Drop test aside, what compares to Leupold?

[kkp005]

Trijicon credo in 2.5-15 or Maven Rs1.2… I’ve got both and they are fantastic. This is coming from a guy that previously had 3 vx5hd’s

 

[Macintosh]

Schmidt and bender Klassik. Its vx5 price, as good or better glass, simple reticle that is still good at lowest-magnification, its only slightly heavier, but it holds zero. As an added benefit its available in mils. The turret may or may not get you to 700 yards depending on cartridge, usually 600 is a fair bet. Can you live at 12x instead of 15 or 18? The limited travel of the turret is the only reason this scope isnt a lot more popular.

Id say some trijicons as well. Glass is close in the uccupoints, credo and hurons Ive used. However, I have heard some models the glass is not as good, and some scopes suffer from noticeably short eye relief at higher magnifications. This seems to vary even within scope families. My 1-6 accupoint is great. My 3-9’s have been ok. Ive heard some of the higher magnifications scopes have more troubles. (Although tenmile seems to be good all around). Some of the reticles are pretty busy or hard to see at low magnification in the dialing scopes.

Imo trijicon for a point and shoot scope, S&B for a dialing scope.

 

[Rich M]

Swarovski and Schmidt & Bender, on all counts save the warranty. And S&B's the only one I'd bet a hunt on at this point. I've owned and used both, as well as Leupold.

Warranty is not what I'd judge a scope's value by - it's mostly a sucker's game, from companies who know their products are crap. The absolute best gear usually comes with qualified warranties of some kind, and needs it the least.

Yup.

I bought a T96 couple months ago to replace trijicon huron. The huron is better glass than vx-2.

The T-96 will cost less than vx6 on EuroOptic. Check it out. I had free reign to get whatever i wanted and S&B T96 was “best” scope i could actually buy for low light.

 

[BamaSE]

Yup.

I bought a T96 couple months ago to replace trijicon huron. The huron is better glass than vx-2.

The T-96 will cost less than vx6 on EuroOptic. Check it out. I had free reign to get whatever i wanted and S&B T96 was “best” scope i could actually buy for low light.

I second this. S&B Klassik to discern what is lurking in the woodline at dark thirty at 300 yards. S&B Polar T96 to count the hair on his nostrils. Great low light scope. Have one on my primary rifle, Tikka T3 .30-06.

 

[nobody]

I've looked through several scopes from the Leupold line, vortex line, and Nightforce NX8 with the mil-xt reticle. To my eye the Vx6 had a crisper image and better low light transmission than those I've looked through so far. In my situations that last 5-15 minutes of light can be the difference.

My intent in the point of this post is to figure out if there is a comparable viewing experience with better durability/reliability. It sounds like some think there is and some agree there is a compromise. Is it worth it to give up a little on the glass for better reliability? That's what I'm trying to figure out.

yes, the Maven RS1.2.

But are you legit saying you’ve looked through optics from all those companies and some of them won’t allow you to shoot during the last 5-15 minutes of legal shooting light?

 

[glock233]

Zeiss is probably the near peer/upgrade I think of first.

I don’t think you should put durability aside.

 

[onlybrowning]

Yup.

I bought a T96 couple months ago to replace trijicon huron. The huron is better glass than vx-2.

The T-96 will cost less than vx6 on EuroOptic. Check it out. I had free rein to get whatever i wanted and S&B T96 was “best” scope i could actually buy for low light.

Which T96 did you choose? I like the lower mounting height of the 50mm, but am curious if the 54mm is “more better.”

 

[KenLee]

A Chinese Burris

I missed the "more reliable" in original post. You want whichever reticle you prefer in a T-96 S&B or Amplus 6 Leica.

 

[RockAndSage]

My intent in the point of this post is to figure out if there is a comparable viewing experience with better durability/reliability.

Yes, the S&B Polar line, as others have noted. Trijicon Accupoints are excellent as well, with glass exceeding what you need, but not quite as good as Leupold, Swaro, or the better S&Bs.

Unless you absolutely need a scope by September, you also might consider this scope. With everything I know about who's behind it, the specs it was made to, and the performance thus far, I've personally elected to buy two, and hold off on other scope purchases until these come out. They seem pretty optimal for hunting realities.

Is it worth it to give up a little on the glass for better reliability?

Unless you're hunting deep, dark, heavily timbered country in rugged, north-facing draws at sundown, then absolutely, yes - with scopes. And truthfully, you're not giving up that much with the better, reliable scopes mentioned above. We're not doing Euro night hunts with North American big game. With binos and spotters, I won't give up anything I don't absolutely have to, but with scopes, any of the reliable ones mentioned above are more than capable.

 

[nm.otter]

Exit pupil matters more than the marketeers would have you believe. It also costs far less than building with high-spec glass alloys.

 

[KenLee]

I understand the drop test failures along with the wandering zero are both well documented on Leupold scopes. My question is, with both of those aside, what compares to the:
- glass quality (including low light)
- simplicity of reticles
- fire-dot or illuminated option
- weight
- warranty

I am looking for a 3-15, 3-18, or 4-20/24 type range of scope for hunting specifically from 100-700 yards. I've had a couple Leupolds I've been very happy with, but would like to consider more reliable options with how common the issues seem to be. I'm looking for something comparable to the VX6 in low light glass quality, clarity, simplicity, and function but more reliable when using the turret or the accidental drop.

Thanks in advance for the recommendations.

What states are you hunting in?
State laws vary in how early/ late you can shoot.

 

[Steve300xcw]

Is it worth it to give up a little on the glass for better reliability?

Think about that for at least 2 seconds..

 

[KurtR]

Cheap scopes I can still shoot to legal light so that’s a non factor . I want reliable and repeatable. The scopes that fit that bill will have glass that’s plenty good

 

[RockAndSage]

Cheap scopes I can still shoot to legal light so that’s a non factor

For you, in South Dakota. And me in some sections of open sage in Nevada. It does start making a difference in the dark, rugged timber though, for sure.

 

[Rich M]

Which T96 did you choose? I like the lower mounting height of the 50mm, but am curious if the 54mm is “more better.”

2.5-10x50. Used mid height rings.

Havent low light tested yet, just put it on the rifle last weekend w only 20 rounds under it so far. Can clearly see .243 holes in target at 200 yds on 10x.

what i dont get is the guys who argue about giving up glass quality. Why would you do that?

Also, folks saying that all glass w given exit pupil works the same in low light are wrong. All 3-9x40s have same exit pupils but some actually work in low light. Go figure.