Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold - why not 'Etched Reticles' in ALL scopes?

He actually makes Eremicus sound down right rational. At least Eremicus actually shoots his rifles.

Almost BUT, not quite!!! (Grin)

+1

I've asked you many times before, and you refuse to answer, but I'll ask you again. If the etched reticles are not superior, as you claim, then why does Leupold include an etched reticle in their top of the line VX7?

VA, FYI, I bought a CDS scope from Leupold recently, still have it, not ANTI Leupold, but comparing side by side at the range, the Zeiss edges out in resolution and reticle contrast, not by alot - Yet none the less noticeable, but as pointed out above, the Conquest is less $$ than an etched Leupold.

As to being Ignorant, there are MANY good optics, COMPARABLE and SUPERIOR in optical performance and equal if not less expensive in price. Fact. You claim my post as baseless opinion? SO ALL Leupold reticles ARE etched? You are confusing, or misinformed, or just pissed that I said something unfavorable against YOUR choice? Do YOU have a relationship w/Leupold? Are you an industry/mfg. rep? Sounds like it.

WHY more Leupolds? Same reason alot of folks drink COKE, Budweiser, Heinz 57, etc. It's Brand Loyalty that is partially created by Marketing.

As to who makes the best, if Leupold was THE BEST, why does Nightforce, Swarovski, and Zeiss (inc. the Euro mfg. models at higher prices) stay in business?

Leupold typically makes solid optics, and has a good track record in dependability, yet you will note even JB says he has had Variables fail and is one reason he has been changing over alot to fixed scopes.

Leupold is good - and I have and do presently use some of their products. Other mfg. DO make/sell products EQUAL and BETTER IMO.

YMMV.

Just making a point that hey, if Zeiss can make their scopes w/etched reticles at a price the same or less than Leupold, there is NO reason I know of WHY Leupold cannot compete feature to feature.

As to WHO uses WHAT and WHAT brand gets most press - we all know in today's world of marketing, dollars talk. One must always consider the 'influence' that a given business may exert over product usage and press coverage.

Many guys who shoot tactical and sniper set ups, inc. LEO, do not choose Leupold, but Nightforce and others. I don't shoot those matches, or rifles, but many of those who do use something else.

I never said a Leupold is more prone to failure 'when the chips are down' but I personally WILL always trust an etched reticle over a non-etched. I HAVE seen broken reticles, NONE were etched.

At one time, Ford had the #1 selling car IIRC, the Taurus. That fact DID not mean it was 'THE BEST' made car, simply the most sold. There IS a difference. The Best is not always the most popular. A Ford will get you to the same destination as a Lexus, but many Lexus owners may argue their cars are more comfortable, have more features and comfort, and have better reliability. Some or all of their comments 'may be fact,' perhaps opinion, but the FACT is, PERCEPTION is REALITY.

A Non-etched reticle MIGHT be as contrasting to someone else's eyesight/use, and THEIR scope, just MIGHT last as long as another's etched, but I'd venture to say, more disable reticles are of NON-ETCHED design. My opinion, that I strongly feel is fact. If evidence says otherwise, I'd like to see it in credible form, by a NON-BIASED source.

I also will not use a Remington Bolt Action for a Dangerous game rifle, NOR for one where you will be deep in the outdoors, as it has a 2 piece handle, and I HAVE had a handle break off a very new rifle. Rendering it USELESS, so IT is NOT a choice for ME, when 'the chips are down' or for a serious/expensive hunt. Have you EVER, and I DO mean EVER - heard of a 1 piece bolt handle/body unit separating? I have not either.

That's a big reason for this forum, everyone gets to express their opinions, choices, EXPERIENCES, and for stating facts.

FACT: Leupold Makes scopes with NON-ETCHED reticles, that are NOT as contrasting to MY eyes.

BTW, if you want to address my original post/question, I will be glad to listen since you failed to stay on topic.

Have a great day sir.

Yeah and Ford sold more Escorts than BMW sold 320Is. Does that mean an Escort is better than a Beamer? NOT

BTW, I do believe many if not all Mark 4 scopes, and Leupolds that are destined/marketed towards military/LE use, have etched reticles. There may be other reasons for it as E and other's have stated, but I DO believe LONGEVITY and providing the most durable end product IS a strong reason WHY Leupold used them.

I have never heard anything bad about Leupold Etched reticles, re: durability.

Again, in fair balance, I like Leupold and think they do a good job and are worthy of ranking high among optic mfg. in quality AND service, and have some models I like at good price points. That said, I think other mfg. ALSO deserve my business - have and will get it, because they earned it because of what value I perceive in them. There is no - end all - one stop shop IMO in optics. It's HIGHLY competive - in quality, value, price, AND service. I think that last piece is KEY to Leupold's success.

If they OR any mfg. built PERFECT forever lasting products, a service dept. would NEVER be needed - correct?

Other brands I have used w/perfect success in optics: Burris, Pentax, Bushnell, Swarovski, Nikon, Zeiss, Bausch and Lomb (yeah, the new Bushnell but I LIKED the B&L name better, and some of what they made then as well - now discontinued), Weaver, even Tasco and others.

There are other brands I'd like to own sometime when funds permit, perhaps a Leica bino - the 8x32s seem to be at the top of the heap - To My eyes, but Swaro are right there....Pentax not far behind...alot of great choices.

