Looking at upgrading the Conquest 3-9x40 on my custom 270 to give me a little better view/zoom/capabilities in an effort to reliably stretch the rifle out to 5-600 yard range without Kentucky Windage Holdover.

I have never had a Leupold Scope - never really wanted one as Zeiss, Meopta, Vortex have held me over. However a buddy swears by his VX3 4.5-14X40 30MM SF model and I see were I can pick up a new VX3i 4.5-14x40 30mm sf cds for a pretty good price. Should I take the plunge or will I be in for a let down?

I had that same scope it was a mark 4 which is the same scope. FOV is poor on the low end, the eye box sucks IMO. The scope had tracking and return to zero issues even after taking a trip back to leupold to be "fixed" leupold has so many great options, for your needs a CDS turret would be awesome. but I flat out just don't trust leupold anymore. I also prefer the optical formula of the japanese designed glass, ie nightforce, bushnell and nikon. optical formula meaning the scopes eye relief and ease of getting behind.

thats just me, I am sure others will disagree. and thats ok.

I've had the 4.5-14x40 version in both 1 inch and 30mm tube versions. Both are gone. Both were very difficult to get behind due to very sensitive eyebox. The view would black out with minimal head movement. If you like your Conquest, which I do, do like I did and get the 4.5-14 Conquest in either a 44 or 50mm objective and target turrets. To my eyes, the Conquest glass is better than the VX3. Just be aware that the 50mm version of the Conquest has more elevation adjustment than the 44mm version.

I just mounted one on a new build this week. Not sure what the others are saying about the eyebox, but that certainly is incorrect about this scope. It is a #170703 VX-3i 4.5-14 CDS SF 30mm with Windplex. I also saw a source for a great deal on the #170702, and I may just pick one up, even though I don't really have a need for it at this time.

There was plenty of eye relief at all power levels when mounting the scope on my gun. The eye relief does not change at all from low to high power, no head repositioning needed, in other words. No issues with eyebox "blackout" either.

True, the FOV is slightly reduced at 4.5x. But, simply turn the scope up to about 5 or 5.25, and it is a full image. Swarovski 30mm scopes do the same thing. I have had 5 of them.

I have one with m1's and like it so far. Used it for a while but have not used it a whole lot for what it's worth. I've not noticed tracking problems yet.

The guys over at ballistic turret tape systems can make you up a tape for your conquest for $26. This one is on my meopta and I admit its pretty small numbers but it works. There are 72 clicks per revolution and that's what I had them set up on the tape. If you knew all your ballistics of your favoritemail load they could set that up in yardage for you too.

That wouldn't solve the basic problem mentioned of lack of adjustment range, and lower top end power

Buying a leupold thinking it will be a great long range tool, is a mistake.

You have to understand I'm an inherently evil person at heart and love to steal 15 seconds away from somebody's life showing them an option they may not have thought of with their current equipment!

But, not as much of one as listening to someone here with unsubstantiated claims that has a personal vendetta against a particular company, or has a relationship with a competing company.

You Michigan long range guys are legendary...

There are good scopes out there built for distance, leupold and Zeiss aren't them.

Chris Kyle used a Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm LR/T on his 338 Lapua. He seemed Ok at making long range shots.

pop....goes the bubble.


The OP mentioned 500-600 yards for a hunting rifle. From that, it is pretty obvious he's not in the 1500 yard gong ringer's choir.

True, he could pay 3-4 times more and get a Nightforce, have it twice as heavy, with similar or marginally better optical quality, but I don't think that's what the original question was asking or looking for.

I'm no fan of the eye box, but I'm always twisting the turret and this particular scope has always tracked well and returned to zero.... YMMV

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1209432-american-sniper-what-rifle-did-chris-kyle-use/

Don't go talkin sense like that now!

There are Lupould's, and then there is everything else.

If you fellas want to see an interesting figure, look at the remaining energy left on a 130 grain .270 bullet at 600 yards and tell me what you can really expect to kill with it at that distance. The original post states that is the distance he wants to "stretch out" to. There is a big difference in "stretching out" to a distance and being able to reliably and humanely kill at that distance. Just because you can hit a target at that distance does not mean that you can kill it at that distance. So it seems that the original poster has more problems than what scope to use because at that range, his scope is going to be the least of his concerns. Just my 2 cents worth.

While I appreciate your concern on my "problems"....you need to slow down a bit on your ballistic thoughts.

This rifle shoots a 140 accubond at 3050fps...At the 4-5000 feet elevation I hunt at , that leaves me over 2300 fps and 1600 foot pounds of energy at 500 and 2150fps and 1450 foot pounds at 600 yards. To say that is not adequate is ridiculous.

I don't plan on turning this rifle into a constant 600 yard hunting tool. I enjoy the stalk and we hunt a lot of thick lodgepole timber ridges. Everything I have shot with this rifle has been under 400 yards (elk, deer, bear, antelope, moose).

