NOTE: *** I tried this post on another forum and didn't get enough information so I'm trying it here ***

I'm about to order a 4.5-14x40 Leupold scope and am concerned about the difference between the VX3 scopes vs the Mark 4 scopes for reliability of reticle adjustments.

Anyone have any advice on either? This scope will be used for a lot of turret turning varmint types of shooting and I'm very particular on the reliability of reticle adjustments. I have one Mark 4 and it seems to be drop dead reliable for reticle adjustments.

I get frustrated when I move a reticle adjustment a few clicks up and my group moves left or right or doesn't respond correctly to the adjustment. GRRRRRRR!!!!

Please help....

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/7863344/4


dave

I would spend the money on the new Bushnell LRHS.
It has a little less magnification than you are looking at but this scope was built to spin the turrets.

I have two of these and really like the reticle, zero stop elev. turret, bold markings on the elevation turret.
For the money it is tough to find these features.
Great warranty as well.

Try it you will like it.

I can't say about the VX3 but I never had much luck with Mark 4's.
I have had 3 of them and sold them all. I know others that swear by them.
There maybe some of the available thru George Gardner at GAP of the SH Group Buy, $1,500 get you the scope and a $300 retail range finder for $50 cost.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/8731961/1

http://youtu.be/erVo6qRExDU

Read the whole thread... Thanks... Great thread... Too much pissing but a lot of good info... Still not clear on how the VX-3 stacks up against the Mark 4 but my confidence level in the newer Leupy's came up a couple notches.

I also have a Nightforce NXS Zero Stop for serious work...

Bob

The VX3's, not the VXIII's use the same dual spring adjustment internals as do the Mk4's. The only real difference(s) are in the external knobs. Heck, you can even get the VX3's with M1 knobs just like the Mk.4's. Or you can get the much lower profile CDS knob. E

I've had more Leupolds go tits up on me than any other manufacture. That includes 1 VX3 3.5-10x40 with CDS I had. It totally lost adjustment and this is what I ended up with:



Not trying to stir the pot, just pointing out 1 of the problems I've had with Leupolds. Excellent CS, but I'd rather be using a scope I know I can depend on

Hard to say if the internals are the same between a VX-3 and MK4 unless we took both apart for evaluation... or someone with design knowledge chimed-in. Are the erector tubes, gimbal assemblies, springs, blah, blah, etc. the same? The MK4 has a 30mm tube, but IIRC the VX-3 can be 30mm or 1".

I had an arm load of the VX-3 4.5-14x when they went on close-out locally but couldn't stand the tunnel vision and returned them. Some have told me the 30mm and MK4 don't have this, but I stood at the Leupold facility in Beaverton with a MK4 in my hands that still tunneled badly. Some people don't notice it or care, so this isn't a deal breaker for many. I'm also not a FOV nut, but at 4.5x... its not much better than most 6x scopes. Some of the locals around here still argue with me that the 4.5-14x is better in the woods than a fixed 6x even though they have similar FOV

You may want to check with Formid and Frank at the 'Hide. One thing that has stuck with me is what Frank stated awhile back regarding variables... NF fails the least, Leupold fails the most, and S&B is somewhere in between. That said, I like the FX-3 scopes I have, but have more faith in fixed power scopes.

Jason

Here's something I've wondered about...

Its one thing when a scope goes tits-up, but its another when someone says, "such-n-such scope don't track." How do we know that the scope was mounted correctly, and not in a bind? I bet if you took an average scope and put it in a slight bind, it'll have some funky tracking. Actually, I know this from firsthand experience. Correct the bind, and it'll track.

Just makes it very difficult to weed through the internet reviews regarding tracking. All out failures are another thing though.

Just thinking out loud...

Jason

edit: that dang BSA can still shoot, even with a broken scope

I've only owned a few Leupolds before now and the only one that I got a lot of use from DID, in fact, fail me but Leupold fixed it so fast it almost got back to me before I sent it... I sold it and only recently started buying them again.

