3.5-10x40 vs. 2.5-8x36

Eyebox ease of use, any difference?

Lowlight, any real difference?

I have a rifle that needs a set and forget scope. I owned a VX3 2.5-8 many years ago. Not sure if the VX3i is changed. I rarely shoot far while hunting. I do climb steep mountains and have a very strong dislike for heavy rifles. Also considering FXII and FX3 6x but they are stuck with that nearly useless wide duplex reticle. Prefer to avoid additional cost of custom shop order.

Oh good lord, you just had too didn’t ya.. haha

I have both, love both, 2.5-8 on my meat n taters killin rifle.

Ha, not exactly the darlings of the ‘fire.

This is just for a Mtn climbing, killing rifle. Zero at 200 and hunt. Simple.

Yep that’s how I roll, you’ll be happy with either

I have the VX3i 2.5-8 on a 6.8 SPC and had the VX3 3.5-10 on a 308 and it worked fine, but moved that scope to a 338WM, but have yet to fire that rifle. I can't tell the difference in glass from the 3 and 3i. Have not had any problems with them yet. I generally don't hunt at last light, but have no problems at first light.

I did have 2 of the VX3 4.5-14x40 scopes but sold both of them as I did not like how the eye box shrunk as I turned up the power. Had to keep changing cheek to stock placement, plus they were too much for woods hunting here in KY.

prm, 2.5-8X36 for me and my boss.

I liked the 3.5-10 I had, but didn't keep it long enough to see how long it would hold up. I chose it because of the ER and long mounting surface, helpful with a Number 1.

I ran the knobs a few times before mounting it and had none of the usual bullet hole chasing when I sighted it in.

PRM: If I could only have one scope, it would be a Leupold 2.5X8X36 with the B&C reticle. They are small, compact and since I'm not a turret twister, they work for me. I've had them on just about every caliber from the 375 H&H on down. I used to think I needed more X, but it just wasn't so. I also like the old Zeiss 3X9X36MCs but they are no longer made. As to the 3.5X10s, I have one of those as well and I see no difference in light transmission when compared accordingly (objective size X power setting, etc). I will leave you with one more thought that I've posted before; The owner of the hunting site, Accurate Reloading, does a LOT of hunting, a LOT, especially in Africa. He uses his own caliber, a 404 necked down to 375. His scope of choice? Leupold 2.5X8X36 and this guy can afford anything. I've owned just about every brand except NightForce and while I realize and respect guys like Formilidious and others who accurately and honestly reported issues with Leupold, their applications are entirely different than mine. j

Well said, jorge.

I've used both and still have a 3.5-10. I also own a couple of Swarovski V3's the 3-9X36 is used for a set and forget hunting rifle set up. If I always had the extra scratch laying around I'd opt for one of theses every time I think they weigh about 12oz. have a couple of the3-10X42's also. Always an amazing difference when i look through one and then pick up the comparable Leupold. YMMV but Think either choice would be great. I prefer the slightly slimmer 2.5-8 for balance almost always on a hunting weight rifle.

My 2 all time favorite scopes. I’ve got several of both and would have a hard time picking the best version. Mine are all from the early ‘90s thru about 2006 and have been absolutely solid. Bought 2 of the new versions past couple years and they puked early on so after a trip back to Leupold I sent them down the road. I’ve got enough
older versions to cover my needs. For the OP’s intended use I’d go with the 2.5-8 version just because it’s a bit lighter and smaller. I’m like Jorge, set it and forget it, no knob twisting or ultra long range shooting for me.

FYI, We have a few 3.5-10x40 Duplex for $299.99 and 3.5-10x50 Duplex for $399.99. Give a call

Thanks for the inputs. It is all about the application as Jorge and others have noted. I have a rifle I want to be able to dial for elevation. It has a 3-9 SS. Love that scope for that purpose. The rifle I’m rescoping now (84M) has been around the world and been the rifle I’ve used for the majority of the animals I’ve killed. Putting some thought into what I actually need for hunting, it is apparent that dialing for long shots is not it. For whatever reason, I don’t end up with long shots. Not against it, just doesn’t happen. I’ve needed to pick a gap to fur at 60yds through branches ten times for every one shot opportunity beyond 200. I’ve never gone home empty handed because the rifle wasn’t set up to shoot at some longer range.
This Mulie season I had a shot around 300 but tall grass and aspen tree branches were in the way and I couldn’t get a solid position. That was on me, not the rifle/scope. Did pass on some better bucks that I had easy shots on in the 100-135 yd range. So, combine my reality with the fact that heavy scopes annoy me, and I’ve decided to go back to something lighter on this rifle for a package that suits what I do. I have a field I can spend a lot of time working on shooting from field positions that keep me above the grass, logs, rocks, and bushes. If I can quickly execute those shots to 250, and to 300 with a little time to settle down, I will have 99.9% of my shots covered and do so with a lightweight mountain hunting rifle that I prefer. I’ve ordered a 2.5-8 and may pick up a 6x too.

prm; does your 3x9 SS have those tall turrets? back to the Leupold, I've had good luck with the 2.5X8 and the B&C reticle. It plain works, you just have to calibrated to the caliber/MV you are going to use with it. I have it on my 300 Weatherby and on a 308. Obviously the stadia wires zero at different ranges, but once you figure it out, they are spot on.

