Home
Long time Leupold fan here but I do read, interpret trends, and am not afraid to criticize a product.

Just expressing my personal observations recently. I have purchase a few used scopes at gun shows, here on the 'fire, and on rifles that I have bought used. I have also sent a few Leupolds in for repair with good experiences in the past and have also used their custom shop a few times with complete satisfaction. However, I have sent three scopes in over the last several years for cleaning/repair and have not received any back but rather an offer for an exchange on a "similar" current Leupold offering. These scopes were M8 8x w/ AO, Vari X 3-9x compact, and most recently a Vari-X II 2-7x 33mm. All were in very nice external condition (particularly the 1st and 3rd) but had adjustment issues when mounted and tested on a rifle. I expressed my frustration given the general outward appearance of the scopes and re-iterated my desire to get these scopes repaired if any way possible. The answer was "no" and I was sent a VX II 3-9 compact, a FX III 6x 42mm, and most recently a VX Freedom 2-7 w/ hunt plex reticle. I kept my adjustment caps this time knowing there was a good chance I would not get my scope back! Reasons for not being able to repair my old scopes included lack of parts for the fixed 8, ? objective lens issues on the 3-9 compact, and a fractured main tube on the 2-7. Their were no external signs of abuse on any of the scopes. The fixed 8 looked brand new!

I am not complaining about their effort to have me pleased as a customer but as you can see, none of their replacements were that similar to what I had sent in except for maybe the last (more on that later.)
I went to their website again recently and was shocked to see how their "traditional" type Leupold offering had diminished recently and how their current offerings offered only one reticle choice and that reticle might only be offered in that one particular scope ie. the hunt plex in just the 2-7 Freedom. Many have no option for a CDS while others come only with a CDS! Forget having a M1 or target turret put on... no custom shop, at least currently, and quite a bit more expensive.

I know I will be criticized, but I would be pleased (particulary if the Freedom line's erector/repeatability issues were improved if I could slap a Stoney Point turret on to use with the "clicks" but even that is not possible with the loss of the "coin slot" adjustment.

For all of their weaknesses, enjoy your old classic Leupys while you can. I have never had an old one that I purchased "new" fail me as far as basic function. Maybe someone will find a successful business in repairing/restoring the older ones like Weaver and Redfield.

For now, thank God for Phillipine made Burris' and Nikons that you can still find on occasion!
PS... I love SWFA SS's as well, just not on everything I own and shoot!!!
I have two SWFA 6x scopes with the milquad reticle and I like them quite a bit. Nevertheless they are pigs compared to what size scope I'd like to have on some of my hunting rifles. That's the main reason I don't have more of them.
Agree!

Times change but Leupy filled a big niche for a long time. Hard to imagine them not being relevant as we have known them.

Holding out hope for them as I am in many arenas today.
“If you don’t have a competitive advantage, don’t compete.” - Jack Welch

I realize the market , as a WHOLE, is changing from hunting and benchrest to “tactical” and “long range”, but there is STILL a “niche market” for lightweight scopes, classically styled scopes, handgun scopes, and American scopes.

Leupold is trying to compete with $200 China (Vortex, Athlon, et al) scopes on one end, and $2000 Nightforces on the other.

In the meantime, they’re throwing away many of their offerings in the “middle”, and the specialties/oddities that was THEIR “niche”.
Used VX-2s, especially the ultralight models, are bringing more on eBay than they sold for when new, and often higher than comparable new VX-Freedom models. It seems Leupold has a branding problem with this latest line, despite claims that they are mechanically superior to the VX-2s.

Performance notwithstanding, I think the VX-2s were some of the more attractive scopes that Leupold has produced. The VX-Freedoms, with the redesigned turret caps and power select rings, remind me of the cheap China-made scopes that are packaged with inexpensive rifles at WalMart.
Originally Posted by lundtroller
Long time Leupold fan here but I do read, interpret trends, and am not afraid to criticize a product.

Just expressing my personal observations recently. I have purchase a few used scopes at gun shows, here on the 'fire, and on rifles that I have bought used. I have also sent a few Leupolds in for repair with good experiences in the past and have also used their custom shop a few times with complete satisfaction. However, I have sent three scopes in over the last several years for cleaning/repair and have not received any back but rather an offer for an exchange on a "similar" current Leupold offering. These scopes were M8 8x w/ AO, Vari X 3-9x compact, and most recently a Vari-X II 2-7x 33mm. All were in very nice external condition (particularly the 1st and 3rd) but had adjustment issues when mounted and tested on a rifle. I expressed my frustration given the general outward appearance of the scopes and re-iterated my desire to get these scopes repaired if any way possible. The answer was "no" and I was sent a VX II 3-9 compact, a FX III 6x 42mm, and most recently a VX Freedom 2-7 w/ hunt plex reticle. I kept my adjustment caps this time knowing there was a good chance I would not get my scope back! Reasons for not being able to repair my old scopes included lack of parts for the fixed 8, ? objective lens issues on the 3-9 compact, and a fractured main tube on the 2-7. Their were no external signs of abuse on any of the scopes. The fixed 8 looked brand new!

I am not complaining about their effort to have me pleased as a customer but as you can see, none of their replacements were that similar to what I had sent in except for maybe the last (more on that later.)
I went to their website again recently and was shocked to see how their "traditional" type Leupold offering had diminished recently and how their current offerings offered only one reticle choice and that reticle might only be offered in that one particular scope ie. the hunt plex in just the 2-7 Freedom. Many have no option for a CDS while others come only with a CDS! Forget having a M1 or target turret put on... no custom shop, at least currently, and quite a bit more expensive.

I know I will be criticized, but I would be pleased (particulary if the Freedom line's erector/repeatability issues were improved if I could slap a Stoney Point turret on to use with the "clicks" but even that is not possible with the loss of the "coin slot" adjustment.

For all of their weaknesses, enjoy your old classic Leupys while you can. I have never had an old one that I purchased "new" fail me as far as basic function. Maybe someone will find a successful business in repairing/restoring the older ones like Weaver and Redfield.

For now, thank God for Phillipine made Burris' and Nikons that you can still find on occasion!



They fu cked you over. The older ones were better. Why do you think they still bring good money over on ebay and the like?
You’d think that when someone said “3-9x40” that Leupold is the first thing to come to mind. They could have made that particular model the perfect yardstick.
I was a Leupold fan for a lot of years. Sometime back I started having issues with tracking and rtz on several different models. Did some research and found that I was far from the only one. Their CS was good, but my confidence was shook, so I moved on to other brands well known for ruggedness and repeatability.

