That’s a shame. Such a handy and useful little scope for us woods folks:

https://www.leupold.com/fx-ii-ultralight-25x20-wide-duplex-riflescope

Good 'ol wide duplex strikes again.

It looks like all of the Fixed scopes, except the FX-1 4x28 rimfire are discontinued. Even the 6x42 Wide Duplex is discontinued.

I remember back in 2010, I had a 1-4 30 mm tube scope on my 9.3.

The fkn thing weighed 15.5 ounces, 20 ounces in rings

Nowadays, a fixed 2.5x on my latest 9.3, what was I thinking?!

Nobody needs 1 power, I can't even figure out the point of 1 power. 4 power is no better than 2.5 power.

The fixed 2.5 leupold in warne mountain tech rings, shaved well over a half pound of pointless retardation off my current 9.3x62.

If Leupold doesn’t watch what they are doing
LEUPOLD MAY BE DISCONTINUED PERIOD

They don’t discontinue a product because it’s making them too much money……

Sadly, the market has moved away from what I would call practical hunting scopes.

That sucks. Those 2.5Xs are wonderfully light scopes with huge eye relief. It’s really a shame to lose the option.
Leupold has been trying their best to alienate a large portion of their customer base. At some point the customer retention vs customer acquisition equations ought to show that keeping some of the old favorite scopes in the catalog will keep some of the old favorite customers buying their products. Especially when Leupold was one of the only remaining games in town for handy fixed power scopes. But the MBAs only worried about the bottom line.

Glad I have one, even if it is the wide duplex...

Like most scopes if it works really well for you, they're going to stop making them.

As for 1x almost all the coyotes I shoot are shot using 1x(1-4x20), 1.5x(1.5-6x40) or 2x(2-12x42) rarely ever get off the bottom power, FOV is far more important for the way I hunt than X's.

Just put an older M8 2.5x Compact on my 338-06 carbine. Makes for a great little package. Planning to kill an elk with it this fall.
Damn shame simple practical scopes are no longer being made.
Rex

I have one on a 45-70, but have also used 1-4s.

Pluses for the 2.5 are: The eye relief is very welcome with some of the loads I've fired, but as time passed, I've toned it down a little. The weight and size makes the effect on handling minimal. It is very robust. Its Cons, in comparison, are less field of view and a narrower eyebox.

The various 1-4X20s I've had, to include the 1.5-5 VX-3i, generally had wider field of view on 1X, and minimal effect on handling. The additional magnification is welcome during zeroing but never used in the field. The eyebox is more generous, a welcome attribute while hunting.

The "loss" of eye relief never caused an issue, and I'm sure the small variables couldn't take the beating the FX can, being it has more parts and all. All this led me to slightly favor the 1-4 over the FX, and between the VX-II, VX-2, and VX-3i, the VX-II was my favorite.

But I still use the FX, and hate to see it disappear from the lineup. Mine will have a job as long as I have a Guide gun.

Never cared for the wide duplex myself. Preferred the 1-4x20 with regular duplex for my lever guns but of course Leupold discontinued that and replaced it with the vx-freedom with it's fuucked up pig plex and MOA circle plex reticles. Idiots.

With the sort of resurgence of lever guns these days, one would think this scope would be selling well and they have so many other applications also. I have one on my .308 Hawkeye compact and it is about perfect for that little rifle.

Yeah you'd think but people are generally idiots and apparently would prefer to either fuuck up the handling of their lever gun with a 20 oz. 30mm LPVO or put a 3-9x40 or something similar on it. Nobody makes a truly good lever gun scope anymore.

Son shot his first moose with one on a Ruger Ranch in 450 Bushmaster. Can't imagine a better scope for that little carbine. Every-one seems to be going for big 30mm variables that are "clickable" to ranges that most of us shouldn't be shooting at.

I prefer the wide duplex

Why?

10 oz in warne mountain tech rings. A full 4 inches away from my face.

325 grain oryx over 64 grains of powder, in a light rifle, I really appreciate that eye relief......

I think these were still in the ultralight line. few years ago I was still using a silver 3-9x33 on my weatherby ultralight 308. it was a friction style. once I got it said it never came off zero. it wasn't the best that anything except very light if I recall correctly 8.8 Oz but it got the job done with no issues..

I have one on a model 94ae, I feel sorry for those who don't.

Another stupid move by a company that is doing it best to fail.

My use/ownership of Leupold products ceased in 1998.

This is a sad story. Glad I grabbed one recently.

prairie goat;
Top of the morning to you sir, I hope the day's breaking bright and fair down your way and you're well.

Interestingly, well or not depending, I just stuck a 1978 made 2.5X in my pocket for "trading stock" as I head out to the local gun show.