I have one Nightforce for a rifle I intend to shoot a BUNCH and can't afford the ticket on several of them. I guess my budget will barely support the Mark 4 scopes and that's about it.

From what I read they WILL track fairly reliably until they fail and I ALWAYS have another rifle and/or scope with me when I hunt so I guess I have enough info to make my decision.

Yes... I noticed the "tunnel vision" problem with the Leupy 4.5-14 scopes and have to put up with it I guess. For me they're either target scopes or long range varmint and long range big game hunting scopes.

I guess I'm gonna quit this thread before the pissing contest people find it and turn this into another many paged argument. LOL

It seems that a lot of people have nothing better to do than sit at their keyboards and insist that their opinions are the only correct ones.

Bob

First of all, any scope can fail out of the box. All of them have.
Second, it's been pointed out many times that the guys over on the tactical forum, FormD and Frank, lump all Leupolds with all Nightforce and SB when making their comments. They are simply not the same at all. There very significant differences in internal construction among Leupold rifle scopes, unlike the scopes made by Nightforce and S&B. Even there tactical line varies alot. I've got a leupold tactical scope called the Precison Rifleman. It is not, in any way, the same as a Mark4 scope. Mine is simply a VariXIII with a Mil-Dot reticle and a Leupold's target knobs. A setup that works well for guys like me, but simply aren't built for those that do alot of hard dial spinning out to the edges of the scope's adjustmet range. E

I had that exact scope in mark 4. it was the LRT model. It was the latest dual spring model. That scope gave me fits for a long time. I also put it on a rifle that was capable for .25 moa. believe me when you have a rifle truly capable of that it will expose scope flaws. The scope held zero just fine if you didn't crank the turrets, however everytime I rechecked zero after using the gun my zero would be off both windage and elevation. The scope even had a trip back to leupold to fix it.

for those that say leupold's are great and track just fine, go try a nightforce and get back to me. I will never trust another leupold on a long range setup. in fact when I get a tad more money my last leupold will be sold and upgraded to something else. If I needed a scope like your looking for I would get a vortex, if you swing more money maybe a huskemaw or even better nightforce.

You've got a rifle capable of .25 MOA? That's pretty cool. Never seen one of those.

Tanner

The only two scopes I've had actually fail were a Swaro A (Z3), and a Conquest 4.5-14 with target knobs, therefore, I will proclaim to all of the internet world that all Conquests and 1" Swaro's are unreliable....they suck.

Oh, I just remembered the S&B Summit I had...that had a razor thin wire duplex reticle (that I personally couldn't use), therefore all Summits suck too.

I love the optics forums.

....or just upgrade to a SWFA SS.

If you want a Leupold that will track reliably, buy a Mark 4 fixed power or a Mark 6. Other than those, I wouldn't trust a Leupold for dialing duty.

no NF thats what I did

U R welcome.
Sightron does pretty well for the casual duty stuff.
dave

Oh ? I wonder why the US Army use nothing but Leupolds ? Even the US Marines use some of them. Nightforce has yet to land a significant military contract with our military. But I do understand they are catching up with their six month backlog of busted scopes.
Onbe of the things that drives some nuts is that their mounts aren't straight on the reciever. When they crank the turrets, the zero goes right or left as well. E

Right. Upgrade a SWFA SS. According to you, they are made by Tasco. I'll stick with Leupold. E

The original SS was made by Tasco. SWFA SS version, I don't know nor does anyone else. If a person is looking for reliable adjustments and can't afford $1500+ the SWFA SS is the way to go. Leupold's record for (not) tracking is well documented here

If a twister doesn't go NF, Hodnett recommends a Bushy HDMR.

The M24's replacement has a shidt and bendover. The original Leupy "M3 Ultra" had one-minute elevation clicks as that is the only way leupold could build a scope that would track. Some say that is still the case.

