Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold VX1 VS VX2

Glass quality and coatings aside, is there anything in the internals of a VX2 that would make it more durable than a VX1?

The 2 is a one piece tube. I believe the erector system is a bit beefier as well. A much better scope easily worth the premium.

Both the VX1 and VX2 have a 2 piece tube and the same erector. Difference is mostly in the optics coatings.

Yes. AFAIK the VX2s have always been 2 piece tubes, Shane. The extra money is in the coatings, FF eye piece, and turret adjustments.

As far as durability, I would say they are the same.......

The two piece tube thing is a red herring anyway.

Yep

Totally agree. It's just cheaper to make, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily inferior.

It sounds strange but I actually prefer the view in the VX1. I had never looked at any of these until a couple weeks ago,thinking them to be sub par to what I would buy. The image goes all the way to the occular tube in the VX1's as opposed to the black ring around the tube in the VX2's and 3's. I think it has something to do with internal baffles.

It may not sound like a big deal but I just prefer a view that is larger by going all the way to the edge of the aluminum. The glass quality isn't so much lower that it really matters in my hunting.

To me it boils down to what gun and how much are you going to use it. The VX2 is the best buy on the market in my opinion since the Conquests are gone. If I'm putting a scope on my best, most used deer rifle, I'm going to pony up the coin for the VX2. If I have a gun that's only going to be used for an occasional varmint or deer hunt then yeah, I would go w/a VX1. powdr

I have better scopes for my main rifles,Vortex Razor, and Kahles Helia CL, but have been considering a couple of VX1's for my secondary rifles.I've always liked the VX2's and have a couple of them. I never even considered a VX1 until recently but if the internals are just as robust as a VX2 then I see no reason not to buy a couple.

You may appreciate the baffles more when the sun is low and flare needs to be minimized.

Since the difference in costs isn't all that much, particularly if amortized it over the life of the scope, say 10 or 20 years, I would always go with a VX-2 on 1st tier rifles and maybe 2nd tiers, but would probably just go with the still very good VX-1s on lower tier rifles and loaners.

For example, Natchez sells the matte/duplex VX-1 3-9x40 for $200 and the matte/duplex VX-2 for $300, a difference of $100. The numbers are easy to run, with the VX-1 costing you $10 per year over a 20 year life and the VX-2 costing you $15 per year over the same span of time. While $100 is certainly "real" $$, looking at the purchase as a long term investment, a $5 per year difference isn't much $$, about the cost of a Big Mac value meal at McD's. Some people have criticized me for suggesting this way of looking at purchases, since you're spending all of the $$ at the beginning, but it is a way of looking at purchases that works for me.

I have a couple Vari-X IIs, couple VX2s, and just recently bought a VX1. If you kept your eyes closed until the rifle was shouldered, you'd never know the difference. The only down side to the original vari-x IIs is the friction dial and for a set it and forget it application that's hardly a problem.

You can't tell the between a Vari-X II and a VX-2 at twilight?

I have Leupold 2-7x33s in Vari-X IIc, Rifleman, VX-I, VX-II, VX-1, and VX-2 flavors and despite not being a sophisticated optics guy, I can tell the difference between the Vari-X IIc and VX-2. My Vari-X IIc is a 1997 shotgun version with the heavy duplex reticle and my VX-2 is a 2014 standard version with a standard duplex reticle.

I do think that the heavy duplex reticle is most usable/visible earlier before sunrise and later after sunset than the standard duplex, which may or may not have influenced my ability to see a difference, however slight, between the two scopes. 'Hope that makes sense.

Nope, at least not while hunting at last light. In fact, I always thought those scopes were pretty decent in low light. It's pretty dark 30min after sunset and the Vari-X IIs have always allowed me to easily hunt to the end of legal time with ease. I can't say that of many other 3-9 scopes I've tried over the years. I'm certainly not giving up my Zeiss and Swaro scopes for them, but I'd still take them hunting w/o a doubt I could see well enough in legal light.

I recently had a nice buck at a mere 60 yards in the last few mins of legal time during our primitive season. I could see the buck in my binos, but barely see a black spot in the Bushnell 3200 3-9x40 I had on that particular rig. I sure wished it would have been even the lowly Vari-X II at the time. Or better yet one of my 3-9 Conquests

Don't get me wrong, I'm not touting those old scopes as something great by any means. They are just a decent mid priced set it and forget it optic for a hunting rig that will most likely give a lifetime of use. Heck, My first and oldest has scratches from decades of shirt tail cleaning and the darn thing is still a good hunting optic.

Have a good one,

loder

The main difference I can tell is in the adjustments. The VX-1's adjustment feel somewhat mushy and hard to tell when it is actually clicking at times, much like the Redfield Revolution. I can't tell a dimes worth of difference in the glass, and both stay set very well once sighted in. The VX-2 just has more positive adjustments from my experience.

Optically, the new VX2 is easily better than the old Vari XII. Matter of fact, the new VX1 looks much better as well IMO......

Thinking is just the sampling of each you got. I have a vx3 and feel it is on the mushy side. Willing to bet another off the shelf might feel slightly better.

After selling scopes for a little over two years and looking through Leupold scopes many many times, to my eyes a VX-2 has much better glass than a VX-1. Where the lines get a little blurred for me is the difference between VX-2 and VX-3. To me they are pretty close.