Haven't really looked back, but I do have a pile of older levers and blued/walnut bolts on which I don't care to replace the gloss Leupolds. I know aesthetics don't place bullets, but I do enjoy the look of a sleek, low powered, 1", gloss scope on these guns. None of them see really high round count, so I guess I'll just keep my fingers crossed and keep running them until something happens.

I keep waiting for a resurgence in blued/walnut and, by extension, an offering of lower X range, rugged gloss scopes. But the way things are going, its not looking like that is going to be a reality.

Ultimately, I hope Leupold gets it figured out, and I start reading about how tough they are and how well they track, hold, and return to zero. I'd be happy to be supporting them again.
Who makes the best moderately priced scopes today that are not Chinese?
Usually when a company chooses to label a product with a name like "American" or "freedom", it's a dead giveaway that it is made somewhere else. It would be interesting to know the rationale for selecting the name "VX-Freedom" for an American made product line.
Originally Posted by Dixie_Dude
Who makes the best moderately priced scopes today that are not Chinese?


Two years ago, you could’ve mentioned Nikon and Weaver (Grand Slam). Now?? Burris and Leupold are the two left standing, and Burris is now starting to offer China garbage.

Vortex has sub-$500 offerings that are sourced from the Phillipines, but they’ve got the “tactical look”.

Clearidge gets mixed reviews (and has limited offerings), and I’m not sure if Swift is still in biz. Neither of them ever were a “player” in the category.

Meopta COULD be a player, but marketing doesn’t seem to be their forte, and you can’t get them at the local sporting goods chain.

Sightron is a consideration, but, again, many folks wanna be able to hold something in their hand, before spending $300-$500....

Bushnell changes specs/names/etc so much, it’s hard to keep up. The 3200/4200 were fine scopes. Now?? They change models every 3 years, so it’s hard to know what you’re getting, and the average joe equates Bushnell with $50-$75 Sportview’s and Banner’s, not knowing they’ve made solid stuff, as well.

Understand, I’m talking about more “classic” style, “set and forget” scopes, that can be had for sub-$500..
Been a Leupold fan a long time but I’m done buying new ones.
Tried the newer stuff, bought two VX3i scopes and one failed after a couple of rounds. Cheap feeling all the way around too.
I’m down to a couple of VXIII 2.5x8’s and a 1.5x5 on set and forget rifles.
Dang shame.
Leupold has gone crazy. I don't even try to find what I want in their cumbersome lineup. They're trying to rush out something to compete with everyone else's something. They need to pull back from that frenzy and build good quality scopes again.

The market has been taught that big tubes and turrets for their sniping at Bambi are absolutely necessary. If you're not shooting ears, feet, and asses off Bambi at two miles, you're a Fudd and have no business getting in the sniper's way. It's a lot like what happened to the PU Truck. If it's not a rolling mainframe, satellite controlled, it's not adequate, and neither are you.

They might consider building reliable set it N forget it scopes like the VXII and VXIII with a couple fixed power scopes in that range and build an UberGlass Panzer Class 30 or 34mm tube behemoth, dripping in bells & whistles.

Also, why do we need every type of reticle a graphics expert on acid can dream up? crazy
only leupold i still own is a 22 year old fixed straight tube 2 3/4 power on my 416 rem mag.still works perfectly.stopped using them around 96 or 97.to me they were average or worse in variables.i shot after that pentax,burris and some nikons.plus a early 1st year bushnell 4200 series.all variables.then i started shooting swarovski and kahles scopes.to me as stated leupold didnt cut it.to hear you guys talk about the new ones they must be pure junk.
I hate Leupold because there was a time I loved them...but they let me down. They once made a great product at a fair price...now they import and assemble trash. Import trash and swap it out like vortex...as things without value are not worth fixing.

Trash vendor imho.
I mostly have VX 3’s and just a single vari-xiii. The vari iii is a really nice scope clear as any of VX3s. I got a few VX3is but I dont see much difference between them and the VX3s. Havent checked out the VX 3 HD line yet. I love my VXs but even outside the online complaints they seem sort of scattered. Im a set it forget it hunter so no need to dial. I only plan on adding one more rifle which will be a light weight and likely will wear a 2.5-8 luey. So at 58 years old maybe my scope buying days are about over. I looked thru my cousins 2-7 VX2 he purchased a few years back. That is a dang nice scope for the money. I hope they can get it together.
Originally Posted by luv2safari
Leupold has gone crazy. I don't even try to find what I want in their cumbersome lineup. They're trying to rush out something to compete with everyone else's something. They need to pull back from that frenzy and build good quality scopes again.

The market has been taught that big tubes and turrets for their sniping at Bambi are absolutely necessary. If you're not shooting ears, feet, and asses off Bambi at two miles, you're a Fudd and have no business getting in the sniper's way. It's a lot like what happened to the PU Truck. If it's not a rolling mainframe, satellite controlled, it's not adequate, and neither are you.

They might consider building reliable set it N forget it scopes like the VXII and VXIII with a couple fixed power scopes in that range and build an UberGlass Panzer Class 30 or 34mm tube behemoth, dripping in bells & whistles.

Also, why do we need every type of reticle a graphics expert on acid can dream up? crazy


Agreed on all points. I went to the Leupold site last night, took a quick gaze at the confused line-up and left. I just buy used Leupolds now. Picked up a used VX3 2.5-8 on-line after I left the Leupold site behind.
Originally Posted by Boarmaster123
I looked thru my cousins 2-7 VX2 he purchased a few years back. That is a dang nice scope for the money.


You're right. Nice and light and very bright. I like mine a lot.
Originally Posted by fburgtx
Originally Posted by Dixie_Dude
Who makes the best moderately priced scopes today that are not Chinese?


Two years ago, you could’ve mentioned Nikon and Weaver (Grand Slam). Now?? Burris and Leupold are the two left standing, and Burris is now starting to offer China garbage.

Vortex has sub-$500 offerings that are sourced from the Phillipines, but they’ve got the “tactical look”.

Clearidge gets mixed reviews (and has limited offerings), and I’m not sure if Swift is still in biz. Neither of them ever were a “player” in the category.

Meopta COULD be a player, but marketing doesn’t seem to be their forte, and you can’t get them at the local sporting goods chain.

Sightron is a consideration, but, again, many folks wanna be able to hold something in their hand, before spending $300-$500....

