Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Always a Leupold guy, BUT..

My VXIII 3.5-10x40 with B&C reticle almost hosed me last summer. Two days before leaving for Africa and I went to the range just to double check my Kimber which I was planing on using for plains game. First shot was 8” high and a little right, WTF. 2nd shot was close to aim point, and the third was way off as well. This particular scope has been back to Leupold before because it went tits up, and it seems it’s gone again. Luckily I had another VX3 that I swapped and got back on track. Now, Im thinking of swapping brands. I loved Leupolds because I thought they were great scopes for the price, and when I bought my last scope, cost was still an issue. But I’ve lost some confidence in them with heavier recoiling rifles. So, I’m thinking of putting a Swaro Z3 3-10x42 with BRH reticle in my Kimber. Am I just being stupid or is the Swaro really with it?

if I was going to Africa I think I would step up to something with a little better reputation....to much money involved to take a chance in my opinion

Leupold is an average to good scope. Swarovski is top shelf. I made the switch after a Leupold failure and a Zeiss failure. Have one Swaro fail to adjust, but bought it used. Never again. Any serious trip gets a new Swaro.

I hope you have better luck with Swaros than I did. Had 2 go wonky on a 300 wm. Less than 50 shots for each one. Explanation on the first one was something to the effect that they were only designed to be adjusted a certain percentage of their range, which I was still in. After the replacement did the same thing in about the same number of shots, I concluded that they weren't a good fit for magnum recoil. A cursory scroll through a few threads on rugged scopes showed that I was far from the only one to have such luck with them.

I’ve had inconsistent tracking in Swaro Z3s, a Z5 and a Z6. Have had a Z3 that would not hold zero as well. Glass has been excellent in most but not all. Swaro service has been outstanding.

My experience is the old VARI-X- III were far more likely to hold zero than the subsequent models. Tracking has always been a joke on the older models…50/50 on the newer ones. I’m alway looking for older ones for set and forget situations.

For dialing, I’ve migrated to NF SFP scopes as I’ve grown weary of scope roulette on my hunting rigs.

you couldn't GIVE me a swaro.......

All brands/models of scopes can break.
Leupold is/was the most popular middle to higher cost scope in America.
If only a small number of Leupolds were ever sold, we would hardly or never hear about problems.

My NF SHV and SS scopes usually don’t return to zero when it’s below freezing and I crank them very far. The SS at least returns to zero if I warm it up, usually but not always for the SHV.

They all fail, but typically in very small numbers. I have sent at least one of almost every mid to top tier brand back at one time or another.

I have to agree with this
Swaro makes perhaps the best binoculars and spotters......but their rifle scopes are junk IMO
good glass with bad mechanic's, dont track well or return to zero well.
I have way too many Leupold scopes to sell them but will never use one again for a once in a lifetime hunt
Last few years I have been using Tract Toric scopes with great success they have worked very well without issues

Fck Leupold.I want my rifles topped with a scope from LOW in Japan…

Leupolds suck!

Whitetail, Mule deer, Elk, prairie dogs, ground hogs, coons, squirrels, crows, possums, think that too.

I have a number of Leupolds and 1 Swarovski. Wouldn’t trust any of them to track dialing but great for set and forget. B&C and TDS reticles work for me. I have 1 SWFA and it is the only scope I’ve ever owned that tracks.

If your rifle has iron sights, get familiar with them in case your scope goes goes tits up. And bring a backup scope too boot.

I agree with regards to Swaro, in my case the SwaroA 1" tube. It sucked, swaro fixed it, I sold it. My buddy had two of them do the same thing. Love the binos, 1" tube Swaro scopes suck though. Took a 2-12x VX6 to Africa 6 times with nary a problem......but it's the only Leupold I have left.

LOL.

So says a guy who has never done anything and owns shitty rifles.

Leupold sucks sweaty balls

Yep!

Leupold Hater's deer.



Leupold Lover's deer.

Weak.

Grow stonger.

Weak? Weak is posting photos of other peoples big game kills. Burns is weak.

