First Leup in a while. I'll do a much more rigorous test later, but just had it out at last light next to my 3-10x42 Swaro. Initial impression- the color balance of the new coatings REALLY works better for my eye. The Swaro was brighter, but the Leup appears at first blush to be very good.

It's a 2.5-8x36, just the straight duplex. I'll add a turret later; dunno which one yet. I'd been looking hard at the 3.5-10 but for what I want to do with it the 2.5-8 is better.

The power ring, when turned, has a very fine "zzzzz" to it. Like a super fine gear type feel. Are they all like that now?

This was a real PITA choice for me. Sure wish there was such thing as a light, trim Conquest.

What are you going to put it on, Jeff?

Hmmm...

Well, see that's the thing. It's going to do double duty. I've got a Rem 700 MR in 7mm-08 that's had a few other Leup 2.5-8's on it; great scope for that rifle. Then, I have my .325 BLR, which really is a cool rifle, especially post-trigger-job. However, the comb of the stock is such that scopes need to be really low. A Leup 2.5-8 in xtra-lows works, this I already know.

So it'll depend on whats got me horned up at the time, or what's getting hunted, but it's mission is those two rifles.

A 3.5-10x40 won't clear the barrel on the BLR in the x-lows. Also not ideal sizewise for the 7-08. IMHO.

I had to fester on this one a bit, but in the end Leup was the obvious choice and I've got no problem giving them my money!

You do realize that Leupold jacks up the price $100 on their new scopes to cover the warranty.

Yes, I do realize that.

Why? There are several greats scopes in that price range, and a few that are indeed better than Leupold. You could have gotten a new Monarch with a turret kit for less money for example...

Ruh roh. Here we go!

Well, that'd mean branching out into untested waters <grin>. I'm comfortable with a Leup or a Conquest on a hunting rifle and my Swaro is proving to be solid. Don't know nuthin' about no Nikons.

DC223- you running a 2-8 Nikon? If so, chime in on it.

Jeff, sounds like you got just what the Dr. ordered for your needs. Enjoy.

There's also a commonality thing going. I've got a Vari-X 2.5-8 on my .223, which is my kids training "real" rifle. So having one on the 7-08, which is their next step up, makes sense.

This scope choice was complex (yeah, I know, I'm an overthinker +P <g>); it tied all the way into my 7WSM that I'm PATIENTLY WAITING FOR!

IMHO that is part of the fun.

It should look brighter than the Swaro because thew Swaro is bigger. That will allow more light to hit the eye.
They might be more expensive than a comparable brand from another source. The trouble is, there are no competing brands. For instance, how much do those super hard coatings add to the scope ? For a hint, take a look at their prismatic scope with and w/o the super hard coatings.
Then there are the costs associated with Leupold's extensive testing. They aren't free either. E

haha! Like other optics makers don't test? Leupold has all the testing they need for free, with all the returns they get.

They do have a good warranty, I've used it <grin>. I'm quite sure the fact that every single Leup product ever made is still warrantied, is factored into the cost of the new scopes. How could it not be?

Otoh, good product IMHO and whenthey are the rught fit for a given rifle, I like them just fine.

Hey, I've bashed Leup. And my last half-dozen scope purchases before this have been Zeiss. But they've fixed the color balance issue, I'll soon find out if the erectors are any good, and it's a light, trim scope for $399 with a great company behind it.

I can like all that...

I disagree with your assertion.

Are you comparing the VX3 against a Nikon?

Where is the Nikon manufactured, Phillipines? I'm curious what their pay scale is compared to the hard working people of Beaverton, Oregon. I'd pay a little more for "Made in the USA."

Who has the better warranty and re-sale?

Jeff-O, I'm glad you posted this review. I found a minty tang safety Ruger UL and you helped me decide the VX3 2.5-8 is the way to go.

Leupold only tests a few scopes from a production run. If they tested thoroughly like Zeiss does, they'd cost even more.

Oh, I think it's much more than that...................

Bastid.... grin...

They, for a long time, actually recoil tested their scopes. They still do as well as impact test them. Until very recently nobody else did. One of the major reason's why they have such a solid rep for reliability world wide among serious hunters. E

Tracking woes, expensive warranties, fuzzy resolution, and all that "bling"... I can't believe anybody would even consider a Leupold these days.

I hear good things about March scopes tho!

