Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Root of the Leupold "problem"

I have around 100 Leupold scopes that are set and forget. I have a lot of other scopes too, but my go to is the 2-7x33 with a heavy duplex reticle. I also have 2 6x42 that I sent back to Leupold and had the reticles changed to the heavy duplex for first/last light hunting. What other people do and use is of no consequence to me and their opinions about what I do and use are equally inconsequential to me.

I haven't looked at that yet, but perhaps Leupold has been filtered out of that shooting population somewhat prior.

Separate the wheat from the chaff. I can see that happening as well. For the op's needs, he should be fine with that 6x Leupold. IF he's starting out with a "proven" good one. Set it and forget it. If it shows signs of degrading accuracy over time, then send it back and have Leupold go through it. Not much else you can really do there, besides selling it and moving on to something better.

Total agreement...

While the Loopies of the last 10 years aren't what the Leupold I grew up with, I've had good experience with Leupolds. In 2000 I put a 2-7X33 on my 416 Rigby. I actually shot it a lot with 350ge Speers as a coyote and gopher destroyer. I sold it to a friend after two trips to Africa, and he is still using it with the 2-7 Leupold.

I have several dozen Leupolds on rifles. The only one I had fail was a 1.5-5 VariXIII on a 338. Granted, it was one failure too many. I set and forget, no "fun with dials".

Then you have to read it and come to your own conclusion. However in that population, failures of the so-called alphas are not uncommon.

That sounds like capitalism to me. It stinks if you are Leupold but great for the makers of mallets.

kwg

Are the mallets "Assembled in America" from CCP sourced parts and materials?

I worked for Digital Equipment Corp in the mid 80s. We came out with the VAX (Virtual Address Extension) computer. Really revolutionary! A real threat to IBM, Sun Microsystem and Hp.

There was a home appliance company in the UK whose vacuum cleaners were called Vax.

Unfortunately for us their commercials said "Nothing sucks like a Vax!". We heard that a lot.

The Leupold bashing on this site never stops. My take on it is that many of the older scopes are tried in dialing situations for which they were not designed. Granted sighting in a Leupold has typically been an adventure since at least with the older models tracking was a bit imprecise.
The upside is that they are relatively light but that comes at the expense of precise tracking.
There is no free lunch. Just depends on what you prioritize.

Remember the hot shit Alpha processor a few years later? Not a basic phone processor would crush it.

OP - I have used 6x36 Leupolds for a few decades as set and forget hunting scope, the one that has been used the most is on a 7-1/2 lb. 30/06 and it has never given me any issue whatever. I seem to remember it as having a 1985 manufactuer date.

I had enough confidence in it that I used it on my once in a lifetime mountain goat hunt where worked just fine.

I do not put to much faith in all of the failure stories because without knowing the backstory it is impossible to say if the scope failed or it was a mounting issue - or Gasp! A shooter issue.

drover

I don't think there are a great amount of variations in rifle scope erector systems. Some have a single leaf spring or a double leaf or even coil springs holding the tube in place along with the turret(s). This is either a QC issue or poor quality components or both IMHO. Leupold is probably making many more scopes than their"glory years" and are also making other items they did not make 30-40 years ago. Maybe the business has gotten out of hand or the owners want more $$ and are allowing corners to be cut.

If you have a Leupold scope that works fine for you- use it by all means. No reason to bash those of us who have had many problems with them over the years.

I still have several Leupold scopes on hunting rifles, but as each one gives me problems it goes down the road any more rather than send it in to Leupold and have them tell me they can't fix it and send me a new scope..

Holding zero isn't really the major issue I've had with Leupold scopes. Only had one or two over the years that had that issue and Leupold was pretty quick to fix it. My problem and the problem of most of the people I have talked to is the lousy erector system. If you move the knob that says 1/4" per click 4 clicks, you should get an inch, right? In my experience and several guys I shoot with, sometimes you do and sometimes you don't. Sometimes tapping it with a screwdriver, cartridge, or whatever blunt object you have handy will get it to move, sometimes it won't . Sometimes it takes several shots to get things to move and it isn't always the distance you dialed- that may take a couple more shots. Moving the crosshair up or down invariably tends to also move the crosshair left or right- not a good thing for dialing or for sighting in with the cost of components these days.

