Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold Scopes failing repeatly

I have nothing but Leupold Vari X II's. Never lapped rings.
I use Leupold rings and bases. Every rifle I have is dead on if I do my part.

T

I have 7 Conquests. I have a silver one (3.5-10X44) which I am trying to sell ($375). Nothing is wrong with it, I simply replaced it with another Conquest because the new one had a Z-600 reticle.

Of all the Zeiss scopes I've owned, I have NEVER had a problem with any of them, and they are great in low-light.

A window licker not being able to reach the window would I guess have a window failure, according to some folks.....

...kinda makes you wonder where E is

So boatanchor, you were asked for the facts to back up your statement....where are they? At least BobinNH had one, your's appears to be hearsay. I've had a Swaro A 3.5-10x42 for 9 years and it's been super, as have my elite's.

You think maybe someone was trying to stir The Pot?????Maybe get E worked up???Yes internet entertainment is fun.

E's the wise one, he's Elk hunting as were playing on the net.

Rob

While not my favorite brand, Leupolds have always been reliable for me in the field. The only problem I've had is with reticle tracking. On some Leupolds I've owned the reticle did not move in direct correlation with the number of adjustment clicks. In other words, 4 clicks on the dial wouldn't always correspond to 1" of adjustment on the target at 100 yds. Sometimes it has taken as much as 8 or 10 clicks to move the reticle 1". But I will say that once you get it adjusted it tends to stay put.

Nope. Just think it isn't the case in this particular situation. Lapping rings doesn't take a genius. Sounds like it isn't his first rodeo. Let's blame the shooter first and then lets move on to whomever lapped the rings. Heaven forbid someone posts a problem with a Leupold.

Per the original poster, it seems HIGHLY unlikely that a significant sampling of Leupolds (from both his own and buddies' shooting) would all be failing with limited shooting time (300 rounds is nothing). This is not a common opinion of Leupolds from even those who dislike them.

That leads me to conclude that something else is wrong, since he also has had good results with earlier Leupolds.

My guess is that something (and ring lapping would be the most likely culprit) has changed in the way he and his buddies have been mounting their scopes in the last few years. If that problem is not corrected, then switching brands of scopes will have no benefit.

Leupold failures? So common it is no secret at all. Most people that actually shoot rifles a lot as in benchrest will not be quiet on this subject of Leupold failures. It always comes down to the same old thing that Leupold refuses to address. Spring failure on the erector tube. That's why Cecil Tucker has been doing a spring up grade for years. I'm sure for anyone that has ever seen a Nightforce scope and wondered what that spring housing on the scope was for, now has and answer.

I was a long time advocate of Leupold since the early 70's. I no long recommend them to anybody. I had one conk out on me on a Yukon river hunt. I still have a goodly number of these Leupold scopes, they are slowly getting sold or traded off.

I don't want to hear anybodies BS about how clear they are. I don't care, if a scope lags after the adjustment or does not hold zero, you can put it where the sun don't shine. There is only one scope out there I have full faith in nowadays and that is Sightron. S&B is so highly priced I no longer recommend, great scope but when they exceed the price of the rifle, they leave most people out in the cold.

"Sightron IS THE ONLY SCOPE THAT HAS LICKED THE ERECTOR TUBE PROBLEM"

I could careless what your opinions are about the scopes on your closet Queens, Go to the range and try to square a target. If you have a Leupold that will square the target, you are past lucky.

The only Leupold you can trust are the modified Tucker scopes. This also screws your warranty.

JUST WAIT TILL YOU HAVE ONE OF THESE SCOPES FAIL ON YOU ON A HUNT OR AT A MATCH.

Steve you have a valid concern.

I like Leupold, use Leupold, and know people inside the company. In my view, their customer service is about the best of any company in America.

That being said, I have had multiple failures with their scopes. The failure has been in tracking or holding zero (and one loose lens). All that failed were either on light weight 12ga slug guns or a 416 Rigby.

This past weekend I mounted a new VX-III 2.5x8 on a custom muzzleloader. I love the scope but it did exhibit some erratic tracking while zeroing. After a few shots to "settle down" it held fine. However, I find "settling down" unacceptable. At the same time I also mounted a FullField II 3x9 on an identical muzzleloader. It did not require settling. I have found Burris to track very well and hold zero.

If I am buying a scope for a big kicker (over 375 in my book) I will purchase a Burris with posi lock (or El Paso made Weaver). I'm sure there are others that would also work but I only have experience with Leupy, Burris and old Weavers.

405wcf

Yep, he is that

Damn 3sixbits, you Alaskans aren't afraid to lay it out there....

Go Sarah!

405wcf

Alaska teaches it's children real quick to take nothing for granted. Your equipment fails you a few hundred miles from the mail box, the time for the hunt is always limited and to have your equipment crap out on you and well nothing more to say "Your screwed and blued and tattooed". You can shop the heck out of the Sightron on the net and get great deals.

This is why Sightron is miles a head of the rest.

Sightron

could you expand on what they did to solve the erector tube assembly issue? i own a sightron S2 and have been very pleased with it but i'm still needing a bit of an education why it is so good. for the record i've had exelent luck with my 4200 elite too (it sits on top of my 7mm rem mag)

It ain't rocket science either.

Clean-up about 75 to 80 percent of the bottom rings, mount your scope and go shoot.

Am I missing an inside joke here? Do you know this guy or have some other reason to believe he can�t shoot?

Or are you really putting forth since he has had trouble with some Leupolds that must mean he cannot shoot because the Leupolds couldn�t possibly be at fault?

Jon, it's just a guess, but I'd say he doesn't know the guy much less have a clue whether he can shoot or not.

I am a full time gunsmith with my own full service gunshop. I build/modify/repair about 1000 firearms a year with one apprentice. I sell my fair share of scopes and return my fair share of scopes. The superlight rifles in .300 + .338 caliber magnums really test any scope maker. I see many scope mounting errors that appear to be scope problems. The most common is when the front dovetail in a standard leupold/redfield ring is not "worked" into place. The scope is mounted with stress in the tube because the windage screws are used to boresight. The scope moves with the front ring as the recoil helps the stress to be relived. If this or other mounting problems don't settle down quickley the problem appears to be a shifting zero. Usually when the rifle settles down the shooter thinks the barrel is starting to "break in" or now they found the load that shoots best. That said, I still have seen bad scopes from every maker regardless of price. I have seen certain rifles chew up scopes one after another. The solution in my shop has always ended up with a low powered or fixed VX/Vari X III. Every scoped rifle I own wears a VX/Vari X III, So that is where I stand from my own experience. Ask someone else and they will tell you the opposite. One thing is for sure, if you return a scope and it still gives grief send it back again and ask for a replacement not a repair. Mark the scope (don't get crazy) so you can tell if they did what you asked. I have never had to drop one in a lake.