So does your sig gif...

62 pages later, Leupold will still be on the hind teet.

LMAO!

Good post. I’ve seen the same thing. Failures with the Swaro Z3, and the Leupold VX 3is a dog. Why do you guys think Leupold went from those to the “upgraded” VX3i so fast?

Including your wife’s sweaty balls

Leupold Hater's only elk ever.



Leupold Lover's Elk.

Is that your friend?

LMAO!

Swaro won’t give you much more.

Straight to the NF SHV and don’t look back.

Oh, I forgot to add, JOHN BURNS SUCKS POLE.

SWFA 3-9, Trijicon 3-9, NF Compact 2.5-10..... That is what I would engage.

I have that exact scope with that exact issue. I sent mine in for repair only to have the same issue when I got it back. I am not going to bash the brand because I have other Leupolds that consistently steer bullets to where I aim.

Leupold came with the tag, guide, and access?

Yikes, you convinced me…

Shrap, what you do and use is irrelevant to me, and vice versa I'm quite sure. If you decipher reports of real world actual use as trying to convince you of anything, then that's "you" problem, not me. Use what you want and I'll do the same. I couldn't care less.

why not use the best ? Nightforce scopes that is what i am taking to Africa ,have used Nightforce out west in the field not in a truck on a 2-track , at my home state in the woods and tamarack swamps and while shooting bench rest competition. showing pictures of rifles and dead game animals is tacky i don`t need to brag i deal in facts ,with a Nightforce scope on my rifles.

I'd like the one 2nd from the left with the Irish Walnut

Regardless of what scope you choose for an important trip away from home, you should have a second scope along in quick release rings ready to go. I did this for my African trip and it saved my trip when I damaged my first scope bouncing around in the back of the bakkie .... changed out scopes, checked zero, and went hunting...

agreed !

Weaver k3 microtrac

Understood, but Huntsman made it clear he wouldn’t own one and I doubt he has had more days in the field with a Swaro than I have and find it funny how everyone is so quick to be critical on the Campfire…

Threads like this will just end up being 10 pages of folks arguing over what they trust the most. The fact of the matter is, most scopes made today will help you kill chit. Youll hear leupys are junk, swaro is junk, zeiss is junk. Nightforce is the only scope that will allow you to successfully harvest game. I have owned them all. Never had any of them fail. Any scope can fail, but after reading a thread like this, youll think that everything is junk and will not work lol. Opinions and options are great, but the point is, grain of salt type of thing

I hear you. Seems like everyone nowadays has an emotional attachment to their gear that they paid hard earned money for. I'm probably the weird one.....I like and use what works for what I'm doing, no brand loyalty, none, zero, nada. When it doesn't work anymore, I find something that does. Killed over 60 African big game animals with my VX6. When people around here hear that out they schitttt their pants and respond much the same.

Then again, not everyone is in love with carrying 3lb scopes around their rifles in Africa, especially when the odds of having to dial it are 99-1. Hope you have a great hunt though.

The 2.5-10 NXS and 3-10 SHV are 19-22 Oz depending on whether you have a 32MM or 42MM Obj.

I currently have a 2.5-10x32 NXS on my 375 Talkeetna. I'm going to put a 1.5-6x42 Swaro into a set of Talley screw-lock rings and give it a whirl upon same.

Exactly why i dont use nf. Too damn heavy

Just so folks know, the hunt was last summer and the VX3 I swapped from another gun worked perfectly. Longest shot was 220 yards on a waterbuck.

But, I’ve lost confidence in the scope that was on my Kimber, and that’s the reason for the post. I don’t plan on dialing because I dont need to shoot over 500 yards, and several of the reticles available compensate for that. The reason I mentioned the Swaro was because of weight. If weight wasn’t an issue, I’d probably run a S&B, but they are in the 21-22oz range, almost 10oz more than the Swaro. Same thing with the NF. Plus, it’s more of a classic gun and Im not really a fan of the tactical look of the NF.
I’m figured this would turn into some what of a d!ck measuring contest, but I do appreciate the responses.

