Also posted in Express rifle section. Not intended to bash Leupold!!
A friend has a CZ 416 which he loves and shoots often. He has had a Leupold Vari X lll 1.5 x 5 fail for the second time. He has it mounted in Alaska Arms QD rings. The Tech at Leupold questioned the rings and stated that the first time he sent it back they rebuilt the scope. My friend shoots a good deal and has taken deer, hogs, buffalo rang steel at 230yds and 318yds.
He loves the rifle but no longer trusts the scope. Recommendations for a scope, comments on the Alaska Arms mounts welcomed.
This rifle has the European style stock and is a joy to shoot. I have fired it both off hand and from a bench and it is quite accurate.
Kind regards
pavementends

My first thought is Trijicon, or Nightforce.

I have not had problems with my Trijicon's, or VX 6's on 375's. or 404 Jeffery, but the Rigby is a another level.

The Rigby is where my recoil tolerance ends. YMMV

I have Alaska Arms QD rings on a 375 Ruger and a 416 Ruger and have had no issues with the rings. The scopes are Kahles 1.5x6x42.

I have a Tract 1X8 LPVO on my Whitworth 416 Remington shooting 350 grain TSX at 2715 FPS and 400 grain TSX at 2450 and this scope works perfectly

I would consider going to a 30mm tube whatever brand he chooses.

I like the VX-6 1-6 HD but have never used it on anything with much recoil.

Lots of great optics these days.

I consider Leupold middle of the pack on a good day for quality of mechanics. So if your friend wants a quality optic, he should look elsewhere .

SteinerP4Xi 1-4x24

https://cameralandny.com/shop/stein...0134-dfd8-00163e9110c0?variation=1467309

Sorry to hear about this.

Wish you all the best.

This would be a good choice ^^^


I have a Trijicon Credo 1-6x24 that would work well also. It's built like a tank. I really like this scope.

Have an SWFA 1-6 on a 375 H&H. Been great. Really like the reticle; on low X it's like a large aperture peep, crank it up to 6 and you get the bare MQ. Had a Leupold 1.5-5 on it before without any trouble.

Had a number of 1.5-5's through the years, most on relatively heavy kickers such as 45-70 levers, 450 Marlin, 378 W. While I have had troubles with some larger gold rings that were dialed on, I haven't had trouble with the 1.5-5's.

I mounted a Trijicon 1-4 on my bud's M-70 .416 Rem. It works great and is a tough scope. He trusts it and so do I.

He took a 43" buff in RSA couple years ago. 400 gr. SAF at 2,375 fps. The Trijicon allowed him to shoot the buff a couple more times before he could get away. Triangle reticle is good for fast offhand shots.

DF

I have used S&B and Swaro 1.5 x 6's on heavy kickers for years with zero issues. A while back I switched to a Swaro Z6 1x6x24 extended eye relief scope and for me is about as perfect as I could hope for for a heavy kicker.

I have had good luck with Zeiss and Swarovski scopes. Never failed. Use them up to my 375 H&H.

I never had an issue with any of my Leupolds before... If he wants something nice then Swaro/Zeiss/Steiner would be my choice. Also- I agree with someone above- 30mm is the way to go!

After recently putting a Trijicon Accupoint on my 9.3, I quickly decided the .416 Taylor will be getting one as well. Show your buddy this thread:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/17919112/1

Never had a problem with Leupolds, own nothing bigger than a 338 Win mag

For which reason?

What was the failure?

No Zeiss, no Swaro, no Leupy, no Vortex would ever go on an important DG rifle of mine! Too fragile.

Trijicon, Nightforce, or S&B.

NF Compact

Zeiss Victory 1.5-6x42 is a good one, sorta big but with great light transmission and brightness. Good in dim light.

Someone said this would be a great leopard rig.

Probably right. 375 H&H M-70 SS, chopped and fluted, NECG irons, including fiberoptic front.

DF

The only Leupy that I ever owned went back to the factory twice. I got it back and sold it. Vxiii.

Bud came over with a Ruger 35 Whelen that would not shoot or hold zero, had a older Leupold 2x7 on it told him to change scope,
I had about 7 of those early Leupold 2x7 and all would not hold zero or adust correctly. Even after Leupold repaired them gave up on them.

Having lost faith in a Nikon and a Leupold, I sent them back. Both were promptly replaced with no acknowledgement if there really was a problem. Few mention them but the upper end Burris and Bushnell are great glass for the price.

Got one for sale

Typically 30mm tubes are stonger and there is more internal room for things like dual springs.

OK, but I was looking for his reasons.

Wandering zero. Mounts tight and not after removing and reinstalling scope.

Leupold "wandering zero"...

Go figure.

DF

The entire system is wandering.

It might be the scope but there are lots of other things in a system.

For sure.

Wondering about that wandering....

