Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Nikon or Leupy

Looking at a 3-9x40. Opinions on a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 or Leupy VXI 3-9x40. Dale

Easy.

Leupold.

DF

I have used both Nikon and Leupold scopes. Had a Prostaff 2-7 on a BLR and had no issues with it performance-wise. Currently have Nikons on 2 rifles (Monarchs) and Leupolds on 3 (M8; VariX III. and Vari X 3). Honestly feel that for my purposes the glass is pretty much a toss up. I kind of like the Nikon reticle better by a slim margin. I much prefer that I can use Butler Creek caps on the Leupolds, whereas the Nikons pretty much are relegated to rubber band type scope covers, as any twist on the eye piece can affect focus. Both are good optics; what you decide on is up to you.

Exactamundo. No contest.

In my opinion, customer service from Leupold is light-years ahead of Nikon - which almost certainly will, sooner or later, be very important to you.

Not even a remotely fair comparison. The VX-1 is far and away a better scope. I have some of each and will be ridding myself of all the Nikons as funds permit.

I agree. Sooner or later (it is inevitable), you will be using Leupold customer service. Just a proven... That's why I would pick Nikon..

Certainly, when the Nikon goes TU, just toss it in the trash because their CS will be no help.

Yep.

Splurge. Get a VX2 3-9x40. The $100 dollar difference is worth it.

Think about this before you buy:

I agree. If the $100 simply isn't in the budget the VX-1 is a very good scope. The VX-2 is as much scope as anyone actually needs.

This isnt even close. Leupold by far. Prostaff is a very low end scope and nikons cs sucks. VX1 glass is far superior.

Agree with this if you can swing it.

I guess I'm in the minority regarding Nikon reliability. I have several with one dating back to the early 90's and have never had a problem with any of them. I've had exactly 1 Leupold and it would fail to hold zero on occasion. This was with a 1.75-6x36 mounted on a light kicking rifle.

For clarity, you've got to go pretty high up the Nikon line to get a comparable view, though.

+1

I would skip the VX-1 or Prostaff. The option for me would likely be to spend less and get a Burris Fullfield which I think offers more than either or save a bit more and get a VX2 as other suggested.

Bottom line, look down the tube, check out the features and see which one you like the best. Even though I do freelance PR/Shooting Event's for Nikon I am not going to tell you which one to choose. It's going on your rifle and you have to pick the one that works the best for you and your requirement's. I will tell you Nikon has a PROMO going on right now that includes the PROSTAFF 3-9 and 4-12 BDC scopes.
As for Nikon CS or Nikon warranty, watch the below 30 sec. video on Nikon's No Fault Warranty. 6 years of doing this job I have never had 1 scope go belly up or fail to hold zero during numerous event's and probably over 500,000 rounds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IweRfw4vMEY

Lot's of people know on the forum that I really like my VX3's w/CDS as hunting scopes. If you will remember I posted a month or two ago that I acquired a Monarch 3 w/XTR. I only have about 100 rounds with it so far on a 7-08, but it has been very reliable so far, and I can't tell much difference optically between it and and a 3.5-10x40 VX3. It has tracked reliably out to 500, back to 100, and in between. So far, so good, and time will tell.

I agree that the Burris Fullfield II is better than a Prostaff and a VX-1.