Leupolds great fixed power scopes

[pastorp]

Guess I prefer a fixed power scope. And all things considered, a leupold riflescope meets my needs. When I consider weight, optics, and durability, I think leupolds are hard to beat. I know there are riflescopes out there that excel in one area of these considerations but leupold gives me a good balance of what I need in a riflescope..
That being said my favorites are the old M8, 3x and the M8, 6x. The 3x works great for me on big game rifles and the 6x is my preference for varmint rifles. Of course I don't shoot prarie dogs. If I did I might want a 10-12x riflescope.

What's your favorites in riflescopes..

Regards,

[pruhdlr]

I have owned Leupolds for the past 35+ years. At this time I own 15'ish. I purchased my first Leupold fixed power,about a week ago. It is their 2.5X20 Ultralight. This scope was meant specifically for a NEF Handi-Rifle,chambered in 500S&W Mag.

The bbl has been chopped to 18" and the LOP reduced to 13.25". With the potential recoil of this weapon I wanted a scope with the longer eye relief(4.9")and something short and light. The reduced weight thing is for the effects of inertia. So far this combo looks like it will be perfect for the close range,fast shots,that I may encounter in the larger boar hog territory.

I have loaded and shot some 370grs at 1800fps but this weapon has the potential to launch a 440gr at that same speed. I'm still working my way up.

I consider the Leupold line of scopes high-middle of the road in optics. I do not own any of the high end stuff but probably would if I could afford them. ---pruhdlr

[Dave in WV]

I just ordered a Leupold fixed 4x with the post & duplex reticle. I have a Leupold VX-II 3x9 with the post & duplex reticle on my 30-06 aand a Pentax Lightseeker 2x8 on my .243. I really like the Pentax other than the shortish eye relief. It's ok on my .243 but was a bit short on my 30-06. Pentax/Burris has the best all around plex reticle for my likes. I have a Nikon Monarch 2x7 on my 7mm-08 and it's a really good scope but the reticle is thinner than I like these days. That's where the fixed 4x is going.

[Zachary]

I have nothing against fixed scopes.  They are (all else being equal) simpler and lighter.  However, as for the "simpler" part, some years ago the variable scopes had more problems than fixed scopes.  Today, the variable scopes (again, all else being equal) are just as reliable and durable.  As such, the only real advantage to a fixed scope is essentially just the weight, and perhaps a bit shorter (which might back a scope easier to balance and/or handle).

I think that Leupold fixed scopes are among one of the best out there.  (Then again, it also depends on the model you are talking about.)  Another fixed scope that I really like is the Nikon Monarch.  Nonetheless, I would say thta 95% of all my scopes are variable.

Zachary

[PowPow]

I love the Leupold FX-1 4x28 on my 10/22 carbine.
It is simple and compact which provides good balance for a small gun.
My 3 other scopes are Leupolds, but are VX-II's.
I use my 2-7x like a 2x fixed.

[MGMorden]

I use my 2-7x like a 2x fixed.

A lot of my guns end up that way too.  99% of the time on a variable power scope I leave all of them set to 5x all the time.  Next hunting scope I get I'm seriously considering just getting a 4x or 6x fixed. 

[PawPaw]

Most of the rifles I buy are pawn-shop fodder, so they come with scopes attached.  Some of those scopes are crap and I remove them and give them to the grandkids to play with.  Some of them are fairly nice scopes.  For example; the rifle I have on layaway right now has a Leupold 3X9 on it, and it will probably stay on that rifle.

However, the last two scopes I've bought new-in-the-box are a Nikon fixed 4X and a Weaver fixed 6X.  I put the 4X on a .30-30 and the 6X sits on my .30-06, my go-to hunting rifle.

But, I have to say that the scopes we see today, even those under $100.00, are better scopes than we saw 20 years ago, speaking strictly for the optics.  My $100.00 Nikon is a whole lot better scope than lots of the ones I've seen over the years.  In optics, as in all things, you get what you pay for, but I think that we're blessed with some really good scopes these days.   

[MGMorden]

But, I have to say that the scopes we see today, even those under $100.00, are better scopes than we saw 20 years ago, speaking strictly for the optics. 