Personally, I think Leupolds are one of the best looking scopes on the market and their glass is as good as any on the market IMO. And if they worked as advertised they would be the only scope I would use since they are built by my neighbors and acquaintances and their plant is just 5 miles from my house. But it hasn't worked out that way for me and many others and I don't recommend them to friends any more. The fact they closed down their custom shop, won't produce gloss scopes, and stopped doing things like reticle changes and other services has pretty much soured me on the management team and product over there now...

Go ahead and bash away...

My experience is with VariX IIIs and above.

Root causes in order:

Bad Mounts such as Redfield JRs.

Bad shooter such as a few here on the fire. Practice more.

Bad rifles

Bad scope. The MK6 was more prone to real optic failures than anything else I have seen from Leupold.

I had a VariX II long ago that worked great as set and forget.

I had an early VX-6 with measurable track out during zoom but it held zero at max zoom.

I have tested and shot a few hundered VX-6 and VX-6 HDs.

Since the Mk V is a heavy beast ( I know because I have 3 of them) recoil effects on the scope should not be extreme. Mine wear Kahles and Burris Signature Select (old models) which are heavy scopes adding to the weight of the rifles.
You might consider Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40 or a Sightron SII 3-9x42 (old model Japan). Both are lightweight and stood up to recoil on .35 Whelen and .300 Weatherby rifles with no issues. The fixed power Leupold might be good as well.

I had a Swaro Z5 2.4-12x50 BRH mounted on my old Mark V SS 270 bee that weighed 7.5 lbs. Rifle was a hammer and never had an issue with the scope. Used Talley detachable rings on it .

...or made by ORKS?

Leupold failure. Sure it happens, like ANY mass produced item, there will be failure from time to time. Sell a bazillion, and there will be a number of them. Some due to straight up equipment failure, or manufacturing defects. Some due to poor mounting jobs, and some reported "failures" will be because the operator doesn't know how to shoot or properly zero a rifle. Sadly I have helped a number of people zero rifles at the range that where blaming their equipment for their inability to get it done rather than their lack of knowledge or experience. The "Leupold bad" phenomenon started here on 24HR campfire. It has spread to other forums from time to time to be sure, but you can almost always tell where they got their info and opinion from, as the wording and statements are almost mirror image of what gets posted here. This website is a fine one, but it's poorly moderated and has a contingent of foul mouthed individuals that your average person wouldn't stop to give the time too, because of their poor attitudes. Unfortunately when they push their agenda there are some weak minds that can't help but just repeat it as gospel. Even though some of these folks are paid shills for offshore manufacturing companies selling offshore scopes. So, is Leupold the be all end all, no they aren't. I have no doubt there are better scopes for 1000 yard plus shooting. For a solid performing hunting scope, they are pretty darn good. I have no doubt some folks have had some bad luck with Leupold, just as I've had consistently good luck with their scopes, I've had the same good luck with Burris and Bushnell (with the exception of a couple really cheap bushies). Zeiss has been good to me too. I've even managed to make the Leupold CDS system work somehow. So take what you see with a grain of salt. Some of it is true, but some of it is pure hokum.

Depends on how much time/effort/expense goes into your hunts.

Increased risk of:

Internal fogging
Loss of zero
Difficulty zeroing


Benefits:
Loss of 8oz

This is shaking out pretty much as I expected it would.

As some have mentioned, there are contributing factors to "failure". Things like, improper mounting, misplaced expectations and just plain lousy shooting.

I don't need or want a dial up scope on this particular rifle. Just a sleek, dependable optic that has a minimal weight tax and will look appropriate.

This is why I landed on the loopy 6x.

Just wanted to see if there was any demonstrable failures.

Looks like the fixed 6x will work out fine.

Thanks again for the input.