Does anyone have any opinions on differences between these two scopes? Looking at setting up a light weight rifle and wondering if the cost difference between the vx2 and vx3 is worth it

Thanks

I'm a Leupold fan, but have models that I like and dislike. Personally, I'd rather the 2-7X33 even if the 1.75-6X32 were the same price.........

I prefer the 2-7.

Same here.

The 4.5-14, 2.5-8 and 1.75-6x are my least favorite Leupold scopes (not counting the UL 2-7 and 3-9).

The 4x, 6x36/42, 2-7x and 3.5-10x my favorites.

Of the VX-3's, the 3.5-10x40 is my pick of the litter and I have several.

Recently, I mounted a VX-2 3-9x40 on a rifle for a friend. I was amazed at the quality, it's pretty close to the VX-3.

Of the scopes mentioned, I'd probably go with the 2-7 and I have a 1.75-6. It's a great scope, I think I'd go with a VX-2 if I was buying one right now.

Go check them out and compare side by side. VX-2's have such a sleek profile and they're really light. What's not to like...

DF


Edited to add, the reason I suggested my buddy get the VX-2 3-9 instead of the 2-7 was his long action .300 WM. It's harder to mount a short 2-7 on a LA rifle. It can be done, just harder to do. And, he and I like our scopes back a bit, not forward like some stock crawlers prefer...

And to agree with Steelhead, of the scopes on his least favorite list, I'd put the 4.5-14 at the top. Something about that scope I just don't like. I don't have one, another buddy does. His is the LR 30mm version. Don't like that one, either.

As I understand it the VX-2 of today are pretty much the same optics as the VX-III of a few years ago. I recently upgraded 3 of my rifles, 2 to VX-2 3-9 UL(sorry Steelhead) and 1 to a VX-3 2.5-8. While the difference from my old VX-II's is obvious, the difference between the VX-2's and VX-3's is subtle.
That said the new 2.5-8 is hard to beat for a light weight scope.

The 2-7x is easier to use than the 2.5-8x. Now that the optics are so close, you might as well save money and have the easier usage.

By far.

I have a vx3 in 1.5 x 5 I hunt in the east we dont take long shots . I also have a vx2 in 2 x 7 and I like it a little better than the vx3

wow guys, looks like the vx2 is getting the nod. Thanks for all the input!

Lately been using a VX-2 2-7x33 on my Sako 85 .308 in low Leupold ring mounts and like the scope a lot.

I have a VX-3 1.75-6x36 with heavy duplex. As far as Leupold's go, it is an excellent scope. Good low light performance, decent low light reticle, small, light, and decent image quality.

I have and am pleased with both. That said I cannot see spending the extra duckets for the VX3.

Question is how is it easier from one to the other?

I have a 2.5-8 with B&C reticle that I absolutely love, it is easy to use and has a great eye box. I also have three 4.5-14s and 3.5-10s. I don't favor one over the other. I don't have any issues with the 4.5-14.

I do not have a 2-7 so can't make that comparison but I do have a couple of 3-9s and they pale compared to the 3.5-10 and even the 2.5-8.

Only reason I would get a 2-7 would be for the weight savings.

You are comparing different series of scopes so the 3-9x should pale.

I have three 2x7s spanning about 25 years: a new VX-2, a VX-II and a Vari-X IIc. They just keep getting better. They're pretty light without paying extra for "lightweight" versions, well proportioned for short actions, reasonable price, and a very useful magnification range.

Just set up and sighted-in the new VX-2 a couple of weeks ago (Rem 700 Classic 300 Savage). Was alternating it with the VX-II (Kimber Montana .308) while letting rifles cool. Very nice, noticeably sharper, and easier to focus with the new focus ring. May have to switch it over to the Kimber since that's my main deer rifle.

My opinion, the 2x7 is just about perfect for a lightweight bolt action. Have never used the VX-3 1.75x6, didn't see the point in spending the extra $$. Have never found any of the 2x7s wanting. I do have a couple of Vari-X III 1.5x5 (Savage 99F .308, Rem 700 Classic 350 Rem Mag). If I was buying a scope for the 350 today it would be a VX-2 2x7 (existing scope is from 1986 - when you could buy a Vari-X III for under $200!). Not the Savage - any scope messes with the aesthetics, so less is better as far as I'm concerned!

Good call.

My VXII 2X7 is at least 25 years old and going strong. It's been on several different rifles- right now the Rem725 .260.

I find it easier to use in the following ways:
-more mounting length, easier to position while mounting
-eyebox is more "forgiving", easier to pick up quickly
-the look seems "fuller" to me, all the way to the edges with no tunneling

The VX-2 is better than the VX-II.

Reportedly close to the VX-III.

DF

I have a VX3 1.75-6x32mm on a 1895G 45-70. Great scope and works very well in low light.


Worth the money.

JD338