That I can agree with.  Don't get me wrong I have had scopes that were junk, but even the cheapies these days seem to work ok.   A while back I bought a little Rossi single-shot .308.  Didn't need it, but they were on sale for $165 which I just couldn't pass up .  For that cheap of a rifle, I certainly wasn't going to throw on an uber-expensive scope.  I ended up putting a cheapy BSA scope on it.  Can't remember the exact cost, but I think it was somewhere between $40 and $60.  I've had that rifle/scope combo out to the range several times now, and it's consistently doing 1" to 1.25" groups with factory loads.  Now, granted, as a range gun I'm not THAT concerned about light transmission, and I never touch the zoom, but as far as holding zero and shooting, it's worked fine.  I actually own 3 Millet scopes (2 Buck Silvers and 1 Buck Gold) all of which were $75-100 each, and they've all worked marvelously.  Only "big name" scope that I own is an older Leupold VariX-II that I got on a used rifle.  It's certainly worked flawlessly but I have to admit that the lack of "click" adjustments on the turrets certainly was a let-down on that scope.

[bagdadjoe]

One that I would really, really like to have back is a straight 8 power Leupold matte finish I had on a first run Remington Police Sniper with a wood stock in .223.  The first time my "to be" wife ever shot a rifle she grouped a 3 shot of about 1/2" at 100.  Love that woman, love that scope, love that gun.  All that being said, I hated it when she outshot me with my own rifle. 

[Drilling Man]

  Other than target scopes, i have a 7.5x Leupold on my 22WMR, and i really like it a lot on that rifle.  I much prefer a variable scope on my big game hunting guns though.

  DM

[charles p]

I have nine Leupold rifle scopes and one pistol scope.  All are variable and spread over several generations of scopes.  My only disappointment is with a first year 3.5X14 LPS.  I think I bought it in the late 80's.  Just not worth the money and it seems heavy.  It is also the only 30mm model I own.  Great scope, but so are their other scopes at 1/2 the price I paid for the LPS.

I've sent several back to be examined - especially the two friction adjustment 3X9's I own.  Never a question or charge.  Been very satisfied.

[Dave in WV]

My Leupold 4X with a post & duplex reticle came yesterday. I got it mounted and boresighted with my laser boresighter. I'll get it zeeroed Sat. when my son goes to check his rifle.

[Reverend Recoil]

Yesterday I installed a Leupold 2.5x20 Ultralight scope with Conetrol rings and base on my Ruger No.1 9.3x74R.  This scope is light weight, compact, and very bright.  2.5x is plenty of magnification for shots less than 250 yards.  The Conetrol mounting system was a bit of a puzzle to install but I think is the best system for the Ruger No.1.  This rifle will be used on Louisiana wild hogs next month.

[pruhdlr]

I have the same scope(Leupold 2.5X(20mm)Ultralight on top of my 18" bbl'ed 500S&W Mag.

I had several of my carbines out of the safe last night cleaning all the scope lenses and happened to notice one thing re. the 2.5X. It has a heavier duplex than my Leupold shotgun/ML scopes in1-4X20mm and 2-7X33mm both with the "heavy" duplex.

This is(to me)a good--->great thing. Now I know why these 2.5X Leupolds are used quite a bit in Africa on the larger caliber bolt guns. --- pruhdlr

[cwlongshot]

Guess I prefer a fixed power scope. And all things considered, a leupold riflescope meets my needs. When I consider weight, optics, and durability, I think leupolds are hard to beat. I know there are riflescopes out there that excel in one area of these considerations but leupold gives me a good balance of what I need in a riflescope..
That being said my favorites are the old M8, 3x and the M8, 6x. The 3x works great for me on big game rifles and the 6x is my preference for varmint rifles. Of course I don't shoot prarie dogs. If I did I might want a 10-12x riflescope.

What's your favorites in riflescopes..

Regards,

AMEN BROTHER!!!

Leupold all the way. I owned others, but given time I have grown to regret the purchase everytime. Leupold has never let me down.