24HCF is a large site and while we hear about some Leupold problems how can we quantify the number of Leupolds fixed to rifles performing as advertised? Sure, make enough product and there will be failures.

I have a number of "bling" Leupolds and have compared them against my Conquests and NF and haven't noticed "fuzzy resolution." Would Zeiss or Nikon honor a waranty claim if I purchased their product second or third hand?

Expensive warrant?

As previously stated, I believe the extra $100 covers more than the warranty. Chalk that up to paying a man or women an honest wage. I only wish my vehicle insurance policy was as simple.

And what if it is an expensive warrant. I may consider it one time insurance policy in the event something goes wrong for me or my child if I decide to pass it on.

My musings.

Obviously, you've never dreamed about being in a hunting situation, where you have 17 bucks in a herd, at the last 30 seconds of daylight. You need at least a S&B scope to pick out the biggest buck. Leupold won't get the job done...

Oh, I have dreamed and your point is valid. If I could invest $10K into an AK hunt, I would be looking at S&B.

I can't dispute your above scenerio, but unfortunately Leupold and NightForce is the most I can afford. S&B is no longer an option after allowing my wife to be a stay at home mom. I suppose I'm the guy Leupold targets and the Europeans have adjusted their lines to compete.

That being said, If I can't pick out which buck from the herd with my Leupold, then I'm hunting beyond legal shooting time.

I spent a little time looking over the March line. Interesting product.

How do you have the drag set?

Hey, I'm just repeating the things I've learned on the internet.

Yup, a solid source of intel.

It can be if you have a good wheat/chaff separator. If you're really green it can be a mess.

Put a piece of tape around the bell, and nobody could tell the difference looking though a VX1 or VX3. Leupold has done a good job "convincing" otherwise though...

Bullshit.

Thanks! You just saved me a whole bunch of money.

I just can't wait to hear about Jeff 0's tracking woes.

dc's bias is obvious ... it's like responding to SM700

You're welcome!

Hopefully there won't be any. I'll report either way.

The 2.5-8X36 is an excellent scope. I'm sure it'll serve you well.

Terry

I suspect so, Terry. It's my first of the VX3 generation, but I've owned at least a half-dozen Leupold 2.5-8's. I now have two- this new one, and a Vari-X from about 10 years ago that has a turret on it and tracks very, very well.

Then again I've seen some really wonky things from Leup's when turning adjustments so, we'll see!

I hear the VX3's have super hard coatings.........an industry first

Sounds like something a former congressman...Anthony Wiener would say...OH, Weiner

Coatings that improve light transmission, color rendition, and perhaps negate fogging and bead water concern me more than scratching lens, but I am not as abusive perhaps in how I use my equipment.

I do agree w/supporting USA made. Nice Conquests are supporting jobs here as well. If they ever 'small size' their models as lean as Leupy, they will be even more popular.

My fav Leupolds are the fixed powers and the 2.5-8 and 3.5-10x40. I see lots of pros w/those more than others - for MY needs. They IMHO have more going well for them than not.

DC - would 'blue' tape work best? LOL.

Too bad VX2 2-7s do not have a proper power ring to grasp, and a turn friendly knob in terms of ease of use like other brands. That 2-7 would be very viable then...

That said, I like other brands, but a FX2 in 6x36 would be the last scope to ever get rid of for any rifle...the 4x33 running 2nd. Nothing wrong w/the view of the 6x42 if you have an extra C-note.

That said, a VX3, in 2-8 might be a strong contender for my all around pick for an affordable, proven, quality variable, next to the 3-10x40. The 3-9 Zeiss is sandwiched right there and it's sharp etched reticle and crystal clear optics makes it worth serious consideration, not to mention price, but no doubt, some rifles just 'go together' better w/a leaner sized Leupy.

John Barsness reported not so long ago that most modern lense coatings are durable, far more durable than years ago. I'll take Rainguard type coatings any day over "super hard" coating given a choice.

DC, you get more delusional by the post!

I sure wish those rainguard type coatings were more common. It'd make my life easier! I use flip-ups by necessity.

I'm VERY easy on lenses, just ask anyone who's bought one of my 2.5-8's <grin>. That said I love the color balance of the VX3 coatings and if they are indeed very hard- I'm cool wit dat!

I have to put it through the paces some more, but so far my VX3 2.5-8 has not impressed me with its tracking. At 500 m last weekend when I dialed up to 500, back down to a 200 yard zero, and back up, the zero at 500 varied some.

