When did leupold go down hill?

[LongWayAround]

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.

Like my previous post said, this was my first year doing it. There was a lot a messing around on the zero range.

I wouldn't say that amount of people using them correlates to reliability at all. There's a ton a vortex lovers out there too.

Market share is a a result of marketing.

 

[Bowhunter46]

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”

If 1/10” is the only loss you’ve seen you’re lucky. I remember one in particular on a 30-30 zeroed at 50 yards for near over bait. I’d zero it, come back a week later and it’d be 5” low to the left. Re-zero, come back a few days later and now it’s 3” to the right. This was on a vx3 and I babied this thing. Kept in a pelican bomb proof case, drove 15 minutes from my house to the range and back in the safe

 

[roadrunner]

Well if you click the link, you can see a date

So you spent more time pasting links rather than just typing YYYY...

 

[LongWayAround]

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”

My thoughts exactly.

A hit doesn't mean everything is perfect. It means that it was good enough.

How well was zero to begin with? Wind calls? Elevation dialed or holdover? Field position errors? There's enough inputs that it's absolutely possible to have shifts and still hit targets.

I always wonder a bit when I hear "I hit exactly where I was aiming." How sure are you?

 

[Okie_Poke]

Like a toxic girlfriend that you have a hard time leaving, they’ve gotten by on good looks and good memories for too long.

I feel personally attacked by this. She it just looks so good.

My VX5 HD did hold zero a couple of weeks ago while elk hunting in Colorado. Lots of brush, bounced around a lot in the SxS, took a tumble/fell off the SxS. I was paranoid enough from this site to verify zero; it held. But I've heard too many "it works until it doesn't" stories to fully trust it. I plan to replace it at some point. But, she's svelte and just so nice to look at through!

 

[jmac42]

Every Leupold I've ever had would never hold zero from year to year. I had one lose zero during hunting season and I started replacing all of them. I'm talking, it lost zero hunting whitetail does in Michigan where there is zero abuse to the rifle and it was off by 9 inches at 100 yards. Since reading the scope evals and switching to nightforce and trijicon, we enjoy checking zero but not re-zeroing rifles every time we shoot.

 

[Bowhunter46]

So you spent more time pasting links rather than just typing YYYY...

Well I figured if you didn’t know when it happened you probably didn’t know the post either, judging by your opinion on it you’ve never read it.

 

[Mike D Texas]

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.

Leupold is demanding just as much a premium on their scopes at least the VX5 and above line so that’s not a good argument.

There is an argument to be had about the Leupold typically being lighter

 

[Rich M]

I have a 2006 VX-2 that holds zero and works like it should.

Picked up a VX-3i around 2019 and 30-06 was too much for it.

 

[Bowhunter46]

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.

They weren’t designed for hunting, but I’d rather take the weight that comes with the confidence that I won’t lose zero. And the reticle doesn’t really matter on Leupold if it can’t hold zero

 

[BradArnett]

My buddy sent me this last night. 8 shots with his 270wsm and vx3 3.5-10. Scope had been ok the last 4 years until yesterday. Said he pulled it off and something was rattling around inside. He also said the varix3 2.5-8x that his 6.5grendel killed back in September still hasn't been sent back to him from leupold

 

[Schmo]

My buddy sent me this last night. 8 shots with his 270wsm and vx3 3.5-10. Scope had been ok the last 4 years until yesterday. Said he pulled it off and something was rattling around inside. He also said the varix3 2.5-8x that his 6.5grendel killed back in September still hasn't been sent back to him from leupold

View attachment 966095

“But he’s a Leupold hater, and this is a very isolated incident”

 

[BBob]

They weren’t designed for hunting, but I’d rather take the weight that comes with the confidence that I won’t lose zero. And the reticle doesn’t really matter on Leupold if it can’t hold zero

Well now, for history sake......The origin of Nightforce originally named Lightforce was by a guy out of Australia and was certainly all about a hunting scope. The first ones were high magnification large objective lens scopes designed for night hunting in Australia. The guy had I believe LOW make up a batch of the originals. Eventually the guy formed Lightforce which became Nightforce Optics after some legal name thing. I still have one of the original 8-32x56 scopes that were sold here.