[pruhdlr]

Allow me to second that "AMEN BROTHER". -----PRUHDLR

[Brithunter]

Hmmm sorry folks but I have two Leupolds a M8 Compact 4x and a Vari X 111 2.5-8 and both are at best mediocre. The reticles are way too fine for most of my hunting and compared to the Pecar Champion 4x36, Lisenfeld 3-9x42, Meopta 7x50, Zeiss Jena ZF/4N, Schmidt & Bender 6x42 or the Khales 4L2 4x and even the Tasco Titan 3-9x42 is better. All except the Schmidt were brought used as I can only new afford new optics on rare occasions.

The Leupold M8 Compact will possibly go on the .22 L/R Brno Model 2  and if it does not then it will be sold as basically I have no use for it the Vari X 111 is sitting atop a Parker-Hale 1200 super in 8mm Mauser and whether to keep it or not is the question I have to find an answer too. Using the Leupold to hunt with I will lose at least 1/2 of the last light hunting due to the optic quality and light transmission compared to my other scopes.

I am hoping to be able to get a new 6x42 about Febuary time probably a Meopta and I am thinking about selling the Leupolds so I can buy a couple of the 6x42's instead of just one of them. I suppose I just have to find someone who wants them which may not be so easy as Leupolds are not that popular here it seems.

[Dave in WV]

Brithunter, you may have access to optics that are not available in the US so it's difficult to compare to what we have.

[Drilling Man]

  I would hardly call a scope mediocre because "you" can't see the crosshair, as that's a personal thing.  I happen to like the "plex" that's in a Leupold very much.

  DM

[Brithunter]

  I would hardly call a scope mediocre because "you" can't see the crosshair, as that's a personal thing.  I happen to like the "plex" that's in a Leupold very much.

  DM

Hmmm let's see a rifle scope is an aiming device and if you cannot see the reticle which provides the aiming point what use is it? I prefer the German No7 (S&B listing from their web site)  reticle which has a fine cross hair in the centre but the side and lower bars are heavy with square tips that show up in poor light. Having no heavy bar at the top does no obscure what is behind the target so makes checking for safety easier. However as I mostly have to buy used I have to take what is offered in most cases. Several of my scopes have the German No1 Tri Post reticle.

Now the Khales I have is about 50 years old and I picked it up used the Zeiss Jena's are old too as Doctor Optic now has the plant I understand the Jena's I have were made under the Iron Curtain regime and were made to fit the CZ-Brno ZKK 600 series, mine is a .308 ZKK 601,. Lisenfeld closed up upon the death of it's owner I understand but mine has been very good scope. The Meopta 7x50 is still in production and they are available in the US as of course are Schmidt & Bender. Not sure on the pricing in the US but here they took a jump in prices after the adoption of the Euro and the recent banking troubles plus I think the importers have jumped on the bandwagon and added more in their greed. So the S&B's are now out of my reach finacially. Leupolds here in the UK are stupidly priced and I can actually buy a S&B for less than a Leupold. The lenses on the Leupolds are also not as good and the magnification is nearly always under what is stated on the scope. Looking through the old Leupold catalogue I have here the Vari X 111 I have is actually a 2.6-7.8 and that's one of the closest they get.

Now I have determined that for my use and hunting a 6x42 is just about right so unless I stumble upon a real deal on a S&B 6x42 or a Zeiss or Swaroski then about Feburary I will most likely buy a new Meopta 6x42. Could do with two really  but will have to see how the finaces go and I will probably sell the M8 if I can to add what ever I get for it to the pot towards the 6x42.

[Dand]

I have an M8 3x on my pre 64 '06. Its been on there since the mid 1970s.  I don't hunt a lot with the rifle these days and if I did, I'd probably want more magnification with my aging eyes.  But I had the gun out at the range in August and fired some 1 to 1.5 inch groups with it.  Its been a reliable scope for a long time.  REally like the long eye relief too.

[Brithunter]

Dand,

           I would say that old Leupold owes you nothing now. It had paid for itself over and over a long time ago  .

 On a Husqvarna Model 46 I have it wears a Bushnell Scopechief 3X which works well too. The optics are dated as is the fine cross hair but for what I want this rifle for it's fine but then again it's not one of my main hunting rifles. If I was to go seriously hunting now with it I would probably swop the scope for something a bit better. I may consider doing so with the Pecar 3-7x36 when I get it back from a re-furb. I just got this one ($85 US) and it has spent the last 20 years in a cupboard, a damp one in Scotland by the looks of the rust spots on the steel tube. The middle lens has oil on it so it's off for a strip and clean. The scope place will send the tube back to me bare and I'll get my local smith to re-blue it the scope place can get the alloy parts stripped and re-anodised but not re-blue steel. He will also replace the fine cross hairs with a duplex reticle to make it more user friendly for me.

