|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,136 Likes: 1
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,136 Likes: 1 |
I like the CDS concept and would love to see Leupold equip their 2.5-8, VX-3 with one. I would love for Zeiss to do a CDS type system on their 3-9 Conquest. At its competitive price and super glass, it would be hard to pass up.
The Swaro Z system BT's are nice, but need the addition of the Outdoorsmans turret, IMHO, do be equivalent to the CDS and it isn't cheap. A factory CDS type set up on a scope makes dollars and sense...
I have a feeling we're going to be seeing more offerings along this line, based on the reported popularity of the system.
DF
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,685
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,685 |
My 2.5-8 is on a 223 Ruger Hawkeye. the 3.5-10 on a long action Model 70. The LOP on both are the same. Both scopes are mounted as far back as they'll go. The eyepiece of the 2.5-8 is a little closer to my eye than the 3.5-10 but with both scopes on 8x I still have to crawl the stock a little with the 2.5-8 to get a full sight picture, don't have to with the 3.5-10. At lower powers no problem.
Not too scientific and it's probably different for someone with different/better vision, different build, etc. but that's how it works for me.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,172
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,172 |
I have both Leupolds and find the 3.5 x10 to be a bit more user friendly. Both of the scopes rarely see anything but 4x while hunting. Put me in the camp that has little use for a fixed 6, tried it and sold it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,282
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,282 |
That's why I use a 5.9X fixed
“Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6 |
Jeff, I've had both the 2.5-8x36 and 3.5-10x40... they're both excellent scopes. Really, I think two of the very best all-around scopes Leupold makes.
The 3.5-10x40 is probably my favorite Leupold scope, but I tend to pick scopes based on how they balance on a rifle, both size-wise, and weight-wise. I'd go 3.5-10x40 on the 8400 WSM and 2.5-8x36 on the 700 7-08, but there's no "right" answer... BTW, the 3.5-10x40 is 2oz's heavier than the 2.5-8x36. Sorry to bring this old thread back up, but I'm in the same dillema as JeffO was a while back. I like Brad's answer here as some people are saying the 3.5-10x40 is too "Bulky" and I don't really see the logic. It is 1 inch longer and 2 ounces heavier. Does it really have that much of and adverse effect on a rifle. Does your rifle want to twist out of your hands as you try to shoulder it. Come on guys. I just bought one for my EW and now I think I'll buy another one for my pre 64 fwt 30-06. Both will have the CDS which looks like a good thing to me. I know jeff went to the 2.5-8x36 and has had a few tracking problems with that scope, so in retrospect it may look like the CDS may have been the better option. Would like to hear JeffO's response to this to see if he thinks he made the right choice.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,943
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,943 |
Jeff, I've had both the 2.5-8x36 and 3.5-10x40... they're both excellent scopes. Really, I think two of the very best all-around scopes Leupold makes.
The 3.5-10x40 is probably my favorite Leupold scope, but I tend to pick scopes based on how they balance on a rifle, both size-wise, and weight-wise. I'd go 3.5-10x40 on the 8400 WSM and 2.5-8x36 on the 700 7-08, but there's no "right" answer... BTW, the 3.5-10x40 is 2oz's heavier than the 2.5-8x36. Sorry to bring this old thread back up, but I'm in the same dillema as JeffO was a while back. I like Brad's answer here as some people are saying the 3.5-10x40 is too "Bulky" and I don't really see the logic. It is 1 inch longer and 2 ounces heavier. Does it really have that much of and adverse effect on a rifle. Does your rifle want to twist out of your hands as you try to shoulder it. Come on guys. I just bought one for my EW and now I think I'll buy another one for my pre 64 fwt 30-06. Both will have the CDS which looks like a good thing to me. I know jeff went to the 2.5-8x36 and has had a few tracking problems with that scope, so in retrospect it may look like the CDS may have been the better option. Would like to hear JeffO's response to this to see if he thinks he made the right choice. The weight and dimensions you highlight may not seem much, I firmly like the 2.5x8 much more because of the feel of the rifle more than the specific magnification. In fact, I like the 1.75x6 even better for the same reason (have the latter on my favorite rifle of all time, happens to be a 300 Win Mag).
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6 |
Jeff, I've had both the 2.5-8x36 and 3.5-10x40... they're both excellent scopes. Really, I think two of the very best all-around scopes Leupold makes.
The 3.5-10x40 is probably my favorite Leupold scope, but I tend to pick scopes based on how they balance on a rifle, both size-wise, and weight-wise. I'd go 3.5-10x40 on the 8400 WSM and 2.5-8x36 on the 700 7-08, but there's no "right" answer... BTW, the 3.5-10x40 is 2oz's heavier than the 2.5-8x36. Sorry to bring this old thread back up, but I'm in the same dillema as JeffO was a while back. I like Brad's answer here as some people are saying the 3.5-10x40 is too "Bulky" and I don't really see the logic. It is 1 inch longer and 2 ounces heavier. Does it really have that much of and adverse effect on a rifle. Does your rifle want to twist out of your hands as you try to shoulder it. Come on guys. I just bought one for my EW and now I think I'll buy another one for my pre 64 fwt 30-06. Both will have the CDS which looks like a good thing to me. I know jeff went to the 2.5-8x36 and has had a few tracking problems with that scope, so in retrospect it may look like the CDS may have been the better option. Would like to hear JeffO's response to this to see if he thinks he made the right choice. The weight and dimensions you highlight may not seem much, I firmly like the 2.5x8 much more because of the feel of the rifle more than the specific magnification. In fact, I like the 1.75x6 even better for the same reason (have the latter on my favorite rifle of all time, happens to be a 300 Win Mag). That's because they arn't much. Goes to show you there's a reason they make differnet scopes for differnet folks.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,862
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,862 |
bsa1917hunter, Does it really have that much of and adverse effect on a rifle. Does your rifle want to twist out of your hands as you try to shoulder it. Last year I hunted with an Ultralight rifle which had a twenty-ounce 50mm scope mounted on it. Nary a problem.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
BSA, I wouldn't say I had tracking "problems" per se. I did have my zero move once and the scope didn't track right with my charts, if memory serves, but I'm not ready to say it's got problems.
