When did leupold go down hill?

I know of a rifle involved in a 4 wheeler incident that caused it to roll down the side of a mountain that actually had the barrel bent during the event.

Scope was a VX 3 (I believe) and was put on a replacement rifle and is as good as the day before the incident.

So, this "drop test" that allegedly means something, when was it done?
 
I have three vari-x IIIs from the mid 1990's that have served me faithfully. One of them went hunting last weekend and will likely go again within the next few days. I've never heard any evidence that Leupold 'cheaped out' when they discontinued the vari-x III in favor of the vxIII, but it's certainly possible. It's also possible that my old vari-x IIIs are just ticking time bombs waiting to fail, but I'd say that's likely true of *any* 30 year old scope design.

I don't think Leupold 'went downhill' so much as technology climbed up the hill past them. From the beginning of the exposed elevation turret era there were whispers, then shouts, that Leupold couldn't or wouldn't assemble their turrets square with their reticles. Even a decade ago it was well known that they had a reputation for misalignment between reticles and turrets. So a large market segment switched to Vortex (which of course has its own issues) and at this point I think Leupold has long been riding on their brand and marketing, not their engineering.

Which is really sad because they could make a handful of changes and be the gold standard again.
 
I know of a rifle involved in a 4 wheeler incident that caused it to roll down the side of a mountain that actually had the barrel bent during the event.

Scope was a VX 3 (I believe) and was put on a replacement rifle and is as good as the day before the incident.

So, this "drop test" that allegedly means something, when was it done?
https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/leupold-vx-3hd-2-5-8x36mm-cds-zl-field-evaluation.333050/

https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/leupold-vx-3hd-3-5-10x40mm-cds-zl-field-evaluation.314762/


https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/2x-leupold-mark-5-field-evaluations.278289/

https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/leupold-vx6-hd-3-18x50mm-cds-zl2-field-evaluation.417838/
 
It’s all anecdotal but I grew up with the older fixed power Leupolds. I have 2 my father has 6 or 7. All of them have been fine. I have dropped/fallen on one of them numerous times. Not on purpose but on accident when I was young and my feet were growing faster than the rest of me.

But I have also seen a few of the same vintage Vari X scopes absolutely shit the bed just shooting off a bench lol.
 
And they may have worked for him, they haven’t been the most reliable for me. They used to be better than they are now, but nowhere near nightforce durability
They're biggest attribute, by far, is that they're tough. They should be at the weights/prices they command. Someone needs to teach them how to make a hunting reticle that's worth a crap.
 
I have a vx5 for 7+ years taking a few tumbles. Oak brush has tried to steal it many times over the years. It has never lost zero. It tracks perfectly and returns to zero each year. The moral of the story is test your gear. Lemon owners seem to squawk more on the interwebz. One last thing. I will say, not everyone knows how to mount a scope properly. Crushed tubes comes to mind, bases not torqued correctly, alignment off, level out, ect. Then blame it on the "bad" scope, get on the www and a way we go!!
 
Im genuinely envious of those that have trust and good luck with Leupold scopes. The vx5 3-15 is the perfect hunting scope, except a few key shortcomings...
 
Im genuinely envious of those that have trust and good luck with Leupold scopes. The vx5 3-15 is the perfect hunting scope, except a few key shortcomings...
Right, I want to like their scopes the mk5hd is an awesome scope besides its ability to retain zero
 
You guys should tell the NRL Hunter folks the mark 5 doesn't hold zero. The majority of those shooters are using mark 5's followed by mark 4's.
 
You guys should tell the NRL Hunter folks the mark 5 doesn't hold zero. The majority of those shooters are using mark 5's followed by mark 4's.

I would say that if you have to zeroing ranges at matches, and most people use them, and lots/most adjust their scope before the match…. That’s probably not the appeal to authority I would use for my example.
 
Most of the folks I know that use them don't touch their zero at the match. They simply collect velocity for power factor.

As for that being an example, that's the single place I WOULD choose to use for data. Nowhere else are you going to find that many scopes in use.

<edit> I don't own a single Leupold scope so I've got no dog in this fight. I just see a ton of Leupold bashing for not holding zero and I've simply not seen that. All my buddies use them in NRL Hunter and I shoot 6-7 of the matches per year and the majority of folks use Leupold.
 