I recently had a thread about fixed vs variable. I"m wanting to re-scope my 7mag, and seriously consider a 6x FX3. I want a matte finish, and the one thing I don't like is that is only comes with a heavy duplex, wide duplex, or LR duplex. I really wanted the plain 'ol duplex. The other thread about vx3 vs Swaro A3 addresses my concerns as well about the heavy duplex. I've been leaning a little towards a S&B summit due to this.

JGR, you got any experience with or first-hand reports on the Summit?

The wide duplex is not enough different from the standard duplex to bother me... totally stupid move to limit them that way, though. The heavy duplex is the one I just cannot like...

Bummer.

I've got $369 Conquests that have been tracking like STUDS for dozens and dozens of trips to my 600-yard range.

Well, this is the right scope for these two rifles (other than a Swaro Z3 3-9, which I can't afford) so... if it doesn't track, I'll just send it back to Leup until it does!

My VX3 2.5-8X is going on hunting season #3.Pretty nice scope,and last year it was right where I left it the year before...did not need to touch the sight settings....but...

Now it's hitting low right at 300 yards, and I'm not sure why.......this bugs me; I hate it when POI moves and I don't know why....

Having had a slew of Vari X III's,VX III's,and this VX3,my eyes tell me the newest one's have more contrast and to my eye just look better....especially as light conditions get challenging.

I also take a bit more comfort in those dual erector springs.

Yeah, a couple of trusted guys here who personally own and use them have spoken very highly of them. I have personally not used one.

I've got one sitting in my safe, might take it out for a spin this weekend.

What's your take on it so far?

Well, optically, it's nice. Other than that, really can't say because I haven't used it. Like you, I've heard good things about it from people whose opinions I trust.

Sighted in the 2.5-8 today; it passed the first test but it weren't much of a test. Bore-sighted it, first shot was 3.5" high and a skootch left... clicked it 14 clicks down and it hit exactly on-line with the bullseye,, still a skootch left. 2 clicks right, then the family came home and started yelling at me!

Seeing it move 3.5" with 14 clicks, no shot needed to settle in, was a good first step.

I'm glad too because I've been seriously considering a 2.5-8 leupy for my new fwt .

My only beef with the 2.5-8x36 in general is that it's not a stellar low light scope. Presumably the 36mm objective has something to do with that. In the past the slightly yellow tint of the coatings also, IMHO, didn't help shall we say.

I'll be comparing this with my Swaro 3-10x42 and 3-9x40 and 1.8-5.5x38mm Conquests here soon at last light. From my one little quick comparo the other day I can say already that the new color-balance of the coatings helps MY crappy right eye!

I tend to overthink chit (lol) but I REALLY overthunk this purchase. Long, tangled story. I really wanted to try a 3.5-10 Leup but that just wasn't the right scope. If for some reason the Swaro in my safe awaiting the Kimber coming back doesn't work out, I'll likely try that on there next.

But the 2.5-8 is just a darn nice all-around hunting scope, when weight and size are at a premium.

Again, IMHO.

Funny you say that on 'low light' as I recall a lady at Leupold telling me on the phone that the 2.5-8x36 gave the 'highest light transmission' of their scope line - therefore was the 'brightest'......maybe its all in the details = on 2.5x?

The VX3s are very GOOD but other's might best them.

No doubt not 'alpha glass' nor 'alpha class' as Swaro and Zeiss is just hard to beat as I am sure S&B though I have been very impressed w/B&L-Bushy Elite scopes in the past, and agree w/RD - rainguard is not a bad thing for a hunting rifle.

And yes Jeff, this 'over-thunking' we all do is entertaining, yet I recall when I shot my hog via a Swaro 6x36 Fixed on a #1 RSI 243, he popped out the brush at 240 yds, I dropped him as quick as I could ask my son if he was watching thru the binos as I shouldered, acquired/squeezed, all in a very short FEW seconds, and one would never 'think' this vs that...as when you instinct/reflex shoot, those mental masturbation debates we discuss are not in your psyche.

Buying decisions before the hunt might be more emotional based than being a 'deal breaker' on a hunt, as that shot above would have gone just as well with a Leupold, Bushnell, and others as it was what I had and I gave it no thought.

