For over thirty years I used Zeiss and a variety of other brands that were supposedly better than Leupold. I used whatever Nikon was selling at the moment as their high end model when I wanted an economical scope. A few years ago I bought my first Leupold scope and have been extremely happy since. I'm now up to 10 or so Leupold rifle scopes and one Gold Ring spotting scope with zero issues, and incredible customer service.
I live in Beaverton, the home of Leupold, and have had a couple opportunities to sit down with Leupold technical guys and have asked about some of the issues I read about on this and other forums. They were able to explain things to me in a way that my non engineering background brain could understand, and I came to realize most of these "issues" are not really issues but perceived issues on the part of some people.
I also have had opportunity over the years to talk with a fair number of people who work at Leupold making the scopes, and I've never heard any of them complain about how the company treats them, and in today's world, that means a great deal to me.
It wasn't until late middle age that I turned to Leupold products, but I am very happy with them. They may not be perfect, and some of their stuff may not be the absolute best in a category, but on average it is good stuff that outperforms the vast majority of those who are using it.
They were able to explain things to me in a way that my non engineering background brain could understand, and I came to realize most of these "issues" are not really issues but perceived issues on the part of some people.
A brand that needs streamlined. Schmidt & Bender! I still don’t understand their line and I am an optics snob. Their line makes my head hurt, I also wonder who on earth is buying their products leupold has tons of options and amazing options. I just can’t trust the mechanical aspect of their scopes. And no it was perceived. The Same gun with a nightforce has held zero for years after repeated dialing. Same scope mark 4 and I was adjusting zero every time at the range. This was also after a trip back to leupold. Like I said ship a video cd of the scope being tested mechanically charge an extra $100 for it.
Not sure how many Leupolds I have, in the high teens. And have used them extensively since the early 70s. Are there better scopes, maybe. But for the cost, they are a great value.
I feel like part of the deal is that in the last 10-15 years long range target and paper shooting along with long range hunting has become much much more popular. When i was a kid growing up my grandfather and uncles and older cousins all had Leupolds, Weavers or Redfield Wideview scopes. They were all mounted, sighted in and almost never touched again unless the gun was banged or dropped. Nothing against these brands of scopes because i was a huge Leupold fan for many years (until i got my first bad one) but its easy to be a great scope when its mounted and fired 10 shots or so to sight in and never fooled with again other than to fire a few shots a year hunting for 5, 10,15, 20 years or more. Their names were built by hunters who didnt turn dials and weren’t worried about how well they “RTZ”. Now a days there’s tons of people who want to sight a scope in a 100 or 200 yards and then dial out to 500, 600 or 1000 yds and then dial back to zero and back and forth at all different distances. And they expect the scope to do so accurately. I dont think the early Leupold customers were attempting this for the most part for many years and when they did start trying it the scopes didnt do it real well so Leupold was playing catch up to some of the European scopes people were starting to buy. I’m sure there is more to it but i think this a big part of Leupold’s demise in some peoples eyes.
I feel like part of the deal is that in the last 10-15 years long range target and paper shooting along with long range hunting has become much much more popular. When i was a kid growing up my grandfather and uncles and older cousins all had Leupolds, Weavers or Redfield Wideview scopes. They were all mounted, sighted in and almost never touched again unless the gun was banged or dropped. Nothing against these brands of scopes because i was a huge Leupold fan for many years (until i got my first bad one) but its easy to be a great scope when its mounted and fired 10 shots or so to sight in and never fooled with again other than to fire a few shots a year hunting for 5, 10,15, 20 years or more. Their names were built by hunters who didnt turn dials and weren’t worried about how well they “RTZ”. Now a days there’s tons of people who want to sight a scope in a 100 or 200 yards and then dial out to 500, 600 or 1000 yds and then dial back to zero and back and forth at all different distances. And they expect the scope to do so accurately. I dont think the early Leupold customers were attempting this for the most part for many years and when they did start trying it the scopes didnt do it real well so Leupold was playing catch up to some of the European scopes people were starting to buy. I’m sure there is more to it but i think this a big part of Leupold’s demise in some peoples eyes.
