BigGameHunt.net Hunting Forums

[whitewateripper]

I was talking to a friend thats an avid hunter and he says the only differnce between the Leupold VX 1, 2, and 3 is the thickness of the gold ring... is that true? I will be getting a Leupold scope and was thinking VX 2 or 3 but if they are all the same but the gold ring I will just get the VX 1. What is the differnce between all 3 and is the VX 3 worth the extra money then the 1 and 2. I was thinkin 3x9x40ish scope

[Hammer1]

If you go to Leupold website, www.leupold.com you can search their entire site and compare. Saying that, I don't think Leupold make a scope that is not of great quality.
Scope quality is more than a shinny ring or a buck decal on turret cap. the quality is within
Just check out the line of Schmidt & Bender scopes. They are the ugliest thing on the market,tougher than a boiled owl and priced a couple of grand above the "pretty ones".
Quality of all scopes lies within...........

[Unit5A]

I'm not exactly a scope "expert", but I do own a VX2 3x9. It's been on the same rifle for about 16 years (give or take) and is as good as the day I bought it. Through rain, snow, a couple of hard drops, hot deserts, and freezing temps, it has always been crystal clear and right on when I needed it. Each year before hunting season I go to the local range to make sure it is still "sighted in", and have never had to make an adjustment because something shifted internally or whatever. My only adjustments have been for different ammunition selection. During this time my hunting partners have replaced their other cheaper brand scopes at least once for various reasons.
I'm not saying that it's the best scope in the world, I wouldn't know. I think there are plenty of fine scopes out and about. However I can say my Leupold has performed for me, and I wouldn't hesitate to buy another.
I'd have to disagree on the quality comment.

[whitewateripper]

So is the VX3 worth the extra 160 dollars for a 3.5x10 or will a VX2 or even a VX1 work at a 3x9 for shots pushing 350-400 yards

[Unit5A]

I don't have any actual hunting experience with the VX3 or VX1, however one of the partners previosly mentioned did buy a VX3. He shoots a 7mm mag with the BOSS System and hand loads his ammunition for precise accuracy. I have been at the range with him numerous times and frankly am quite amazed at the groups he shoots.
It sounds like you want to be able to do long range shooting like he does. I have to admit that I never have attemted to shoot game at that range (350+), but one of the reasons he bought the VX3 was for longer ranges. It was worth it for him, and he loves it.
So, if you want stronger magnification, be able to make finer adjustments, and money isn't a problem go for it? I have never seen a VX1so can't comment.

PS- not that it's a major issue, but I wish I had the matte finish.

[ChesterGolf]

The new names for the scopes get confused with the old names. Unit5A mentioned owning a VX2 for 16 years. The scope he is referring to is the Vari-X2 (commonly called VX2 which has been in production only a few years)which is now the new VX1. The new VX2 is a cross between the old Vari-X2 and Vari-X3 and has multi-coat lenses and click adjust elev. and windage. The new VX3 is another step up from the old Vari-X3 because of better optics and other sought after features to command the premium price. Confusing???

In a nut shell the The old Vari-x2 and new VX1 are the same scope. VX2 would be next in quality, Vari-X3 after that and VX3 is a step above that. I went with the new VX2 because I thought is was a good comprimise between price and quality and still give me the features I was looking for. I personally don't see the difference between it and my Vari-x3 on my varmint rifle. I know this sounds as clear as mud but I hope this helps.

[whitewateripper]

I dont plan on making those long shots most will prolly be 100-200+ yards but if i had a shot at 350 yards I wouldnt mind a scope that kept up with that but it sounds like a VX2 will work unless the VX1 isnt much differnt in quailty

[ChesterGolf]

There is quite a step between the VX1 and VX2. The VX2 has multicoated lens, click adjustment, better glass. The VX1 is still a fine scope but is a no frills scope in todays market. It is still the extremely tough scope that made Leupold so popular and still has an unbeatable warranty. Either way, the scopes will last you a lifetime and be reliable in all extreme conditions.

[bnow0707]

Buy the best scope you can afford. It affords you extra light in low light conditions. I have a VX-III 3.5-10x50 and I wouldn't settle for less on my everyday rifle.

[Unit5A]

ChesterGolf,
Thanks for straightening me out, I was refering to the Vari-X 2. Like I said, I'm no expert. One of the reasons is probably that my Leupolds have been so good for me, that I haven't had to do much scope shopping. :thumbsup1:
A little history here- My Dad used to say "If you have a limited amount of money, buy a cheap rifle and a good scope"!

[alsatian]

I am not an expert.