The re-furb will probably cost about £60-£90 ($95- $142US) and it will probably see me out then.

[cwlongshot]

Hmmm sorry folks but I have two Leupolds a M8 Compact 4x and a Vari X 111 2.5-8 and both are at best mediocre. The reticles are way too fine for most of my hunting and compared to the Pecar Champion 4x36, Lisenfeld 3-9x42, Meopta 7x50, Zeiss Jena ZF/4N, Schmidt & Bender 6x42 or the Khales 4L2 4x and even the Tasco Titan 3-9x42 is better. All except the Schmidt were brought used as I can only new afford new optics on rare occasions.

The Leupold M8 Compact will possibly go on the .22 L/R Brno Model 2  and if it does not then it will be sold as basically I have no use for it the Vari X 111 is sitting atop a Parker-Hale 1200 super in 8mm Mauser and whether to keep it or not is the question I have to find an answer too. Using the Leupold to hunt with I will lose at least 1/2 of the last light hunting due to the optic quality and light transmission compared to my other scopes.

I am hoping to be able to get a new 6x42 about February time probably a Meopta and I am thinking about selling the Leupold's so I can buy a couple of the 6x42's instead of just one of them. I suppose I just have to find someone who wants them which may not be so easy as Leupold's are not that popular here it seems.

Brit,
 Just a couple comments on this post..

You say you do not like the reticles in the Leupold scopes. Yet I have herd you comment a number of times at your affinity to the German No 1 & 7 reticles. Just so you know, Leupold is available with BOTH....

You also say you loose about a half hour of light to the Leupold compared to your other scopes. Now I understand that European hunting is different than USA (Maybe you do not?) as in many areas, your able to stay out longer and even when dark in some areas. By and large we here in the states, are not. Leupold is a USA company, making optics by and large for USA. Most states have a requirement that you be out of the woods by either sunset or half hour after it. That still plenty of light for many lesser scopes than Leupold. Just yesterday, I stretched that time a bit.  and was in my stand till just about dark. My Bausch and Laumb 7x42 binos where useless, but my VXII Leupold 2x7x32 scope (German #1 reticule) still allowed me to see quite well. In fact, I could see thru it better then with just my eyes alone. As you know, this isn't a top of the line scope, its middle of the pack at best.

You have scopes available to you, many of us have never seen. So its quite possible that they could be better. Some of the manufacturers you have named have a long standing history of making a top quality optic. But many simply are not available to us. Your requirements for a hunting scope (in Europe)are quite different than us in the states.
Another example, unrelated: The Autobahn is a far cry form any US road. A vehicle that would be too slow, under powered or not handle worth a darn. Would quite likely be head and shoulders above many of the vehicles on the road here in the US. In terms of power and handling. Does this make small under powdered and lesser handling US vehicles useless? Absolutely, ON THE AUTOBAHN. But not here. SO In comparison, I offer a scope that's head a shoulders above whats needed for use in the country its manufactured intended for use and for the users of that area is not fairly judged when used outside of that area.

JMHO,
 CW

[Brithunter]

Ok let's break this down a bit for oen thing of course the huntign and quarry is different. For one thing an awful lot of US hunters refuse to take Does. Here it's normal and the Stag/Buck and Doe seasons are usually split as the view is that to manage the population one must remove does too. Our Fallow deer are the smallest that would roughly size up with White tailed deer the Roe, CWD and Muntjac are small and even tiny with respect to the Whitetailed deer and although night shooting of deer except under special circumstances is illegal the definition of night fall is different.

I have hunted the US once back in 2003 in Northern Missouri and yes it's very different. I used the 6x42 Schmidt & Bender as why handicap myself? Already had the Leupold VX 111 for some years by then as it came on a used Ruger No1B in 300 Win mag.

