banged around in 4x4, boat, or alpine hunts. I am careful with my gear, but things happen.
2) Can be dialed reliably and repeatedly, but also must have locking turrets or capped turrets. I have had uncapped turrets spin on scopes when bushwhacking and I just don't want exposed turrets that don't lock any more on hunting rigs.
3) Weight around 20ozs or so. Anything much above that weight I'm not interested in. Anything lighter I may consider, but I'm skeptical.

I value reliability way above glass clarity so whether it's German or Japanese glass is irrelevant to me. I just want to be sure it works in all conditions.

Also I see the new SHV 3-10 no longer has parallax knobs on them. This actually is good for me as I prefer less things on a scope to go wrong. But at longer ranges has anyone found the parallax knob free SHV to be much worse at shots up to 600 or so yards? Is the loss of the parallax a big issue on this scope under 10X?

Thanks.

Edited: change 2.5-10 to 3-10 for SHV.

 

[Formidilosus]

Does the above still reflect the general consensus on reliable scopes?

Thanks.

Yes. Except that I would remove the Leupold completely.


The SHV 3-10x Illuminated is very solid. No issue with parallax.

 

[Southern Lights]

Yes. Except that I would remove the Leupold completely.


The SHV 3-10x Illuminated is very solid. No issue with parallax.

Cheers for that. I'll look at the SHV illuminated without parallax.

I will be mounting this on a Blaser R8 I recently bought. Any issues with eye relief on this scope? The Blaser works best with longer eye reliefs I'm finding. I have a Swarovski Z3 I wanted to try on this rifle, but I find the eye relief is marginal unless I get it very far back.

 

[Formidilosus]

Haven’t used an SHV on an R8, but I can’t see there being issues.


Spent a couple of weeks on the north island last year around Whangamata. Loved NZ.

Let me know how the combo works.