Leupold VX-I vs. VX-II

[Flynt]

What is the difference between the two? I just bought a VX-II in 2-7x33, but now I'm wondering if a VX-I would be more suitable. I'm looking for a short range, 50-75 yds., scope to go on my old Ruger .44 carbine (circa 1970).

I thought that the VX-II was meant to compete against Nikson's 2-7x33 Prostaff, which has parallax adjusted to 75 yds. I've since learned the Leupold's equivalent is the VX-I 2-7x33, which has 75 yd. parallax.

The VX-II is about $100 more expensive than the VX-I. My question whether the quality of the VX-II is greater than the VX-I...or what other characteristics distinguish the two. Thanks.

 

[JDGray]

I believe the tube is one piece on the VXII, two piece on the VXI. I had a VXI on a .22, and sent it back to Leupold to have the parallax set to 50yrds. They ship from the factory set at 150yrds. The scope I had had a good clear picture, and had no problems with it.

 

[9mmepiphany]

i made the same choice in a scope for my Anschutz 1712. i got the 3-9x33 with adjustable parallax.

i'm pretty sure the VX-II is serveral levels above a Prostaff. i have the Prostaff on a chinese air rifle

 

[REAPER4206969]

The only difference is the VX-1 has standard multicoat lens coating and micro-friction turrets and the VX-2 has the multicoat 4 lens coating and click turrets. I own both and other then the click adjustments I can not tell the difference.

 

[REAPER4206969]

I believe the tube is one piece on the VXII, two piece on the VXI.

They use the same tube. You may be thinking of the "Rifleman."

 

[Peakbagger46]

I've had both. The VXII is of beter optical quality and more positive adjustments.

 

[Franklin7X57]

so is it 100 dollars better?

 

[hometheaterman]

I have a VX-I and honestly it's my least favorite of any scope I've owned including Tasco. It's been sent into Leupold twice for repair in the 2 and a half years I've owned it.

The Burris Fullfield II I have is much much better. It seems to me way clearer, seems to do better in low light at least to me, and it doesn't seem to lose zero from just bumping it hard or dropping it short distances as bad as the Leupold. The Leupold seemed to lose zero too easily and while it was clear didn't seem any clearer than the Tasco I've used and friends that compared them said the Tasco looked clearer to them. Overall, the Burris seems much better to me as well as friends who have used it and it was cheaper to boot. I haven't had the Burris for that long so can't comment on how long it will hold up. Only had it not quite a year but I love it so far.

 

[Maverick223]

Personally I don't like any of the budget Leupolds (including the Rifleman, VX-I, and VX-II series). I think the Nikon ProStaff/Primos/Monarch or Bushnell Elite 3200/4200 lines are a much better deal at about the same price point. A Zeiss Conquest (2.5-8x) won't cost much more and IMO is of better quality than all of the above.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I agree with mavrick on this one. In my opinion there's no reason to choose any leupold less than a VXIII over much cheaper and in my opinion better competitors