When our girls first started hunting it was on our eldest's Swede carbine and it was noticeably faster than whatever other scope I'd put on there before that for her.

Then it went onto a 336 Marlin that I'd worked over in the shop. It was one of those rifles one had to shoot to appreciate somehow.



Hitting clay pigeons laying on the bank at 100yds was seemingly easy with it. Shooting offhand too.

Buddy came over when I was tuning on it, began to lay down brown bills which are $100 Cdn by the way, until I relented even though it wasn't for sale.

I did keep the scope, but somehow in the years since I've not found a project for it.

All the best to you all this weekend.

Dwayne

The Leupold 1-4's where actually 1.6 on low. They just called em a 1-4. they eventually changed it to 1.5-4 on Various-x and freedoms etc.
Always wanted a 2.5 fixed Leupold never could find one. If so it wasn't much lower in price then a variable.

The Leupold 1-4's where actually 1.6 on low. They just called em a 1-4. they eventually changed it to 1.5-4 on Various-x and freedoms etc.
Always wanted a 2.5 fixed Leupold never could find one. If so it wasn't much lower in price then a variable. My Compact 2-7 is 8.1oz not the greatest scope as far as clarity etc. It sits on a .22LR

Unless its wanting toughness is there any reason for the 2.5 over a variable?

6.5 ounces

Really glad I bought one before they were DC’d.
Still in factory shrink-wrap in my safe.
Thanks Phil.

I'll probably lose sleep over that LOL NOT

Gotcha. 3 oz less than their 1-4x20s is a good bit.

Another reason, at least for me, is the trimmer size/shape of the eyepiece doesn't have a clearance issue. The 2.5x fits fine on a Mini-14 Ranch where the 'zoom' ring on the 1-4x20 hits the 'ears' on the rear sight assembly. Those fixed M8-2.5x Leupolds really are awesome scopes!

How do you guys find they do around the end of shooting light? Still work well enough?

I’m seeing a great deal of lever rifle pictures with a red dot and magnifier combo. I suspect it’s people getting bored with AR’s to a degree and they find lever rifles are more often equipped with muzzle threads and rails. All the well equipped AR owner has to do is transfer some equipment at that point.

The package you have pictured does look very handy.

That trim eyepiece does a nice job clearing a Marlin lever gun hammer as well when mounted super low.

I’ve had no problems in low light. You get a pretty large exit pupil at 2.5x.

Have one in the safe NIB, waiting for the right rifle to come along!

Happy to hear it. I love the idea of this on a light carbine for 200 yard hunting but I was worried that it becomes too hard to use as the light gets low. That's reassuring. Thanks Andy.

Agree.

Hopefully the void is filled.

Have an M8 2.5 on a Henry .45 Colt and a 1-5 Vari X-III on a #1 .45-70.

Not wild about the frictionless turrets, but they do hold zero. The M8 is about the darkest scope I own.

If I had it to do over, I’d put a red dot of some sort on the Henry. I’ve come to the conclusion that they’re plenty for a pistol caliber carbine.

I do think a lightweight, straight tube scope is the way to go for stuff like .350 Legends and .450 Bushmasters. Throw .45-70’s, .30-30’s, and the like in there as well.

One thing I’ve noticed is that guys tend to want to shoot at 1” dots to zero a rifle and if they can’t see the dot, they think they don’t have enough scope. I’ve asked when they last saw an orange, 1” sticker on the side of a deer. I’ve gotten everything from puzzled looks to middle fingers as a response…..

Sounds like a perfect application for one. Hope you can find one!

100, hopefully some astute business people at the good manufacturers are seeing the void and hearing the cries...this prs bullsh1t fad will turn to practical rifle hunting one day again....just not right now, hang in there folks, the trend will go the opposite direction one day

first guys back in the door on this will do well, but basically start with studying the small and loved 1" leupold stuff, it won't take much to hit the 21st century visions of this

trim dimensions, add in illumination reticle center dot preferably by solar or fiber (no battery required but if so as back up), a simple elevation solution to 600 (cds-zl is the best of dials, but lr -duplex reticles also good), variety of fixed power options, 2/4/6....and then 1-6 type variables, with objectives only big enough to keep them trim and low low mounting

this trend will come around one day again.....trijicon leupold.....would be my preferred players....but holosun could have a chance here to get in the game with their awesome solar tech, I'd trust night force, maybe swfa but they seem all a little too prs or military oriented still....they haven't seen the void where leupold ruled yet and just brought us competition with the 21st century upgrades....it's that simple

we're talking 1" tubes, 40mm or SMALLER objectives, 10x max on variables otherwise a low mag game from 1-6x primarily, and add in some elevation solutions (simple ones because that is hunting and what hunters want) and the illumination. dot is a no brainer.....the biggest scope in the line should be about 2-10x 40mm and 15 ounces maximum, Not one of these scopes should be over 1 lb

