Hunting Washington Forum
Equipment & Gear => Scopes and Optics => Topic started by: hambone on January 24, 2010, 08:18:13 PM
-
i am going to buy a new scope for my 7 mm short mag. i am going with a leupold 3x9x50 vari. x 2 just want here some pros and cons on this scope. i have owned my old scope for 28 years it is a leupold 3x9x40 going to put it on my old 30-06.
-
no cons on a leupy scope. Although you might check out the new Redfield scopes that Leupold is building now. They have a 3-9x50 for about 219.00 with a ballistic reticle. www.redfield.com
-
An older Vari-X II or the new VX-II? Is a difference.
Downside is weight of the 50mm objective plus the extra height of the scope due to the large objective. Is a good scope, but for a VX-II price, there are other, better scopes out there. Personally I'd go with a 40mm with higher quality glass/coatings.
-
I agree with what Tony 270wsm said, stick with the 40mm objective lens. Another consideration is a rifle scabbard if your ever on a horse hunt, that big objective lens is not as easy to get in and out of standard horse scabbards. 40mm gives plenty of light gathering ability. But other than that, the only scope I ever buy is leupold when buying new. I do have a Burris fullfieldII on my 25-06 and it's a plenty good scope as well.
-
hambone, any VX-II or Vari-X II in 3x9, is a great lifetime warranty scope. 40mm or 50mm is your choice. Personally, I don't see how the pro's outweigh the cons on the 50mm. Great scope choice, as it sounds like you have been down this road 28 years ago. ;)
-
The VX-II 3x9x40 is one of my favorites. I dont care for a 50MM Obj. on a hunting rifle.
-
Consider upgrading to a VX3 3.5-10x40mm. I think you'll like the 10 power with the 7 short mag.
http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shooting/products/scopes/vx-3-riflescopes/vx-3-3-5-10x40mm/ (http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shooting/products/scopes/vx-3-riflescopes/vx-3-3-5-10x40mm/)
-
-Hard to argue w/ Leu quality or warranty.
-Go w/ a 40 or 42 mm obj.
-Look at the Zeiss Conquest 3x9 at Cabelas. At 399$ it is far and away 1 of the best values in a scope available.... you'll likely be paying 550$ for that scope next year.
-Look at Vortex Viper... superior glass and optics to the VXII, at arond 300$ it's the real deal.
-
no real cons as to the quality or service of leupold, i have several leupold products and couldnt be happier. my only gripe is that i think that they are way too proud of their stuff. friend of mine bought a VXII 3-9x40 here a short ways back when i compared his new leuy to the my nikon buckmaster 4.5-14x40 the only difference i saw was in the price tag, he paid almost double what i got my nikon for from the same shop. not plugging nikon here, just saying i think you can find glass that is extremely similar if not better for less than what leupold wants.
Steve
-
I do not think you can go wrong with a Leupold.That said I would look at the Zeiss conquest,far superior glass!I went to Kesselrings a few years ago to get a new Leupold and looked through both and went with the Zeiss and never looked back to Leupold!Jerry
-
buy a burris instead, a simple test on the two scopes. take both scopes and look at the sun or bright light and watch leupold crosshairs fade away. same price, same warranty. i have owned them all and tested hundreds of different scopes. just buy the best optics you can offord and enjoy!
-
Leo's are good glass, but I have to agree with elkaholic123. I to went with the Zeiss ( now I have 4 of them ) and will never go back.
You have to get what YOU want and what looks good to you, not what everyone else tells you to get. :twocents:
-
I have leupy on all of my guns, love the quality, warranty and customer service.....plus made in the good 'ol u.s. of a
-
I topped my varmint rifle with that exact scope last year. 3-9X50. I LOVE the 50mm. I will never buy another scope for varmint huning that is not 50mm. The low light conditions/night is amazing compares to 40mm. Now for big game hunting it may be a little bulky. :dunno: Sweet scope though. You can never go wrong with Leopold.
I sent back a pair of 10+ year old binos that wend double vision cause I dropped them. I did not expect much more than a repair. Well, 7 days after I shipped them, I had a brand new upgraded pair at my door. No questions asked. Gotta love the no fault warranty, not many companies will match their service.
-
i have a winchester model 70 featherweight .270 wsm and put the exact same scope on. i absolutely love it. the weight difference with the 50mm is not noticable to me at all. i think your makin a good choice.
