Which of these 2 scopes would you pick

[greyling22]

I can pick a leupold vx-1 3-9x40 for about a hundred bucks. OR I can pick up a weaver grand slam 3-12x42 side focus for $200. Cheaper is always better but value is hard to argue with.

If I get the leupold I will put it on. My blackout upper. If the weaver, I'd put it in my cz455 and move the sightron over to the blackout.

 

[stringnut]

Either is adequate for any of my purposes. However, you need the scope that best fits your needs. What are you doing with it. Hunting, target, etc. For most purposes on a centerfire the side focus is not really needed. Parallax usually isn't an issue in most situations.

 

[Grumulkin]

I would go Leupold.

 

[jmr40]

It depends on when the Leupold was made. I assume you're looking at used scopes. Newer Leupold VX-1's have click adjustable turrets. If so, I'd go Leupold in a heartbeat. If it has the older friction adjustments I'd keep looking for something better. It isn't just the adjustments. Newer VX-1's are a huge step up over older versions in every way. It is just that the windage and elevation adjustments are the easiest way to know when it was made.

Rather than spend $200 for the Weaver a brand new VX-1, Burris FF-II, or Redfield Revolution for $200 would be a better option.

 

[greyling22]

Vx-1 is brand new. So is the grand slam. It is my understanding that grand slam glass is significantly better than vx-1 glass. I know my nitrex tr1 has better glass than my vx-1 rimfire.

As far as uses, nothing fancy. Targets at the range, casual pig hunting in occasion, nothing critical.

 

[Coltdriver]

If you have all the time in the world a side focus is ok, but I hate them. When I hunt I rarely have time to fiddle with a side focus. Just my .02 cents worth.

 

[MIL-DOT]

The OP didn't clarify the range and type of shooting expected. If you expect to be shooting at distance, say beyond 200 yds, then I'd want a parallax adjustment. I love Leupold, largely for their bulletproof warranty, but the higher end Weaver stuff is very solid, Japanese made, and lifetime guaranteed,as well (last I checked, anyway).
And, it doesn't take "all the time in the world" to adjust a side focus. And besides, most hunters are going to be set up with a good idea of the distance, and have their scopes adjusted for that distance already already.
They're generally not doing range calculations and figuring out their bullet drop and fiddling with the knobs just prior to taking a shot. .

 

[VoodooMountain]

I have both of these scopes and find very little difference between them and so would choose the vx-1.

 

[chicharrones]

I can pick a leupold vx-1 3-9x40 for about a hundred bucks. OR I can pick up a weaver grand slam 3-12x42 side focus for $200. Cheaper is always better but value is hard to argue with.

If I get the leupold I will put it on. My blackout upper. If the weaver, I'd put it in my cz455 and move the sightron over to the blackout.

Since you mention putting the side focus scope on a rimfire rifle and moving the Sightron over to the centerfire rifle, that sounds like a good plan depending on what the Sightron is. What kind of Sightron do you have?

 

[I6turbo]

I have two SF scopes and a bunch of conventional A/O scopes. I wish ALL of mine were SF. MUCH quicker to fine tune and much easier to access and adjust without disturbing the grip.

I'd go with the 12X between these two choices. 9X is not enough to shoot your best target groups at distances beyond 50 yards or so. 12X is also not enough, but it beats 9X, all else being somewhat equal. The glass in the new redesigned Weaver GS (with the SF) typically gets very positive reviews from the 10 or 12 people I've seen who have them (several people on Rimfire Central have them). If your CZ 455 has rear sights, the GS will fit low and behind the sights. That's a major factor when it comes to scoping CZs that have iron sights (though between these two, both will fit behind the sights).

 

[Haxby]

Weaver.

 

[cdb1]

Whichever one you see the best through. It's that simple.

 

[Teachu2]

whichever one you see the best through. It's that simple.

we have a winner!!!

 

[greyling22]

I'm left handed, so the SF doen't really offer any advantages over traditional AO other than reducing length. as far as hunting with one, just set it on 100 and it will be the same as a regular scope.

The sightron is an S1 hunter 4-12x. i'ts a pretty basic scope. not quite as good as a mueller apv, but very functional.

But if Voodoo is right and as far as glass goes there is no real difference, I'd guess I'd prefer to save $100 and grab the leupold. But if the glass really is a lot better, and can make a case for upgrading and move some scopes around. I'd just need to downgrade my planned aero precision mount down to a chinese mount. They're heavier and bulkier, but they work fine.

 

[chicharrones]

I'm left handed, so the SF doen't really offer any advantages over traditional AO other than reducing length. as far as hunting with one, just set it on 100 and it will be the same as a regular scope.

The sightron is an S1 hunter 4-12x. i'ts a pretty basic scope. not quite as good as a mueller apv, but very functional.

But if Voodoo is right and as far as glass goes there is no real difference, I'd guess I'd prefer to save $100 and grab the leupold. But if the glass really is a lot better, and can make a case for upgrading and move some scopes around. I'd just need to downgrade my planned aero precision mount down to a chinese mount. They're heavier and bulkier, but they work fine.

Is that Sightron also an AO scope? If so, I'd probably leave it on the rimfire and put the Leupold on the centerfire. Saves you money for the Aero scope mount while still getting a nice Leupold.

 

[greyling22]

yeah, it's an AO. It's clear enough, but the colors are a little overexposed? washed out? something like that. Turrets are a little mushy, and it's not as clear as the apv, but I thought i'd give sightron a try. I guess that like leupold, their good stuff is not in the bottom of the product lineup.

 

[cdb1]

Greyling22, no one can tell you which scope is better for you. Everyone's eyes are different. As an example I see better out Zeiss than Swarovski. I know people that see better out of Swarovski than Zeiss. You need to look through the scopes you are considering if at all possible.

I'm a big Leupold guy but the Grand Slam is definitely a higher quality scope. Is it worth double the cost of the VX-1? To me yes because I also see very well out of Weaver scopes. You might see better through the VX-1 though so it would be the scope to buy.

Parallax adjustment is really not needed in a hunting scope at distances between 50 and 400 yards. That is why centerfire rifle scopes normally have parallax set at 100 yards, shotgun scopes at 75 yards and rimfire scopes at 50 yards.

 

[I6turbo]

Greyling22, no one can tell you which scope is better for you. Everyone's eyes are different. As an example I see better out Zeiss than Swarovski. I know people that see better out of Swarovski than Zeiss. You need to look through the scopes you are considering if at all possible.

^^ I think the matter of different scopes suiting different eyes is very often overlooked, or not well understood. I'm another example. To my eyes, in terms of clarity and resolution several of the $450 - $650 models from "name brands" such as Leupold, Nikon, Swarovski, Zeiss, etc., do not compare very favorably to certain Burris, Vortex, or Sightron models of similar or lesser cost. As a specific example, the Burris Fullfield II 4.5-14x42 suits my eye better than most anything I've tried for less than about $650 street price.

I know Leupold scopes are high quality (rugged and reliable) and obviously work great for many/most people, but for some reason the optics just don't match my eye very well. Same goes for the Nikon Monarch series. Trijicon optics, on the other hand, seem to be made for me (but their price tags aren't!).