Honestly I kind of shelved it when my 7 WSM finally arrived; I haven't fired that rifle in a couple months! I'll get back to it after hunting season.
I could like either scope in the title of this thread. Where I get confused (don't take much, lol) is that the 3.5-10x40 Leup and 3-9x40 Conquest are essentially the same size. I do like those 3-9 Conquests... $379 with a nice lil turret...
As to weight here's my take. On my Kimber 7 WSM I briefly ran a 3-9 Conquest this summer. Compared to the 3-10x42 Swaro AV on it now, it was noticeably more "tippy" when carrying one-handed. Does that matter? I think that's a personal preference thing. I'd not expect to even notice it on a heavier rifle- in fact, I don't, on my .338 XCR and m700 30-06, which have those 3-9's mounted. But I did notice it on a featherweight.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,076
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,076 |
Jeff,
I'm late to this discussion but, given the two options in your original post, and the fact the you want a light rifle all up, go with the 2.5-8. You really lose nothing but some bulk and a few oz.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
Heavywalker, first: howdy! How's things?
Yes, I bought the 2.5-8. New VX3. Nice scope. I plan a CDS for it, later.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,076
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,076 |
Things are pretty good.
CDS? I have tried every flavor of leupold turret there is and at this point, for me, it is M1 or nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6 |
BSA, I wouldn't say I had tracking "problems" per se. I did have my zero move once and the scope didn't track right with my charts, if memory serves, but I'm not ready to say it's got problems.
Honestly I kind of shelved it when my 7 WSM finally arrived; I haven't fired that rifle in a couple months! I'll get back to it after hunting season.
I could like either scope in the title of this thread. Where I get confused (don't take much, lol) is that the 3.5-10x40 Leup and 3-9x40 Conquest are essentially the same size. I do like those 3-9 Conquests... $379 with a nice lil turret...
As to weight here's my take. On my Kimber 7 WSM I briefly ran a 3-9 Conquest this summer. Compared to the 3-10x42 Swaro AV on it now, it was noticeably more "tippy" when carrying one-handed. Does that matter? I think that's a personal preference thing. I'd not expect to even notice it on a heavier rifle- in fact, I don't, on my .338 XCR and m700 30-06, which have those 3-9's mounted. But I did notice it on a featherweight.
Thanks Jeff, I appreciate your feedback. However, I think I am going to go with the 3.5-10x40 with CDS since the 2.5-8x36 doesn't come with the CDS (I don't want the hassle and extra expense of doing it down the road). The scope will be going on a pre 64 model 70 fwt and with the ring and mounting system I'll be using I think it will work out great (I made someone a promise I'd use their mounting set-up on the rifle and it's one I prefer on the classic pre 64 anyway). I know it is a toss-up when considering these 2 scopes since they are both damn good and so comparable. I think in the end, a guy would be very happy with either one ot the 2.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
A big consideration for me, also, was that I want this scope to do double-duty on my .325 BLR. I have to mount scopes as low as they'll go on that rifle due to the comb. In extra-lows a 3.5-10x40 wouldn't clear the barrel.
I think you made a GREAT choice!
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6 |
A big consideration for me, also, was that I want this scope to do double-duty on my .325 BLR. I have to mount scopes as low as they'll go on that rifle due to the comb. In extra-lows a 3.5-10x40 wouldn't clear the barrel.
I think you made a GREAT choice! Thanks Jeff, I just ordered it 10 minutes ago, so we'll see . I was going to by one thur nsaqam, but he said his source was out and on backorder. I checked midway and they are on backorder now and I ordered one yesterday and my order was taking a while processing and I started to panic . I've been eyeballing one on ebay for $476.00 with free priority mail shipping so I bought it. Now If I don't like them I'll be chit out of luck I guess. I've heard the new VX3 is a pretty damn fine scope and I'll put them to the test
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
Hopefully no sandpapered lenses this time, eh?
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6 |
Hopefully no sandpapered lenses this time, eh? No, its a new scope Jeff. It comes with the coupon code to get the free CDS from leupold. I've never had a problem ordering scopes from ebay.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,720
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,720 |
To me,a rifle has to balance in my hands,I don't use a sling,it's in my pocket when needed.Both of these scope are great,pleny of power and clear,but they must "fit" the rifle to make a package....
Come on America, Athletes and actors are not heroes, only soldiers, airmen,marines and sailors get that respect�and let's add firemen and LEO's
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,088 Likes: 6 |
To me,a rifle has to balance in my hands,I don't use a sling,it's in my pocket when needed.Both of these scope are great,pleny of power and clear,but they must "fit" the rifle to make a package.... I totally agree, we'll see how she balances out but I think it will be pretty good. I just didn't want to put a tasco on it. As a matter of fact, I need to go and loctite some bases down on that rifle. My friend Whitebird gave me the bases and rings and I want to do what I told him I was going to do and use them on this fwt.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 18,508 |
BSA,
have you thought about waiting until the VX-6 2-12x42 comes out to take a look at it?
|
|
|
|
599 members (10ring1, 007FJ, 10gaugemag, 1lessdog, 219DW, 1234, 54 invisible),
2,517
guests, and
1,323
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,201
Posts18,485,216
Members73,966
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|