I always bought bushnell or simmons and then they started to malfunction so i went with Nikon prostaffs and vortex crossfires. I am possibly buying a marlin 45-70 to replace my cva single shot and want to do it right this time around. I was thinking about putting a Nikon prostaff 2-7 BDC or 3-9 (already have) on it but recently found a leupold 3-9 vx1 for about $140 and the 2-7 is about $170. is it worth the extra cost for the leupold or would the Nikon suffice? just using for the week long ohio gun season and some reloading development.
is leupold worth it?
- Thread starter Axis II
- Start date
- Status
I dont feel the vx-1s or Rifleman to be steps up from the nikon prostaff.
In that magnification range and cost i like the burris 2-7.
Another scope that might be worth the look are the bushnell ultraHDs in 1.5-5x32. I have that (shotgun scope version) scope on my .458 socom and it has worked excellently. The hash marks actually track my particular loads pretty well even.
Ive also had very good luck with the now discontinued Brunton Eterna 1.75-5x20, i actually think i prefer the 1-4/5s on these types of rifles better than the 2-7 or 3-9s. They are usually a tad smaller, the eterna being an anomaly with its huge occular bell.
In that magnification range and cost i like the burris 2-7.
Another scope that might be worth the look are the bushnell ultraHDs in 1.5-5x32. I have that (shotgun scope version) scope on my .458 socom and it has worked excellently. The hash marks actually track my particular loads pretty well even.
Ive also had very good luck with the now discontinued Brunton Eterna 1.75-5x20, i actually think i prefer the 1-4/5s on these types of rifles better than the 2-7 or 3-9s. They are usually a tad smaller, the eterna being an anomaly with its huge occular bell.
grampajack
AR Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,714
Didn't we just do this?
OP, I would suggest looking at this thread: https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/sorry-for-more-rookie-scope-questions.823253/ We pretty much covered everything in that one, and then some.
I for one was very persuaded to try the Minox VZ3. I don't have a need for one right now, but I'm already looking for excuses to buy a rifle that needs a good 3-9 deer scope. I mean, everybody needs a deer rifle don't they, even if they haven't been hunting in over a decade?
OP, I would suggest looking at this thread: https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/sorry-for-more-rookie-scope-questions.823253/ We pretty much covered everything in that one, and then some.
I for one was very persuaded to try the Minox VZ3. I don't have a need for one right now, but I'm already looking for excuses to buy a rifle that needs a good 3-9 deer scope. I mean, everybody needs a deer rifle don't they, even if they haven't been hunting in over a decade?
which burris? I will never own bushnell again. they screwed me on a shotgun scope/yes it was a banner-that broke after 5 sight in shots and ended up making me shoot a deer in the rear quarter. found out the back lens broke and would hold zero. they blamed me asking if i dropped it.
eastbank
Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2009
- Messages
- 5,020
i bought several 3x9 leupold verix-1,s at grices store in pa for 149.00+tax, and they are very good tough scopes with 1/4" clicks instead of friction adjustments. i put one on a rem sps in .260 rem and like it. i ask if the 3x9 verix-1,s had the same no fault warrenties as the higher priced leupold scopes and was informed yes they did and as i have higher end leupold scopes that was enough for me to buy them. your money, your choice. eastbank.
Berger.Fan222
Member
Never regretted buying a Leupold. Regretted the other brands every time.
grampajack
AR Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,714
And they accused me of being a fanboy! Glad to see I'm in good company.
Ironically, though, I'm not a huge Leupold fan in the grand scheme of things. I constantly find myself recommending Colt and Leupold, though, even though I'm not a huge fan of either one. If we were talking $1k + scopes I would definitely recommend somebody else, just like if we were talking $1k + guns I wouldn't be recommending Colt, Glock, etc. But if you want a $200 scope or a $700 dollar AR your options are just kind of limited if you want any semblance of quality. People think that's being a fanboy, but it's just the way the cookie crumbles. It's like that with everything, though.
Last edited:
Leupold offers several levels. When introduced the Rifleman WAS a VX-1, but with limited options to keep costs down. In 2012 Leupold upgraded all their scopes except the Rifleman. A VX-1 made since 2012 is just an older VX-2 with different labels on it. A lot of scope for around $200. The Rifleman is still the same scope. The VX-1 is much better, and only a little more expensive. The current VX-2 is essentially an older VX-3 and is the sweet spot for Leupold products IMHO. For $300-$350 you can get as much scope as most will ever need. I'd not feel a bit handicapped with a VX-1, but I can afford the VX-2 and prefer it.
