Leupold Variable Scope???

steve223

steve223

New member
I recently bought a Remington Mod 700vsf in .223 and now I need a new scope. I am thinking of buying Leupold VX-111
4.5-14x40LR or 6.5-20x40LR in either one I would like the fine duplex. Mostly I will use this to coyote hunt I hope
and I will most likely shoot this rifle quite a bit at the
range. I think the 6.5-20 would be nice for the range, but maybe a bit much to hunt with. I have used Leupold for years and own a few all the same VariX111 3.5-10x40 all of
these scopes have worked perfect since I bought them never
any problems of any kind with any of them. But lets say I'm
am open to suggestion as far as brand goes. That is to say
if there is something cheaper and just as good I might try
it any comments or suggestions would be appreciated. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowingsmilie.gif
 
Last edited:
Steve,
The VXIII in 6.5-20 is a nice scope for work at the range. Don't know about hunting coyotes. I do know that for me it was not enough for groundhogs. I replaced all of my 6.5-20X40's with VXIII 8.5-25X50's.(varmunt reticles)
I needed the extra magnification for long range target ID. I do power them down when I am going to take the shot.
Can't go wrong with a Leupold. Maybe I am just biased, but IMHO there is no such thing as "the same, or better" for less money. You get what you pay for.
By the way I have a VXIII 6.5-20X40 EFR, a VariXIII 6.5-20X40 EFR, and a VariX III 6.5-20X40 for sale. All are in excellent shape and fully covered by Leupold's warrantee.
Jeff
 
Steve223- I put a Leupold VX III 2.5-8x on my .223 (Ruger 77). I wanted the lower power because I hunt some thick cover here. I also hunt open prairie at times. Anything from ground squirrels to coyotes. I am happy with this scope, but if I had to do it over, I would go with the 4.5-14x and nothing higher. I agree with Jeff, you can't go wrong with a Leupold. It is a big decision so if you can take your time. Just my nickels worth.
Greg
 
Thanks fellas,I have always got great service out of the Leupold scopes that I use. I think that maybe the 4.5-14 might be the way to go, but I just like the idea of more power I guess it's a bigger is better thing. Do you think there is much point in getting either one of these in a 50mm objective? I also have one of the old Varix111 3.5-10x40 on a 300mag that I rarely shoot anymore might just take it off and use it. Don't know what I will do at this point. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-006.gif
 
Putting the old scope on might be a very good idea. At least that would give you an idea of how well you like a scope of that power on the .223. Maybe put a lower power on the .300. Or, if you want to sell the old one, let me know.
 
I have used the 4.5-14 and the 6.5-20 they both have their place but out of the two I believe the 4.5-14 is more versatile. I currently have more 2.5-8's than anything else but my shots are around 200 yards at the most and usually around 50 yards. As for the 50mm lense, I like my scopes mounted as low as possible and the bigger lense makes that impossible on a bolt gun.
 
At the risk of being burned at the stake, I don't think the Lupes that are being sold today are as good as they were a few years ago. I have purchased two VX-III's in the past year and I don't think they are as clear as my older Vari-X III's. I am comparing similar power and objective size. All that has really changed for the positive is a big increase in price. When looking at prices, the new VX-III's are getting up into the Zeiss range. There is no comparison between the 4.5-14 Conquest I put on a Cooper two months ago and the VX-III, but they are very close in price. For a more realistic scope, that I am not afraid to haul in the back of the truck chasing PD's, I am becoming more enchanted with Nikon. I now have two 6.5-20 Monarchs (in addition to two hunting scopes) and I really like them. Are they as good as my older Vari-X III's....no. Are they as good as the newer VX-III, maybe not. But for 2/3 the price...they are worth considering. I had to send one Nikon back for warranty repairs. Door-to-door time, with a proper fix, 11 days.
 
I don't think I will sell the old one but if I decide to I'll let you know. As far as the 50mm lense goes I feel the same about as you do Tom It's no great aid in the accuracy dept. IMHO. I'm also curious about Burris scopes are they any good or is Leupold still a better scope?
 
I appreciate your input Claimbuster I have never tried a NIkon scope but I have alot of experience with their camera line of products mostly 35mm. They build a great camera, and I have used them for a long time and they work great. Nikon for the most part has a good name and that only comes from making a good product, and keeping their customers happy. I will give them a look. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 
Steve, I've got the 4.5x14x50LR and 6.5x20x50LR leupold scopes and they are nice. The side focus is alot better than having to adjust the AO on the bell both mine have the mil-dot takes alittle getting use to. For paper shooting the 6.5x20 is better. Well good luck
 
I have both the 4.5-14 and the 6-20, personally I like hunting with the 4.5-14. It is clearer and is all the scope you need out to 400 yards. plus on high power it doesnt get narrow like the 20.
 
