Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics How do Leupold VX-2's compare?

pisssssssh.......




Casey

Nobody can dispute that Bob

Of course,
My favorite scope to look through is the 3-9 or 3.5-10, but the demensions are too big for a lightweight rifle--or any S/A big game rifle IMO.



Casey

Noooo, you're wrong! Your eyes did not see the VX3 as better!

No, he just saw the VX-3 better........the other scopes were still in the gun case........



Casey

If different scopes have the same features and track the same would you go with one that has better optics?

This is the post of the week. You've spent years trying to convince everyone loopies were the optical equivalents of much pricier scopes, which of course, they aren't, then you turn around and post this little gem.

Not only are you loopyphile, you're a hypocrite.

I have 8 of the various 20 mm Leupolds and I'll be danged if by looking I can tell the difference between my VariX II's and III's than that of my VX I shotgun scopes. Optically they all appear the same.

Personally I'm VX'd out and Vari confused beyond the point of even trying to understand just what the Hades they are up to with all these changes? I guess the old saying that a "fool and his gold are soon parted" plays really big in the optics industry.

I have a Bushnell Banner 1.75-4x32mm shotgun scope with 6" of eye relief that I really enjoy using just as much as the Leupy's. OK Glass, Good eye relief, quick focus ocular bell, circleX reticle for quick target acquisition.

I can definitely tell the difference between the Vari-XII, VXII, FXIII, and VXIII, and the FX3 and VX3...

Who is luckier, Jordan Smith or Chainsaw?

Probably Chainsaw, financially speaking. But maybe I'm luckier, practically speaking, if my eyes can take advantage of the enhanced optical quality?

Jordan probably an age thing. I'm at the point where I can't hardly remember all those Roman Numerals anymore much less try to tell the difference optically. I guess my homework assignment is to study up on what a FX3 and VX3 actually are. I suppose if I ever get my chit together I'll forget where I put it.......

It isn't age...

I can see a difference between my Meoptas, Kahles, and Docters compared to Leupold. That is what really turned me off of Leupold. Thinking about finally buying another Loopy, just because I want a lightweight scope with a turret. I can live with less resolution etc, to gain the other features I need.

You guys must have much better eyes than I've got, even though at age 51 I've never worn glasses a day in my life except to read small print. If I'm trying to read business cards at 100 yds I may need expensive glass. For big game hunting anything from an FFII, VX2, Elite, Monarch on up does the trick, out to and past legal shooting.

^Yessir, but those all have better glass than the VXI, Rifleman, Vari-X series, etc

Maybe not better than a late Vari-X III.

I believe they are. The Vari-XIIIc is a good scope, but not as bright or clear as the ones listed above, IME.

There isn't a Vari-X IIIc, there is a Vari-X IIc.

I'm referring to the ones manufactured after they introduced MC4. I thought they were called Vari-X IIIc, but whatever you want to call them, those are the once I was talking about.

I certainly wouldn't waste good money on a Rifleman or a VXI. I had a Vari X III on a Ruger 7mag forever and killed lots of stuff at dusk thirty.