Q&A Leupold VX-3HD 3.5-10x40mm

[Reburn]

Only evidence that matters to me is dead animals and mine have been producing that without having to rezero.

Cool story bro.
Glad you enjoy the scopes.
Thanks for showing up and letting us know you have the one that works based on your word and no evidence.

 

[Formidilosus]

I don’t keep targets from years ago.

It takes you years to shoot a few groups for zero checks?

Only evidence that matters to me is dead animals and mine have been producing that without having to rezero.

That’s not reality. Hitting 8” targets at 50-100 yards is done with smooth bore shotguns. I have killed multiple deer by only boresighting where the first round fired was at the deer- because they were 30 yard shots.


Again, always the same- “I never have had an issue”. Followed by the reason they don’t have targets is because they don’t shoot.

 

[Macintosh]

This eval is like the twilight zone…ive been there! Throwing a “eh” group and then a random flier every couple shots was literally the story of my shooting for years across every single one of my rifles, which all happened to have vx3 scopes. It took a borrowed scope to finally realize it wasnt me or the rifle, and it took this forum to realize it wasnt a fluke. Im sure some people have been and will continue to be happy with them, but the wandering zero in this test matches my experience PRECISELY.
Anyone out there want a good deal on a 3.5-10 vx3 with capped turrets, hit me up. Still under warranty!

Edit for a comment below: mine were with capped turrets, not the cds turret. It was not dialing that caused an issue.

 

[N2TRKYS]

Cool story bro.
Glad you enjoy the scopes.
Thanks for showing up and letting us know you have the one that works based on your word and no evidence.

Thanks. You’re welcome.

Even flown out for 3 other hunts over the years with the same results. Never had to adjust zero.

 

[bmart2622]

I don’t keep targets from years ago.

So shoot it now

 

[atmat]

So shoot it now

No one will actually do this. Every time the conversation comes up, the person defending the bad scope speaks of all their history of success without ever actually doing a simple drop test.

 

[2-Stix]

I have chased zero with thus said scope. I can attest of this happening.

Help w Rifle Inaccuracy

Needing some help with improving my rifle accuracy…and I know off the bat this could be tough as hell to diagnose over a forum. I have a 7mmRM Tikka T3x Superlite with the original stock. I’m using Talley rings and a vortex viper hslr 4-16x50mm scope. In the past I’ve had trouble getting 1moa...

rokslide.com

 

[Fatcamp]

We had one of these scopes on a .300WM. Accurate and killed a bunch of game with it.

It was on my wife's rifle and she shot 1" groups with it consistently. She had it for years and we both killed deer with it, and she shot some antelope. One at 370 yards.

I never did trust it but it did its job until I sold it last winter after buying an SWFA for her rifle. Always found it amusing when she would use a .300WM Savage with a Leupold scope and outshoot the cool kids at the range. Always figured it would cause her problems but it just kept shooting small groups and chugging along.

I don't have any targets to show. We reuse all of ours until they are covered in tape and the scope is now gone.

 

[DB29]

@Formidilosus Do you know if there is the same issue with the Vari-X iii?

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus Do you know if there is the same issue with the Vari-X iii?

Yes. No hunting variable Leupolds have ever been built for legitimate dialing. Old models- like 80’s seemed to hold zero better with light or normal use.

 

[Yotekiller]

My experience with Leopold scopes (to many to count) has been exactly the same results as Formidilosus

 

[DB29]

Yes. No hunting variable Leupolds have ever been built for legitimate dialing. Old models- like 80’s seemed to hold zero better with light or normal use.

For the models that don’t dial have you found issues with holding a zero?

 

[Formidilosus]

No one will actually do this. Every time the conversation comes up, the person defending the bad scope speaks of all their history of success without ever actually doing a simple drop test.

Overlook the drop portion- why are people not tracking their zero, or can not show their zero targets? “Here this target was initial, this target was a week later, this target 3 months later,”. Etc.

The Cold Bore Challenge is a perfect example of it. Look how many people questioned or found out their zero was off. And not being rude, look how many people missed at 400-450 yards. People can make whatever excuses they want, but people are missing a lot and part of that is their rifles aren’t zeroed or staying zeroed.

 

[Formidilosus]

For the models that don’t dial have you found issues with holding a zero?

Yes. They are relatively fragile scopes.

 

[DB29]

Yes. They are relatively fragile scopes.

What do you recommend that has similar quality or better glass?

 

[Formidilosus]

What do you recommend that has similar quality or better glass?

I would recommend reading all the scope eval threads and the Q&A threads in their entirety. There is a lot of information.

 

[Macintosh]

Overlook the drop portion- why are people not tracking their zero, or can not show their zero targets? “Here this target was initial, this target was a week later, this target 3 months later,”. Etc.

The Cold Bore Challenge is a perfect example of it. Look how many people questioned or found out their zero was off. And not being rude, look how many people missed at 400-450 yards. People can make whatever excuses they want, but people are missing a lot and part of that is their rifles aren’t zeroed or staying zeroed.

Agree with people being surprised at their own lack of awareness of their own actual results. But I think its the norm for people to not keep targets. No one I know keeps targets except the few who are REALLY into shooting. I dont keep targets, I keep notes.

Would it be easy for anyone to conduct a running zero check on the same target starting now to “put their money where their mouth is”? Something like: zero the gun at 100 yards and shoot a 10 round group, and keep the target. On the same sheet of paper paste or draw 2 circles just larger than the first group—I would go so far as to say the circles could be 1/2” larger diameter (1/4” per side) than the initial 10-round proof group to allow up to 1 moa-scope click (.25moa) allowance in any direction. Without touching turrets for any reason—no re-zeroing, this is a zero CHECK— on your next range session on a different day shoot one 5 round group at circle 2. Then next shooting day another 5 round group—again without re-zeroing—at the last clean circle. Thats 3 targets on 3 different days, a “proof” and 2 tests, that can realistically be done at any rifle range, on one 8 1/2 x 11” sheet of paper, with 1 box of ammo, that would show a scope holds the absolute most-basic zero under very light handling and travel to/from the range. Info including transport distance and conditions, if rifle was cleaned between groups, time between targets, etc. then you post your completed target and info. Any shot landing outside a circle is a FAIL, that scope did not hold even a loose zero under cupcake conditions (i.e. no drops or bumps, small group sizes, built-in allowance, etc).

It’s really not challenging at all, but I call it the “leupold zero challenge”.
I’m betting many wont pass. But I’d love to be proven wrong.

The problem with this^^ is it doesnt compare to a proof group from a known-good scope, so if scope error is captured in the initial proof group, but there is a similar amount of error in each group, it wont show up and a bad scope could pass. If anyone has a better way to easily show this throw it out there.

 

[yycyak]

Is it the same story with the fixed FX-series and M8's too?

Yes. They are relatively fragile scopes.

 

[woods89]

Thanks to all involved for the work that goes into these!

I don't watch hardly any hunting youtube any more, but when I did, a lot of the ones I watched featured either Leupold or Vortex optics. There were some misses and rodeos that happened that seemed a little odd to me. Of course it was never positioned as an equipment issue, but some of them made me quite suspicious that they were a zero failure.

That's one thing that burns me a bit, that we have people of influence in the hunting space that are supposedly highly concerned with ethics, and yet they are pushing products that almost have to be directly responsible for a certain amount of wounded game every year.

 

[SirChooCH]

If you were in the situation you had one of these and wanted to swap t another scope for about the same price point scope, what would the recommendation be? SWFA 2.5-10 or something else?