Now what your missing is that to get a good, for me, reticle in a Leupold then I would have to buy new or ship my scope back to the US for adaption with the resulting cost and for all of that I can buy a much better, IMHO, scope. I just did a search for prices here and remmebr that the UK is rip off central  a VX3 4.5-14x50 works out to over $1100 US take a look :-

http://www.sportsmanguncentre.co.uk/category/Optics/Scopes/Leupold_1/
That shop prides itself on it's prices.

The CARL ZEISS Duralyt 3-12x50 is cheaper than that Leupold now honestly which would you have given that option?

[cwlongshot]

OK let's break this down a bit for one thing of course the hunting and quarry is different. For one thing an awful lot of US hunters refuse to take Does. Here it's normal and the Stag/Buck and Doe seasons are usually split as the view is that to manage the population one must remove does too. Our Fallow deer are the smallest that would roughly size up with White tailed deer the Roe, CWD and Muntjac are small and even tiny with respect to the White tailed deer and although night shooting of deer except under special circumstances is illegal the definition of night fall is different.

I have hunted the US once back in 2003 in Northern Missouri and yes it's very different. I used the 6x42 Schmidt & Bender as why handicap myself? Already had the Leupold VX 111 for some years by then as it came on a used Ruger No1B in 300 Win mag.

Now what your missing is that to get a good, for me, reticule in a Leupold then I would have to buy new or ship my scope back to the US for adaption with the resulting cost and for all of that I can buy a much better, IMHO, scope. I just did a search for prices here and remember that the UK is rip off central  a VX3 4.5-14x50 works out to over $1100 US take a look :-

http://www.sportsmanguncentre.co.uk/category/Optics/Scopes/Leupold_1/
That shop prides itself on it's prices.

The CARL ZEISS Duralyt 3-12x50 is cheaper than that Leupold now honestly which would you have given that option?

Well now, That's a whole different kettle of fish now ain't it! 

Not being able to or not able to afford a item is something I and most of us can relate to. 

Dealing with things like this are very frustrating I am sure. I wish it didn't need to be. I am very happy that I do not need to, but I see your frustrations.

Concerning harvesting of does. In many cases its not the hunters but the regulations!! For EONS the state of Pennsylvania only allowed bucks to be harvested. pennsylvania has one of the largest whitetail deer populations in the country!! They had a day or three a year called DOE DAYS. When only a doe could be harvested. this was OLD THINKING and of coarse you are correct BOTH sexes need to be harvested, but it simply was NOT ALLOWED. I don't exactly know what this has to do with optical quality but figured knowledge is power rite.

CW

[Drilling Man]

Hmmm let's see a rifle scope is an aiming device and if you cannot see the reticle which provides the aiming point what use is it? I prefer the German No7 (S&B listing from their web site)  reticle which has a fine cross hair in the centre but the side and lower bars are heavy with square tips that show up in poor light. Having no heavy bar at the top does no obscure what is behind the target so makes checking for safety easier. However as I mostly have to buy used I have to take what is offered in most cases. Several of my scopes have the German No1 Tri Post reticle.

 now out of my reach finacially. Leupolds here in the UK are stupidly priced and I can actually buy a S&B for less than a Leupold. The lenses on the Leupolds are also not as good and the magnification is nearly always under what is stated on the scope. Looking through the old Leupold catalogue I have here the Vari X 111 I have is actually a 2.6-7.8 and that's one of the closest they get.

  I agree, if "you" can't see the reticle, "you" have a problem.  Thing is, it hasn't been a problem for me.

  SO, what i'm getting out of your post is, "you" can't see the reticle in a Leupold, they cost too much there.  And that's why you won't order a Leupold with the reticle that you do like...  AND "that's why they are a mediocre scope...  got it!  

  I've used an S&B, i thought they were heavy, didn't like the reticle, cost waaaaaaaaaaaaay to much, and then i was told they don't even have a lifetime warr...  SO, i guess that makes them a "mediocre" scope for sure!  lol

BTW, We can shoot 5 does a day here, and my freezer doesn't seem to mind that i put does in it,




  DM

[Brithunter]

DM as you well know not many states in the US allow the limit you have for deer. Most seem to be on a tag system and there is also the posession limit is there not. Also you know as well as I do that influencial men like Whelan wrote about not shooting Does and a lot of Americans still think that way.

