Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold vx-3 4.5-14x40 need opinions!

Getting ready to get another scope. Looking at the Leupold vx-3 4.5-14x40 without AO or side focus. Is this a quality scope or is money better spent to at least get the side focus model? All hunting will be big game in the mtns.

All Leupold VX3's are high quality scopes.
The non parallax adjustable 4.5-14X40's were introduced by Leupold because they discovered that most buyers of them were big game, not small varmit, hunters. The advantage to that design is that you'll have a deeper or longer depth of focus than either of the parallax adjustable models.
However, anything over 10X is going to show parallax. And this will enlarge your groups. You may be able to use the ocular to remove some of it, but I've never been able to remove quite all of it even in my 4-6X scopes.
Frankly, I flat don't care for any of the Leupold 4.5-14X scopes for big game hunting. They have too many optical compromises, and too little eye box at the lower magnifications to make me happy. I much prefer the smaller variables or, better yet, the basic 4X and 6X models. They have plenty of magnification for any big game hunting. E

I have the 4.5-14x40LR (30mm tube model) on my mid-weight walking varminter. It has the side focus.

I like the scope for its intended purpose but it isn't as forgiving as some other leupold scopes i have or have had.

that said, i'd happily use it for deer in open country. Don't think it is necessary in a "mountain" rifle but your definition of big game in the mountains may be different from mine

Having looked thru all the 4.5x14x40's I would not want one without the side focus!

+1

Agree with the others - the only way I'd run that one is with AO or SF.

The 3.5-10x40 is their best variable for a hunter. Just my 2c's

The side focus is going to be a 30mm tube, for a rifle intended for the mountains I would go with the AO with a 1" tube before the SF. I have 3 with AO and the eye box is more critical as is always being brought up, but I have never had a problem with them.

Also have one 4.5-14 LR and like it, but don't know if I would go that route again on a strictly big game rifle.

But than again I would probably opt for the 3.5-10 with a CDS and probably live happily ever after.

I have and like the 4.5x14. I use it on a rifle I hunt open country, and for that environment it works very well.

I have the AO and wouldnt want one without it.

I would think any scope over 10X should be AO,I can't use one with MY eyes....

Seems like that much power an AO is a better way to go, from what I can gather. I have my eye on a couple of Zeiss in that same power and maybe and I score one of them instead.

Thanks for the help! This will be my "big money" purchase so I wanna be sure it's done right.

The Conquest is a bunch of scope for the $$$$ !!

In the 4.5-14 config. I like the Conquest a good bit better!!

Agree with RDFinn, for my mountain and plains rigs, 3.5-10 is very hard to beat.

Now you all have me thinking. Maybe go with the 3.5-10x44 zeiss or the Leupold 3.5-10x40. About $100.00 difference is it. Decisions decisions.....

My dedicated antelope rifle (Model 70 .264) wears a VX-III 4.5x14x40 B&C, non-AO, and I wouldn't change a thing. I don't find the lack of parallax adjustment a handicap, like the focus. It's definitely true the eye box is smaller than lower powered scopes of this line, but I've not found it an issue, especially in long range, fairly deliberate shooting. I don't use this rifle in the timber, however.

This is all second hand information, and free to boot, so take it for what it's worth (not much!) but I heard enough... well, bad may be too strong of word, but enough to make me pass on the 3.5-10 Zeiss. (I do have four 3-9x's, a 4.5-14x44, and a 4x, so I do like Zeiss.)

KDK So you did not like the 3.5-10 in the zeiss? Just not your preference in a a scope?

I own a Leupold VX-III in the same configuration without AO on a custom Weatherby Vanguard 257 Weatherby Magnum and have no issues whatsoever. Parallax errors will only become apparent to affect hunting big game with 14x magnification even with the maximum offset at distances of far greater than 500 yards. In fact the maximum linear parallax error for that scope at 500 yards is about 3.2 inches and that is if your eye is at maximum offset from the optical axis. Or 0.60 moa at that distance. Personally I find the eye box very comfortable and forgiving and for a flat shooting cartridge like the 257 it is a perfect low profile scope without encumbering it with a 4 or 5 mm or larger objective of an AO or further complicating the scope with a SF. The Swarovski 2.5-15x44 Z6 30mm has no AO or side focus and cost over 2 grand and the Leupold will do everything that scope will do, meaning you can say the optics are better on the Swaro, but the reality is you are not going to shoot more game with it than the Leupold.

That scope has side focus.

100% agree... that and the 2.5-8X36.