Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Let's work together with and on Leupold

I'm not dissing Doug for his effort. But in a sense it's more his job than it is most of ours.

Most agree the old Leupold scopes held zero better, and have gone downhill. If you don't think Leupold already knows this based on the returns they get then vs. now you have your head buried in the sand.

Leupold has chosen to run a business model similar to Forest River (that builds travel trailers). Keep adding more lines and changing model names and features to keep the consumer a step or two behind on their knowledge of the product. Market them well, give them lots of "features", people love them their ""features" but actually shoot very little. By the time anyone figures out what the low down on a particular line is, change the names, models, and features and start all over.

Anybody else notice how similar Leupold model numbers were as they changed them around? Anybody fall behind in knowledge (and lose interest in trying to understand new models and features) when they went from Vari x III to whatever then whatever then whatever? Remember when their line was 3 models and you knew what you were buying? Those were the times in Leupolds development that made them successful. Men bought them and trusted them and they worked. Leupold has made the choice to muddy the waters and decrease reliability, How is that our fault for noticing?

Then vs. now, it's easy to lose track of Leupolds model development, and they don't work like they once did. All these people with similar stories can't be wrong.

In my opinion, Leupold is way past the fact-finding, truth-seeking stage in their business model an is relying on name recognition and customer goodwill rather than product performance to sell scopes. You can tell a company that knows it needs to build a great product to stay in business and one that doesn't. They aren't hard to spot. Leupold is coasting and ignoring known shortcomings of their products.

As always, JMO and worth what you paid for it. But my money goes where it works, not where it used to, "just because". I still shoot some Leupolds mostly because I haven't figured out a replacement for all of them but I do know that some don't move right when I make adjustments, and one lost zero and is setting in the safe unused. I don't really want to deal with problems when I'm shooting, I deal with problems all day long at work.

I'm to a point that I'd rather shoot a $1000 scope on two or three rifles than own 20 $3-400 Leupolds, some of which don't work right and can cost me a hunt. Screw that, I'm too old and tired to deal with Leupolds s h i t.

How profitable is Leupold? Anyone know?

From what I've seen on line, the heirs (family) have a big presence on the board.

Not sure if they have public shares, most companies like that do.

I've not been able to get particulars about their financial stuff. That info may not be available to the public.

DF

I doubt that when condition are poor.

Guaranteed.

I know better than that

You’re already paying for a turret to track and RTZ... the turrets are listed with a value... For instance 1 click = .250 MOA... it doesn’t list it as .250 MOA +/- 1 MOA ... so why should an end user pay additional to get what he was advertised and paid for in the first place... For the most part most end users don’t have the knowledge if their scope works correctly or not...They blame baggage handlers, the trip in the back of the SUV or a bump of the rifle for their scope being off or atmospheric condition for a misplaced shot... This is what certain companies rely on... The market is large enough with the set and forget guys and the under 150 yard shot guys that errors with tracking and zero retention is over looked so Leupold and others will always have a customer base... Now as shooting has evolved to longer ranges the problems which have been there for 10-15 years are starting to surface... A guy that shoots 20 rounds a year at 100 yards or less doesn’t really notice his zero has changed 2-3 MOA vertical or horizontal or both... it’s 2-3 inches off at 100... not a problem for them... He’ll rezero before season and beat the kid for bumping his 270... Unfortunately companies realize this and do not have the want or need to change anything except the price tag on the latest and greatest product line...

The problem with upgrading a scope to be robust and track/RTZ is it will come with additional weight and lord knows that those 2-4 added ounces will break the bank for the light weight crew... There’ll be 60 threads of complaints about weight then... it’s a never ending cycle...

That’s some funny schit, right there 😂😎

On the willingness to pay more for reliability ... I liken this to a woman in an abusive relationship who decides serving him breakfast in bed is the appropriate response to stop the beatings.

Beaver10, based on your retired friends' accounts, can you ballpark figure the year scope reliability dropped below Leupold's previous par?

Well then, my apologies, I must have misinterpreted your meaning. I thought you were dissing Doug for his effort when you said this:





How could I have been so stupid?

Totally misunderstood... lmao...

Leupold Freedom EFR 3-9X.
Has a blur ring around the outside edge of the lens Dunno if that lens issue or due to being recessed in the Adj Obj.
Is there and noticeable.

First Leupold I've had in Freedom line, no other Vari X2 VX3 VX1 or M8's have had that "feaure".



Bought another new Freedom optic unseen (ordered through local dealer-same as other).
Freedom RDS.
Can see a gold square around reddot reflected onto lens.
Against a dark object w intensity low it's VERY noticeable. Even outside in bright light it appears as a faint blur around the dot.
What the hell use is a 1 MOA dot when it's in actuality a 3 or 4 moa blur with a 1 moa red center?

Used rifle came into LGS, Freedom 3-9X (non AO). It has a blur around outside edge too, but lesser than my EFR.

Read reviews, watched YT videos............."crisp to edge" was mentioned a few times.
Have looked at two and the both are not.

Yeah, you look at the center, but the blur is so blatant its a casual distraction.
My Redfiekld Revolutions (three 2-7X, one 3-9X and one 4-12X).................didn't have it.

Just run an ad.

ROFL

Is there a noticeable edge to the blur? If so, it may be used to gauge distance.

I agree that I want both, but even $150 glass nowadays is good enough. I’ve had a few Burris E1’s that were plenty. They could use some better anti-glare coatings but it’s never been something I couldn’t overcome with a baseball cap.

Nothing like using the fine edge of the blur to gauge distance/size... And people wonder why some of these optic companies are still pushing schitt products... unfükinbelievable....

It’s a calming blur for guys that never kill anything. Cuts buck fever in half. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😎😎😎😎😎😎





The best Leupold money can buy says NIGHTFORCE ON THE BOX.

Tracking would sell me on their scopes.

I got into the Varmint For Score game ten years ago with local matches and started with Weaver T-36 scopes to see if I was going to really stay with the matches before I spent bigger money.
The glass was better in my buddies Leupold 36x and 45x scopes but they didn't track, only two guys still use Leupold.
The others went to Weaver or Nightforce.
Up or down one click, left or right one click, I can keep on shooting and not have to chase zero during a match. Tracking!

From the late 90’s they saw a decline in the quality of components going into the scope. 😎