Randall
the problem is the scopes they sell and market as "tactical scopes" if they are sold with an adjustable turret the scope needs to work with it. this scope isn't cheap, Why is the tracking bad? for that much money leupold should test these. nightforce does, why can't leupold? we are tired of it!! all my leupolds have went down the road. if you set them and forget them they are going to be a good scope, But so is other scopes like bushnell elites.
That's a tough choice for folks to whom a scope purchase represents serious money, considering the potential consequences for failure in the field, and that the only remedy XXXXXX offers is repair or replacement.
I'm thinking this would be true for any and all scope makers, no?
It is, and I don't expect any of them to offer that. But, if a company's reputation has fallen off, an offer to buy back a defective product for a limited time might help restore it.
To be honest, I have no idea if the stuff we read here about problems with Leupolds (or others) is commonly reported outside our little sphere, so Leupold may not be worried about it at all.
They were able to explain things to me in a way that my non engineering background brain could understand, and I came to realize most of these "issues" are not really issues but perceived issues on the part of some people.
Yeah, no. They still refuse to accept the truth.
Pretty sure that the two var i x II scopes that I sent back 3 times each because of failing erector springs was not a perceived issue. The tech at Leopold said the springs weren't designed to dial that much. I really wasn't dialin g that far, but the scopes failed to return to zero after about 250 rounds. Again, each scope went back 3 times for repair with the same problem. Switched to a ss. Problem solved.
Said it before but here again ..We had both vx11 tear up in Africa ..Warranty not worth a damn over there..Sent back,supposedly fixed but I sold 'em......The vx3 I had was pretty good but would not hold zero...So far zero problems with Zeiss,,Burris or MeOpta..why go back ?
Doug have you heard anything from Leupold about replacing there erector system with a new one? I have a good source saying they are working on it.
That right there is the magic question! Every single scope I have sent back to them came back with erector rebuilt on the repair explanation and there’s been a bunch.. Keep in mind I was not dialing much with any of those scopes, they either wouldn’t track, hold zero or had CDS that simply didn’t work worth a chit. Everyone on this forum knows that the weak erector/Springs are what have plagued them. If they came out with a statement and explanation of a more robust design to the erector system it would definitely help them. The idea that they are pumping out new model $700 - $1000+ dollar scopes and your led to believe that they have the same crap erector in em that has a reputation for failure doesn’t sit well with me.
I just did a count, sold 13 Leupolds in the past few years. Still have a few but NONE will be used for a hard to get big game tag. Too much invested in a hunt these days to wonder if the scope will fail.
Twice I had failures, once during a coues wt hunt and the other the week before another coues hunt. Over the past decade I have sent back many Leupolds for repairs. Just as another poster said all were erector issues. A few varmint rigs still use a Leupold where it really doesn't matter.
I am helping a friend with his new rifle and a VX-6. First time to range the scope the windage and elevation adjustments didn't match the POI. Will be yanking it off to test on a super accurate BR rifle to see if it is the rifle or the scope. I have a feeling it is the scope.
I have owned a total of one Leupold scope and will not own another one. It is currently sitting at Leupold since June 5th. This is the second trip for it back to the factory. Never again. I'll stay with my Super Chickens.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
I have 4 Leupolds. I like them to set and forget. I trust them and like the view through them. None of them adjust correctly at all when you start moving them though and none of them ever did. The next scope I buy will have a reputation for tracking correctly.
I'm still a Leupold fan, and have 4 of them, but my last scope was a Nightforce SHV.
Competition. Leupold will remain a contender in my book, but competition from numerous optic makers puts the squeeze on the larger, older manufacturers. Innovation --- if you're not getting better, faster than the other guy, then you're getting worse. It's a good time in history to be a buyer in the optics market. Lots of good stuff at reasonably good prices.
