Ok, let me start off by saying that I've searched, googled, you name it! My intention is not to start a battle on the forum, but one of the problems I've come across researching the internet is there is too much info out there. I have more questions now then before...

Here's the deal - I am in the market for two new scopes. One for a 22-250 (coyote gun) and the other for a 257 Wby Mag (big game gun). I had been leaning toward the VX-3 4.5-14 with CDS, but I started looking closely at the specs and didn't like the FOV at the lowest setting. Odd that other brands in the same power range tend to have a slightly better FOV. This triggered hours and hours of searching to discover that this particular Leupold is not held in high regard. The rest of the VX-3 line has respect, just not that one model.

So, what's the deal? Is this the "lemon" in the VX-3 lineup, or am I seeing extreme opinions? The nearest store is 100 miles away, so it's tough for me to hop on down to the store and have a look.

1) With both guns being "long range" calibers, I would hate to not have "enough" scope on them. But, what is "enough"?

2) Do all 4.5-14 scopes have similar issues? Monarch? Conquest? Etc., or is this a Leupold issue?

3) For the 257 Wby, I am not after a 1,000 yard gun, regardless of the rounds capability. I would like to be capable at 500 yards if necessary. Of course, a 100 yard shot is preferred, but out here in the west on public land, you have to play the hand you're dealt. Sometimes that means a shot at 300 yards or greater. Would a 3.5-10 VX-3 be sufficient on this gun, or is it not "enough" scope?

4) For the 22-250, I've shot coyotes from 50 ft to 300 yards. What is enough scope for that gun? I currently have a 3-9 vari-x II on it now (going on my son's gun), but find that even at 9x a coyote at 300 yards is still pretty small, I wouldn't mind a little more, but not at the expense of optical quality.

5) I would love nothing but Conquests or better on all my rifles, but that's tough to do financially. I've got a Conquest on my 300 win mag, and it's awesome. But, I also got it when Conquests were new to the market, and they were actually less $$ than a vari-x III. My Conquest was $440 new in 2003, it is now $700. At the same time, I do want a quality scope on both guns.

6) Should I stay in the 14x range, and look to another brand? Should I go to a 10x max power, for which the VX-3 seems to have the goods for?

BTW - You'll notice that I didn't even bring up the topic of reticles vs. turrets. That's another thing that has my head swimming....

1" 3.5-10x M1 non-A/O Duplex....................

It's a great scope I have had several. You are worrying to much about nothing. The VX-3 3.5-10x40 would be great too.

I couldn't cite the worst variable they make,as being a candidate for anything,other than avoidance.

Whether it 1" or 30mm................

its junk

Yeh and 10x is a excellent choice for 1000 yards.... LOL

I like 10x quite a bit farther than that.

Rather like a 6x at 1K..................

I have used the 4.5x14x40 in either the vari-x or vx series for years. It is my favorite scope for hunting and range work.

I do not like the vx3 4.5x14x40 cds because of no AO. If the scope had the AO it would be just as good as any VX3 scope. I called Leupold about why the cds does not have a AO and they said it was simply to keep the cost down.

If you are going to buy a 4.5x14x40 make sure it has a AO and it will be a great scope.

Dink

I have a 3.5-10 x 40 cds, 4.5-14x40 cds and a 4.5-14x44 conquest with rapid z 800 on a .257 wby. The conquest is much better, has wider fov, AO, larger obj, and better glass than the 4.5-14 leupy. The 3.5-10 vx3 is really nice and it sits on my 30-06. Very nice scope and shoots well with the cds to 600 easily. I know the glass is the same on them but the 3.5-10 has a much more pleasant view. I just don't like e 4.5-14 cds. It's on a .270 and tracks really well but I don't like the view as much.
Lee

on my 22-250, I have a VX II 4-12X fine duplex A/O and it workd great for coyotes. I have shot coyotes to beyond 300 yards with it.

My 257 weatherby is a deer/antelope rifle that has a Zeiss conquest 3.5-10X one it. It's not a 1000 yaard scope nor am I a 1000 yard shooter.

I do give my self a good kick now and then for not buying a boatload of Conquest 3-9x40 @ $289 when Doug was selling demos. Could be a lot closer to retirement now!!

Thanks everyone for the great advice! I know I do tend to worry about things too much. I just would hate for the muley of my dreams to be sitting at 600 yards, and me saying "damn, I shoulda bought the X scope instead of the Y scope." I say that, even though I could hunt the rest of my life and never come up with that situation.

The coyotes do tend to hang up right around 400 yards though...bastards! Maybe I should spend more time working on my calling technique and worry less about the scope?!?!

VX-3 3.5-10x40 is the pick of that litter. I got the CDS, but haven't played with it yet. The Conquest 3-9x40 is a bargain at present. It's actually less than the VX-3 3.5-10x40. 10X is a lot of scope. Back in the day, that's about the best we had for our .222's, etc. Now, it seems, everyone need mega power for everything. You can zap that 400 yd. target without the necessity for 14 power. A bunch of folks on this forum favor the 6x42 and it's hard to make many points against such a glass.