Thank goodness for competition as it has bred HIGHER quality giving us all greater optical performance and likely value for the dollar than if there were none.

65BR,

On a somewhat different note. What are your impressions on the CDS system.

Specifically, how much MOA can you dial with a single revolution?

I like the CDS system, yet to order my custom knobs that are free in this promotion, but overall, I DO like my VX3, 3-10, and MUCH better for my eyes than a 4-14 I bought and decided it was not as 'forgiving' in lateral eye relief/eye box, etc. It was good optically, but just not as 'user friendly' for my eyes as the 3-10x40. I have to say this 3-10 IS a good scope, and not far off the Zeiss. If I were NOT cranking a turret, the Zeiss would get my vote, not by alot, but it also was less $$. The CDS feature is WHY I bought the VX3. IF Zeiss had that feature, out the box, at a modest upcharge, I would be VERY likley to buy Zeiss. A Smidgeon of better resolution, and for MY eyes better reticle being the reason.

As to MOA, I am no expert, someone may clarify, my scope cap shows markings '3/6/9/12' and looks to go to 15 moa on one rev.

I own a lot of leupold scopes. Most of them were bought 10 or so years ago when their prices were more reasonable and before there were many viable competitors on the market. Somewhere in there Leupold instituted their price controls where a retailer couldn't discount their scopes and the prices jumped about 15% overnight, then they jumped more with Leupold's regular price increases. Around the same time scopes like the zeiss conquest came out and gave leupold some competition in their niche market. Before that it was a choice between a leupold and a high end euro scope costing 3x as much, now there are quality scopes in the same price range.

With all that I haven't bought a leupold in 10 years. Times change and the free market system has a way of sorting things out. I've said many times that a leupold VX3 3.5x10x40 is a great $300 scope, it's not a great $450 scope. There are better options out there now for that kind of money. Leupold has relied upon too much marketing and not enough innovation. The thing that disappoints me most about leupold is their failure to update their glass. VX3 glass should be every bit as good as zeiss conquest glass but the consensus is that it isn't. Glass is probably one of the least expensive parts of the scope, there's no excuse not to have top notch glass in a $450 scope. You shouldn't have guys with a $199 Nikon finding that their glass is just as good as your $450 leupold.

Leupold needs to shift their budget around to update their research and manufacturing. Stop spending so much money on the TV shows and fancy magazine ads and spend those pennies putting some quality glass and decent components in their scopes. It's not 1995 anymore, there are others building better stuff for less money now.

Why didn't you call him Turdlike, you slippin?

Do the turrents have a fixed reference point--a dot or a hashed mark on the scope body?

In other words, if you dial in at 100yards, is there a fixed point that you can (using the set screw) set the dial to zero?

Am I stating the question clearly?

the xt duplex in the vx-7 is not etched, it changes colors easily

Sorry 65br,

Found the answer in another topic. Toad mentioned that the CDS is calibrated in MOA and has the zero stop.

GB

GB, glad you did, alot has been written on CDS.

The CDS has custom caps that are free till the end of the year, you get two, beyond the MOA cap, those are 'calibrated' for YOUR load, BC/Speed etc. in yardage.

I think it is a good system for a compact turret for hunters, all reports indicate they are reliable.

Crowhunter, I hear you on the glass quality of Leupolds. Not bad, but could be better. Have seen Burris and Bushnell Elite's with GREAT glass at better prices. If Leupold can sell a scope to Bass Pro that can offer them at 159 for a 3-9x40, surely a tricked out CDS 3-10x40 did not cost 300% more.

As to Leupold's 'rate of inflation' - I agree and take issue when the inflation rate was 2-4% nationally, they hiked prices 7-9% annually, more than just one year...and the difference between Leupold and the top Euro's have closed in gap, the quality IMHO has not kept up re: glass. It's not bad, it's pretty good, but it's not great, nor the best - just how I see it.

I WOULD like to see Bushnell have MORE options w/reticles as well as turret choices. I never needed it, but some have complained about service w/companies outside Leupold inc. Bushnell, but I have no first hand experience to speak.

I think Zeiss Conquest has the biggest potential to upset Leupold's market share, due to ALL dimensions of optical quality/feature/service and price. AND they assemble them in the USA. Leupold's are NOT all 100% made in the USA today.

If Zeiss continues innovation/options in reticles/turrets and keeps prices reasonable, and backs them up w/service, they may well be many future buyers, 'optic of choice' in time.

Again, Leupold is not a bad product but they do not command my loyalty exclusively, and likely never will. Others may, and that's fine by me and I am sure they will get good service out of them. When I shop, I set out to buy the very best quality, that I can afford at that time for what I want to accomplish.

As to Nikon having owners say their 199 dollar scope is equal or better than higher priced Leupolds, not surprised. The Japanese have a commitment to quality and work HARD to earn and keep their customers business. I hear good things on the quality and service and may try more in the future for the value they offer, and for continued efforts in offering new useful products/features. They likely have and will continue taking some Leupold sales.

I don't recall you asking me JG. I'm not sure what reticles they offer in their VX7 scopes and why. Not a line I've paid much attention to simply because I'm completely satisfied with other scopes they make. E

What I find amazing is that leupold is still able to sell VX-I and VX-II scopes built with 47yo technology.

Probably should be named the "Heritage Series"..

The Colonial line would work.

Pilgrim +P..