Ther you going my point. Which Leupolds, RD ?
And just who and how was this so called determination made that Leupolds don't track well ? I've seen no real testing done by anyone. Just opinions based on vague experiences by people who don't seem to understand that Leupold makes lots of scopes with a wide variety of applications. Nightforce, S&B and SWFA scopes are not made like that. E

I had the same thing happen with a Leupold 4.5x14 w/cds

That was my point. Those you mentioned along with the Bushnell HDMR and LRHS scopes are designed for heavy duty use. The SWFA SS just goes to prove that you don't have to spend over a grand to get a dead reliable scope although they are not light in weigh.





Take a couple of deep breaths, collect your thoughts and tell me what you are really trying to say down here in these posts from the same page of this thread.

From Terry Cross on Snipers Hide:

I apologize in advance but I have to rant for a second.

I have always been a huge, huge Leupold advocate. They were always my benchmark for quality, innovation and U.S. workmanship. I own an awful lot of their product and continue to use it regularly.

However. . . . In the last few years, I have seen a change in the way Leupold does business and delivers product to the market. As they have grown, they have embraced many less than admirable traits that seem to define too many parts of American businesses. While their pricing has been steadily increasing at a faster rate than inflation, their quality has dropped. They are still capable of producing a sharp, repeatable optic but not as dependably.

My biggest aggravation with Leupold is the fact that less than 5% of their product line that can be legally stamped "Made in U.S.A." and I'm not even sure that those few are !!! What started out with a few of their Wind River imports has blown into an all out effort to prostitute their name brand for a dollar.

I just received 18 RX-4 range finders, 18 Tactical 10x50 Patrol Binoculars and 18 Mk 4 LR/T 4.5-14x50mm TMR Illum. scopes for a package deal I have to ship. This is pretty much suppossed to be their better gear. Guess what? Range finders "Made In CHINA". Binoculars "Made In China". Scopes have no country of origin marked on the packaging, instructions or product. Call back from Leupold informs me that the scopes are assembled in Oregon but so many of the parts and sub-assemblies are made over-seas (mostly China except for some of their lenses)that they do not qualify for the Made in USA stamp!

I can assure you that sourcing their components and products from China has dropped their costs very, very dramatically while they have continued to raise market prices. You know, honestly, it isn't even the price/profit thing that burns me. It is the fact that they chose to move their sourcing and manufacturing (I do consider "manufacturing" and "assembly" two different beasts in this instance) out of the country and specifically China. Why couldn't they keep most of their production here and just up their pricing 10%? Jesus, I could drop my selling price and triple my profit on freakin Pod-Loc kits if I used components from outside the U.S., but I refuse to go there. Guess that is why I still drive a 10 year old truck.

While they may still have satisfactory product performance and at least attempt innovative ideas occaisionally, I believe that they are straying from their roots, pumping a ton of money into foreign factories and putting yet another hole in the bottom of the lifeboat that retains at least a small fraction of our ability to domestically support our police and military logistics in the event of any serious conflict. I remain firmly convinced that we shall sorely curse the day that we wake up and realize that we need to raise our military to a task only to find out we have cut off our own legs. I aim this statement not only at Leupold but other textile, steel, electronics and molding industries based in the U.S. You don't just start that [bleep] back up inside the U.S. borders overnight.

I will continue to use my original Leupold products but I shall migrate away from giving their company blanket support. I will, instead continue to give more and more support to companies that take risks, accept slightly lower margins and consciously make the effort to strengthen our own economy and workforce. As you purchase your gear or spec out the equipment for your agency bids, please consider more than F.O.V. and click value.

I would seriously love to debate the execs at Leupold in front of their Board about some of this.

DISCLAIMER: I know that some out there will have personal budgets at home that restrict your choices to imports and I totally respect that. A non-US product is better than no product at all in some cases.

DISCLAIMER #2: Yeah, that was more than a second. Sorry.
TC

Answer from Lowlight on Snipers Hide.