IMHO,

DF

Agar426: Based on MY real life, extensive, in the field, at the range, in bad conditions and in ROUGH conditions useage the VX-3 4.5x14 is VERY hard to beat!
I love mine!
Be very dubious of ANYONE who decries the fine Leupold 4.5x14!
I have used them afield on virtually everything from Ground Squirrels to Elk and have as yet to notice a shortcoming of any kind!
And, I am like you, I do most of my Hunting on public lands - the 14 power high end comes in handy rather often.
Good luck with whichever scope you choose!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Dale, what's the largest caliber you've used them on ?

So, can I safely say that while there's better glass out there in the 4.5-14x range, the Leupold itself isn't "bad" glass? It's just not the best in that particular category?

My heart's not set on the Leupold....on the contrary, I'm trying to swing the $ for the Conquest. In case I have to bring down the amount I can spend, I just wanted to get the most for my $, and not end up saying "I shoulda bought the xxxxx instead of the yyyyy." The bottom line is that the scope has to do primarily one thing well...hold zero. After that, glass quality is next, then bells and whistles after that. This is going on a hunting rifle, not a bench rest rifle.

I truly appreciate all the comments. It's nice getting real world accounts from users. Specs on paper tell a lot, but nothing substitutes real world experience.

Between the (2) 4.5-14's I've had much better luck with the Zeiss in both holding zero and glass quality. The big sway in the VX-3 eye relief 4.5-14 is a turn off to me. The VX-3 3.5-10 is much better. If your going to go to the lower magnification, is doesn't make sense not to buy the 3-9X40 Conquest!

It would definitely be a much easier decision if the Conquest 4.5-14 wasn't almost twice as much, well not quite, but close (I can get the Leupold for wholesale, but not the Zeiss).

You could get a zeiss 4.5-14 for only about $200 more than the leupold. Nothing wrong with buying a demo that's like new with full warranty.

Agreed, anyone that says the 4.5 x 14 is better than the 3.5 x 10 hasn't used both of them. If you are a hunter and not just a target shooter the 3.5 has it all over 4.5. Can't go wrong with a Conquest either, in my opinion they are a better mouse trap, particularly in 3x9x40 form.

If you like shooting in low light forget about the 4.5x15x40 LR. I have several of them, light gathering is not very good. The more I shoot long range the more I am learning that high magnification is not needed, or aften desirable.

Does the VX-3 with the 50mm bell provide any larger field of view at the lower settings that its x40mm counterpart?

BBerg

...................Agar..........You are going to get varying opinions going from one extreme, that the 4.5-14x40 is junk, to the flip side where others including myself own and like this scope.

First off, the FOV on the 4.5-14x40 VX3, which is 19.9' on the low setting @ 100 yards, is narrower by nearly 10' when compared to the 3.5-10x40 VX3`s 29.8' on its low setting. The 4.5x14 VX3 is a longer ranged variable and is not a shorter ranged woods scope where a wider FOV would be more favorable. Imo, for open country longer ranged hunting, a 10' narrower FOV at 100 yards is not all that much of a critical issue. The highly vaunted and very popular FX3 6x has a listed FOV of 17.7' at 100 yards, and the 4x FX2 has a listed FOV of 24 feet. And yet most find both very acceptable for just about all hunting including hunting in the woods and timbers.

With regards to eye relief, some state that there is a wider variance from the low to the high power for the 4.5x14 vs the 3.5x10. According to all the specs I`m seeing and from different sources, the 3.5-10x40 VX3 has a listed eye relief from between 3.6" to 4.4", while the 4.5-14x40 has a listed eye relief from between 3.7" to 4.4".

The 3.5-10x40 is a very suitable and versatile longer ranged scope and would be very do-able for what you seek. IF your hunting includes some shorter ranged work, its 10' wider FOV on the lower setting will be better.

But strictly used as a long ranged open country hunting variable, and setting aside the FOV difference between them on the low setting, I fail to see why the 3.5-10x40 VX3 would be a superior scope to the 4.5-14x40 VX3. And their length and weight are nearly the same.

The 10x max vs the 14x max, really depends on your personal preference and/or what your paper punching ranges will be and the size of game you`ll be hunting. If I were hunting smaller varmits at longer extended ranges, I`d personally prefer the 14x vs the 10x for my eye balls.

A 4.5-14x40 VX3 sits atop my 338-378 Wby Accumark. Not a shorter to moderate ranged woods or timbers rifle and scope. It is an open country and longer ranged big game powerhouse.

No issues or problems to report with this scope.

And to add on an after thought, the 3.5x10 will bring in a little more light for low light hunting. Very low light hunting is usually never part of my agenda anyway.

So for my usage, the 4.5-14x40 suites me fine.

I have a vx 3 3.5-10 which has the power to shoot even coyotes at 1000 yards for hunting it has enough power for my needs. however with the 4.5-14 model you have an option of getting parralax adjustment which should allow you to shoot a little tighter way out there once the parralax is removed. thats the only reason why I am wanting to buy the 4.5-14 model

I have two 4.5-14x40's in gloss. 1 on my Biesen stocked Sako Riihimaki 222 and one on my full custom 257 WBY. LOVE 'em. Would not put one, or any Leopould for that matter, on my 416 Rigby or 340 Tyrannosaur but on non severe use and non DGR rifles such as a varmint rifle or a 25 something or other thay are great. Been using them since they came out in that power range I think, About 20 or so years now. IMO, ideal for the applications you mentioned.

Here is an artist's rendition of the various 4-14x40/50 models.
He nailed the FOV experience, not sure on the rest of it...