Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Durabilty of Leupold 4.5x14 AO on heavy kickers?

Ouch, I've got a 50mm objective on a super sniper I think.... but the 50 doesn't recoil that bad....

One of the clubs I belong to features ranges up to 1000 yds. They have lots of NRA and tactical matches. Leupolds are quite common here. E

Ask the BR crowd, they send LOTS of new leupys back in since they don't track right. That was NEW leupys.

Of course I'm picking nits, but nothing says leupy is above all else.

Somewhere I got the impression that the harder the kicker the smaller the scope that should be mounted so that recoil momentum would not become abusive for the heavier scopes and in turn destroy their internal mechanics...so that for say a 375 or a 416 it would tend to favor the 1.5-5 or 1.75-6x40 type scope and not the 4.5-14x50 type units...the larger heavier scopes being subject to premature failure...

For what it is worth I have a 3.5x10X Leup. mounted on a .338 WM that has fired 900 to 1000 rounds without problems.
In my case the rifle has a muzzle brake so this may have an effect on the results.

Put one of these on any rifle and you won't break it no matter how hard you try.

TVan,

I read another post where you were talking about those. Beefy! Too heavy and not really what I'm after for a hunting rifle, but pretty impressive for a tactical rifle.

-jeff

You are right, they are on the heavy side for a hunting rifle that you may be carrying all day.

That must be why so may of them are for sale by the tactical shooters.
All scopes will break down from recoil if used enough. E

In spite of that, Leupys are the first choice of most of the benchrest crowd.
From what I've seen by the benchrest guys I know, alot of that is from "fadism", following the ideas of somebody else in hopes of gaining even the tiniest edge.
The latest fad, BTW, is to freeze the adjustments and go to external adjustments in the mounts. We'll see how far that fad goes. E

Interesting thread - it seems some Leupold bashing always shows up on these.
I have currently own and shoot dozens of Leupold scopes and have as yet to encounter my first failure.
I have owned probably 100 of them that I have used and sold and none of them have failed either.
I personally LOVE the Leupold 4.5x14 variable scope!
I highly recommend it.
Someone - I beleive it was Jeff - doesn't matter made a posting in which he denounced the Leupold somehow for early and late Hunting!
This is pure crap!
I Hunt YEAR ROUND for both Big Game, Varmints, Predators and Wild Turkeys with a legion of Leupolds and I have never been denied a "legal' chance at any kind of Game due to my use of a Leupold scope!
Not ONCE, EVER! And I don't know anyone who has suffered this plight while using a Leupold!
I have used Leupolds for 45 years now and Hunted day and night, dusk and dawn, high noon and midnight - the Leupolds have worked better than just fine - they have performed with a level of excellence and reliability that keeps me purchasing these American made scopes as often as possible.
I also own and shoot scopes by Zeiss, Kahles, Unertl, Burris, Redfield, Nikon, Sightron, Weaver, Bausch & Lomb, Lyman, Simmons, Tasco as well as a few others. The Leupolds work just wonderfully well and are usually my first choice.
My magnum Rifles ALL have Leupolds on them!
The Leupolds work and work WELL!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I have the 4.5 X 14 on several of my hunting rifles for several years now 7MM, 7MM STW, 300 Weatherby and 8MM Remington Magnum. Not one problem on any of them. In fact I still have the first Leo I ever bought not a problem with any of them.

It wasn't THIS Jeff that said that, Varmintguy!

-jeff

I have a Vari-X III 6.5-20 EFR that has been used to test reloads since the mid 90's. It has always been in high rings so there are no clearance issues when switching rifles. This scope has been on everything from .22 bench guns to light weight magnums including a few rounds of .50BMG. I have yet to have the first problem with it other than the parallax markings seem to be off just a little but that could be me also. There are other scopes that I think are optically superior to a small degree but overall Leupold gets the nod from me.

Having said that, the Rifleman series Leupolds IMO are JUNK! Otherwise I have yet to have a problem with any of them, throw in great customer service, lifetime warranty and last but not least made in the USA and Leupold gets my $$$ every time.

Bob

I hunted with Leupold scopes for more than 25 years. Never had a problem with one, other than I never liked their reticles in low light because instead of showing nice and black they seemed to fade into a greyish black that makes it difficult for my eyes to see in fadind light.