Amen,

Every year they seem to get farther and farther away from what made them the company worthy of the reputation they have, which I personally feel is no longer warranted.

The shear number of them we see problems with is staggering, on military weapons systems no less. They seem to be completely out of touch with the shooter, all shooters, Civilian, Law Enforcement, and Military.

Unfortunately people still flock to their products based on the past reputation, regardless of the fact their current products don't hold up to that standard.

dave

The info I saw was regarding the MKIV scopes.

Jason

Dave,

A few years ago I was shooting with a bud one day and he brought his friend along. Turns out his pard just got a job at Leupold in design, but hadn't started yet. We discussed some different scopes, such as a true 1-4x as there was a lot of interest in the S&B 1-4x at that time. Also talked about other things Leupold, did and didn't do. He was excited to start his new job.

Next time I saw that guy he brought some prototypes for us to check out. He seemed excited to show them to us. I asked how the job was going and if he found out why Leupold didn't offer a true 1-4x and some other models that we were interested in. His mood changed and said, "I was told Leupold doesn't give a ffuck what the public or military want. We build what we want." He went on the say, "The old man still runs the show and what he says goes." I didn't ask anymore questions and left it at that.

Still like my FX-3, but I never cared for the older MKIV scopes and wouldn't spend the money on the newer MK4.

Jason

Jason
Some how I just dont find that surprising at all.
What dose surprise me is that people will put up with that level of build quality.

dave

After looking through both a Leupold VXII 3-9x40 and a S&B Klassik variable a few years ago, at a big 185" muley buck at dusk thirty, and easily being able to make out the buck with either, I wondered why people spend $2500 on hunting scopes. My buddy Big Al killed 4 bucks with that VXII totalling 776 inches, a 194 avg over the last 8 years. Imagine that......

This. I can afford any scope out there, but the old adage of a fool and his money are soon parted resonates...

awhile back I pondeerd on the merits of replacing a twenty year old Leupold VXIII 1.75X6X32 with a newer one in order to gain better optics. My "go to" 375 is my Model 70 that has two Safaris and about twelve animals to it's credit, including a buffalo at twenty five yards and a kudu at 350 at last light.
Unfortunately years ago I bought into the EAW over-engineered German BS so the rifle sports 1" rings (bastards want close to 300 bucks for 30mm rings!).
At the suggestion of some pretty savvy individuals, I went up in magnicifaction and put a Meopta 3.5X10X44 RD scope on it. Great scope with great optics but it is HEAVY (18oz) and frankly it looked likeshit on that rifle. I toyed about replacing the whole EAW setup but the receiver is tapped for them and I didn't want to fool with it. So I settled on a new Leupold as above and like I always do, ordered it with a heavy duplex. Aesthetically and weight-wise and given the type of hunting I do with this rifle, there is just no better scope out there for this rifle.

Night before last I took it out back to my leopard blind (a sprayed painted deer mottled with black paint and both my wife and neighbors thing I'm nuts). At sixty five yards I took my Z6 set on 5X and the Leupold the same (32mm v 42mm objective so I was trying to keep exit pupil size relatively similar). Last night I took out my Zeiss Victory T* 3X12X50 and again trying to keep things even (5X), I had similar results. Sure if I crank up the magnification they blow the Leupold away, but I am convinced one of the new comparable VX6s will hang in there at half the price.


I know a lot has to do with my brain "wanting" the Leupold to compete, but I have to tell you it did! Yes if I put letters out there the Z6 is crisper, but when it comes to just putting X hairs on an kill zone I frankly cannot see the justification for the almost fivefold difference in price.

What's the problem RD, can't you read ? Leupold makes a wide variety of scopes. Nightforce and S&B don't.
The SWFA scopes have never been tested against like priced Leupolds under the same conditions. Simple enough ? E

Really ? Leupold has been making the MRT line, which includes a scope like that for several years. Their 1.25-4X20 VX-R Patrol has been around for a couple of years now as well. E

Just answer my question then. You stated the VX3 and Mk 4 have the same internals ?