Same here. Ive killed game with all of them, even a $30 tasco lol

On my last Africa trip, my son and I took three rifles. The plains game rifles had Trijicon Accupoint 3-9x40 scopes and the .375 had a Leupold VX-6 1-6x. The scopes all worked fine, but just in case we also had a backup scope for each rifle in QD rings. Luckily we didn't need the backups.

I've mostly had good luck with Leupolds but a few have had problems. I use several scope brands and generally prefer fairly light scopes under 16 ounces. But I do have a couple of Tract Toric 2-10x scopes that weigh 18.6 ounces and one SWFA 10x that's about the same weight. Other than target rifles I prefer not to go with heavier scopes.

Yes, all can have failures...and do. My issue is the last 5 Leupolds I've bought have ALL failed. 100%

Trijicon is the most obvious comparison based on length diameter, weight, etc. I have purchased 2 3-9x40 Accupoints in the last 3 years and 1 of the 2 was dead out of the box. 50%...but if I'd bought 5 would bet %age would be better... (We already know in the sample size it's better)

My "thang" is this... Leupold has always been vaunted for their service, and everyone knows their premium price for a medium product includes that amazing warranty. Yet, I returned a VX6 2-12 that came back and wasn't fixed. I returned my Dad's VX6 3-18 that came back and failed again in one mag. Most recently, I returned a Trijicon Accupoint 3-9 and a VX-3 3.5-10x40 some 2 months back, and the Trijicon is back, remounted, and working great... The Leupold isn't even back and other than the initial "we have it" I haven't heard a thing.

[bleep] Leupold...

I'll take all the Leupolds and Swarovskis you guys are giving away. Lol

I've had pretty good luck overall with LOW scopes. Other than the SWFA 3-9 which happens to be a scope I really like but I'm about to give up on. I have several of them and use them more than most other models in general but I've had at least 5 fail in the last dozen years.

Everyone says it's my fault except swfa and they just put me on a long list for another one. Those eho tell me it's my fault have never bother to tell me what I did wrong. I wish they would because my fieldcraft 6mm Creedmoor has one on it and it was always sub 1/2 moa. Now it's 2-3 moa and shifting around. That happened with at least 2 other 3-9's and 2 others just stopped adjusting windage 1 direction. Properly torqued in 6 screw swfa rings.

I guess any scope can have a failure so it's good to have a backup scope or sights or backup rifle. I got tired of waiting on a few 3-9 replacements so I took Chinese athelons instead one 4-16 and one 2-12. They're both still working fine and I've been running the 2-12 on a seekins element 7 prc without the brake.

I'm going to try another 2-12 on my fieldcraft 7-08. That light little gun has trashed 4 scopes, all my fault apparently despite trying different rings and lapping and aligning them. If it eats one of those I'm just going to put a swfa fixed 6 on it. I have yet to brake one of the 6x.

I started getting away from leupolds in the 90s when I started using a few LOW built weavers and liked that a click was a click. I had great luck with first gen weaver grandslams for years but after several years I think some of their springs went softer and groups started opening up with a few.

Then the gen 2 grand slams came out with dual springs and were good for a hunting scope but had crappy Burris ff2 style adjustment where the whole rear of the scope is turned to adjust power. Despite that for basic cheap scopes I still have maybe 5 gen 2 3-12 grandslams built by LOW maybe a dozen years ago and all are still working great. I've got a few on ARs and some on rifles for the kids. For a lighter weight non dialer scope they've been great. I've also had great luck with LOW built bushnell elites like LRHS and DMR 2 and 3s. The BE 3-12 LRHS is one of my all time favorite hunting scopes.

Bb

I’ve had many Leupolds, haven’t had any problems. I had binoculars that failed, but they sent me a new pair.

Interesting thread on Rokslide about drop testing scopes.

This could get some legs.

Yeah, the guys over there won't wipe their assss without Form's permission. That drop test is a joke IMO.

How so? The test looks objective.

Or is it just a joke because Leupolds can’t pass it?