What I am interested in is having the optic that will help in that rare instance when a big buck/bull is out there 5-600 yards and conditions dictate a shot instead of letting him walk. I also want to get away from having to kentucky windage holdover on anything beyond 350ish.

In that rare instance, a true sportsman will let him walk until he can stalk closer and insure a humane kill because CONDITIONS do not dictate the shot. Only you can do that. But that's just me.

However, as a fellow hunter, I truly do wish you all the best and also believe you will be well served by the leupold scope you are considering. I've used them for 54 years and have been more than happy with them.

My Leupold's optics were just fine for 600 yard shots; the mechanics failed twice however. If you choose a leupy and it works, you'll be a fan, if not, you'll move to a different brand. I moved to Nightforce and have no desire to ever own a Leupold scope again.

Bob, you are not allowed to speak from experience here on the campfire.

While you're throwing around references, check a few others, like what scope was on the TAC-338 for the confirmed 2100 yard kill. This one says it starts with L and wasn't a Nightforce

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2015/01/17/american-sniper-chris-kyle-rifles/

My have two concerns with the night force option...First, and I could be wrong - but I feel like I could get better glass (not mechanicals) for the price - i.e. Schmidt Bender Zenith.

Second, most models are just a little to much scope for this rifle and usage...The only one that may make sense is the 2.5-10x42 NXS.

Some reviews have compared the optics quality to the previous VX-3, and that's pretty sad, for a scope 4 times the price. One main factor is weight. Some of their scopes are twice as heavy as a comparable powered scope of another brand. Might be ok for some uses, but not for a mountain gun. I had one, and it sure was not a $1600 scope from my experiences. I was glad to sell it and the buyer was happy to get it. They are good glass, solid, and dependable, but priced because of the name on the box.

I recently got a Leupold back from the service shop after it went tits up on me. I'm not going to lose any sleep though about it. That scope seen 4 different rifles and thousands of rounds.

If you like your Conquest you might try a new HD5. I picked one up for $699 from EuroOptic a 3-15x50 with the Z800 reticle that s year and hits on Mule deer or elk vitals quickly are slam dunk now at 5 &600 yards. My cow was 550 yards away the first behind the shoulder, she turned toward me and the 2nd hit her center of the chest they had one shared exit hole.

The glass is great and the reticle fits my rifle perfectly out to 800 yards. I loved my 3-9x40 but the HD5 beats it every way possible. Leupold makes some nice hunting scopes but I really love how the Zeiss gives me a great view and superior performance.

Quote Dogcatcher223:
I am discovering that you are right dog. What's up with that?

Once a friend and I put an 18 foot Grumman canoe in Wolf River intending to make a weekend float fish/hunt trip. We had not looked at the weather report. BIG Mistake. It rained heavy rain and the river flooded. Somehow, we managed to turn the canoe over at our camp site and my friend lost a model 70 with a fixed 4 power Leupold scope on it over board and we could not find it in the muddy, flooded river.

We managed to refloat the river the next weekend when the river water had cleared up and after digging around in the sand on the bottom, found his rifle. He took it to a gunsmith to be repaired. Later the gunsmith called him and told him what all he was going to have to do and then he asked, do you want me to keep the scope while I do all of this, or do you want to come by and take it home until I finish?

My buddy said well I thought I'd just replace it because you don't do scope work. The gunsmith said, you don't need to replace it. It's okay after I rinsed all the mud and sand off of it. It works fine and there is no problem with it!

That was in 1961. I couldn't afford a Leupold scope then, but I made up my mind that if I ever could, I was gonna get one. Two years later when I was in the navy, I bought one from the ship's store because we could get them a lot less that civilians could buy them. I've still got that scope and it still works fine. I have used only Leupold scopes since then and have ALWAYS been happy with them.

That buddy of mine who dropped his rifle and scope over board introduced me to my wife of 50 years. His wife of 51 years died last year. But he and I still hunt together after all these years and he still has that same model 70 rifle and Leupold scope he dropped in Wolf River back in 1961, and it still works. So I think they are pretty good scopes.

But that's just me and what do I know?

please understand people use scopes very differently than alot of other people. If you are a set it and forget it guy a leupold is probably GREAT for you. Most guys take their gun out of the closet pop off a few rounds every fall before deer season to maybe check the scope and that is all they do. most hunting rifles probably never see 150 rounds. If that is what you do and there is NOTHING wrong with that your leupold will be just fine, so will lots of other scopes out there. Manufactures know this they are likely into the scopes cost wise less that 25% of what they retail for, so to them if 10% come back we just warranty them NO BIG DEAL.

me personally number one I have access to public land, lots of it. I spend probably a total of 30 days in the field with a couple of main rifles. shots are in your face out to well as far as you dare shoot, probably over 1000 yards. This is not counting the various other days where a trip is taken to the desert and some gongs get wacked and some rocks shot. I want to crank dials and spin turrets. return to zero and tracking are far more important than how clear the glass is. very very different uses for optics, one is intended to never see 150 rounds over its life the glass I use I want to work under my demands. I prefer nightforce. The very scope asked about here is why soon I will not own a leupold anymore. The problem in my case is a mark 4 is MARKETED to guys like me that hard use scopes. The problem is its not any different than the regular scopes they sell. it just says mark 4 and has different turrets and is priced ALOT more and advertised as being up to the challenge. its not.