In a single independent test you're probably correct, however, if you check out some of the tactical forums you'll find tons of information by highly respected members of that shooting community who have repeatedly reported on the reliability of the SWFA SS scopes. That's the point that we're discussing here. Those guys don't give a crap about fancy trademark names, just real performance. Seeing how you've already quoted some of those gentlemen here, I suspect you already know the answer my friend.

Nothing has been more oversold than low light performance. But as Art LaHa once told me, "tom, it's not bullchit, it's promotion."

Sent my old VariX III into Leu for a HD reticle and did did an update on the adjustments...no charge. First class CS.

That being said, a guy has to have a lot of faith into the ongoing repeatability of his designated turrets while twisting at game, particularly those once in a lifetime type critters.

JG in some ways I agree, your buddy could probably have taken the same bucks with a $75 simmons. I think people are way too worried about how great the glass is, in riflescopes. binoculars are another matter all together. I personally see no point in the high end swaros or S&B's as a run of the mill hunting scope. its a waste of money. however what I do see spending money on is a scope with bomb proof adjustments that has the features I want.

this thread is about adjustment reliability, if anyone thinks leupold is all that great with turret cranking beit mark 4 or otherwise I suggest you haven't used that many of them or not used them as they were intended. Bryan litz demonstrates leupold tracking error on his applied ballisitcs videos. He measures out by hand with fish tape exactly 100 yards and uses a tall target test and some math. The next test is with a nightforce. you can see the tracking error. Doing tracking boxes and other stuff is hooey. no one adjusts a scope like that in practice. does it adjust up and down as it should thats pretty much all you need to know. leupold lovers, keep living in bliss what you don't know isn't bad.

Not going to argue with you CC with regards to the hard core turret twisting crowd, but (purely guessing) that number is minute compared to the numbers of hunters in the regular hunting crowd. The average hunter will never wear out a VX3, Elite, or Conquest. Too many of my hunters (plus me and Big Al's personal experience), who hunt all over the world, have rifles wearing Leupold something or other for me to buy into the "all Leupold's are horseschitt", horseschitt. I'm also not brand/blind loyal enough to think that all Leupy's work right all the time either, but then again NOTHING (dave7mm) works as is supposed to 100% of the time.....nothing.

again JG, I hear you. leupold is a fine scope if you zero it at the range and set it and forget it. I like elites or zeiss better in that case but thats just me in that situation. Most people aren't cranking on scopes but its becoming more popular these days. For a guy thats only shooting to around 500 yards they are just a well served by one of the many hold over reticles this covers just about everyones needs.

You're right. SWFA SS are cheaper scopes...They're also a heck of a lot more reliable, on average, when it comes to tracking fidelity and RTZ.

The MR/T is a 1.5x.

If you go back and read what I wrote, it was regarding a true 1x. There's a difference.

Jason

see below

IME, The Leupy VX lines are good set and forget scopes and are certainly reliable enough for hunting.

Are they as durable as a Nightforce and do they track like one? nope, but they don't cost near as much either.

You get what you pay for.

I ain't been overly impressed with tracking ability on the VX3's I've owned. It's ok.

The new VX6 I bought my son tracks no better than my VX3 models and suffers from the same maladies.

Which are:

1. They don't return to zero consistently.

2. They don't do real well being run to the edge of their adjustment capability, which is the case with many scope brands.

Stay away from the top end and they usually do ok IME.

I've never owned a Mark scope, so can't comment on those.

Not disputing your results JM, but that's really odd. The last three VX3's I have utilized are:
Vx3 3.5-10x40 CDS 7-08
VX3 4.5-14x50LR CDS 7mag
VX6 2-12x42 CDS 7mag

All have at least 200 rounds each, dialing out to 700'ish (VX3's), and 900 (vx6) and roughly every 50 yd increment in between, back to zero, and redone many, many many times.....zero issues. This over a 2 year period.

my CDS scope has been the one that has seemed to me to be more reliable

I'm a realist though CC, mine could go bonkers tomorrow. I sure hope not....headed to Namibia Monday with that VX6/7mag. All that being said.....I'm wanting to try out one of the Meopta R2's with a Kenton turret. I think Meopta is onto something.