I would be somewhat peeved if someone dropped one of my scoped rifles.

^ ^ yep

Lol, this thread is comical.

If you cant kill game with a Leupold or swaro, the issue is far more with the indian than the bow.

I have been a leupold scope man since about 1970. I have never had a problem with a leupold scope and have used them in Africa several times, Alaska couple times, British Columbia 4 hunts and every year hunting deer and elk here. I have to admit most of my scopes are older vari-x II , vari-x III and vx3. Maybe just lucky but will only use leupold

Formi used to post on the ‘fire years ago.

We had a drop test:
Formi dropped his on a shooting mat.
Sam dropped his in a pasture.
Deflave sent his skittering across a frozen Montana sewage lagoon.
Stick pitched his off a switchback.

Can’t entirely recall how the scopes fared……

Leupys don’t tend to fare all that well.

Older was better, and the fixed powers were money.

I quit Leupold when they quit on me, sent 2 in for repair, when they came back one took 17 shots to zero and the other would adjust erratically. The old 2 x 7 was the worst tried several.

Where is Big Stick, he might tell us exactly how he feels about scopes?????

No longer even consider Leupolds on new rifles. I think I have 5 left of Vari-X flavors as set it and forget it scopes. I know one is a rimfire on my Marlin 39A. Now it's Zeiss, NF, Trijicon, SWFA, Meopta.

None of 'em do, which is the problem IMO. When 98% of everything tested, "fails"..........I guess rings/mounts, action torque, bedding, etc get a free pass, as it's always the scope's fault. I've killed a buttload of game with "failed" scopes such as the VX6, Arken EP4 (2), Athlon Helos, Athlon Ares BTR Gen 2.

I hope you have better luck with Swaros than I did. Had 2 go wonky on a 300 wm. Less than 50 shots for each one. Explanation on the first one was something to the effect that they were only designed to be adjusted a certain percentage of their range, which I was still in. After the replacement did the same thing in about the same number of shots, I concluded that they weren't a good fit for magnum recoil. A cursory scroll through a few threads on rugged scopes showed that I was far from the only one to have such luck with them.[/quote]

Had one cost me a Booner at 167 yards lasered. Off a sandbag rest. Shooting 7 feet to the right at 50 yards I found out the next day. Love Swaros but they'll never be on a heavy recoil rife any more. They do have a reputation for not being able to handle recoil per our most esteemed posters here.

There are certain scopes that do pass the tests, and it seems to be a lot more than 2% of all scopes tested. The testing is far from being scientifically robust and statistically powerful, but they try to control as many variables as possible by bonding action to stock, etc. At the end of the day, it is a source of data, and it should be interpreted and used with the level of experimental design and control taken into consideration.

A recurring theme in these discussions is that killing game is assumed to be the metric by which scope performance and function should be assessed, but that is not the metric that this testing seeks to address. I am very confident that more game has been killed with Tasco scopes than with the VX6. That doesn't mean that everybody wants a Tasco or that the Tasco is "better" for hunting than the VX6. The scope requirements for killing the vast majority of game in NA are fairly lax. Most scopes that are used to kill game don't need to track correctly. They don't need to RTZ. They don't even need to retain zero much better than holding POA to a 2-3 MOA cone. However, some hunters and shooters require, or just want, better performance. While 2-3 MOA zero retention may be sufficient for most hunters' needs, they may want the scope to hold zero within 0.25 MOA.

These sorts of tests push gear to the limits, and that is useful for some people as they assess to what level they want their scopes to perform, and which products they consequently want to use. I see this testing as a good thing and another useful data point, which should be taken for what it is and with a grain of salt.

Had many Leupolds over the years and only one that actually failed was Fixed powder VX2, cross hairs just collapsed, sent it in and got it back in couple of weeks. Now I did notice that sometimes tracking isn't responding as it should and had the same issue with Meopta I spoke about this with Meopta rep and he stated that sometimes adjustments get stuck. This is his response and I'm sure it is true with many scopes in that respect.