Leupold heavily sponsors and/or provides significant discounts to many shooters at events, especially if they place well at any point. That and their lower cost compared to similar offerings from other brands make them attractive. As for "bashing", that's not really the case. There are many of us that believe there is good value in the testing that Form has done.
 
I don’t think they’ve changed much at all. If anything, they’ve gotten better over the years. The glass is nice, they look great (I still don’t know why other manufacturers can’t make scopes that look as nice as Leupolds), the naming system is marketable, warranty is great, USA company, etc.

For me, coming of age in the 80s and 90s, they were the benchmark. The problem is, most of the people I knew back then didn’t shoot year-round. We, like a lot of hunters, would shoot during deer season, then put our rifles back in the safe. Come next season, we would all head out to “sight in our rifles”. They usually required some adjustment (which should’ve been a huge red flag, because at what point did they go from being “sighted in” to needing adjustment? Seriously, was it while it was sitting in the safe or was it right before you shot that doe in the leg?) Anyway, sight in day was when the real fun started. One click very rarely equaled 1/4 inch at 100 yards. Form’s description in one of his Loopy tests was spot on. Shoot a round, adjust several MOA and shoot again. No change. Then adjust some more and give her the ol’ tap tap tap and shoot again. Now too far the other way. So on and so forth, chasing that POI.

The problem was, we didn’t dial back then and so scopes didn’t need to dial well. Leupold knew that with enough coin turns and enough tapping we would eventually get it figured out. The old timers used to comment that if you bumped your scope on something or left it in the safe too long, it would eventually wander and we just accepted it as a fact of life and kept buying the next version, figuring that when the name changed from vari X to VX with Roman numerals to VX 3 or whatever, things must be improving because the glass was, in fact, a little bit better.

Enough of this BS. With the exception of their high-end Mark whatever stuff (which is itself suspect, from what I’ve read here and elsewhere, and experienced with friend’s rifles) you still have to deal with inaccurate adjustments, turret tapping, and wandering zero on the VX line. They’ve had decades to get their act together, and they haven’t been able to figure out or been willing to bring to market what a growing number of other companies are providing. Like a toxic girlfriend that you have a hard time leaving, they’ve gotten by on good looks and good memories for too long.
 
Im genuinely envious of those that have trust and good luck with Leupold scopes. The vx5 3-15 is the perfect hunting scope, except a few key shortcomings...
Me and my buddy hunted a 400 section private ranch in the Davis Mountains of W TX for 6 days, beat the ever-lovin crap out of his 7mm08 wearing a lowly VX5 during that time, including countless hours in an UTV. When it came to crunch time, the VX5 steered the 140 AB perfectly at 498yds on this huge 34" aoudad ram. L1N5dJ4.jpgxBozIxH.jpg
 
Come next season, we would all head out to “sight in our rifles”. They usually required some adjustment (which should’ve been a huge red flag, because at what point did they go from being “sighted in” to needing adjustment? Seriously, was it while it was sitting in the safe or was it right before you shot that doe in the leg?) Anyway, sight in day was when the real fun started. One click very rarely equaled 1/4 inch at 100 yards. Form’s description in one of his Loopy tests was spot on. Shoot a round, adjust several MOA and shoot again. No change. Then adjust some more and give her the ol’ tap tap tap and shoot again. Now too far the other way. So on and so forth, chasing that POI.
I've said it before, but man, this was my exact experience until pretty recently and I never stopped to question it until I had a shot go wrong. First time I used a "real" scope (Nightforce SHV) was so underwhelming it blew my mind. Measure, adjust, shoot, and it's just right where it should be. No chasing it back and forth across the paper until it "settles". Zeroing is such a non-issue now.
 
I think some here are misinterpreting what we mean by losing zero. A tenth shift is a zero loss, but not consequential on game until the distance is several hundred yards. Just because someone was able to shoot an animal after a spill/hit/drop, doesn’t mean the scope is still “zeroed”
 
You guys should tell the NRL Hunter folks the mark 5 doesn't hold zero. The majority of those shooters are using mark 5's followed by mark 4's.

One match that I attended this year (first time doing it) a guy that thought he was pretty hot shit was lamenting that his gun got tipped over (on a bipod) and lost zero. Not sure what the scope was.
 
Back
Top