 

[rickyw]

It’s been awhile since we’ve gone around the leupold merry go round on this site. I was getting bored with all the small caliber debate.

 

[roadrunner]

Well I figured if you didn’t know when it happened you probably didn’t know the post either, judging by your opinion on it you’ve never read it.

Correct. Not much interest in it. Simply wanted to see if there was any relevance or correlation of bad quality recently.

Some of us have never had an issue with Leupold.

I haven't been in the scope market since probably 2010 or so. Haven't needed to be and reading a review isn’t going to suddenly make me run out and buy a preferred scope over something that doesn't have issues.

 

[Bowhunter46]

Correct. Not much interest in it. Simply wanted to see if there was any relevance or correlation of bad quality recently.

Some of us have never had an issue with Leupold.

I haven't been in the scope market since probably 2010 or so. Haven't needed to be and reading a review isn’t going to suddenly make me run out and buy a preferred scope over something that doesn't have issues.

Well I’m happy Leupold has worked for you and I’m glad you’ve shared how well they’ve worked for you. However, this post was obviously intended for the people that have had issues with them. That’s why the title is “when did they go down hill”.

 

[roadrunner]

Well I’m happy Leupold has worked for you and I’m glad you’ve shared how well they’ve worked for you. However, this post was obviously intended for the people that have had issues with them. That’s why the title is “when did they go down hill”.

Might want to go back and reread the opening post.

Just sayin'....

 

[Bowhunter46]

Might want to go back and reread the opening post.

Just sayin'....

Yes, I stated that they appear to have gone down hill. I asked which scopes are good to go. I think most of us have the opinion that the new vx line of scopes are not good to go. You’ve stated you haven’t been in the scope market since “2010 or so”. Yet, you still haven’t commented on which scopes are good to go, so you might want to re-read the original post

 

[Q_Sertorius]

The inconsistent adjustments go back as far as I can remember. Since “Leupold makes great scopes”, I thought that it was normal to tap on a scope with a screwdriver handle to “make sure the adjustment took” and it made sense to me that dropping a precision instrument like a scoped rifle would require sighting it in again.

When I discovered that I could get a $300 SWFA scope that tracked and repeated exactly every time, it was an eye opener for me.

The other big revelation for me was shooting large enough groups. If all anyone ever did was shoot a 3-shot group and check zero by shooting a single shot at the beginning of the season, it’s hardly surprising that “zeros shifted while the rifle was in the safe.” It was never true to begin with.

When it comes to ammo, most Americans are like the most parsimonious quartermasters in history. People love to brag about how little they shoot. Saving ammo is a virtue. But I find it is often pennywise and pound foolish to skimp on ammo while zeroing or in practice.

 

[EdP]

There are many of us that believe there is good value in the testing that Form has done.

...and I am on of them. Even so, I think it important to recognize that the testing was not done scientifically. Although the drops simulate some of the negative effects a scope in the field may be exposed to, precise angles of impact and impact force were not controlled so the results should only be used to draw a general idea of how robust a particular scope line may be. When someone says "I dropped my rifle and it did this or that and the scope was fine," the event can't legitimately be compared with Forms test. Conversely, when Form's test compares one scope to another, the scopes are not exposed to identical conditions due to variations in weight, exact height of drop, scope dimensions, and other factors that affect the impact force and direction.

I don't point this out to be critical of the work Form has done. He has done the best an individual on his own can do to make comparisons between scopes. It would take a corporate lab to develop and implement a scientific testing methodology. I would like to see a standard developed similar to the waterproof ratings for electronics (IP ratings) but the scope mfgs don't seem to be interested.

Sorry, I don't have a date to point to.