About 3 years ago a I bought a 4.5-14x 44 mm Zeiss Conquest with mil-dot reticle. I compared it to my VX3 2.5-8 and my 2.5-10 LPS Leupolds. The Zeiss light transmission was substantially better than the VX3, and still notably better than the LPS. Resolution was slightly better in the Zeiss than either of the leupys. I sold the LPS, and one of my VX3s. The Zeiss optics are subtantially better to my eyes. And yes, I did compare all scopes at the same power setting, side by side. So like another poster said, I don't know why anyone wouldn't go with the Zeiss, other than long time familiarity or loyalty to the Leupold name and perhaps never having compared them to the Zeiss. Again, I was content with Leupold scopes for 25 years... until I bought the Zeiss at a comparable price and compared them side by side. The Zeiss optics walk away from the comparably priced leupy glass. I've seen the light... and there's no going back.

I should report that instead of buying a 4.5x14 for my .338, I just picked up a Zeiss 3.5x10 with the Rapiz-Z 600 reticle. So far I am VERY impressed. The reticle matches my .338/Accubond load perfectly, out to 600 yards, and the scope did stay usable beyond the point my 2.5x8 Loopy did the other night in a test- though the Zeiss has a 44mm objective while the Loopy has a 36mm, so it's not apples to apples.

I love 'em both (Leupold and Zeiss) at this point.

I typed a much longer review of the Zeiss today on both this and the optics forum...

-jeff

I find your choice very interesting. Zeiss makes no knowledgable person's list as a tough scope. When Barsness did his very informative article in the July 2004 edition of Rifle magazine, "Tough Scopes," the Zeiss scopes were no where to be found. Leupold, the Bushnell Elite 4200, some of the Burris's, etc. but not Zeiss.
Zeiss's 3.5-10X44 looks brighter because it's eye piece is much bigger and it's eye relief is much shorter. That alone makes it's image look brighter. Not better glass and coatings as many assume. E

We'll just see as far as durability; who knows. You don't hear about Conquests coming apart any more than Leupolds or anything else- at least not that I've noticed.

I chose it after looking through a bunch of stuff, including Meopta, Leupold, Swaro, the Elite's, Burris... I just liked it best (at the price point). At the price I got it for, if I end up wanting "out" I won't lose much anyway. I don't see that happening.

For what it's worth, and it really pains me to say this as a Leupold user and big fan, but the guys at my favorite shop, whom I trust, have been reporting some pretty wonky stuff on new Leupolds lately. They've seen two of the new 4.5x14 AO's come back recently. They've seen hairs and fingerprints on the inside of lenses. They've had other new Loopy's have problems right out of the gate. It's not a confidence-inspiring picture they paint.

I don't want to get into a debate over the optical qualities of the two, mainly because I cannot compare apples to apples. All I have for Leupolds is a bunch of 2.5x8's, and a 6x18AO. None are a direct comparison to the Zeiss 3.5x10x44mm, obviously. That said, I am really liking the optical qualities of the Zeiss a LOT. For whatever reasons I can see much more detail in dark woodsy shadows and the like. It stays usable longer at dusk. The eye relief is acceptable or better.

-jeff

Why do any of us deserve this? Seriously, optically it's a better scope and it has no track record for not being tough. Do your scopes serve as double duty for pounding in your tent stakes when you go on your 14 month hunting expeditions at 20,000 ft? Good grief . . .

I have had MANY scopes and several dozen Leupolds, which are a good scope. I have used these in the worst conditions in northern and western Canada and for working, not playing around where a problem was merely an inconvenience. I bought my last Leupy in Oct., 2006 and my first Zeiss Conquest about 3 months later, I have bought 3 more Conquests since.

In my experience, the Conquest is a MUCH superior scope to any Leupy I have had, even the LPS I had on my Dakota .338 for a few years. I think that the Conquest is THE scope to buy when a person needs to be concerned about price and I have yet to see any lack of toughness.

This is based ONLY on my personal experience and in owning/using well over 100 big game rifles in 44 years....but, WTF would experience teach anyone, eh?