have them track, rtz, and hold zero to fencepost driving levels then look out lol....there's gonna a bunch of prs crap hit the classified haha, and a whole new 0-600 shooting discipline will emerge, life-size targets, 2 boxes tops over a weekend, speed to shot the critical focus etc. and sub 10 lb rigs including any bipod or aiming aid attached, and no training wheels circus level scopes etc. lol....factory ammo/factory rifles and then custom and hand loaded ammo categories....that's it, real world, real hunting

focus on making hunting shooting the most instinctive as possible, kiss as possible, the natural laws governed by hunting...600 max, 3/4 second tof, 20"+ wind reading drops off drastically in real world hunting, we're not chasing the 2% here....goal should be to improve the 98%, far more like 3d archery....prs went the wrong direction from proper hunter development

I agree. I remember the magnum craze. Every other deer hunter I knew in the SE were convinced they needed a 7mm mag or 300 mag to kill whitetails at 150 yards.

What will they be made of?

Adamantium?

Unobtanium?

Looking at the originator, maybe irrelevantium.
He sure doesn't let facts get in the way of his ideas.

Gee, kids these days, what’s a heavy 3-9x40? 13.4 oz is Trijicon accupoint. I think leupolds were lighter. What’s their 3.5-10 weigh? 12.5? I used to run 30mm side focus leupolds that were 40mm objective, og mk4, and they were 15.5 oz...

All aluminum...wtf you think they made of? Do kids these days even know what actual hunting scopes and rifles look like? Or is it all 20 oz plus ffp mil chassis tanks etc?

Lots of 33-36 mm stuff in the 10-12 oz range. And no that’s not tube size lol.

Target Hubble’s and Hunting Scopes are two different things. If you can’t get to 600 with 1 lb or less in glass then you have bigger problems to worry about.

Want all the bells and lariat auto drive with sunroof models to hunt? Or just a plain Jane no fat work truck model? No offence...actually much offence and disdain to those who can’t see hunting is a KISS principle no fat is where it’s at type thing so...

So...take what’s good about 21st century tech and know how in terms of a battery optional illum dot and cds-zl or lr duplex type reticles and the keep the best no fat envelopes from the 20th and improve on that with 21st know how.....should allow us to build 21st century proper hunting scopes. In same envelopes with 21st century honed features. Hunting features. Not bullsh1t prs ffp extra fat features in extra fat scopes...useless to go to 600.

I’ll carry my fat around my middle thanks.

I suppose it’s natural to assume that shooting at a small target will let one get smaller groups, but actually the target should be chosen to allow the reticle to be centered easily; size, shape, and color. The best size for a low-power scope might be pretty large.

Was thinking a 3x5 index card represents heart and brain housing group quite fine

Were it a higher power scope I usually just use a 1 inch-ish piece of green masking tape.

The 2.5 ultralight goes 9.5 oz in warne mountain tech rings. Of all the scoped 9.3x62 mausers I've used here in Alaska, this fn mauser scoped with a 2.5x is the lightest one yet at exactly 8lbs even:

Well poo on Leupold. I was a huge fan of their 3x fixed scope which of course no one bought so the cancelled it but brought it back for a little while. If they would make one with a #4 reticle I think I would by 4 or 5 just in case

My thoughts exactly. Instead of trying to do what everyone does now, why not be different and stand out? It’s a shame that quality, simple and compact fixed power hunting scopes are a thing of the past.

I've been running the 2.5x ultralights for quite some time. They're just a basic sighting device. A "half a scope".

I've also run other "half a scopes": The burris 2.75 scout. It had a more legible reticle at low light and was better than the leupold. It was equally light at about 7oz.

I'm certain that burris could configure the fixed scout into a standard scope. It has a longer tube, than the 2.5x ultralight, which is too short.

The field of view on the 2.5x ultralight isn't all that great either. I could honestly give a flying f uk that the leupold half-a-scope is discontinued.

I'll talk with Burris about the 2.75 fixed scope.

The Sightron S1 1.75-5 only weighs 12.7oz, not bad at all.

nice looking little scope. Are they well regarded?

The Vx-II 2-7x32 is 9.8 oz if you find one used and the vx-Freedom in same is 11.7 I think? But depending who you ask around here they lose zero if you look at em wrong too lol

Not really a half-a-scope. Just another beat around the bush sized scope. A nice 2-7 weighs 12 oz or less, and oftentimes has a usable, range compensating reticle.

My first Alaska rifle was equipped 1.75-5 burris fullfield.

Anyhow, these 6-7 oz fixed low power scopes. There's still a market for them. Somebody will easily fill the void.