Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics How's a VX3 3.5-10 better than a VX2 3-9?

These 2 seem to be really close in features and weight, length, power, ect.
So why would someone drop the extra $200?

Because some folks don't might paying a little more $$ for slightly better optics?

It seems to me that in many categories of "things", gaining the last 4% of performance, from 95% to 99%, increases the cost exponentially for each percent of improvement. In the Leupold line, I wonder what series has the biggest jump in measurable performance over the previous/lower series?

Rifleman to VX-1?
VX-1 to VX-2?
VX-2 to VX-3?
VX3 to ???
??? to ???

The current VX-2 is in the sweet spot.

That was my thought, but since I'm not an optic expert, I thought that I'd throw it out there for discussion.

I don't know if it's the best per model line increment, not having much experience with newer examples of the lowest lines. But performance per dollar wise it's really good.

Good clarity, reasonable weight, good eye relief, easy to mount on a variety of rifles.

I do like the 3.5-10x40 better, but I don't find it easy to tell someone to spend the extra money.

In 2012 Leupold upgraded the entire VX line of scopes. Current VX-1's are essentially the same as an older VX-2. Current VX-2's are very comparable to an older VX-3. The VX-3's were improved too, but I can't see spending more than the cost of a VX-2.

FWIW I have a couple of the 3-9X40 VX-2's of recent production. They are a BETTER scope than a couple of 2.5-8X36 VX-3's that were made in 2007.

Current VX-1s are essentially the previous VX-IIs?

That damned Roman Numeral vs. Arabic Numeral things raises its ugly head yet again.

Agree with what has been said on both the VX3 and VX2. I do like the locking eyepiece better on the VX3. Whether it's worth the dinero or not is up to the buyer.

Same also. The 3-9 VX2 with CDS is such a good scope and at a very reasonable price. I Like the VX3's and I think they are a step up from the vari-x III's as are the VX2's as compared to earlier versions.

The deal Cabela's had on the VX2 3-9's with CDS was hard to beat.

May want to check your dates, I believe the VX-3 started in 09'.

Honestly, I have 20/20 with 100% color perception and I really can't tell the difference, opticly, between the newest of the two in low light at the same magnifications.
There might be some feature Im missing but I'm real impressed by the 2 and I'd bet leupold selling fewer 3's.

Here is a difference between the VX2 and VX3

Leupold switched to twin erector springs in selected models in 2009

According to Leupold the following scopes have twin erector springs: VX-3, VX-3L, VX-R and all tactical scopes



The Rifleman, VX-1 and VX-2 do not have twin erector springs

I would imagine the twin system makes it more durable and improve turret repeatability.

You would think, but no.

My 54 year old eyes can't discern a difference between a VX-2 & VX-3.

They can see a difference between the now discontinued, but still available, Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40 and the above Leupolds. The Zeiss is much clearer and sharper.

If on a budget and scoping a rifle, I'd go VX-2 4-12x40 AO for a .22LR or varmint rifle, VX-2 2-7x33 on a short action hunting rifle, and the above mentioned Conquest on a long action hunting rifle.

I like the VX3s for the couple extra bucks though I do have some two series here and there. I used to sometimes find the adjustments a bit lazy before the spring upgrade and I like the B&C reticle. Besides, up here what with fluctuating currencies and sales taxes a VX-3 costs the same as a Vari-X did 30 years ago.

When I'm feeling budget conscious I look at how much cheaper a VX-3 is than VX-6 or my Mark 4s. Then they start looking like a deal again.

My eyes cant tell much of a diff either but they say the VX3 is a tougher scope, who knows.

How is a Swarovski better than the VX-2? Or a Nightforce? Or a Schmidt and Bender? Unless you need a specialized scope for handling recoil, or need dead nuts reliable turret twisting, etc. a lot of scopes will get you dependable field service from half an hour before sunrise and half an hour after sunset.

Any expenditure past a certain standard is just for a nicer piece of equipment. Worth it to many, but not required.

What I really want are open sights that give the same sight picture as a 4x scope at a 2 oz weight.

If Leupold wasn't THE American brand of scopes, they'd sure have lost everyone with their marketing genious.

Had one of each (VX3 3.5-10 and VX2 3-9) out to the range 2 weeks ago, both on Kimber Montanas. I can personally tell a difference, the VX3 being slightly better, but it was definitely not a big difference. I have 4 VX2's and 4 VX3's, so don't think I'm just trying to justify my VX3's. I also like the power ring and the eyepiece (function and looks) better on the VX3. As someone else mentioned, it's up to the individual whether or not the difference is worth it. To me sometimes it is and sometimes it's not - depends on the rifle, how much I'll use it, what for and if looks matter (a VX3 can't be beat on a nice walnut stock, blued rifle IMHO).

twin erector, eye piece and reticle choices. MY vx3 came with screw in aluminas and a one piece scope cover.