Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupy 2-7x33 vs. 2.5-8x36..........

I have long stated the cheaper VX2 2-7x33 to be a better scope than the VX3 2.5-8x36. And been questioned on it plenty of times. Others here seem to wholeheartedly agree. I was questioned on it again, so here goes.

This is my opinion, not theirs. Anyone who cares to, is more than welcome to post their own reasoning in defense of either model right here.

Advantage:

Price----------------------VX2

Weight-------------------VX2

Mounting latitude----VX2

Lower mounting-----VX2

FOV----------------------VX2

Constant eye relief----VX2

These things are enough for me to pick the 2-7x33 over the 2.5-8x3 every time. The 2-7x33 is simply easier to "get behind" IMO.

The 2.5-8x36 has 2moa more adjustment. And that will vary from scope to scope, so it's really a wash. It also supposedly has better lens coatings and is brighter due to larger size. If it is brighter, it sure ain't much. Certainly not enough to over ride the other shortcomings. IME it has wandering eye relief. Roughly twice that of the 2-7x33 IMO. I guess one could argue that it has a nicer or smoother power ring and adjustments. But again, not enough here either to sway my opinion.

Anyhoo, these are my thoughts and not yours. Just letting some here know why I say what I say regarding the 2 models. And I have taken plenty of deer with the 2.5-8x36. Even on 2 long actions, so you needn't tell me it works. I know that. It is just less scope for more money IMO.

Lets hear it......

I asked you and I wouldn't disagree with anything you just said.

I've used one on a model 70 in 7mm rem mag for years. It doesn't take any balance away from that gun and so far I've had no need for anything more powerful or brighter. I don't think I've even lost a deer shot at with that gun.

The 2.5-8's have a larger eyebox, easier to get on target quickly than the 2-7.

I have every generation of the 2-7x33's and 2.5-8's except for the current 3i. I like the 2-7, I wish I could like it more--it's less expensive and smaller and the glass itself is all a guy needs. Plus the LR dots are a more usable option than the ridiculous B&C flea turds cluttering up the crosshairs

My serious elk-getters have 2.5-8's, they are just easier and faster to use.


Casey

I'm a fan of the Leupold 2-7x line of scopes from #106xxY all the way back to #1118xx.

I respectfully disagree

What am I missing?

I just went and looked at two rifles I have out right now--a VX-II 2-7 and a VX-3 2.5-8.

The lowest power for each, the 2-7 blacks out sooner than the 2.5-8 when I move my head around?

Casey

And just for the record, after counting my fingers and toes, I own more 2-7's than 2.5-8's.

Not sure, but what I can tell you is that eye relief changes with the 2.5-8x throughout the power range about twice as much as the 2-7X does, IMO....

And that's a good point. I'll have to check that out this weekend. I'm taking my eagle eyed teenage son shooting and I'll have him check it out too.


Casey

I've had lots of VX2 2-7,and VX3 2.5-8X. When called upon they both work.Presently I have a pair of 2.5-8X's.

I have noticed the VX2 line in general seems to show more parallax out around the 300 yard mark than the VX3.

Casey pretty well said what I think. I too have owned every variation of the 2-7x33. I'm certain I've had at least 10 of them. I prefer the 2.5-8x36 for the reasons stated.

BUT, I really like the 2-7 too, and I can't fault 2muchgun's thinking. He's a guy that is out there doing it. All that to say we can all look at something differently, and not end with the same solution. It's not a right/wrong thing.

Quick question, does the 2-7 have the same twin erector springs as the 2-8?

Own both. Shoot both. Like both.

They both suck so why does it matter which one sucks more?

You need to up your game on glass.

Really, what would you suggest that can compare in weight, size and magnification that is better?

I have a couple of the Kahles 2-7X36 scopes but they are now discontinued. I've heard too many bad reports on the Swaro Z3's to think their internals are any better.

You heard...but haven't experienced a 1st hand Z3 failure.

Gotta love this forum. Lol

I have been using 2-7x Leupolds for 48 years and have over 50 Leupold scopes in service on this date. All have worked fine for me, but I am not a turret turner, generally don't shoot a lot of rounds with any single rifle, generally don't hunt in severe weather, and generally don't shoot belted magnum cartridges. Still have the first one, a 2-7x23 with a TCH reticle, in Redfield turn-in mounts on a Remington 660 in 6mm.

Do you know that you are on a talk forum that deals exclusively with other people's opinions and experiences?

I don't like the thin reticles in the Z3's. I also looked a a new one last week that had trash inside the tube.

Speaking of loving this forum,did you have any useful suggestions, or just derogatory remarks?

Mr Clark

If you believe a Leupy VX-2 is better than a Swaro Z3 then no I don't have any suggestions for you. WOW

Perhaps Ringman can point you in the right direction with a Bushnell. Lol

No sir, the VX2's do not have the twin erector springs, and that always sticks in the back of my mind when using a VX2. Never had a reason not to trust one, just one of those things...

Count me in for preferring the 2.5-8, But I do agree that the 2-7 is a nice scope.

More condescending and derogatory remarks. WOW right back at you. Is it possible for you to converse like a grown up adult?

I never said the Leupold was better than the Swaro. I said I'm not convinced the durability is any better.I do think they have better glass, and I like the designs and weight.


I don't think you have any suggestions at all,since there just isn't anything available in a high end 2-7 power light weight scope. I do have hopes for the new Vortex Razor HD LH 1.5-8x32 and the Leica in the same size and magnification. My whole point though is that there isn't anything the Leupold 2-7 is competing with.