I completely AGREE with you. I had not looked at it that way but there is , as you say, a big difference in what different shooters need to get out of their scopes.

Kind of thinking I like the sounds/features/options of the Zeiss Conquest HD5 3-15X42 or 3-15x50 with the 600 yard ballistic reticle.

Wal let us know what you get and how it works cause those of us who don't use that kinda equipment may one day wanna use it and we'll know what works and what doesn't.

All tha best to ya.

As long as I can make my $6-800 scope purchase look like I only spent a couple hundred to my wife - then we will be good to go!

Wal now, thar ya go fish'in up under that Dingleberry tree.

You want to learn from this. It ain't no use atall fishing under the Dingleberry Trees of life. Near 'bout ever'body gets caught under them at one time or another. It might be a bad job, a mean boss, or a foreclosing banker... or trying to lie to yer wife about what yer new gun or scope costs...but whatever the situation, remember: you ain't got to stay under the tree and get plopped on.

If I wuz yew, I'd try fish'in sumwhere else. It jist doan pay to go there.

I looked on the Zeiss ballistic calculator and your 140 AB at 3050 FPS matches the reticle very well at 15 power in a 3-15x42. Your 600 mark is supposed to be good at 626 and your 300 hash mark at 308. In a hunting situation that is right on target. I've always estimated holdover well but not as well as with hash marks.

Why not just use the turret on your Conquest? On mine I simply pull up and spin the turret to my zero mark. Then add 4 little white marks in the right place and your at 600 yds with a 200 yd zero. The turret works great on mine.

In my opinion your not upgrading with your choice and I think as you asked, yes you will be let down.




Shod

Ken,do you by chance have a picture of the mounted scope on the rifle?

Yep, Here it is:

the new VX-3i's are fantastic. All Leupold's i have owned are fantastic come to think of it. I have never had a problem with them to be honest with you. Have others? Definitely. Like all things man makes, they are not perfect and will break on occasion. Leupold is known for building the most rugged scopes out there, and their lifetime warranty and customer service back it up.

Not really sure what the complaint is about the eyebox, pretty sure Leupold's have one of the most generous eyeboxes in the market.

The CDS dials are the only way to go. Getting a dial custom cut for your rifle is something that you will not want to be without once you get one. Just dial and shoot. It's really as easy as that. No counting clicks or doing math.

I wonder just what kind of scope Cummins cowboy has on his rifles?
Maybe the question we should be asking is what scope would Cummins cowboy buy since it seems every scope out there has problems or is just plain old schit

Very nice KenMi. I bet it's a shooter. LH Tikka w/Mickey?

Started as a LH T3 30-06. Rebarreled it to 280 AI 25".

McMillan Sako Hunter LH stock. Stock was delivered about 6 weeks early from expected order time.

It was a great shooter as the 30-06 in factory form. Haven't had a chance to get to the range yet. Trying to find a day when I have time and the weather is decent hasn't been easy, and there isn't much point in shooting it inside in a 50 yard range.

I have (32) Leupold scopes [I track them with a spreadsheet].
Of those (3) are CDS.

I never use the CDS turret marks. I work in and MOA chart or put tape around the turret and mark it with a pen in yards.

I also have good scopes by:
IOR
Sightron
Burris
Redfield
USO
Unertl
Nikon
Bushnell

I have a ~50 old bad scopes taken off rifles:
Weaver K4... not bad, but in the bad box with some real bad ones.


I thought Leupold CDS were great. In 2015 I recommended them. Someone I hunt with bought one. I help him sight in the scope for different long ranges on a Rem 700 7mmRM.
At some point the turret knob got loose from the turret shaft [positioned by Allen set screws] and we had to start over.
Inside the knob scratched some of the anodizing off the scope, causing the friction that caused the counter torque that made the knob come loose.

We never got him sighted in past 300 yards, which is a shame as his groups at 300 yards were tiny.


He got a buck in 2015 anyway, despite our CDS trouble.

Jesus murphy



Now Clark, that there makes about as much sense as a soup sandwich.

And he shot an antelope with it too in 2015.
You can see the white electrical tape I put around his CDS vertical turret, marked with a black sharpie, but only finished sighting it in out to 300 yards.

IME, if you want to upgrade a Conquest you need to go with the VX-6. My favorite is the 2-12x42 and it is CDS ready.

DF