Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Another Leupold Failure

It's what they live for. Over the years they have refined their silly little rantings to a few tired, canned retorts. They seem to have a couple of new recruits. Somewhat entertaining, but surely not unexpected. The optics forum is kinda like stepping over pigchit to get to the bacon..

I can see the point of someone who purchases a leupold and has repeated problems posting their comments, while being cognizant of the fact that any product will have a problem sometime.

What I don't understand is those who hate Leupold and who have had nothing other than problems and will not consider buying another for now, constantly posting the same/same over and over. You don't think they give you what you want, don't buy. I don't particularly like certain rifle brands that others think are great. I don't come on and bash them every time their name is mentioned.

Then again, I'm sure they only are trying to lookout for me because they care so much.

Yup...

I don't think Leupold makes junk. I actually think they make a pretty decent scope. It's just with two higher end units failing on me, I think I'm ready to go in a different direction.

The first time, the VX-II, failed, Leupold wouldn't tell me what went wrong. That really burned my biscuits. I even talked to a supervisor and he wouldn't or couldn't say. I still went out and bought another one.

If Leupold treats me 100% right on this one, then maybe down the road I'd come back. I have a VX-III 6.5-20X50 that has been spot on for better than 10 years now.

So again I'm not bashing just sharing my experience. Which up to now has been three scopes purchased and two sent back for repair. In total I have approximately $2k of my money sent their way.

Tom

Tom,

My comments weren't directed at you. Heck, you've only got 54 posts total. jwp and Dave have more Leupold-bashing posts than that in a month.

-Dan

I dont bash 'em...I just dont buy 'em. Been driving Nikons for about 12 years now. Always been great scopes. Have occasionally tried a new something every now and then but always go back to the nikons. Thinking about trying something new this year just because. If it works great. If not, I'll just buy another nikon.

I vote for first of Month. Con send me your address so I can send you $50.00 for the 6X leupold.

I had an Elite take a dump recently, one of two Bushnells I own, so I guess I could say they have a 50% failure rate.

Bill

Double yup....

[quote=Tony270WSM]
The actual number of scopes failing isn't the issue, sounds like they are having a higher percentage of failure. Really doesn't matter how many are being sold, it comes down to the ratio. Pretty basic math, but seems to be escaping some. Once again, isn't how many are being sold, is the ratio of solid vs suck.

Tony270WSM...there are two ways to look at this. In studies that are done with empirical data...the larger the data or object...the more true failure rate comes up. This is why in group studies they have a larger number of subjects. For example having 4,000 scopes in a study and obtaining 10% failure would equate to 400 scopes fail. Now having 8,000 scopes in a study and having 5% fail would give ya 400 scope failures. This is a true failure rate and it is hard to obtain because not every one complains and not everyone participates on ONE optics forum devote entirely to Leupolds. What I am trying to say is the number of sold scopes can change the overall scope failures. But most important from a large study is...with a larger number scopes sold....you (we customers) expect failure rates to go down. Leupold certainly does as they hawk their scopes with pride and charges an arm and leg for their scopes.

I am not making a stand on the best scope...I think Leupold is. However...I do not run out and buy the best and newest scope Leupold releases. My Vari-X III will do good for me...not sure how it stacks up in the last gleaming light before night befalls. However I am not going to pay $250 more for the "just in case" last 30 seconds I see Mr Monster.

I think this way because whilst in college in my electronics class...we had an elective course in Optical design. My instructor had his BS/MS in EE and a BS in ME. He was a retured Navy guy and worked on Submarines specifically optics. He loved to hunt and fish and in one class I asked him about scope optics and asked him with all of these advancements are these necessary or bebeficial. He stated that the advances in optical leapfrogs pretty quickly but in truth the human will never get all of that benefit in advancement...the human eye is its limitation. In the Navy the optics on submarine is much more an indicator of usafulness of advancement and how we can benefit. In short...he will not pay the $$ to keep up with technology. (remember this was 25 years ago but Leupy was touted heavily back then too!).

To this day I see Leupold doing alot of promotion and raising the price of their Leupold and this to me is all hype (no I am not downgrading Leupy) because their *very* small advancement they are touting it loudly and asking for 1/2 of your limbs but this does not bother me. Yes I can afford to buy more higher scope but my money can be used better elsewhere. I do not own any V-3 and only one V-III and do not feel I have been lacking. I think Leupy is basing their success on what others think on their reputation. Yeah they are good scopes...I'll give you that...but not sure if a $600 scope will function THAT much better than a $350 scope. Of course if I want to buy a new scope I still look at Leupold's lineup but I also know that my Monarch just keep ticking along...

I hear from a good source that the Burris Fullfield II is a good scope for less than what you'll pay for Leupold. Why want give your money to Burris instead of to Leupold and be happy about it?

Had one of the new burris's, made in the phillipine's, fail after 30 rds of 06, the older ones, especially the fixed power are great

I like chocolate ice cream.