Bushnell changes specs/names/etc so much, it’s hard to keep up. The 3200/4200 were fine scopes. Now?? They change models every 3 years, so it’s hard to know what you’re getting, and the average joe equates Bushnell with $50-$75 Sportview’s and Banner’s, not knowing they’ve made solid stuff, as well.

Understand, I’m talking about more “classic” style, “set and forget” scopes, that can be had for sub-$500..

Yes...
Originally Posted by fburgtx


I realize the market , as a WHOLE, is changing from hunting and benchrest to “tactical” and “long range”, but there is STILL a “niche market” for lightweight scopes, classically styled scopes, handgun scopes, and American scopes.



What I struggle to understand are the 20oz+ low-power tactical/competition-oriented optics (looking at you, Vortex). It doesn't get much better than a quick-handling semiauto carbine for tactical work, but those handling characteristics are destroyed by chucking a pound and a half worth of glass and mounts on top of the thing. Only Leupold and Trijicon still sell variable-power scopes that I'd consider putting on a general-purpose carbine.

The love for gaudy gloss-finished optics doesn't make sense to me either, probably a generational preference. Oh well, doesn't affect me.
Originally Posted by fburgtx
“If you don’t have a competitive advantage, don’t compete.” - Jack Welch

I realize the market , as a WHOLE, is changing from hunting and benchrest to “tactical” and “long range”, but there is STILL a “niche market” for lightweight scopes, classically styled scopes, handgun scopes, and American scopes.

Leupold is trying to compete with $200 China (Vortex, Athlon, et al) scopes on one end, and $2000 Nightforces on the other.

In the meantime, they’re throwing away many of their offerings in the “middle”, and the specialties/oddities that was THEIR “niche”.

Completely agree.

Leupolds place was producing mostly American made or at least “built” set it and forget it scopes at a reasonable price and backed up with a lifetime warranty. Light weight and compact models like the excellent fixed powers and 2.5-8 were also a big part of there niche and what they did well.

Leupold trying to out Vortex, Vortex is going to be a losing battle for Leupold and has left them just another scope maker without an identity.
Originally Posted by TheLastLemming76
Originally Posted by fburgtx
“If you don’t have a competitive advantage, don’t compete.” - Jack Welch

I realize the market , as a WHOLE, is changing from hunting and benchrest to “tactical” and “long range”, but there is STILL a “niche market” for lightweight scopes, classically styled scopes, handgun scopes, and American scopes.

Leupold is trying to compete with $200 China (Vortex, Athlon, et al) scopes on one end, and $2000 Nightforces on the other.

In the meantime, they’re throwing away many of their offerings in the “middle”, and the specialties/oddities that was THEIR “niche”.

Completely agree.

Leupolds place was producing mostly American made or at least “built” set it and forget it scopes at a reasonable price and backed up with a lifetime warranty. Light weight and compact models like the excellent fixed powers and 2.5-8 were also a big part of there niche and what they did well.

Leupold trying to out Vortex, Vortex is going to be a losing battle for Leupold and has left them just another scope maker without an identity.


I’m in agreement with booth of you and the Op. I hope they can get it straight but the latest offerings says they won’t.
Meh, Leupold just about can’t win. People have been taught that accurate adjustments are the end and be all of scope reliability and quality. I think Leupold had the correct idea that adjustment accuracy really doesn’t matter much at all in a set and forget scope and was at the very least secondary to lots of other concerns. They lost ground to other scopes that were in many ways inferior in size, weight, eye box, and over all quality but that had better adjustments. Now, they are chasing a market that has passed them by and they can’t please anyone.

Just look at this board. You either have people bitching about Leupold scopes being trash with bad adjustments and unreliable internal components or you have people wishing they would just go back to producing reliable set and forget scopes of modest weight and middling price. No one is happy.


It is always management ! Leupold is now a " mass merchendiser".

I have sent a couple scopes back for "issues" ....returned with a nice letter and explanation from staff , but not adequatly repaired. Will not ever send anything back .

I have struck them off completley.

I have 25-30 Leupold mounted scopes , all older models. 3-4 un -mounted leupolds.

I prefer used Kahles AH series , especially the rimfires , when you can find them.

Also, use Zeiss 3 X 9 X 36 & 3 X 9 X 42 Diavaris.

I don't look at new Leupolds.

I still have a few Leupold LPS Scopes .... they are quality .

For what it's worth ...........
“Leupold: Made in America tough, the way it should be”

That’d be a hell of a way to sell a scope. I remember as a kid when you got a Leupold, you were king.
For all those being critical of Leupolds offerings, you aren't really comprehending the difficulty of what they are doing.

Interview 100 shooters and 100 hunters. Ask them what they want in a rimfire scope. How many different responses would you get? First you'd get a lot of questions about what the rimfire scope would be used for. Each answer steering the buyer toward a different set of parameters. Ask those same hunters what they would prefer in a southern woods hunting rifle. Ask them what they would want in a western rifle. Ask them what they would want in a casual (not competition) target rifle.

Everyone would tell you they want reliability and durability. That would seem to be a given, but then when discussion turns to the weight necessary to deliver that kind of reliability, you see some people opting for the lighter scopes even though they know lighter may translate into a greater chance of failure. FFP vs SFP. The different reticles that are preferred with the different focal planes. Magnification. Some very accomplished shooters can be completely happy with their fixed 6. More and more I see shooters wanting and steering other shooters toward the truly high magnification variables. Novices may want one thing that highly experienced shooters eschew.

The bottom line is that economies of scale won't allow a manufacturer to make scopes to suit everyone's needs, wants or desires. It's an unenviable task.
Been drifting away from Leupold for a while, not because if any issues I’ve had, but because of ones experienced by other reliable and knowledgable people who often shoot a lot more than I do. The few I still have are working fine, but I’m not planning on more until they correct the known issues with their erectors. Just don’t want any trouble. I hope they do something, because their scopes do have a good balance of size, weight, ER, eyebox, etc.

As to the changes in their offerings, that’s a marketing decision based on whatever criteria they rely on. I find it difficult to believe that they are abandoning niches that are profitable, but absolutely believe they might be willing to make changes to cut costs even to the use of plastic parts and reducing QC measures. Trimming product lines and options is another way to cut costs, of course, as is closing the Custom Shop if it’s not making money; or raising the price of after-the-sale modifications.