DF

Mathman- For me 30 mm or 34mm scopes seem to have more adjustments and brighter for my eyes...I have both 1 inch and 30mm scopes that I shoot regularly. If I were on a hunting trip, I'm looking for a 30-34mm scope... Keep in mind all my scopes are in the $400-$1,200 price range

In and of themselves, 30mm tubes aren't responsible for increased brightness.

Maybe its just in my head?!

The scopes could have been brighter for a couple of reasons, better optical design, better lens coatings, whatever. It's just that many people treat the objective lens and scope tube like a funnel and hose for water, and that isn't how it works.

That claim was originally made by the advertising guy for Swarovski USA in the early 1990s, and somehow it stuck. Good ad campaign--proof of which is that so many people still believe it.

But like a lot of advertising claims, it was BS.

30mm will allow for larger internal lenses which, all things being equal, can bring better resolution which helps in low light.

But we all know all things are not equal.

People will always say mathematically a 30mm tube won’t let in more light, and they aren’t wrong, but, assuming similar optical quality, there’s not one case I can think of where I have seen a 1” tube present a better image than a 30 mm tube.

Ya reckon that guy found a job with the government?

Ha!

DF

PM sent

Hope you can work out a deal. I like mine.

DF

as many guns as you have I"m surprised you have had perfect L scope luck. I don't have quite as many L and have quit them also. But in the stable 2 of them have gone bad over the years. One never saw a thing over 243. The other went onto an AR but the AR is known for double recoil and to be a scope killer anyway.

Seems I’ve had better luck with the old friction adjustable L scopes, set and forget. Some of those are still doing right, no trips to Beaverton.

DF

Me too.....and vice versa for that matter.

While I agree that there are a lot of other things in the system most of them are still in the system when using iron sights which do not wander. Pretty much leaves the mounts or scope.

Leupold is a a solid company with a solid warranty. Every company has issues with their products from time.to time...they will make it rght

And many definitely need it often!

I've had at least a dozen Leupolds over the years, but I'm not dialing with them for the most part. I've only had one failure and that with a 2.5-8x32 VX3 handgun scope that I had on a .260 Remington Encore barrel. I purchased it new with the new barrel and used it for load development and it worked great. Adjustments were spot on, held zero perfectly. Did a final check before the Minnesota deer season in 2010 on a Wednesday. Right where I wanted it - 2.5" high at 100 yards. Five shots touching. Saturday morning I took it to the deer blind, cased, just as I left it after Wednesday. A nice 8 point wandered out at 150 yards. Rock solid rest. Put the crosshair in the armpit and squeezed off. CRACK! The buck dropped like a stone. I reloaded and watched, as normal. He got back up about 5 seconds later, shaking his head, missing part of an antler. I took another shot. Nothing. He took off. I left the blind and went to find my chunk of antler. Immediately packed up and went to the gun range. Impacts were all over the place. It barely kept 5 shots on a 36"x36" target. I took the scope off and sent it back to Leupold. They said a spring broke inside. They said they fixed it, purged the internals, and sent it back to me. I mounted it back on the gun and went to bore sight it in my shop. I started to twist off the elevation adjustment cap and the whole damn turret came off and I was looking at the inside of the scope. WTH. I called Leupold and told them what happened. "Send it back. We will make it right." And they did. I've been using that scope for over a decade now on the .260 Rem barrel or the .357 Max barrel. Perfect tracking and holds zero perfectly. But it makes me trust Leupold a little bit less. The only scope I've dialed with is a Leupold VX-II that I had them put an M1 elevation turret on, mounted on a Ruger M77 MkII .260 Remington. That thing tracks up and down like it's on greased rails. Always returns to zero and adjusts where it should.

Have you had a Leupold failure?

Two M8 6x42s that developed rattles. A VX-III 3.5-10x50 with a dead spot in it's windage adjustment. A VX-II 4-12x40AO whose adjustments got loosey goosey. A VX-III 4.5-14x40LR that stared shifting focus between shots. An M8 6x42AO Target model that needed a rebuild after much use and turret twisting.

I guess I'm a hardhead, I got them fixed and still use them.

Yes 2 Mark 4's 4.5-14. A vx3 4.5-14 and a varixiii 3.5-10. The latter twice. All went back for lack of tracking and rtz . All had busted erectors.

Thanks for all the replies. Leupold after a bit of discussion and stating that a 3" shift in impact was within specs sent a recall ticket. My friend is mounting a straight 2.5 power to try. Lots of opinions expressed and even some good information. I had a 2x to 7 fail on my .375 and Leupold replaced it with a new scope. Matt of course. I am sure dialing puts greater strain on the scope than sighting it in and never changing. I am also sure that a .416 or .458 is harder on a scope than a .222. Mostly the resulting issues from a scope failure on a .222 or even a deer caliber are not as serious as a failure on a heavy rifle. Again thank you for all the suggestions.