Everything at the moment of truth was focused on sight pic and trigger/follow thru. Point is - yep great to compare notes and do homework before the shot, as then in the field, you don't want to 2nd guess any detail, you just want to shoulder, sight, squeeze while you have the shot opportunity, else it be lost. that works great in scenarios where the range as often is in how I hunt, is w/in PBR and no spinning needed.

One reason a 6x was on that scope, glad I did not have a variable to make me 'pause' to consider 'optimal power' at the range for the shot at hand. Simplicity...works well on many a shots afield. That said, a 2-8 can be put on 5 or 6x and left and do very good work w/o any change unless time and conditions allow it.

For a hunter needing to twist/spin, that 2-8 would do well I am sure w/CDS or M1 if desired and I am confident they would 'track' fine.

No doubt we all like the best and have our fav, and different budgets, but even next to best, or less than best, can be very effective when you know your gear.

Jeff, you mentioned Z3 - and your budget, you probably don't want to justify doing this, but I bet their is a rifle and/or scope you could part with....and re-invest....but that is if you can stand to let something go. Some can't, but that 'less is more' can apply to the way we all have money invested in our gear.

Nowarday's, I have LESS...guns/scopes.....but MORE quality now in what I do have....and probably overall less dollars no doubt by far.

I realized over time, I can ONLY shoot one rifle...at a time

Not meant to step on any toes, but stating what I have done during this post derivative's market meltdown....financial collapse, great recession/depression, and job loss era many are facing. I know you'd hate to part with a 35 cal to buy that Z3...

That said, yes, I do miss some I traded/sold, and would not give up all the miles racked up using all the gear I have used to 'learn' along the way. Yet I have what I need to get the job done at hand...someday I may have a Z3, S&B, etc. as future budgets allow, but I still make out just fine.

As they say, 'It's a Journey.'

Enjoy your new combo.

What will a 2.5-8x36 do, that the 3-9x40 won't?

Go down to 2.5X

yep

Squeeze in a 36mm hole.

And I'll add one more thought to this mix - if you like the 2.5x8, you might really like the 1.75x6. Smaller, very bright, beautiful eye box, excellent resolution.

Interesting and civil discussion--thanks guys.

DC223, nada.

If Leupold put VX3 power rings on the lower end models.....it would sell more scopes.....since people can afford more VX1s and 2s.

Very well said. Hmm.. maybe that's why I like the 2.5-10x40 I bought from you

If .5x is significant, then increasing from 8x to 9x must be amazing!

It's twice the amazement

Lol... well, to me the diff between say a 2.5-8 Leup and my 3-9 or 3-10 scopes isn't significant on the top end; I can hit my steels either way. I do love the low-end behavior of the 2.5-8 though. If nothing else set to low powers the 2.5-8 is a GREAT beginner's scope, with all that ER and EB, so now my two training rifles have them and that's cool.

Can't say I've used a 3-9 Leupold; I've always considered the Leupold "3" (or "III") upgrades to be worth it, over the "2" series.

It's the size of the 2.5-8 Leupy that wins me over compared to the 3-9. If I'm looking for alittle more, I'll go to the 3.5-10x40 Leupold every time.

Sorry to put you on the spot, but which would you choose between the 2.5-10x40 elite 4200 and the leupy 3.5-10x40???

Yeah, the 3.5-10 seems like a nice scope. They get a lot of run here too.

My favorite scope, optically, all things considered, is the 3-9 Conquest. If they made one that was optically identical but light and trim they'd own that segment of the market.

I'm going to run the little finger-twist turret on the Leup for the moment. That'll let me know if the tracking is up to snuff. If not, I'll have them address that when they do the CDS/M1 upgrade.

Wish Leup had just copied Zeiss for their "stock" turret....

I haven't run the newest VX3 but between the older versions (VX-III and Vari-X III's) the 4200 is a better scope.

That conclusively, eh?

Well if durability and tracking are important to you, then yes.

I just can't get past "Bushnell", you know?

I don't think they've done themselves a favor by having everything from awful $20 scopes to what some say are excellent ones, all with the same name.

Shallow, I know... but the two Bushnell products I own are not confidence-inspiring.

I am currently marketing a gold ring detox kit for those who suffer. Step 1...




VAnimrod is still scared from his blister pack experience and I keep him in my prayers.

I pray to my pagan gods every day, for VA et al to see the Truth.

So far I'm coming up empty for them though. Dumbphuckitude doth reign supreme in the ranks of the Sticksters.

Lol....