My 3-9 SS does have tall turrets. Not a fan of that but I understand why they are that way. If they made a “Hunter” version of that scope (capped windage, lower el turret, tweaked reticle, quick focus, and a little lighter) I’d use them exclusively.

For the 2.5-8, (and many others) Leupold has in their wisdom decided to use only duplex reticles...sigh. I don’t want to go through the hassle and cost of having it made custom. At least the 2.5-8 doesn’t use the wide duplex like the 6x. I’ll just zero at 200 and then shoot a lot so I know exactly where to hold and can do so quickly.

Yep but boy oh boy, they sure wanna strenuously impress upon the guys that like em, how fuucked up leupold is....

Is there a better deal for $299?

Give a call and we can discuss different options.

Take a quick Click/Peek here for some Weekend Deals

You'll love the 2.5-8x36. I have one on my 338 Federal w/B&C reticle and one on a 257 Roberts w/duplex reticle. I have several 3.5-10x40's also but for what you described the 2.5-8x36 sounds perfect.

I agree with Jorge's comment. My Leupolds have been totally reliable. But I'm just a hunter not a scope critic

The B&C reticle is perfect, IMO and many of mine have it. Last year I ordered out 2 of the 6x36 scopes from the custom shop in order to get the LRD, which is basically the same except has the dots for the 2nd and 3rd aiming points. They seem to calibrate perfectly with all of the rifles I use them on, from a 270 thru 300mag and the 30/06. The slower cartridges like the 06 work out with the main cross hair zeroed at 200, then the next is on at 300 and the last at 400. Faster numbers can be zeroed at 250-300yds and then be on in 100yd increments for the lower aim points. It's the best of all worlds if you're not a knob twister and want it simple. I rarely have to shoot over 400yds and most times are well under that so these reticles work plenty fine enough for me and several of my friends. I'd highly recommend ordering the scope with it.

Leupold will do anything other low end scopes will do. Nothing wrong with hunting a Leupold

I have used the Leupold 2.5-8x36 more then any other scope and one was used on my .338 Winny since they first came out. I used the standard duplex as a "set & forget" scope. I gave my old one to a grandson for a 338-06 I made up for him. I switched to a Nightforce 3-10x40 SHV this year on the .338, as I want to try dialing to 600 yards.

I have the new VX3i version on a little Husky Lite ought six and the 3.5-10x40 on my old Mod. 70 Featherweight ought six. Both are good "set & forget" scopes. I don't think Leupold has a very good reputation if one wants to twist turrets and I personally no longer trust them to do it. But, for Alaska and my hunting they work fine as a "set & forget".

I don't think Leupold's Custom Shop offers the B&C reticle for the 2.5-8x36 any more, but a call to them is the most reliable way to find out. A friend of mine is a hard core sheep hunter and uses the B&C reticle in a Leupold 4.5-14x40 on his .270. He loves the reticle and scope and is good to go out to 500 yards with it.

They do offer it out of the custom shop. I have one on order.

I would have liked the LR Duplex, i had one on an FXII 6x. But I’ll see how the duplex works. As long as I can see it in the dark timber at first and last light all will be well.

The 2.5-8x is my all-time favorite scope. I have several. Light, dependable with a great power range. I have one on a couple of my favorite rifles, including this customized Ruger 77.
Bob

The 3.5-10 is easier to fit on a long action because of its longer tube.

For what it's worth, I currently own a Leupold VX-3i 3.5-10x40mm and it's a great scope. That being said, the 2.5-8x is about an ounce lighter. I do a lot of hunting in relatively open areas and I haven't taken a shot on a big game animal inside 200 yards in years. Since you do a lot of climbing and want a really light rifle, I recommend going with the 2.5-8x then. I'm sure it will still treat you well.

Great advice!

I have the 3.5 x 10’s on several rifles. They are great scopes. I’ve never had a 2.5x8.

Call today for VX3i Duplex
3.5-10x40's for $299.99
3.5-10x50's for $399.99
Doug
516-217-1000

I have the 2.5-8x with B&C reticle on my .25 bob, and the 3.5-10x CDS with windplex reticle on my 6.5 creed.

Bad answer - you'd luv either one.

Wow! an ounce lighter, a whole ounce?

I have several of both, although only the 3.5-10 in the "i" version. They are both good set and forget scopes and quite light. Either will work well. I think the choice has to do with whether you think a little more magnification for longer shots is worth an ounce and a half in weight.

Like most everybody else here who doesn't dial for hunting, all my lightweight hunting rifles have Leupold 2.5-8's. And I have every generation of them. Yes, the older Vari-X Leupold's do seem to be more likely to adjust accurately. I like the magnification range of the 2.5-8's--they seem to be the most useful for hunting in the country I find myself hunting in. I killed this year's bull at 50 yds, but there was a chance I might break out on the side of a canyon and see an eligible critter at 400 across the way. And like Jorge, I've been transitioning all my scopes to a ballistic reticle as I can afford it or if they are eligible according to Leupold. I'm not ever going to shoot at big game beyond 500 yds and even then conditions have to be very much in my favor.

Also, the lighter weight and probably more importantly the smaller size of the 2.5-8 makes the rifle so much easier to carry and better handling--especially when crawling through thick-azz timber trying to jump shoot elk........

Guys have spent a lot of money to lose an ounce off a rifle.