-
o
I have 6 of the leupold scopes, 4 older and 2 newer, the last 2 scopes I puchased were Vortex Viper and they are awesome for the $'s. Last year 2008
I was looking to buy a new set of bino's 10x40 or so and thought about going with leupold in the gold ring since I already have a pair of 10x28 gold ring about 16 yrs. old and still great. I did some investigating and found that Leu. had changed their warranty from unconditional to lifetime, which means now if it is found to be the owners fault you pay for parts, the products purchased before the chaange is grandfathered to the original warranty. A Leupold rep. and Mike at the Outdoorsman in Phoenix Az 800-291-8065, said this was changed about 3 yrs. ago. I bought the Vortex razor 10x42 and they,re great and the scopes also. The warranty is unconditional, drop them off a cliff and they will replace at no charge. If anyone finds this to be bull-shat let me know cause I haven't called Leupolds main office. :dunno:
-
The only thing I don't like about 50MM objective lense is that you'll likely have to run high or extra high rings to clear the barrel which has never been comfortable to me trying to look through. I think the lower the scope the more comfortable it is and the more solid.
-
I know there pricey but I have a VXL 3.5 x 50 on my 300wsm and its awesome! I run a low Dednutz one piece on it. The light gathering is amazing compared to my 40's. The height is more than manageable, its a tad wider, and my cheekweld is perfect.
-
I have a VXIII on my Tikka with a 50mm. I was able to pull it off using medium base rings. The bell clears the barrel by about 1mm. It looks frickin sweet. If I could, Id put 50mm on all my rifles. I convinced wastickslinger to put a 50mm on his VTR and I think he agrees with me. Just having a greater amount of light that enters is a plus too.
MS
-
I have a VXIII on my Tikka with a 50mm. I was able to pull it off using medium base rings. The bell clears the barrel by about 1mm. It looks frickin sweet. If I could, Id put 50mm on all my rifles. I convinced wastickslinger to put a 50mm on his VTR and I think he agrees with me. Just having a greater amount of light that enters is a plus too.
MS
:yeah:
-
It totally depends on the rifle and the barrel and everything. I've got a 50mm scope on my 22-250 encore barrel and it barely clears(maybe 1mm) the AO dial on the front objective lense.
-
I own around 15 VariXIII / VXIII's. Half are the 40mm and half are the 50mm. I can hardly tell the difference on the light gathering capabitities of either. Both are excellent quality. Other than the 50's looking nice on a few of the bigger style rifles, I don't have much need for them. In my opinion, the 30mm tube instead of the 1" plays a bigger role than the objective MM.
-
I have both leupold VXIII and VariXIII,in same powers, 3.5X10 and 4.5X14, but 40mm on some and 50 on some. I cant tell the difference looking thru them, light wise, I see no difference in brightness, I prefer the low mount of the 40, but admit I have used those more. I got the 50's in misc gun trades etc, personally I'd never pay more for a 50mm.
my 2
Carl
-
I would almost always opt to spend my dough on better glass rather than more of it.... especially on a big game rifle. Plus the added weight and size is a pain (flying, scabbards, cases, and just hunting w/ em).
-
thanks guys for the input i havent made my mind up yet got till monday. then i am going to make up my mind and go buy one before the wife changes her mind she ask me why i hadnt done it yet took 3 months before i bought my last binos. checked a lot of places before i bought them i always try to to find the best deals . has any one heard or read about the new redfields are they comp to the vari x 1 or more like the rifleman class. again thanks.
-
I have 50's and 40's. I would get the 40 if doing it next time. Less bulk, negligible difference in optics. Less glass to keep dry.
-
Talked to a Leupold rep. in Wenatchee Friday about the new Redfield Revolution scopes. He said they're the best buy on the market right now because within a year the price will be 25% higher. He said the low price is to gain market share for Redfield in a tight market for a lower priced higher quality scope. We went outside to look through a 4x12x40 and I thought it was very clear with sharp edges and great color rendition. Comparing with the VXI, I thought it just as good maybe better. Also compared it to the Nikon Pro Staff and Buckmaster, I thought it was clearer than the Pro and right up with the Buckmaster. The reticle system is awesome and eliminates holdover guess work. Back in the early 70's the Redfield was a good scope and it looks like with Leupold making the decisions, they are again. :) :)
-
I haven't looked through the new Redfields. The independant reviews I've read have been mixed. The price is certainly attractive. I believe I would opt to spend a lil more and go with a more proven product. :twocents:
-
Like Jamieb said, I like the 3x9x40 VX-II. If you have a few extra $$, look a the VX-III's or a 4-12x42 instead of a 50. Cant go wrong with Leupold!
-
I have a Sightron SII 3-9X42 Big Sky, and can't get enough of it. American design, Made in Japan, a new US company that takes it seriously... Apparently, they have the same glass supplier like Leupold.
I also use VX-II (have a couple of them, newer ones) and like them a lot. I would give a notch to Sightron, over the VX-II...
-
I'll stick with Leupold. I know their track record as far as honoring their Life Time Warranty.
-
:yeah: I am NOT a sightron fan! I am glad they work well for many good sportsmen, but NOT me.