So you are a "bling"-hater I take it, Roy? You'd really hate the trigger on my BLR...

Not a bling hater...........just a performance lover.

I have both. The Elite has the rain guard, has a better picture than my vari-xiii and VXIII. I can't say it's better than the VX3. The loopy is lighter, has a more forgiving eyebox and is easy to get a turret or two added.

The warranties/customer service of the two don't even compare.

You ever tried the Leup Rifleman series?

Beat me to it....

No, I have not.

But I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that they spank the Bushnell on my kid's pellet rifle pretty good!

There's way too many folks that like those 4200's to ignore. I'm sure they are fine scopes. Just haven't gone there, maybe I'll try one someday.

Don't be so sure about the Rifleman vs. cheap Bushnell...

And yes, the 4200 is a very fine scope for the dollar. I would run one in place of my Conquest and my Leups and not feel even bit disadvantaged.

Looked through a high-zoom Bushy (6500?) in the gunshop once and was very not impressed. Bad flatness of field at, if memory serves, full power.

... whoops, not meaning to dog Bushnell.

Roy & Jordan- tell me more about how you've seen them track?

That is freakin hillarious Roy. You know you could make about 20 out of that one and make even more money

Roy, I'm sorry for opening a can of worms here. I personally love the 2.5-10x40 bausch and lomb (Bushnell) elite 4200 that I purchased from you and my other with the fire fly reticle. I was just curious as to what your take was on the matter. JeffO, Keep talking I'm still curious about that 2.5-8x36 since many people have suggested I put that scope on my new pre 64 fwt model 70 and I am still curious as to how well it will track. Thanks

Well, one really nice thing with Leup is that if it WON'T, I send it back and a week later I'm trying a new erector. BTDT.

The 4200's track extremely well IME. I wouldn't necessarily say that they are perfect in that regard, but I've certainly had much better odds at getting a 4200 that tracked compared to some other brands.

Thx Jordan.

Was is Bushnell that BSA just had the service rodeo with?

I'm not sure, but I've used Bushnell CS a few times, and they've always been stellar for me. Sometimes I think that a big part of the CS outcome that people receive is directly proportional to how they handle the situation...

Yes it was Jeff, I recently wrote them another email (last month) explaining the situation and told them I'd pay to have them replace the objective lens (since it was the worst out of the 2) and they said they can't do that because it isn't "cost effective", but I could send it back to them and buy a new one from them at "2/3 the retail cost" of a new one. I'm sorry, but I can get one through JSC (wholesale) for less than that. Kind of discouraged me from buying another Bushnell product, new or used, even though I really like the 2.5-10x40 elite 4200's. Another reason I'm really interested in your evaluation of the leupy 2.5-8 which I've been curious about. As far as how I handled things on my end I couldn't have done anything different. Bushnell has a process which requires you to fill out a form and list what is wrong with the item. I did this with special instructions and they didn't listen to me or even offer the deal until after everything was said and done. My main mistake was not sending the scope back to the dipchit that sold it to me and asking for my money back since he's the one that doesn't know how to take care of things and the scratched to hell lenses was proof of that. I've never divulged his name, but I think I'll tell you guys now since this seems to come up everyonce in a while. bigun31768 (Scott) you knew the lenses were chit when I bought the scope from you and I'm sure you will get yours in the end. That's all I have to say and carma will bite him in the ass for it.

That's a wonderful story about a scope being great and the company that made it sucks?


Travis

IME 'ELITE' glass from Bushy/B&L is wonderful, great results from those I ran, 4-16s and 6-24s.

Now I agree Jeff, it's hard to 'swallow' the Bushnell name being 'TOP/High quality' and somehow they THOUGHT keeping the Bushy name when B&L and Bushnell split, was of benefit. I personally had a 'higher perceived value' with Bausch and Lomb stamped on my tubes. I KNOW they are made to same specs in the same plant, but I miss the B&L name on Elite glass.

I think it would have served them well to keep it, but no doubt, more 'average Joe's' knew the Bushy name vs. B&L as they sold more of the lower/middle priced products over their history.

As to Zeiss owning that segment comment by Jeff - should ergo's lean down - agree. They will be very hard to beat given the price point, optics, and etched reticle. It would be Leupolds worst nightmare IMO if Zeiss got 'competitive' on size and perhaps a few other details/options like turrets/reticles.

They both make very serviceable products and competition breeds quality and affordability IMO.