As to their policy on older models, it’s simply not reasonable to expect them to maintain a stock of parts for long-discontinued scopes. Warranties almost always specify that products will be repaired or replaced at the company’s option. Pretty clear, like it or lump it. If an old scope is still cosmetically good and you want to keep it, there are places you can send them for refurbishing. Do that, or take the replacement, your choice.

Before the anti-Leupold trend began, it was pretty common to read here about guys buying old beater Leupolds, sending them in, getting brand new ones in return, and sometimes selling them. Seemed almost like a cottage industry. Not strictly dishonest, but certainly not in the spirit in which a warranty is offered, and a double negative for the company in that they were giving away product to be sold in competition with their own sales. You can bet they figured that out and it may have been a factor, however small in the changes they’ve made.
JB:

There's a direct correlation between accurate, reliable adjustments and ability to maintain zero. I've had several Leupolds that had wondering zero from session to session. The poi shifts weren't huge, and we'd justify it as moisture variability in wood stocks, wind, hold pressures, atmospherics, etc, etc. Didn't even fully realize the extent to which it went on until those scopes were replaced and the poi stayed put.

Leupold would've been ahead of the game had they owned their tracking issues early on; instead, they doubled down on marginal designs by adding CDS dials to erector systems that weren't robust enough to handle it, and now they have a ton of these type of threads on their hands. With all of the scopes that get sent back, they know what their products are capable of, yet they kept selling the same stuff with dials added to cash in on shifting markets.
Originally Posted by mathman
I have two SWFA 6x scopes with the milquad reticle and I like them quite a bit. Nevertheless they are pigs compared to what size scope I'd like to have on some of my hunting rifles. That's the main reason I don't have more of them.


Exactamundo!

Got a 6 and a 10. Great scopes for some purposes, but not every use, and it’s as you said, a size (form factor) issue, not just weight. Just bought a Trijicon that’s somewhat heavier, but doesn’t have big honkin’ turrets hanging out. It also has a reticle that’s usable under the hunting conditions I experience. Sacrilege, I know.
Originally Posted by Starbuck
JB:


Leupold would've been ahead of the game had the owned their tracking issues early on; instead, they doubled down on marginal designs by adding CDS dials to erector systems that weren't robust enough to handle it, and now they have a ton of these type of threads on their hands.


This is where I am critical of Leupold. Their comments when they had their webinar (or whatever you call it) here told me they refuse to acknowledge their issues. I'd own a VX5 HD firedot (perhaps more) right now if they seemed more interested in addressing what is a real issue, especially with their CDS system. That and the "tap the turrets to get the adjustments to take" was laughable, and frankly sad. Telling THIS group that there were no repeatability/reliability issues and to tap the turrets, was what really steered me away from Leupold. Even with the generous veterans discount I can get, I have passed them over on my last half dozen or so purchases.
The entire hunting & shooting world has been convinced that you can hit anything at more than 100 yards anymore w/o a scope that has dialing turrets & repeatable adjustment to 1/4 MOA........................

And that "hunting" is shooting animals at 800+ yards.

So the market is selling what people think the want & need & will buy.

That makes for big, heavy pieces of lumber that don't fit well on ultralight rig of various types & purposes.

How may companies off a straight 4x anymore????????????

MM
Newsflash... leupold sucked 15 years ago.
My favorite hunting scope is a 6x36 fixed power Leupold....now it seems they have dropped that from their line...i limit my shooting to center hold....300 yards or less...
I am not a turret twister and have sent one Leupold back to get repaired that was 40 years old at the time. I sold it to my B-in-L who is still using it. I have them on .257 Robert all the way up to .375 H&H ranging from 1.5-5x20 to 3.5-10x40. Not one has let me down while hunting. The only time I needed major adjustments year to year has been when I change loads. I do try to get as close as possible to my quarry. That is what makes hunting fun to me.

As I get older and not as nimble maybe I'll need to get a twister type scope to shoot over the ground I can't be as stealthy on anymore.

For those wanting fixed power scopes Leupold still list 2.5, 4 and 6 powers.
Originally Posted by Starbuck
JB:

There's a direct correlation between accurate, reliable adjustments and ability to maintain zero. I've had several Leupolds that had wondering zero from session to session. The poi shifts weren't huge, and we'd justify it as moisture variability in wood stocks, wind, hold pressures, atmospherics, etc, etc. Didn't even fully realize the extent to which it went on until those scopes were replaced and the poi stayed put.

Leupold would've been ahead of the game had they owned their tracking issues early on; instead, they doubled down on marginal designs by adding CDS dials to erector systems that weren't robust enough to handle it, and now they have a ton of these type of threads on their hands. With all of the scopes that get sent back, they know what their products are capable of, yet they kept selling the same stuff with dials added to cash in on shifting markets.


I don’t shoot from the bench and I’m not worried about POI shifts that don’t move from “minute of deer” inside 400 yards. So, I guess I’ve never noticed. But then again, I don’t shoot with enough magnification that I could even tell a minute shift in POI.

The phenomenon of higher magnification that causes people to think they should be shooting at ticks on a deer’s back instead of the boiler room and allows them to obsess over 1/4 minute of angle shifts in POI is what has hurt Leupold.
Originally Posted by DeoVindice
The love for gaudy gloss-finished optics doesn't make sense to me either, probably a generational preference. Oh well, doesn't affect me.


Gloss scopes are hardly gaudy. On the proper rifle, they look exactly like they should be there, thus the current upswing of folks looking for gloss scopes for classic rifles.. Generation preference has nothing to do with it.

Case in point ..... I just bought a early 50s 721 in 300H&H and mounted a GLOSS M8 4x in Weaver R&B on it. It "looks" right, whereas if I had mounted a current hubblesque 4.5-16x50 in 30mm rings with mondo turrets and mils reticle, it would look downright gaudy. Add a bi-pod to that and it would look downright retarded. Those things have their place on fiberglass/stainless 700 LEGO guns and I have those too. smile
It's called being efficient. Eventually you run out of old parts and you no longer manufacture old parts.

Does the original car mfg's still produce parts for their 1975 models?

