Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold FX-II 4x33 or VX-3 1.75-6x32???

So, for a Kimber Caprivi in .375 H&H, which is better? I'm leaning towards the variable. People knock it because of FOV, but on low power, it's 51'@100 yards, way more than the fixed power. It also focuses closer. Anybody know how much better the optics are on the VX'3s vs the FX-IIs?

I also have wondered just how much difference optically there was from the FXII to the FX3 or VX3 lines.

I have this conversation with myself all the time,but just leave the fixed 4X on one of my 375's because the stuff you use a 375 on is the size of horses, easily seen and hit properly to 400 yards or more with a fixed 4X.....

I've used a 4X on game as close as 20-30 feet so don't worry much at that end either.

..........Either one will work fine!

There is an `ol attage which says and I`m paraphrasing,,,,,,,"for simplicity choose the fixed and for versatility choose the variable."

I use a 1.5-5x20 VX111 on my more compact 375 Ruger Alaskan. Porportionally, it looks great on that rifle with a FOV of approx 66 ft on the low power at 100 yards. A very fast (both eyes open aiming) scope!

Perhaps a larger 4x or the larger 1.75-6x32 VX3 would look better porportionally on your Kimber.

4x33?

132

-------------------------

1.75-6x32?

-190.25
-------------------------

132 > -190.25

Go with the 4x.



Bruce

The FXII 4x Loopy is one tough cookie.

Its one of the only scopes I can 'Ground Tune' and not lose zero.

That is really one of their great assets. I've slammed both of my 4X Leupolds to the ground so hard, the only thing I was wondering about when I looked through them was how bad I'd busted them. Neither has ever needed to be rezeroed. Wouldn't have believed it unless I'd seen it for myself.
For the most in reliability, I'd go for the 4X. If I had to have the ability to see better, especially in dark twilight, I'd go with either the other, or, better yet, the 6X42, FX3. E

Slight hijack...

how does the older M8 4x or 6x stack up to the newer model 4 or 6x leupold?

I would never give up the FOV of a low power variable for a fixed 4X and I own a couple of fixed 4's that I keep as presighted backups. I hunt too much close cover, alot of times we're talking feet instead of yards. and the varialble give me the abillity to crank it up if I need 4-6x for a long shot.

Most of my hunting is tight cover coyotes and still hunting white/black tails.

erich

I've compared both my older, single coated M8 to my latest 4X, which is an FXII.
As far as image quality, it is very slight, say .30 caliber bullet holes at 100 yds. for the older scope, vs. some, but not all, 7mm caliber bullet holes for the new fully multicoated scope. Frankly, this may be simply a difference between a well used, and cleaned alot, older scope and a new one.
I can see a small, but definate, difference in flare present when I target something with a low sun behind it as well.
As far as needing lower magnification to kill something up close, I've used both Leupolds and other scopes for that alot. Due to Leupold's large eye box, I really haven't noticed a performance difference between their 4X scopes and the scopes with magnifcations down to 1.75X. E

A wider FOV is your friend for close up work. Magnification ain't. I have both scopes.

I have a FXII 4x33 and a FX3 6x42 and there is a noticeable difference in image quality.

The FX3 is noticeable brighter and has a slight blueish tint to it.

The FXII is still a great scope and has more neutral/realistic colors but is noticeable duller than the FX3.

How much difference that makes is a matter of opinion.

Bruce, what does this mean?

We always refer to that as percussionary maintenance.

I like it...

I think Bruce did the math and the 4x33 is greater than the other one.

I'd take the 4x. Odds are if all one had were an accurate single shot rifle in any decent round, with a fixed 4x, they'd learn how to shoot it, and pick their shot, and when they did fire, game would fall.

A 6x may be better compared to a 4x, but there are no flies on the 4x. A few years ago, I had a doe running across a field at 200 yds, and I snap shot, breaking it's back on the first shot from a 7mm BR rifle. I never had a moment to "second guess" my optic, just aimed and fired, the Pro-Staff RIMFIRE 4x32 did the trick, even though it's optics and fov are inferior to an FXII. My last group w/that rifle at the range put THREE 139 SSTs into 4/10" at 100 yds...again w/a rimfire 50yd parallax Nikon, so much for 'application' or limitations

It is good to compare and pick what's best one can afford for your style of hunting, but at the end of the day, even an inexpensive FIXED will save the day, though I would not trust just any run of the mill 'econo-priced' variable.

Both scopes are good, and the argument may be made by some shooters due to their hunting style, yet I always enjoy fixed and never been let down, not mechanically, nor in their ability to hit game in the vitals.

I TRULY believe that the biggest weakness a fixed scope has is it's inability to give SOME shooters confidence, due to their lack of faith in the lower, fixed power. Seeing targets and bullet holes are nice at the range, but what's needed there is not always the same as what's realistically needed to be successful in the game fields. YMMV.

Hunters need to use what they have confidence in, as perception is reality as they say, and perception/confidence might just affect your shooting technique/speed/timing. Either you fire w/certainty and confidence, or you hesitate, and/or use poor technique and shot placement or presentation may not be what it should be.

Confidence is higher w/the masses w/variables, as they are what most people nowadays tend to use, it's "POLITICALLY CORRECT" but fixed power users are loyal to fixed, as their experiences have proved great success, w/shot placement, and in durability.

Good shooting, and hunting.

I own both. My 358 Norma has worn a 1.75-6X32 for several years, with well over 500 rounds through it. I have absolutely beaten the hell out of it and it hasn't flinched. I think it's perfect.

That said, 99% of the time it sits on 4X, and it would in no way be a compromise if a fixed 4X lived on that rifle. The only time I really use the 6X is on the range.

I think 65BR is dead on when he states that the biggest weakness of the fixed 4X is in the minds of shooters. In the field it is no compromise.

But you can't go wrong either way, they're both wonderful scopes.

I find the older 4x28 M8s to be as bright and resolute as the VX-I series variables, at least.

I'm also a big fan of the older 4x28s, for both ruggedness and and repeatable adjustments.

Dave Talley really likes the older Leupold 1.5x5s for ruggedness, and I really respect his opinion (my .375 H&H has one of these).

Maybe the best thing is to be patient and watch the used market for an M8 3x Leupold. This is a perfect scope for this purpose.