Now back to Leupolds if you like them that's fine and I do wonder how long the lifetime warrenty will last especially now that it seems some of the Leupold parts are being made in Asia and China.

Nope the Leupolds lack the light transmission and are vastly over priced at least here in the UK. Now I don't understand the weight comment about the Schmidt & Bender now I have to admit I have only had and really handled the one my 6x42 and OK it's heavier than the VX3 I have but then the 2.5-8 VX3 is a compact scope and not a full length one and in fact I had to get a step back front ring to fit the VX3 on the P-H 1200 which is a std M98 action of course. The Leupolds are trading on their past glories and need to come up into the modern world plenty of scope makes surpass them in light transmission and performance. Oh and the only scope so far that I have needed the warrenty on was a new American Simmons Master series. Two Master series Aetecs had the same fault and the Master Series pro Hunter that I got on recomendation from some American friends and I have only had it on light rifles (.222 Rem) and the windage has gone all mushy and I cannot seem to contact anyone about it. Oh this according to the paperwork has a lifetime warrenty but it does not seem to be worth the paper it's printed on.

Now I also notice that given a choice of a slightly cheaper price on a Carl Zeiss scope and a Leupold you didn't say which one would you really choose. Some how I guess you'll stick with the inferior Leupold 

[Drilling Man]

DM as you well know not many states in the US allow the limit you have for deer. Most seem to be on a tag system and there is also the posession limit is there not. Also you know as well as I do that influencial men like Whelan wrote about not shooting Does and a lot of Americans still think that way.

Now back to Leupolds if you like them that's fine and I do wonder how long the lifetime warrenty will last especially now that it seems some of the Leupold parts are being made in Asia and China.

Nope the Leupolds lack the light transmission and are vastly over priced at least here in the UK. Now I don't understand the weight comment about the Schmidt & Bender now I have to admit I have only had and really handled the one my 6x42 and OK it's heavier than the VX3 I have but then the 2.5-8 VX3 is a compact scope and not a full length one and in fact I had to get a step back front ring to fit the VX3 on the P-H 1200 which is a std M98 action of course. The Leupolds are trading on their past glories and need to come up into the modern world plenty of scope makes surpass them in light transmission and performance. Oh and the only scope so far that I have needed the warrenty on was a new American Simmons Master series. Two Master series Aetecs had the same fault and the Master Series pro Hunter that I got on recomendation from some American friends and I have only had it on light rifles (.222 Rem) and the windage has gone all mushy and I cannot seem to contact anyone about it. Oh this according to the paperwork has a lifetime warrenty but it does not seem to be worth the paper it's printed on.

Now I also notice that given a choice of a slightly cheaper price on a Carl Zeiss scope and a Leupold you didn't say which one would you really choose. Some how I guess you'll stick with the inferior Leupold 

  We do have a bag limit, 5 a day until the end of this season...   But, then again, we will have a couple more seasons coming too.  lol  Some states have no bag limits at all, so.....

  As for Leupolds, for a guy that hasn't had many, you sure seem to know a lot about them.  Thing you are missing is, those of us that have had a LOT of them, have a different opinion.  Better yet, i choose to go by my OWN personal experience of the many years i have used them in the bush.  If they were as bad as you say, there would be a lot of big game still wondering around that got in my sights.  lol

  As for my own personal use for serious hunting, i buy Leupolds, or Conquest, depending on how it will be used.

  DM

[cwlongshot]

DM,
 Some guys there is just no teaching.  If you don't listen, you cannot learn. Brit doesn't want to listen, so he must have reached his sum total of knowledge. The plain truth is he is entitled to his opinion.

That's OK there will be more Leupold for people who know and appreciate a quality scope.  I'll keep my "inferior" scope and LOVE IT, thank you very much. 

CW

[pruhdlr]

Bought my first Leupold in 1976. Now I own 16 of them including the one that I bought in '76. Never a problem with any of them.

Sent 3 of them back for a reticle change. Back to me in under 2 weeks. I much prefer to learn from expierance vs. word of mouth sometimes trasmitted by someone that is either inexpieranced or has a agenda.

I will stick with Leupold. ---pruhdlr