Once you get to the $400-$500 price level of the VX-3 I think there may be better options.
Within the same price range the quality of the glass is essentially the same regardless of brand. Leupolds claim to fame is a much more rugged scope. On a 45-70 I'd go Leupold to stand up to the recoil. In fact a fixed power is even more rugged. One other scope to consider is the Burris FF-II. They have a reputation for ruggedness as well and the glass is pretty decent. In fact if buying at MSRP I prefer the Burris over the VX-1. But if you can get a VX-1 at that price it is hard to go wrong. Other advantages of Leupold are lighter weight and much longer eye relief.
I'll add one small bit of advice. Make sure the VX-1 is current production. It is quite possibly an older version made prior to 2012 and if so I'd pass. The easiest way to tell is to check the scope adjustment turrets. The older versions were friction adjustable, the newer, improved scopes have click adjustments. It isn't just the adjustments turrets that were improved, but that is the easiest way to tell the difference.
Once you get to the $400-$500 price level of the VX-3 I think there may be better options.
Within the same price range the quality of the glass is essentially the same regardless of brand. Leupolds claim to fame is a much more rugged scope. On a 45-70 I'd go Leupold to stand up to the recoil. In fact a fixed power is even more rugged. One other scope to consider is the Burris FF-II. They have a reputation for ruggedness as well and the glass is pretty decent. In fact if buying at MSRP I prefer the Burris over the VX-1. But if you can get a VX-1 at that price it is hard to go wrong. Other advantages of Leupold are lighter weight and much longer eye relief.
I'll add one small bit of advice. Make sure the VX-1 is current production. It is quite possibly an older version made prior to 2012 and if so I'd pass. The easiest way to tell is to check the scope adjustment turrets. The older versions were friction adjustable, the newer, improved scopes have click adjustments. It isn't just the adjustments turrets that were improved, but that is the easiest way to tell the difference.
cdb1
Member
Like LoonWulf I don't believe a Rifleman is a step up from a ProStaff and I'm not sure if a VX-1 is either. I'd take the Minox over any of the above three as my first choice and my second choice would be a Burris Fullfield II. I'd take a Rifleman over a Crossfire any day on a centerfire rifle.
I will also admit to having a bias against Crossfires. I don't know any other way to put it, I just think they all suck except for the 2-7 Rimfire model. There are some who really like Crossfires though, scope preference is highly personal, subjective and cannot be quantified IMO as evidenced by the thread grampajack referenced.
To me, Leupold is worth it starting with the VX-2 line. I personally would not use the Minox I'm so fond of because I'd want a lower power option than what Minox offers in the ZV 3 line on a 45-70 lever gun. My Marlin 30-30 wears a VX-3 1.75-6x32 which replaced a Burris Fullfield II 2-7x35. It cost more than the rifle, even before I had the Leupold Custom Shop install a German #4 reticle which was free due to an unusual circumstance. I would have paid though.
Some people place more emphasis on the gun, some more emphasis on the optic and some like me just about equal emphasis. If I were a betting man I'd put my money on LoonWulf being more of a gun guy and grampajack being more of an optics guy and eastbank being more of an in the middle like me. I could easily be wrong, my impressions are based on reading many of their posts. From reading the OP I'd say he is more of a gun emphasis person so upgrading to a nicer Leupold, VX-2 and up, may not be in the cards.
Edit: jmr40's post posted while I was creating this missive. I wouldn't have done this post if I'd known because his post says it all.
I will also admit to having a bias against Crossfires. I don't know any other way to put it, I just think they all suck except for the 2-7 Rimfire model. There are some who really like Crossfires though, scope preference is highly personal, subjective and cannot be quantified IMO as evidenced by the thread grampajack referenced.
To me, Leupold is worth it starting with the VX-2 line. I personally would not use the Minox I'm so fond of because I'd want a lower power option than what Minox offers in the ZV 3 line on a 45-70 lever gun. My Marlin 30-30 wears a VX-3 1.75-6x32 which replaced a Burris Fullfield II 2-7x35. It cost more than the rifle, even before I had the Leupold Custom Shop install a German #4 reticle which was free due to an unusual circumstance. I would have paid though.
Some people place more emphasis on the gun, some more emphasis on the optic and some like me just about equal emphasis. If I were a betting man I'd put my money on LoonWulf being more of a gun guy and grampajack being more of an optics guy and eastbank being more of an in the middle like me. I could easily be wrong, my impressions are based on reading many of their posts. From reading the OP I'd say he is more of a gun emphasis person so upgrading to a nicer Leupold, VX-2 and up, may not be in the cards.