Nothing wrong with Leupold, it's called remaining competitive.
That webcast here in this forum a couple of years ago soured me on Leupold. I had owned perhaps 50 Leupold scopes and more often than not noticed the wonky adjustments. I didn't let it bother me much because I tend to set & forget, but their refusal to acknowledge an issue that I KNOW exists completely undermined my confidence in their scopes and their entire enterprise. I still have a VX-II on a muzzle loader and a couple of Prismatics, but I've moved on to try other scopes. Some have disappointed me a bit because Leupold usually delivered excellent (to my eye) optical quality, but I've found some lines I really like such as Weaver's Grand Slam and Super Slam and Sightron's Big Sky series, all of which are getting pretty rare on the used market. I prefer a duplex or simple ballistic reticle and that tends to narrow down my choices. I have several others that are mounted but not yet sighted in, such as a Tract Response and a Bushnell Nitro. The optical quality of those two seems to be very acceptable based on cursory examination. Once I've actually used them a bit, I'll have a more solid opinion of them.

If Leupold would step up their game and get their erector issues eliminated, I could probably be persuaded to give them another chance. But as of today, that's just not going to happen.
After owning dozens of Leupys (mostly various-x-IIIs) I started moving towards Nikon Monarchs 15-20 years ago. The tracking was much better, and brightness/clarity was on par. I also started dabbling in Swarovski and Zeiss scopes. The Euro glass was a even better, but in the case of the Swaro Z3, Z5 and Z6, the tracking was still unpredictable and Leupy like. My most recent scope purchases have been SWFA(4), LRHS (1) and Tract(1). The SWFA HD and Tract glass are great, but I like the LRHS even better. As I get older, my patience for poor tracking has really wained...and my desire to send more $ to Oregon has disappeared. I'm simply unwilling to drop the coin on even the high end models. If I'm able rationalize another rifle purchase in the near future, my $ will go towards a Zeiss V4 or V6, or perhaps, another Tract. It is a sad commentary on U.S. manufacturing. If the Japanese and Euros can do it, why not Leupold? Just my 0.02.
Originally Posted by elkaddict
After owning dozens of Leupys (mostly various-x-IIIs) I started moving towards Nikon Monarchs 15-20 years ago. The tracking was much better, and brightness/clarity was on par. I also started dabbling in Swarovski and Zeiss scopes. The Euro glass was a even better, but in the case of the Swaro Z3, Z5 and Z6, the tracking was still unpredictable and Leupy like. My most recent scope purchases have been SWFA(4), LRHS (1) and Tract(1). The SWFA HD and Tract glass are great, but I like the LRHS even better. As I get older, my patience for poor tracking has really wained...and my desire to send more $ to Oregon has disappeared. I'm simply unwilling to drop the coin on even the high end models. If I'm able rationalize another rifle purchase in the near future, my $ will go towards a Zeiss V4 or V6, or perhaps, another Tract. It is a sad commentary on U.S. manufacturing. If the Japanese and Euros can do it, why not Leupold? Just my 0.02.


Because everything is a compromise between price, marketability, and features. Leupold produced in house designs in the US with US costs and wages. Weaver and the like were just names that contracted for scopes made in factories in Japan. Raise the price, and they could produce something as good as the Euros. But that causes a problem. I mean would you pay as much for a Chevy sedan as a BMW even if it is every bit as good?
Simple. They haven’t had to, yet. A lot of their competition is no better, with worse ergos.

Way back when my company was deeply invested in their so-called Quality program, one of the catch-phrases was, “Quality means meeting customer expectations, not Goodness”, essentially saying if they’ll accept (or tolerate) Crap, Crap is just fine.

These threads will change nothing, merely micturition in the wind. If you’re not satisfied, move on to something that works for you. The boys and girls in Oregon will never notice.
Originally Posted by 16bore
“Leupold: Made in America tough, the way it should be”

That’d be a hell of a way to sell a scope. I remember as a kid when you got a Leupold, you were king.


Ain't that the truth ! Bought my first leupold when I was sixteen . That gold ring made me ten feet tall !😎
I seriously doubt US costs/wages are higher than Japan, Germany or Austria. Indeed, I suspect regulatory costs/mandates are higher than in the US.
Originally Posted by Pappy348
Simple. They haven’t had to, yet. A lot of their competition is no better, with worse ergos.

Way back when my company was deeply invested in their so-called Quality program, one of the catch-phrases was, “Quality means meeting customer expectations, not Goodness”, essentially saying if they’ll accept (or tolerate) Crap, Crap is just fine.

These threads will change nothing, merely micturition in the wind. If you’re not satisfied, move on to something that works for you. The boys and girls in Oregon will never notice.


I have heard quality described as doing the right thing right the first time.
Originally Posted by elkaddict
I seriously doubt US costs/wages are higher than Japan, Germany or Austria. Indeed, I suspect regulatory costs/mandates are higher than in the US.


You going to pay $800 or more for a run of the mill Leupold like you do a Swarovski? You’re paying as much for little eagle as you are the features. Put the same scope with a gold ring and people would find reasons not to buy it.

And then are you going to buy a Leupold that was built in a Japanese factory with some design specs that were simply forwarded to Japan for them to build like ATK or whoever it was owned Weaver did? Weaver got to cut much of the costs of design, research and development, and the factory because that Japanese factory was building scopes and other optical items for companies all over the world. And, of course, Weaver pretty much went out of business as have lots of these companies having scopes built in Japan because they can’t compete with Chinese scopes.
I had a Leupold 2-7x33, that I bought used at a gun show about 12 years ago. Used it on a couple rifles, then put it in the safe where it sat for several years. Mounted it on a rifle and when boresighting, the windage was so tight, coulndn.t tur it.
Sent it to Leupold for repairs. They sent me a new VX Freedom, 2-7 x 33 free of charge. That's damn good service, IMO. This was Nov, 2020.
I have eight Leupold scopes and that is the only one to need repair.

oops---
Originally Posted by JoeBob
Originally Posted by elkaddict
I seriously doubt US costs/wages are higher than Japan, Germany or Austria. Indeed, I suspect regulatory costs/mandates are higher than in the US.


You going to pay $800 or more for a run of the mill Leupold like you do a Swarovski? You’re paying as much for little eagle as you are the features. Put the same scope with a gold ring and people would find reasons not to buy it.

And then are you going to buy a Leupold that was built in a Japanese factory with some design specs that were simply forwarded to Japan for them to build like ATK or whoever it was owned Weaver did? Weaver got to cut much of the costs of design, research and development, and the factory because that Japanese factory was building scopes and other optical items for companies all over the world. And, of course, Weaver pretty much went out of business as have lots of these companies having scopes built in Japan because they can’t compete with Chinese scopes.


