|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,019 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,019 Likes: 1 |
They both suck so why does it matter which one sucks more?
You need to up your game on glass. Why if they work? The smaller Leupolds work fine if you don't shoot at night (legal hours here are 1/2hr before sunrise to 1/2 hr after sunset) and you keep your shots inside of 350 yards or so (the vast majority of us) and you aren't using them as a spotting scope/binoculars. They are a sighting system with the advantage of being small and lightweight and affordable. Is there something with those attributes that is better? Have to be a lot better to make me give up something that has been working for going on 50 years (not the same glass but the same manufacturer).
I am continually astounded at how quickly people make up their minds on little evidence or none at all. Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,565
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,565 |
I am on 60+ Leupolds and counting. For hunting scopes, and set it and forget it scopes, they are great. I know I have Leupolds that have held zero for longer than half of the new "tactical scope only" crowd has been alive. My first was a M7 4X made in the 60's.
That said, For precision rigs, I run NF NXS variables. Only.
And Leupy Mark 4s. But fixed power only.
And Weaver Micro Trac and SWFA SS. But fixed power only.
Regardless of what anyone says, I am right certain I have it figured out quite well.
For normal Michigan hunting ranges, the The Leupold variables have been good to me. But there are some I can't like. The1.75-6x32,2.5-8x36, 4.5-14x40.
I know most here consider me a Leupold slut, but it is actually on a limited basis. Certain models I love, certain models I won't touch.
YMMV.....
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 56,373 Likes: 9
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 56,373 Likes: 9 |
I've had such good luck with the 1.75-6 and 2.5-8 that I've gotten rid of most of my other scopes. They aren't top end glass but they aren't $2K either.
_______________________________________________________ An 8 dollar driveway boy living in a T-111 shack
LOL
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,776
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,776 |
I prefer the 2.5-8 but really don't know why. It just works better for me in the field than the 2-7. It might be that the scope comes up perfectly, the image is sharp and clear, and that I have a bias towards the Vari X III line of scopes.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,330 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,330 Likes: 10 |
I am on 60+ Leupolds and counting. For hunting scopes, and set it and forget it scopes, they are great. I know I have Leupolds that have held zero for longer than half of the new "tactical scope only" crowd has been alive. My first was a M7 4X made in the 60's.
I have a 1978 Vari-X II that has been on my 1978 M700 since both were new--Redfield one piece mount and rings. It's sighted in for 150 NBT's with H4831 since the mid 90's and I haven't adjusted it since........ I don't know if that's saying much for my loonyism............ Casey
Casey
Not being married to any particular political party sure makes it a lot easier to look at the world more objectively... Having said that, MAGA.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,330 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,330 Likes: 10 |
Casey pretty well said what I think. I too have owned every variation of the 2-7x33. I'm certain I've had at least 10 of them. I prefer the 2.5-8x36 for the reasons stated.
BUT, I really like the 2-7 too, and I can't fault 2muchgun's thinking. He's a guy that is out there doing it. All that to say we can all look at something differently, and not end with the same solution. It's not a right/wrong thing.
Quick question, does the 2-7 have the same twin erector springs as the 2-8?
Brad, Leupold ballyhooed the erector springs in the VX3 line but I have never seen them mention it about the VX2 scopes, so I don't think they do have the twin springs. The VXII 2-7 on my son's rifle, 1 click may equal anywhere from nothing to 3/4 inch on the windage adjustment. One of these days I'm going to send it in. Casey
Casey
Not being married to any particular political party sure makes it a lot easier to look at the world more objectively... Having said that, MAGA.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,664
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,664 |
Each to their own. I've never seen enough difference to justify $100 more for the 2.5x8. YMMV
The Karma bus always has an empty seat when it comes around.- High Brass
There's battle lines being drawn Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,565
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,565 |
Maybe I shoulda also put the 1.75-6x32 into the title. It is another that I dislike and would buy the 2-7x33 over. I can't remember if I have had 2 or 3 of them. They are all gone now. One of them had a bad windage turret.....
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,867
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,867 |
I have a 2-7 the first year they came out and it still works great. The only problem I have ever seen with it was a friends fault. He had to get one because I had one. I told him to set it on four and don't mess around with it. Jumped a good buck and it went straight up to him on a dead run. of course he had been fooling around with it and now it was set on 7. Nothing but hair in the scope for three missed shots. He bought the drinks that night.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,705
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,705 |
I'm no scope expert but I have learned that the lighter and lower-mounted the scope, the less weirdness I see regarding wandering zero etc.
