Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics What Is Wrong With The Leupold 3-9x33 Compact???

I seem to remember reading somewhere on here that the Leupold 3-9x33 Compact had some issues. Can someone explain these issues!!!

Eye relief/positioning is seriously compromised.

If Steely says it I'd tend to believe it.

Small eyebox???

I had one on my 300 Win Mag A Bolt. Steelhead is right. Just didn't feel right.

Yep. If you're used to the latitude provided by the 6x42 Leupold you'll think the 3-9x33 Ultralight is from the Bizarro Leupold parallel universe where everything is backwards.

If you don't have trouble positioning your eye in about the same spot each time on the stock, then the eyebox and relief, though not the equal of other Leupolds, works just fine.

I've never had trouble using one myself, along with the Compact 2-7x, and really don't find full-size Leupies that much more amazing. The Leupie compacts offer certain features that you can't find elsewhere. If those features are of high importance to you, then they can't be beat. YMMV

Now that this was brought up I do remember the eye box/eye position issue. I have one and never had a problem........guess I am from mars. Seems to go with the fact that I like BLR's!!!

I've found some stuff to not be an issue for VERY deliberate shooters, I'm not one.

Part of my beef with them is I don't like to feel like I'm "on top" of the scope, whether or not I have a positioning repeatability issue. (BTW I don't, I can set up my rifles for me just fine.) It just isn't comfy. If I need a light variable I'll go with the regular 2-7x33 VX-II and save two ounces elsewhere.

I replaced one with a VXI 2-7x33. For me the 2-7 had greater (better) eye relief and seemed considerably brighter. Both scopes seem identical in length and were mounted in the same spot on the receiver.

3X9 Compact...Problems not!

I built a light weight .270 ROY and put a SS finish 3X9 compact on it and had it dotted out to 550 by Premier reticle. In the 8 or so years it was on there it never lost zero not once. It spent weeks in Alaska moved from place to place strapped on the strut of a super cub hunting dall sheep. BC were it took moose, and mountain goat plus black bear. Wyoming, Colorado, Montana taking elk and mule deer. Backpacing and in saddle scabbards. Whitetail in the East as well as Alberta. Caribou in Queebec. Bumped soaked and exposed never lost Zero. Slighly small in the eye box, a little. Little lacking in low light (read really low) a bit. I just got tired of using it and sold it to another member on this board and it is going on another .270 ROY. I am sure it will give him good service too. I actually regret selling it and have not decided just what I am going to replace it with. It is on the cover of a few brochures next to assorted defunct critters.

So I say BS to most of the negative stuff that I just read on this forum.

Lefty C

Damn, didn't mean to kick your dog......

I don't know how they compare, but I had (stress the had) a Burris 4-12 Compact. Eye relief on it was very critical. I was never comfortable shooting it, and forget any snap shots or even quick acquisition shots (for me anyway). I couldn't find the image if I didn't have at least a couple of seconds to get properly positioned.

Mag,

I did try the Burris version, on a lowly .22hornet. It was like looking through a keyhole.

LC

Until the clipped eclipse I thought the 2-7 compact was the most ridiculous scope Leupie ever made, followed fairly closely by the 3-9 compact. Now they are only the second and third most ridiculous scopes.

Critical in every dimension, including mounting and just not worth considering...
art

Ragged out tonite, I guess. Crown time?

LC

Heck, I love my little Burris 4-12 Mini. It's on a 17 FB XP-100 handgun, and i use it for coyotes...mostly. But i guess if u're used to the 3-12x LER optic then the Mini's (Compacts) r wonderful.

What is first???

Clipped eclipse, he already said so.