Weaver went out of business building the very kind of scopes many on this thread said they want.
To be clear, I won't pay $800 for swaro or Leupy glass at this point. While Swaro glass is superior, my z3s and the $1k+Z5s have had Leupy like tracking. The thing I think is being missed on tracking is it's not like it takes huge $ to design a fix. Only a recognition that it's worth it. Leupy simply has declined to address (at least in the mid range price levels). Nikon was able figure it out and keep good optics at essentially the same price point with the Monarchs. To suggest that tracking couldn't have been fixed over this many decades without doubling prices is laughable. There was a time when various-x-III were the gold standard of value and features. Leupold simply chose not to improve that which could readily have been improved. You need look no further than what tracking is offered in SWFA entry level scopes. While I don't know the specifics of the erector assembly costs, its hard to imagine there would have been an actual $30 cost difference.
JB:

The scopes I had POI shifts on were 2.5-8, 1.5-5, 1.75-6, not high X scopes. And some shifts would've been more than minute of deer at 400.

I don't disagree that many who hunt thicker cover wouldn't notice and would still be well served by a scope that has small poi changes. I still have a bunch of Leupolds in service on "woods" guns.

But, a lot of hunting gets done in wide open cover, where 400 isn't really considered long range; it's just the shot opportunities you're likely to get. And, for those scenarios, you can't really have a scope that's too precise or too tough or too reliable.
Originally Posted by elkaddict
The thing I think is being missed on tracking is it's not like it takes huge $ to design a fix.
.


If you look at Form's testing, very few scopes have stood the test of time. What do those few companies that get his seal of approval know that all the other manufacturers don't know?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard


Weaver went out of business building the very kind of scopes many on this thread said they want.




I suspect that may have Weaver lost out on the marketing front. Honestly, though, I did not pay any attention at all to the Grand Slams and Super Slams when they were still in production and readily available. Maybe the prices were just too high. I do not recall one way or the other.
Just looked at a copy of Gun Digest 2003. The Grand Slam 3.5-10x50mm retailed at $459.99, while the Leupold Vari-X III 3.5-10x50mm retailed at $796.40. Sightron evidently offered nothing comparable at that time. Had I known then what I know now, I doubt I would have owned 50 Leupold scopes in my lifetime. Probably would have been closer to a dozen...and they'd likely all be long gone by now.
All these scope companies cited in this thread as having figured out tracking at comparable or lower prices than Leupold are out of the scope business, with the exception of Sightron and they almost may as well be. So, what exactly has Leupold done wrong?
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard


Weaver went out of business building the very kind of scopes many on this thread said they want.




I suspect that may have Weaver lost out on the marketing front. Honestly, though, I did not pay any attention at all to the Grand Slams and Super Slams when they were still in production and readily available. Maybe the prices were just too high. I do not recall one way or the other.



And THERE you go. I was able to find Weaver Grand Slam’s at ONE gun shop in the DFW area, 10 years ago, and I don’t recall EVER seeing any Jap Weaver Classic’s at any store in that area.

Vortex is actually more of a success in MARKETING, than they are PRODUCT. They publicize it, they warrant it, and most of all, you can walk in a store and TOUCH IT.

It can be argued whether Leupold or Nikon or Weaver were the better “set and forget” scopes. Well, now Weaver and Nikon are GONE, and Leupold needs to make a decision.

Chase Nightforce and the tactical market, to the detriment of their “classic” lines, or simply maintain a “presence” in that market, and OWN the sub-$500 market and “classic” market???
PB,
I think that's a fair point. I think there can be little debate that some uses require extreme duty design and builds. It is worth the costs and weight outside of extreme duty context? I suspect that that is a level most folks will never actually "need." I'm primarily a hunter, and these days, most of my shots are now in the 225-360yd range (this was not the case when I lived and hunted exclusively out west). Do I need a battle ready scope? Do I even need to dial? Of course not. Still, I'm done with scopes that don't tract as advertised when sighting in. From the 80s to the 90s, Leupold was where it was at for a set and forget glass. Today, my priorities for glass are holding zero, brilliant optics, and tracking. I remain partial to SFP duplex reticles (I sight in at 300yds) although I'm really seeing the benefit of illuminated FFP scopes like my SWFA 1x6 and LRHSi 4.5x18. For my present hunting, do I need anything more than a good old Vari-x-III? No. Of course, I believe "need" is truly a 4 letter word. If I had the opportunity to regularly shoot 1000yds plus would I need something different and could I rationalize a $2k+ scope? Sure I could.
SWFA is not out of business, and as I understand it, Nikon got out primarily for political reasons. Can't speak for Weaver.
There have been several brands of sub $300 scopes that could make reliable adjustments for years. Leupold simply has refused to address the garbage erectors. This is a company choice, plain and simple. Someone in QC could easily talley the number of erector repairs they have performed in any given multi year time period and that figure alone would be motivation to do something with their erectors to make them perform properly. If a guy like me has had no less than 6 scopes sent back for erector repairs I’m sure the number is in the tens of thousands per decade. Instead Leupold has chosen to pretend there is no problem, continue making new models with garbage erectors and instead highlighting some new gimmicky description for an upgrade in glass and a device (CDS) that intentionally suggest that you can dial for long range shooting with a historically garbage erector system, and then of course upping the price on each new model. Some of the new VX3 HD models cost upwards of $700. Are you F&$@ing kidding me? $700+ for a scope that can’t steer bullets correctly. No thanks.
Leupolds entire sales strategy for many years was based on men owning rifles that only get shot 3-5 times a year and spend their whole life in a safe! That worked for years until people started shooting a lot, especially at distance, and then when those men tried another brand and surprisingly when they made an adjustment after the shot the bullet moved exactly as it should and voila it was nirvana. Just think back to this forum alone where Big Stick taught a lot of people about turrets and shooting long range nearly 20 years ago. What did almost every rifle he owned wear for glass... Leupolds! With target or M turrets. He’s clearly walked away from them for more precise bullet steering tools at an even lower price point than Leupolds!
Originally Posted by AlaskaCub
There have been several brands of sub $300 scopes that could make reliable adjustments for years. Leupold simply has refused to address the garbage erectors.


I believe this is true. If Weaver could design and build the Micro-Trac system as inexpensively as they did, I do not understand why Leupold can't---or won't. If they did, they'd have my attention. They got everything else right.
As long as hunters are content with mounting trash on their rifles we will see no better than trash offered competitively priced.
Originally Posted by TBREW401
I had a Leupold 2-7x33, that I bought used at a gun show about 12 years ago. Used it on a couple rifles, then put it in the safe where it sat for several years. Mounted it on a rifle and when boresighting, the windage was so tight, coulndn.t tur it.
Sent it to Leupold for repairs. They sent me a new VX Freedom, 2-7 x 33 free of charge. That's damn good service, IMO. This was Nov, 2021.
I have eight Leupold scopes and that is the only one to need repair.