Ie a low profile, light weight scope that can be mounted lower in good mounts, will always be my first option. It gets more important as recoil increases, whether that's due to a more powerful cartridge and or a lighter rifle.
Maybe not too much in it in respect of the two scopes cited above, but for the reasons above I choose the 2-7x33.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,330 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,330 Likes: 10 |
I'm no scope expert but I have learned that the lighter and lower-mounted the scope, the less weirdness I see regarding wandering zero etc.
Ie a low profile, light weight scope that can be mounted lower in good mounts, will always be my first option. It gets more important as recoil increases, whether that's due to a more powerful cartridge and or a lighter rifle.
Maybe not too much in it in respect of the two scopes cited above, but for the reasons above I choose the 2-7x33. If you pay attention to used scopes, 40mm and larger objectives will generally have more and bigger dings on the objective bell--they stick out more and a lot more likely to get banged around. Actually I much prefer looking through Leupold 3-9's and 3.5-10's, but they "unbalance" a lightweight rifle. I've carried a number of 2-7's and 2.5-8's on lightweight and heavier hunting rifles, and the compactness makes it easier to avoid banging them on stuff. Horse and ATV scabbards are another consideration. For me, the size difference between the two is almost nil--but the 2-7's are more S/A friendly. Casey
Casey
Not being married to any particular political party sure makes it a lot easier to look at the world more objectively... Having said that, MAGA.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,990
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,990 |
Dont care for the Leupold 2 X 7 sold my last one have owned around 5 the early ones were a pain to get zeroed. Much prefer the 2 X 7 Vortex Viper. Like the 2.5 X 8 Leupold holds zero its adjustments work. Just sold a newer Leupold 2 X 7 replaced it with a Vortex Viper 2 X 7 zeroed in 2 shots and it holds it zero.
kk alaska
Alaska 7 months of winter then 5 months of tourists
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 189
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 189 |
I have and like both, never had a problem with either.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,735
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,735 |
I've had such good luck with the 1.75-6 and 2.5-8 that I've gotten rid of most of my other scopes. They aren't top end glass but they aren't $2K either. I just picked up my first 1.75-6 a VX3, so far playing with at the house I really like it. Taking it to the range this weekend to stretch it out, this range offers electronic targets out to 600yds about twice as far as I'm capable of. I look forward to reporting back on but if it performs there like it should I may be on the lookout for more of these. I've owned several 2.5-8s and liked them a ton, I've never had a Leupold 2-7 to compare them to but other maker's versions to which I liked the 2.5-8 Leupold better.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,983
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,983 |
If Leupold currently made a straight 8x (approximately the size of the 2.5x-8x), that's what I would use. However, I have several of the 2.5x-8xs. Great scopes; I leave them at 8x all the time.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,906 Likes: 13
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,906 Likes: 13 |
Not sure, but what I can tell you is that eye relief changes with the 2.5-8x throughout the power range about twice as much as the 2-7X does, IMO.... I have several of the 2.5-8 version. The eye relief does change with power, but it's largely a moot point for me. I mount the scope to be perfect on 8x, and at lower magnifications the eyebox is so flexible that I get a full sight picture right away anyway.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,906 Likes: 13
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,906 Likes: 13 |
I've had lots of VX2 2-7,and VX3 2.5-8X. When called upon they both work.Presently I have a pair of 2.5-8X's.
I have noticed the VX2 line in general seems to show more parallax out around the 300 yard mark than the VX3. I've also noticed "threes" seem to have less parallax then "twos" when both are used away from their parallax free distances.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
4X......
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,237 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,237 Likes: 2 |
I'm no scope expert but I have learned that the lighter and lower-mounted the scope, the less weirdness I see regarding wandering zero etc.
Ie a low profile, light weight scope that can be mounted lower in good mounts, will always be my first option. It gets more important as recoil increases, whether that's due to a more powerful cartridge and or a lighter rifle.
Maybe not too much in it in respect of the two scopes cited above, but for the reasons above I choose the 2-7x33. Yes. This is why I have three vari-x II/VX2 2-7x33 and three vari-x III 1.5-5x20 scopes.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 49
Campfire Greenhorn
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 49 |
Can someone who owns either of these scopes tell me the actual Mounting space available on the tube? I debating buying one of these for a model 70 375, but the outside distance on my talley scope mounts is 5.25 inches and I want to make sure it will fit. I see the factory specs, but IME those can be incorrect. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
602 members (12344mag, 17CalFan, 10Glocks, 10ring1, 16Racing, 1234, 66 invisible),
2,505
guests, and
1,361
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,353
Posts18,527,038
Members74,031
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|