"It is possible for the adjustments to kind of “stick” in the scope. I have had a lot of customers send scopes in saying they won’t track, or the adjustments don’t match the click value, and the first thing I will do is spin the adjustment all the way one way, then count rotations back the other way, then turn it half the number of rotations back in the first directions. This not only gets the adjustments moving, but it allows me to reset the scope to optical zero in case the issue is with the rifle being drilled and tapped off center."

I’ve seen it with me own eyes. Might be even more frequent if the scope hasn’t been dialed or adjusted in a while.

I do the same thing as you but using a Bushnell bore sighter and observing if the reticle moves accurately as it’s dialed. When turning the dials I’ve seen the reticle barely move then “jump” as it apparently unsticks.

The erector typically moves in one direction using only spring force, so it is certainly possible for the erector to stick if that spring force is insufficient. This is more likely with some designs than others.

By the same token, if one is a proponent of these ridiculous drop tests, you're also adhering to the premise that those that "fail" the drop test are unable to hold zero, which is laughable. Most people around here didn't kiss Form's butt or ego so he took his toys over to Rockslide where they revere this dude. I find that laughable as well, especially where he bragged about killing "thousands,plural" of animals the past 15 years.

Social and personal issues aside, scopes that fail the zero retention component of these drop tests are unable to hold zero when subjected to those types of impacts. Such impacts may be more than most scopes will ever experience, but it is interesting and useful knowledge to see which scopes can get through that and still retain zero. Of course, to make any blanket statement about model X scope holding zero and working across the board would take testing a lot more than 1 or 2 individual samples of that scope model to have any statistical validity. Still interesting, none-the-less.

So at what point do they become less interesting? 40" drops? 46" drops? 50" drops? How about dropping one off of your rooftop? Is that still relevant? Plus, any hunter that drops his scoped rig on the ground/rocks/etc from any distance would surely recheck zero anyway even with the scopes that "passed". As I mentioned earlier, I have a VX6 that never lost zero in 6 trips to Africa and 60+ big game animals over there. In light of that fact, had many flat brimmed mullets continue to tell me my scope wasn't holding zero. I find that laughable as well.

Why doesn’t Leupold make a VX5 that works for all the naysayers? I don’t get it, they are missing out. That said, until mine fails, I’ll keep using it because is the perfect scope for me. Great glass, good in low light, duplex reticle, dimly lit firedot, alumi caps, good warranty, 3-15 magnification perfect for my hunting and target practice, and holds zero so far. I couldn’t care less about dialing or the CDS system but since it’s there, I also want it to lock so I don’t have even think about it.

Ok. So I may just switch to Talley lightweights to save a few OZ, and then pull the trigger here. The .416 Rigby I used in Africa was topped with a S&B and it performed flawlessly. Thoughts?

https://www.opticsplanet.com/schmid...v_code=BD-RS-SB312K-645-811-882-40-05A02

I suppose it becomes less relevant when the drop distance represents something that the hunter/shooter could not envisioning ever happening in actual use. I think 12", 18", and 36" drops are still in the range of realistic possibilities in the field. I've definitely BTDT. When I was a young hunter, I even had a rifle fall 15+ feet to the ground when I failed to tie it off correctly to lower it from a tree stand. Not that I expect a scope to hold zero through that type of drop.

I don't disagree with you there. It may be difficult to verify zero if on a big trip or when deep in the mountains, but I would sure try to verify zero if the rifle took a tumble.

There are two scenarios here that emerge from that test: scopes that are dropped, lose zero, but continue to work fine once re-zeroed; and scopes that are dropped, lose zero, and never go back to working properly after the drop test. So verifying zero after a tumble is fine if the scope simply needs to be re-zeroed and then continues to hold zero and track properly afterward, but verifying zero isn't going to help if the scope has shaken loose internally from the fall. That's probably where having a scope that can withstand these <3' drops without losing zero or failing to function is particularly useful.

That would be beefing up one part of your system and exposing another part to weakness, IMO. I would rather use something like the Leupold Backcountry one-piece rings if you want that style.

