Nikon prostaff vs Leupold vx2

[cdb1]

I do think the cost to make the leupold is more than 1/4 the cost of retail tho.

I could be wrong. If I am Leupold is operating on a pretty thin profit margin.

 

[berettaprofessor]

No doubt, hands down, Leupold every time. I've got access to Bushnell's and their clones at a factory outlet with steep state association discounts and I'm never happy with them even knowing a scope was half the price of a Leupold of comparable power.

 

[Mowgli Terry]

Got both. Kinda apples and oranges. For the bucks the Pro-Staffs are a good value. It's hard to compare a low end scopes with the mid-range scope of a more expensive brand. I think the Pro-Staff or Buckmaster are serviceable scopes. The VX2, to me, is a super scope. Mine is a 4-12x50. The two or three Nikon's are 3-9's very usable. Still apples and oranges comparison. I have had three scopes replaced by Leupold. One was a 4x scope bought new some forty+ years ago-fifty bucks out the door. To me, Leupold is unbeatable buck for buck.

Addendum: I got eleven (11) Leupold's. I'm looking for the "brown" as we speak. Got my cataracts fixed and a bunch of that stuff went away.

 

[IdaD]

I really like Leupold scopes and I have a VX2 and two VX3's on my primary hunting rifles.

 

[jtmaster6]

I have looked at Nikon and Vortex. Most are plain heavy...close to 20 oz. I end up going to Leupold each time a rifle needs an optic and can stay around 12-13 oz.

 

[Sniper66]

I've had both and now have 8 or 10 Leupolds and no Nikons.

 

[Elkins45]

My experience is that the Nikon Prostaff and Buckmasters are noticeably inferior to the least expensive Leupolds. The cost difference will be forgotten fairly quickly while the superior quality will remain.

 

[Mowgli Terry]

Thursday I was out working up loads for my 300 WSM Browning A bolt II using a 3x9 Prostaff. I did notice some problems getting the scope focused. I have come to realize this is my eye problem. Meditating on this scope I came to the realization that particular Nikon sight had been with me many years. In this length of time how many changes have been made in the Nikon? A current 3x9 Buckmaster came this way on a used rifle. The Buckmaster is much improved, That scope has more user friendly adjustments and is clearer an brighter. Age of scope does make a difference.

Leupold and Prostaff: The playing field is not level if one scope is twenty or years older than the other. Also, is the problem may be shooter's aging eyeballs or a difficult scope? Both? How about comparing scopes in the same general price range. That means similar models.

OT: Reloader 17 and 165gr. Sierra HP is hard to beat in that 300 WSM A bolt.

 

[LoonWulf]

Not a fan of the current buckmasters 2s, but I really like the older rounded bell buckmasters.
I just gave my last 4.5-14x40 to my FIL, since he is an avid Nikon user.

 

[Mowgli Terry]

I was taking inventory here. On my rifles are a 8x, 12x, and 16x Leupold's. None of these models are still made. These scopes have been with me for over thirty years. Scopes still work very well. Others are more recent. I'm not a fanboy but have done business with Leupold many years. This history brings me back. This is not low rating anybody's brand. Just my personal #1 preference. The most recent Leupold is a VX2 4-12x50mm. That glass suits me just fine.YMMV My other Bushnell's, Nikon's, and Burris, scopes had been mounted on rifles that came this way in trades.