My VX6 CDS I am not happy with. It does not re zero after a very large twist and is not consistent with the elevation received. Boxer on here asked me a while ago what I thought of the scope and does it track, I said yeah sure it does it shoots a 6" box ok and comes back to the start, he says that's crap do a 20" elevation test and re zero. So I did that and it's all over the place and given click values are not repeatable . It does hold zero, and is fine for a point and shoot it's not mounted at the moment.

My VX3 2.5-8 is faultless

JG, I'm glad the ones you have are consistent. Mine will run a box test, but when you run them up to edge of adjustment things will sometimes get weird.

Are you working your way up to 900 or going from your zero straight to 900 and back again?

Try going from zero to 900 and back again and see what she does. Do it 8 or 10 times. About half the time my zero is off with VX3's

And with the VX6, Most of the time it's off and it's been on two proven shooters with two different sets of Warne Fixed rings.

I'm not bitching about them and I like the scopes. Good bang for the buck IMO, the ones I've got just have those limitations, certainly still usable.

I don't have my range book with me so and I am away from home, but I do know what I did. I made up a target board 2 meters high and placed it at 200m where the rifle was zeroed and shot a 3 shot group, I had calculated the clicks to get a 20" rise on the target and fired a 3 shot group, was not 20" ( but might be my calculation ) i then reversed the clicks and fired 3 shots did not make it back to zero, re zeroed rifle and repeated as above and was closer to the 20" and still did not come back to zero.

I then did as above with my VX3 2.5-8 and it performed perfect

Groups were shot off a bench and Lead Sled

I am no long range turret spinner, but I like to test my limitations and learn as I go

I guess FormD was right when he said the Mk4's were just rebadged hunting scopes.

Instead of improving the product.
You get Alphabet Soup, straight out of the lupie advertising department.
dave

I believe that applies to the variables.

Yes, I believe you're right.

FormD uses an old fixed 6x Leupold Ultra a lot. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on one either.

That's a rare bird all right. His was the first on I've ever seen.

Yes, the 3.5x10 in particular

I've never seen or heard of that scope, only the 10X.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...rch/true/Re_Scope_zero_shift#Post7010494

Thanks Mathman. I've of the opinion that knob twisting might be overated for a truly light mountain rifle. A 6x36 Leupy with the LRD reticle will do 450yd if you'll do and that is probably about as far as most of us have any business taking a poke with a light rifle off of a pack or from prone.

I agree TAK. Most people have no business shooting at game that far with any rifle.

My Mark 4 M1 16x40 is built like a tank. It is on it's second set of M1s and has never been anything but utterly reliable/repeatable. When I bought it back in the early 1990s, it was one of 2 Leupolds that I considered to be actual mil-spec. It has enough come-ups to shoot into the next zip code.

To say a few things in it's favor, I have won 600 yd egg shoots with it, and shot a couple of 1.25" 500 yd groups with it (Both witnessed by 24 HCF members). It has been beat on fairly hard for a civilian's scope. There is undoubtedly some better glass out there now, but I'd say I got my $900 out of it. I think they run like $1600 or so now.

Some of the M4 Leupys were in fact "rebadged" hunting scopes. As for those scopes, no different than the 2 Mark 4 PRs I own, or the 3 VX3s I have added M1s to. If they didn't track worth a hoot, I'd not own them. However, if my life depended on it, I would not consider them the equal of a true mil-spec Mark 4 or Mark 8, NF, S&B mil-spec, etc. They may track as well initially, but they are simply not built as tough and I would question their durability as to just how long they could/would remain repeatable if subjected to the harshest of conditions. For general hunting purposes, target shooting, etc., they are more than good, IMO........