Edit: jmr40's post posted while I was creating this missive. I wouldn't have done this post if I'd known because his post says it all.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,857
I had a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x40mm on a Marlin 1895 Guide Gun for a few thousand rounds out of it, replaced it with a Nikon Buckmaster Side Focus 4.5-14x40mm to give me access to finger adjustable turrets. The Elite 3200 has better glass, and I can only turn the Nikon up to about 12x before the edge effects get pretty severe, but the extra zoom and the finger adjustable turrets make shooting the ol' punkin chunker a lot easier at longer ranges.
The VX1 & 2's just don't turn my crank. In their class, I feel like I can get better glass with better adjustment tracking, for the money. The VX3's in 4.5-14x50mm is one of my favorite hunting scopes, I have a handful of them on different rifles.
The VX1 & 2's just don't turn my crank. In their class, I feel like I can get better glass with better adjustment tracking, for the money. The VX3's in 4.5-14x50mm is one of my favorite hunting scopes, I have a handful of them on different rifles.
cdb1
Member
This is why I believe scope choice is so subjective. VX-2's don't turn Varminterror's crank but they do mine. We are both right.
Though just between us girls I've heard his crank is very hard to turn.
Last edited:
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,857
Right on both counts.
I hadnt ever thought about it but thats VERY true, ill happily stick a 200 dollar scope on a thousand dollar rifle.
My usages are different also, hunting opportunities are more about me sneaking away from the wife and kids than anything else. Im not horribly concerned with first light, last light, or dailing in my shots, i also generally use 3-9s, so im very likely the poster boy for the low/middle range of scopes..... I also have over 2k dollars worth of lower end scopes lol
maxxhavoc
Member
I have found that once you find a scope system you prefer, the brand is easier to figure out.
I never have had an occasion to shoot more than 400 yards (ethically, at least) so HD glass is not a priority. Good glass, yes. My criteria for scope buying anymore is:
-Mil-dot style reticle
-Milrad adjustments
-First focal plane
-Durable and repeatable adjustments
This limits selection a lot. Nikon loves MOA scopes, and fancy BDC reticles. BDC is only accurate for a single load or brand. I find it easier to write down ranged dope for each load.
When sighting in, Mil/Mil scopes can get the second round in the x ring without math, practically instantly. If impact is 1.5 dots low and 1 dot right on the target, 15 clicks up, 10 clicks left and Bob's your uncle...works at 100 yards, works at 300.
If the scope has a variable zoom, the reticle needs to be the same relative to the target, so the above adjustments work at whatever zoom you are shooting.
My main problem with cheap scopes has been that the turrets do not adjust accurately or stop adjusting accurately due to cheaper materials. After that, the scope is junk.
I tend to gravitate to SWFA fixed power scopes. The price point is good at $299 and give me what I want. If I was going to go with a better brand, it would probably be Leupold. With that said, I still have an old Japan-era Nikon that was run over by an ATV that broke the mounts and bent the eyepiece of the scope. The scope still works fine,
I never have had an occasion to shoot more than 400 yards (ethically, at least) so HD glass is not a priority. Good glass, yes. My criteria for scope buying anymore is:
-Mil-dot style reticle
-Milrad adjustments
-First focal plane
-Durable and repeatable adjustments
This limits selection a lot. Nikon loves MOA scopes, and fancy BDC reticles. BDC is only accurate for a single load or brand. I find it easier to write down ranged dope for each load.
When sighting in, Mil/Mil scopes can get the second round in the x ring without math, practically instantly. If impact is 1.5 dots low and 1 dot right on the target, 15 clicks up, 10 clicks left and Bob's your uncle...works at 100 yards, works at 300.
If the scope has a variable zoom, the reticle needs to be the same relative to the target, so the above adjustments work at whatever zoom you are shooting.
My main problem with cheap scopes has been that the turrets do not adjust accurately or stop adjusting accurately due to cheaper materials. After that, the scope is junk.
I tend to gravitate to SWFA fixed power scopes. The price point is good at $299 and give me what I want. If I was going to go with a better brand, it would probably be Leupold. With that said, I still have an old Japan-era Nikon that was run over by an ATV that broke the mounts and bent the eyepiece of the scope. The scope still works fine,
greyling22
Member
personally I think they are nice, but overpriced. At least the lower end stuff that I have familiarity with.