I think the principle difference between the 1, 2, and 3 variants in the Leupold VX line is in the quality of the optics. As has been said, the great Leupold warranty applies to all of these scopes. I don't think lower quality scope tube bodies, lower quality reticles, etc., are used in the VX-I versus the VX-III. It may well be that the cross hair adjustments are different between the VX-I and the other VXs -- for example the VX-III has 1/4 MOA click adjustments and the VX-I may have continuous turn adjustments or 1 MOA click adjustments, but I'm only guessing. Read the product literature on the Leupold web site for these details. As far as optics qualities, there are a variety of optics "tricks" that are employed in the VX-III that make it more expensive and make the optics "higher quality." Special coatings reduce the reflectance of light off optical surfaces, thereby increasing the pass-through of light -- making the scope brighter, more able to see in dark or low light conditions. Special coatings may be used to correct color dispersion faults of glass optics (different wavelength light bends differently through a medium interface, and therefore colors get spread out -- a fault when uncorrected, even if a minor fault). So the higher quality optics of the higher end scopes provide (1) better low light performance and (2) crisper, sharper image which may be especially useful at longer range.

It bears keeping in mind that no scope is perfect -- not even the highest dollar scopes -- and there may be a point beyond which paying more money for higher quality does not produce a discernible performance improvement in the hunting field. Each hunter will have to determine where that point occurs.

I have heard a rule of thumb that as much money should be spent on the scope as on the rifle itself. This rule should not be considered to be a hard and fast rule but rather to give the hunter pause to reflect on where he is putting his equipment priorities. Even a cheap modern rifle is likely to provide sufficient accuracy for big game hunting. But the limit of the hunter's ability to target his game at long range, in low light, may be the limiting factor in accurately shooting his rifle. Therefore it makes zero sense to spend a gazillion dollars on a high quality rifle and put a cheap scope on the rifle.

I have spent $475 to put a VX-III on a $295 Remington ADL synthetic stocked .30-06. My rationale? This is my back-up rifle and my foul weather rifle. If I am on an out-of-state hunt and have to rely on my back-up rifle because the first string rifle has been damaged -- fell out of the truck late at night arriving at the hotel exhausted from a long drive, for example -- do I want a low grade scope on this rifle? Probably not. I have spent $475 to put a VX-III on a substantially more valuable custom rifle -- thus, in that case I'm not observing the equal money on scope and rifle rule of thumb in this case -- but in my judgment the VX-III is more than enough performance for any hunting situation I can imagine.

Hope these comments help just a little.

[tim]

whitewaterripper

How do you prefer to rip the whitewater?

raft or kayak


me i prefer the kayak.

tim

[WesternHunter]

All Leupold scopes are built to the same quality, accuaracy, and durability standards. All models!! The only difference between the different models are the added and extra features (i.e. parellax adjust, MOA adjustments) and the lens coatings. Also the highest end model has a one piece tube. Many people claiming to be "in-the-know" have said that the lower priced Leuplod "Rifleman" scope is a starter model. Not the case at all. I repeat, Not the case at all!!! In fact the new Rifleman is actually the original Vari-X II scope in matte with a wide duplex reticle that has been renamed, and that's all. I 've been big game hunting for 20 years and recently put a 2-7X33mm Rifleman scope on my .270 WCF Winchester Model 70 Featherweight. It's a great match for that light rifle. That's all the magnification in a scope that I've ever needed for big game hunting, and I keep it set at 5X. It's a scope that serves my needs for that particular rifle.

You can't go wrong with Leupold. They are excellent scopes. Very clear too, regardless of standard-coated or multi-coated lenses. All my rifles wear Leupolds (various models) and have never been disappointed. Don't consider the VX-III to be an upgrade to a VX-II or VX-I, because it really comes down to what features serves your needs. The VX-III scopes are great for varmit shooters and long range target shooters. I think they have too many features to be useful or practical for big game hunting, though they will serve equaly well for it.

Here's a general guide of what I'd recommend for a big game hunting scope: Pick one that serves your needs. Keep in mind that your needs may be different from others. Also a scope is never used for glassing anything. Keep in mind what a scope is intended for - too aim the rifle precisely.
Go with a 2X to 7X magnification. You should need no more than 9X magnification for hunting. Objective lense no larger than 40mm, infact smaller ones of 32mm or 33mm work very well. Don't worry about having all the bells and whistles on a scope. The simpler the better. Keep in mind that magnification of 10X or more are great for benchrest shooting, but in the field they lead to too narrow field of view, a very bad thing to have if a quick follow-up shot is needed on an animal. Too shakey of a sight picture since movement gets magnified too. You also get less brightness with high power. Too many new shooters and hunters have way more equipment than they really know how to use. The rifle should wear the scope. If your scope looks like it wears the rifle, then you have too much scope. :[-X

[Don Fischer]

Damn that was good! Only thing I could add is that for big game hunting, you should never need more than 4x but at times, 6x would be nice. 2-7X is greatly under rated.

Hope you plan on posting some more, welcome aboard.

[redrider]

I think I'll go buy a Leupold right now. That was some great inspiration :lol: