I would spend $800 on a 1-5x, 30mm tube with 36mm objective, relatively small ocular bell, 4 inches of eye relief and bulletproof, repeatable adjustments.
The FX-II Leupolds are supposed to be bomb-proof, so I'm a little disappointed to learn that's not exactly true. But they do offer mounting ease, light weight, smaller oculars for bolt clearance while still providing ~4" eye relief (5" with the tiny 2.5x20mm!), and low mounting capabilities in an era of Hubble style overkill.
I didn't believe that low power could make for small groups until I tried it off the bench with the FX-II 2.5x20mm and shot way better than I thought it would turn out. Don't get me wrong, I really like watching .22 holes appear at 32x at 50m. But this is only to see how accurate the rifle is. For a bench rifle, a fixed 32x that focuses down to 50 yards would do everything I want, rimfire or centrefire.
From field positions doing target stuff, experience says 16x-20x is about my limit. A 4-16x40mm with AO down to 20 yards would be my perfect general purpose .22 For a hunting rifle, see the first line.
Anyway, sounds like the only real complaint is Leupold adjustments, so if they make that part bombproof, everyone can go back to loving them. Sad that they discontinued the fixed 4x32mm and 6x36mm. Those were ideal form factors.
Out of all these posts, is there consensus on a point in the Leupold lineup where the adjustments are generally bulletproof?