However, you are talking about a marlin 1895, which changes things. Despite being tapped, Marlins are not designed for scopes. They have too much drop in the comb to get a good cheek weld and use an optic. Additionally, you have to take the hammer into account. So there is a sweet spot: you want the scope as low as possible, but still clear the hammer, which means you want something with a small rear ocular bell. Leupold and weaver tend to have the smallest rear bells that I am aware of. Nikon used to have HUGE bells, but I think they have since been redesigned. Most the the rest are all about the same size. So, while I typically don't get too recommendy on scopes other than trying to point a good deal, I'd get either a weaver or a leupold for your application. And I'd consider a rimfire version if you are going to be shooting close in. I think the 2-7x size fits the 1895 platform a little better than the 3-9x.
I have a burris timberline 2-7x26 on my 336 and a leupold 2.5x20 on my 1894. (what can I say, my eyes are bad and I need a scope)
However, you are talking about a marlin 1895, which changes things. Despite being tapped, Marlins are not designed for scopes. They have too much drop in the comb to get a good cheek weld and use an optic. Additionally, you have to take the hammer into account. So there is a sweet spot: you want the scope as low as possible, but still clear the hammer, which means you want something with a small rear ocular bell. Leupold and weaver tend to have the smallest rear bells that I am aware of. Nikon used to have HUGE bells, but I think they have since been redesigned. Most the the rest are all about the same size. So, while I typically don't get too recommendy on scopes other than trying to point a good deal, I'd get either a weaver or a leupold for your application. And I'd consider a rimfire version if you are going to be shooting close in. I think the 2-7x size fits the 1895 platform a little better than the 3-9x.
I have a burris timberline 2-7x26 on my 336 and a leupold 2.5x20 on my 1894. (what can I say, my eyes are bad and I need a scope)
entropy
Member
is leupold worth it?
Yes.
Yes.
cdb1
Member
greyling22 said:
All true. A $20.00 comb raiser and a hammer spur will take of the issue though. All new Marlins come with a hammer spur that I'm aware of, if not they run $5.00 I think. You can also make a comb raiser cheaply if you are a DIY person.
Where I find large ocular bells troublesome is on Mauser 98 action and 98 takeoffs like the CZ 550 action.
Sav .250
Member
The guys that own one would say ....yes of course. I looked at a lot but went for a Pro-Staff. Met my expectations.
Have had a Leupold VX-2 3-9X50 on a Remington 700 in 30-06 for about 5 years no trouble or readjustments have been necessary. Windage and elevation adjustments are done with your fingers ,no coins or screw driver needed and it has never gone out of adjustment. Also has Leupold Golden Ring Full Lifetime Warranty.Sorry I can't speak for the other brands as I have only owned a Weaver many years ago.
Attachments
Ks5shooter
Contributing Member
But you will never need it
Bought my first Leupold at 16, 35 years later and dozens of Leupold optics(scopes,spotting scopes,binoculors etc) never a failure.Leupold is all I will ever own
cdb1
Member
But you will never need it
Bought my first Leupold at 16, 35 years later and dozens of Leupold optics(scopes,spotting scopes,binoculors etc) never a failure.Leupold is all I will ever own
Never say never. The VX-3 mounted on the 30-30 I posted a picture of was defective from the get go. The windage turret didn't work. So I sent it in to Leupold to fix or replace. When tracking showed the scope had arrived I called Leupold to see how much it would cost to get a different reticle installed. I was told the charge was $75.00 but, since they would have to disassemble the scope to fix it there would be no charge to install a German #4. So for the cost of shipping the scope to Them a received a new reticle free. Another nice thing is Leupold will mail you shims at no charge if you ask.
v35
Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2006
- Messages
- 910
The answer is "it depends" but in your application I'd say yes, in its overall broad price category. I have a Prostaff 2-7 BDC and like it, but it's not on a hunting rifle. Little differences... like the reticle wires are not a consistent color, but who cares. It's not like I'm staring at them.
If you were asking about a .22lr plinker that is not expected to perform much beyond 50 yards nor will it be subject to a lot of abuse, then the Nikon would be fine and the difference in price for a Leupold equivalent wouldn't be worth it. However, I admit to being biased toward the fact Leupold are completely made in the US and that I'm of a "buy American" mentality. Leupold's product support is objectively unmatched in the industry. If you need repair ten years from now Leupold will do it no questions asked. Nikon probably won't want to know you.
Way, way beyond Leupold's category there are likely to be better alternatives than what Leupold has to offer, but I'm talking about Swarovski, Kahles, or S&B, and for all I know their support might not even be as good or as convenient as Leupold's.
Buy once cry once. Sure they have competitors worth investigating (Vortex comes to mind, and I really like Vortex), you will never be disappointed with a Leupold. Given any number of cheaper alternatives, you will always be asking yourself if you should have spend the extra money.
- Status