Steve--first of all, I agree whole-heartedly with what Tom said. However, I must say I also agree with what Claimbuster said. I have owned and used many Nikons and Leupolds in most of the configurations made today. The Nikon is one helluva scope for the money. I love the Monarch series. As far as Leupold goes, can't go wrong. For yote huntin' I wouldn't fancy a fine croosshair or a scope higher in power or larger in size than a 4.5-14x40. Read my post "Little miffed at Leupold" and get some more info. My new custom 270wsm will be wearing a Vari-XIII 4.5-14x40--2MG
 
IMHO, Burris makes a very tough scope. I have never had problems, and I don't baby my equipment- it takes some abuse. I don't like their sometimes tricky eye relief. I think Leupold wins in that department.
Don't know what type terrain you'll be calling in with your 223, but for my calling I am beginning to prefer scopes on the lower end of power range. For a long time I wanted to "see all the details", but now I am going the other direction, preferring the wider field of view for faster targeting. I am down to 2x7 on one rifle and I am even considering a 1.5xwhatever just to see how I like it for close-in situations. Just my thoughts.
 
Right-on Happy-- i just put a 4.5-14X Leupy PR scope with Varmint HUnter reticle on a custom Savage Striker in 243 WSSM, and it does just fine, in fact we just finished a long-range handgun shoot out here in So. CO, and 1 of the guys was using it as a spotter at 1 of the roving silhouette stations we were shooting from-- quite contentedly i might add.

BUT then again, my buddies monster 270 WSM (u oughtta see this rig 2MG) has an 8.5-25X Leupy on top, and i can tell u for long-range dogs it's hard to beat, altho. IMO it's coyote hunting niche would be for just this purpose-- for me. U know tho. if a guy wants to put a 50 power scope on a .17 HMR, more power to him-- literally.
 
Last edited:
Last season I used one of the newer Leupold 4.5x14x40 VX-III's with the Varmit Reticle. Ok scope, although a bit hazy above 12x, which I use for paper. No Adjustable Objective and no side focus, I wish I had sprung for the extra $100 to get the adjustable version. (Kick my self in the butt to save a buck)

Of course most shot where under 100 yards, the longest was 310 on a runner after I missed her at 100. And I almost had to play shotgun many times with shots at 50 yards or less. Even 4.5 is a bit much for close work.

After many years, I'm thinking of going lower rather then higher in power. Even on Colorado and Wyomings wide open spaces.

I'm thinking of a 1.5 x 5 (I think it is) for an AR I'm contemplating and the good old 3x9x40's I used for many years in the past always worked well. With a .22 centerfire 500 yards is pushing it. Personally I think 300-350 is pushing it for the .223 and if you do your job on calling and stand selection, you'll have plenty of 100 yard or less shots.

North Carloina? that's wooded and thick isn't it? Go lower power.
 
Steve223- I have Burris 3-9x Ballistic Plex on my other .223 and I personally don't think it is quite as clear as my 2.5-8x Leupold. It is a nice scope, but there are better. Like Jitterbug said, you may kick yourself for not spending a few bucks more. One thing I really like about this forum is the information that can be gained by the experience of others. Bunch of great folks!
 
I've also had a few FFII's. Still have one in 4.5-14x42 BP. Not quite as bright as a Vari-xIII and definitely not as bright as a Monarch--2MG
 
Wow what a turnout thanks fellas I've learned more right here than I could have learned reading magazines for months.
You all have been tremedously helpful in helping make this decision and I hape enjoyed reading your opinions and experiences with the various scope makers. I'm going to be going with the Leupold VX-3 4.5-14x40LR with side focus. I think after reading the posts here and through my own experiences hunting game in N.C. that a scope that goes all the way to 20x might be a tad much after all. Thanks again
Steve /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-006.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 
Steve:
I have at least a dozen Leopold scopes from 1x5 to the 8.5x25 and have had no real problems with them. I tried some of the less expensive alternatives and in most cases I think you get what you pay for. If your looking at a top end VAR XIII LR models you will notice the price is getting very close to a Nightforce. I have two Nightforce scopes and I think they have slightly better optics than the Leopolds. Just my opinion and don't know if they are as good as the price difference but that gap is closing. No doubt the NF and the US Optics I have looked at are built tougher than Leopold. This is an issue with me because I carry them on a snowmobile, atv and Argo. The down side to this is they are both much heavier than a Leopold. No doubt the ruggedness comes with the additional weight. Hard to determine just how much of the ruggedness is needed. Show me some glass with the optical quality of the NF or US Optics and the weight of Leopold and I will buy it.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top