November 2021?

I have seen the future!
wink
The fabric of the space-time continuum has been torn asunder!
Originally Posted by elkaddict
SWFA is not out of business, and as I understand it, Nikon got out primarily for political reasons. Can't speak for Weaver.


SWFA may not be out of business, but it sure as hell is hard to buy one of their scopes.
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Originally Posted by AlaskaCub
There have been several brands of sub $300 scopes that could make reliable adjustments for years. Leupold simply has refused to address the garbage erectors.


I believe this is true. If Weaver could design and build the Micro-Trac system as inexpensively as they did, I do not understand why Leupold can't---or won't. If they did, they'd have my attention. They got everything else right.


How many of those Weavers were sold, and how many of those comparatively few that were sold got a good workout? What are the actual differences in the erector/adjustment assemblies?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by elkaddict
SWFA is not out of business, and as I understand it, Nikon got out primarily for political reasons. Can't speak for Weaver.


SWFA may not be out of business, but it sure as hell is hard to buy one of their scopes.


The shipments from China take awhile.
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Originally Posted by AlaskaCub
There have been several brands of sub $300 scopes that could make reliable adjustments for years. Leupold simply has refused to address the garbage erectors.


I believe this is true. If Weaver could design and build the Micro-Trac system as inexpensively as they did, I do not understand why Leupold can't---or won't. If they did, they'd have my attention. They got everything else right.


How many of those Weavers were sold, and how many of those comparatively few that were sold got a good workout? What are the actual differences in the erector/adjustment assemblies?



Physically, I do not know. I don't rake my scopes apart. But what I do know is that the Weaver adjustments work. That's difference enough for me.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by elkaddict
SWFA is not out of business, and as I understand it, Nikon got out primarily for political reasons. Can't speak for Weaver.


SWFA may not be out of business, but it sure as hell is hard to buy one of their scopes.


The shipments from China take awhile.


They're made in Japan, not China.
Weaver showed, more than fifty years ago, that it was not that difficult to build a scope with usable adjustments. They also demonstrated it was possible to build scopes which were rugged. What they did not do was produce scopes with great optics. I have a couple of older Weaver scopes, US and Japanese, on silhouette rifles and they track perfectly. I have one Leupold and it works fine as long as I remember to adjust the windage, along with the elevation, when I move from point to point. If they could make scopes in El Paso which adjusted well, you would think the people in Oregon could do the same. GD
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by Pappy348
Simple. They haven’t had to, yet. A lot of their competition is no better, with worse ergos.

Way back when my company was deeply invested in their so-called Quality program, one of the catch-phrases was, “Quality means meeting customer expectations, not Goodness”, essentially saying if they’ll accept (or tolerate) Crap, Crap is just fine.

These threads will change nothing, merely micturition in the wind. If you’re not satisfied, move on to something that works for you. The boys and girls in Oregon will never notice.


I have heard quality described as doing the right thing right the first time.


Okay, but that one didn't make the cut. You have to bear in mind that actual Quality wasn’t the goal. The goal was to satisfy those who demand companies they do business with have a Quality program in place, similar to ISO. Once Quality had run its course, everyone involved got new business cards and became ISO consultants. This time, part of the schtick was that you not only had to adhere to ISO practices, but you could only date ISO girls, drink ISO beer, and had to abandon all your old non- ISO friends, unless you could drag them into the club.

Kinda like Baptists.....
JB,
The HD models are made in Japan....
I have wondered on occasion whether Leupold's lightweight tubes may be the reason there are so many tracking issues. It may be that the slightest ring misalignment causes the erector to bind up. All I know is I grew weary of the hassle of zeroing a Leupold scope. Whatever the cause, I wish they'd address it and not continue to try to blow smoke up everyone's ass.
Good question. I've wondered the same about one of my Z3 that continues to have tracking problems even after a trip to the factory. As I recall, Swarovski recommends the lightest scope ring tightening of any scope I've played with.

Originally Posted by RiverRider
I have wondered on occasion whether Leupold's lightweight tubes may be the reason there are so many tracking issues. It may be that the slightest ring misalignment causes the erector to bind up. All I know is I grew weary of the hassle of zeroing a Leupold scope. Whatever the cause, I wish they'd address it and not continue to try to blow smoke up everyone's ass.
Being ISO certified has much less to do with achieving true quality than simply documenting your production processes and QC procedures and adhering to them---on paper at least. It does not guarantee a superior product.
You Amazingly STUPID Fhuqks never disappoint and ESPECIALLY when doing your BEST. Hint. Congratulations?!?

[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]

Bless your hearts for TRYING though.

Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!!!.................
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Being ISO certified has much less to do with achieving true quality than simply documenting your production processes and QC procedures and adhering to them---on paper at least. It does not guarantee a superior product.


Bingo. All it is saying what you do and doing what you say.
Oh Boy. Sphincterwrinkle is here.
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Being ISO certified has much less to do with achieving true quality than simply documenting your production processes and QC procedures and adhering to them---on paper at least. It does not guarantee a superior product.


And once certification is granted all that goes right out the effing window as soon as it entails some added costs, or makes someone sad....

Been there, done that, and all it accomplished was draining the corporate coffers, again, and rid us of all that pesky hard-copy documentation that we only used like nearly every day. Oh yeah, almost forgot, the night shift had to rearrange their schedules and screw up their lives in general so they could attend the stupid-azz seminars.

Just another scam like multi-level marketing.
Originally Posted by Pappy348
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Being ISO certified has much less to do with achieving true quality than simply documenting your production processes and QC procedures and adhering to them---on paper at least. It does not guarantee a superior product.


And once certification is granted all that goes right out the effing window as soon as it entails some added costs, or makes someone sad....

Been there, done that, and all it accomplished was draining the corporate coffers, again, and rid us of all that pesky hard-copy documentation that we only used like nearly every day. Oh yeah, almost forgot, the night shift had to rearrange their schedules and screw up their lives in general so they could attend the stupid-azz seminars.

Just another scam like multi-level marketing.


That can happen and I'm sure it does quite often. It does not have to be that way, though.