Carry on...

I've had Phillipine Burris's, but they never failed me. We all have different experiences, and may disagree b/c of that, but that does not make someone wrong or right, just different track records. I have nothing against Nikon, but do get concerned seeing many 'sales' on refurbs on them at say Natchez/SWFA.

It begs the question, are those formerly broken/repaired scopes? Or just 'excess inventory' being sold off as '2nds' or refurbs? It does not instill confidence if those Nikon's were all sent back for repair due to failing.

One thing is for sure, when you get something that works, you have confidence, and when it does not work as intended, you lose confidence. Perception is reality and the truth lies w/in each individual's specific product/experience in question.

Thankfully for me, I have had very few true failed scopes of any brand, from Weaver, B&L/Bushnell, Burris, Tasco, Nikon, Leupold, Swaro, Etc. Have sent a few Leupold's back to get 'checked out' under their warranty program that I bought used.....and never had a complaint on customer service. BUT, I do agree w/above, the best scenario is never need it.

I wonder if the RISE in ALL brand scope failures is related to any RISE in the number of larger cartridged rifles, as their has been it seems a trend to the larger capacity Magnum rounds, and also in lighter rifles which adds G-force I understand?

"If your Leupold product fails to perform in any way, please contact a Leupold Product Specialist within our technical service department to determine if the problem can be solved without sending the product to Leupold.
Many times, the problem can be solved without sending the scope to us. Leupold technical service will assist you with the problem in the best and most efficient manner.

Leupold and Stevens, Inc. is an American, family-owned, fifth-generation company that has been designing, machining, and assembling precision optical instruments for 100 years. Leupold�s� success has been built on our commitment to your absolute satisfaction, and our commitment to building the best optics for the shooting sports and for the law enforcement / military community. It�s for these reasons that we offer the Leupold Full Lifetime Guarantee.

If any Leupold Golden Ring� product is found to have defects in materials or workmanship, we will, at our option, repair or replace it. FREE. Even if you are not the original owner. No warranty card is required. No time limit applies." - LEUPOLD

The above along with the availability of lighter and more compact scopes with a big eye box is a reason I tend to look towards Leupold first when it comes to an optical rifle sight used for hunting. I wish the world was perfect and every mass produced product fit perfectly, every commercial round of ammo shot perfectly out of every barrel, every big scope with many moving parts were as durable to recoil as their smaller and less complicated counterparts, and that there was no need to vet your tackle to ensure that everything was squared away. Things would be much easier:)

But in reality, expect everything to need hand fitting with proper vetting to shake out the bugs. Expect any large scope of any make, outside a super duty military grade optic sight, to fail at some point to excessive recoil above a mid-bore sporter weight rig, and expect Leupold Service to repair or replace any Gold Ring product if you have any problems with scope failures due to materials or workmanship.

In addition to having Leupold correct the scope problems, if you find yourself pissed off and unsure, you can always vent your frustrations on this forum to help alleviate your felt anger:)

Best:)

This sums it up neatly for me. If I'm basically choosing between scopes assembled in America from foreign glass and assemblies... then I'm gonna survey the field.

I agree on the big eye box, but it bears remembering that this is only at low power settings... at high power settings, the Leupold design in general really "pulls away" from the eye; eye relief shortens dramatically and eye box shrinks a bunch.

I've gotten used to the more constant eye relief of Conquests and my new Swaro. It's nice to not have the scope run away from you when you turn up the power. And yeah, the tradeoff appears to be low-power eye box.

Jeff, the Conquest is a good scope, but using it as an example of why Leupold is still a viable choice is such:

I just compared a VXII 3-9 x 40 with a Conquest 3-9 x 40 for a mixed use calling rifle. Though the Conquest has 3/10ths of one inch greater eye relief at max magnification, it has over 21% less FOV at 100 yards compared to the VXII at the same max setting. The VXII has multi-coat 4 lens system with 1/4MOA adjustments and ample range. It is a well balanced 12.4� long package weighing only 12.4oz, is very forgiving, and generally goes for under $300. On the other hand, the Conquest is a bulkier 13.5� in length, weighs nearly a full pound, and generally goes for around $400. I had greater preference towards the VXII and am confident I�ll lay down the same predators I�d lay down if I went with the Conquest.

I have serious doubts that somehow I�d be unable to vet my rifle with the LEU and be prone to failures, whereas going the route of the Conquest or Bushnell, etc, would somehow allow me to better vet my rifle and allow me to successfully hunt. I just do not see that happening in the civilian consumer market. In military applications, yes; but in that context, all of the scopes noted would be tossed in the trash heap outside of scopes such as the NF, SB, etc.

Best:)

Great product never ever a problem with them. There just for you I lied

I'm doing my best at trying to break a FXII 6x36. I'm currently at 60 rounds on my 8.5lb all up .300 WinMag. So far so good and nothing funky.