Good stuff Jordan. While it may be difficult to verify zero where you're hunting and have taken a fall, it sure doesn't warrant SWAGing rounds at a big game animal if you have no idea where your zero is, if it got knocked off, etc, IMO.

I wouldn’t put any scope weighing more than 15ozs or so on Talley LWT’s—and especially if they would be on a 416 Rigby……

I definitely agree. Especially if you think there's a good chance that your scope did lose zero after a bump or fall.

The other option I’ve been kicking around is Conetrol rings and bases. Not sure how much they weigh.

Come on, everyone knows that Schmidt and Bender is the best.

Waaay out of my price range.

My VX 3 2.5-8×32 on a Kimber 300WSM has been to Africa 3 times. I use a TufPak as a case, the rifle is in a soft case surrounded by hunting clothing etc. When zero is checked, a minor adjustment is required. No problem.

I only hunt in Alaska and am on the downhill side of my mediocre hunting career. I used a 1.5-5x20 on a .338 for 12 years. Then went to a 2.5-8x36 for even longer, both had a duplex reticle. For many years I have had a 3-10x42 SHV with Kenton Industries Ballistic Tape on elevation turret. The old Pre-64 Featherweight 30-06 wears a Leupold 3-10x40 with a B&C reticle. My Tikka 6.5 Creed has a 3-9x42 SWFA mil scope on it.

I don't dial Leupold scopes, I do dial the SHV and SWFA if needed, which is rare because a little hold over takes care of moose and caribou out to 300 yards. MY wife's little Mod. 94 Big Bore .356 Win. wears a Leupold 1.5-5x20 with a German #4 reticle. All scopes are zeroed for 100 yards for moose hunts as I seldom shoot over 150 yards.

If one has had a bad experience with any scope, quit using it, if the experience is good it's hard to move on to another scope.

My .338 and 30-06 both have sturdy back up iron sights zeroed for 100 yards and the scopes are in Talley QD rings.

Good discussion. Personally I think Form's tests are helpful, and I think Jordan's analysis of the tests are spot-on.

I wish Leupold's were better at tracking and retaining zero- they're just not (I currently own 14 of them). Have seen it too many times over the years. They could be made more robustly, but they clearly are not. I'd give anything for them to be better - they're light, optics are plenty good, they hit the "optical triangle" perfectly, they're good looking, they're mostly USA made. What's not to like lol?

A local acquaintance was for years (well up into the mid/late 2000's), a National Small Bore Silhouette Coach here in MT. He told me Leupold gave the team scopes for free, but they just didn't track well enough or maintain their zero for competition (and broke too often). So, out-of-pocket, they bought their own Weaver Micro Tracks which performed well.

Fx

Brad,

Formy's (Chuck's) test are faked. Totally full of shit.

You don't live very far away and if you want I will drag a multitude of Leupolds on good rifles up north and let you see how well they track. Every single one.

It's not rocket science.

If you are basing an opinion off Weaver Micro Tracs you might multi decades behind the curve.

Let me know.

You aren’t kidding….

Brad, do you remember what category of air rifle competition the coach was talking about? I thought they used irons only.

Last NIB Reupold I purchased,is a fhuqking dismal piece of fhuqking schit. Hint.




Took a World Class Rifle that shoots in the .2's,to nearly 2" at 50yds in calm conditions,due erector adjustments. Hint.







Swap the Reupold for a real scope and the former Splendor returns. Pretty fhuqking funny! Hint.



SWFA 6x on FWB 300S...Google as you must. Hint.



Hint..................

One of the clients on a hunt this fall is the world champion PRS shooter. I think thats the right platform.

We spoke of scopes. It confirmed that I haven't had L on the list for a long time now.

Good luck.

You are correct. We had the conversation back in 2008 or 09, and my memory is fuzzy! I mispoke, it was small bore silhouette, so 22's - I edited my post to reflect that.

I can give you his name via PM, he's still coaching and his daughter is still winning matches!

Thanks for the update Brad. I have a well used T10 on my smallbore silhouette rifle myself.