My own organization is currently undergoing some very demanding certification (aviation-related) and those of us involved in this are being very careful to ensure that we don't produce documented requirements that would paint us into a corner of our own making. Good, smart management decisions can keep an organization out of the weeds when it comes to this sort of thing. Unfortunately, good management is not a common commodity.
Scarce as chicken lips...
LOL. Unfortunately true.
Ask 100 shooters/ hunters what they want in a rimfire scppe.

I wonder how many would prefer a leupy 3 X 9 X 33 AO.

I have enough of those ...and they are OK in their mediocrity.

I prefer Kahles AH series. The SWFA are Clunkers. Big and Clunky.
Originally Posted by dogcatcher223
Newsflash... leupold sucked 15 years ago.



Agreed
Originally Posted by Pappy348
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Being ISO certified has much less to do with achieving true quality than simply documenting your production processes and QC procedures and adhering to them---on paper at least. It does not guarantee a superior product.


And once certification is granted all that goes right out the effing window as soon as it entails some added costs, or makes someone sad....

Been there, done that, and all it accomplished was draining the corporate coffers, again, and rid us of all that pesky hard-copy documentation that we only used like nearly every day. Oh yeah, almost forgot, the night shift had to rearrange their schedules and screw up their lives in general so they could attend the stupid-azz seminars.

Just another scam like multi-level marketing.

It's all about hanging that banner on the building. Had my first I-S-O indoctrination in about 1993. I was in my mid 20's, and reported back to my boss that it was a gang of ex Alliant Tech engineers using scare tactics. My view hasn't changed. "The doors will close on you". "You won't be allowed to do business with any other companies".

We used to call them ISO mercenaries. Like stated above, people get the necessary experience, then become part of the pyramid.

It's nothing more than re-labeled TQM. Ain't much quality related about it either. It's just paper. For some real fun, take a look at some EN certs, and what they require.

I apologize to the OP for the off topic rant. Good to know others see the ISO flush for what it is.
Well what are all you hotshots goin with??
Posted By: bcp Re: Leupold "adrift in the ocean?" - 03/15/21
Lots of people wandering around gun shows here (when they still had them) for the last few years bragging about or looking for under $150 6-24x scopes for their elk rifles.

And every show had a table or two of NcSTAR scopes with a crowd around them.

Bruce
Bruce I notice your from around here, they got a gun show every month or 2 at the old yard birds. Ain’t been to a gunshow in 25 year personally . Never heard of that brand either

Originally Posted by Judman
Well what are all you hotshots goin with??


I’m curious too.
Posted By: bcp Re: Leupold "adrift in the ocean?" - 03/15/21
Originally Posted by Judman
Bruce I notice your from around here, they got a gun show every month or 2 at the old yard birds. Ain’t been to a gunshow in 25 year personally . Never heard of that brand either


Never been to a Yard Birds show. Often went to the fairgrounds show, and Vancouver and Portland. Portland Expo shows are the ones with lots of cheap Chinese scope tables. I guess those dealers don't go to the little shows.

Bruce
Oh, chink shiit... 👍😂
Originally Posted by Judman
Well what are all you hotshots goin with??


I’ma put this on my gold-painted Kimber. Parallax might be an issue, but I’ll be stylin’...

https://www.amazon.com/DB-TAC-INC-P...aWNrUmVkaXJlY3QmZG9Ob3RMb2dDbGljaz10cnVl
Originally Posted by fburgtx
Originally Posted by Judman
Well what are all you hotshots goin with??


I’ma put this on my gold-painted Kimber. Parallax might be an issue, but I’ll be stylin’...

https://www.amazon.com/DB-TAC-INC-P...aWNrUmVkaXJlY3QmZG9Ob3RMb2dDbGljaz10cnVl


Haha god damn!!! 😂😂
Geez didn’t mean to slow things down. Open sights??
I happily hunted with a Leupold Vari xii 2-7 for many years. Then I compared it side by side with a Bushnell Elite 2-7 which replaced it.

Now the Leupold sits on an old used and abused Savage 23-C in 32-20. Mostly Bushnell 4200's on my main deer rifles.

Dan
Originally Posted by Big Stick
You Amazingly STUPID Fhuqks never disappoint and ESPECIALLY when doing your BEST. Hint. Congratulations?!?

[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]

Bless your hearts for TRYING though.

Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!!!.................


I bet Stick doesn't even have a decent boat.
Originally Posted by Dantheman
I happily hunted with a Leupold Vari xii 2-7 for many years. Then I compared it side by side with a Bushnell Elite 2-7 which replaced it.

Now the Leupold sits on an old used and abused Savage 23-C in 32-20. Mostly Bushnell 4200's on my main deer rifles.

Dan


Nope that doesn’t do it Dan.. sorry 😂😂
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by Big Stick
You Amazingly STUPID Fhuqks never disappoint and ESPECIALLY when doing your BEST. Hint. Congratulations?!?

[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]

Bless your hearts for TRYING though.

Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!!!.................


I bet Stick doesn't even have a decent boat.


Um, LarryO has a few, but none run!!! To much of a commitment, flossing steelhead trumps “fishing”.... grin
Originally Posted by RiverRider
Originally Posted by JoeBob
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by elkaddict
SWFA is not out of business, and as I understand it, Nikon got out primarily for political reasons. Can't speak for Weaver.


SWFA may not be out of business, but it sure as hell is hard to buy one of their scopes.


The shipments from China take awhile.


They're made in Japan, not China.


Yep with a name change from Tasco to SuperSniper..
Originally Posted by elkaddict
Good question. I've wondered the same about one of my Z3 that continues to have tracking problems even after a trip to the factory. As I recall, Swarovski recommends the lightest scope ring tightening of any scope I've played with.



I was a bit disappointed with the tracking of my last Z3 3-9x36. Lovely little scope, but it took longer to sight in than any Leupold I've ever tried (about 20). Ditto for my one and only Meopta.
Originally Posted by Judman
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by Big Stick
You Amazingly STUPID Fhuqks never disappoint and ESPECIALLY when doing your BEST. Hint. Congratulations?!?

[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]

Bless your hearts for TRYING though.

Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!!!.................


I bet Stick doesn't even have a decent boat.


Um, LarryO has a few, but none run!!! To much of a commitment, flossing steelhead trumps “fishing”.... grin


What's with all poseur Larry's scopes wearing buttplugs? Not mounted on a rifle, he must be sitting on them.
© 24hourcampfire