Rifle Scopes Scoping a 6.8x43 AR - VX-R Patrol or SS 3-9?

[azimutha]

I just had the VX-R brought to my attention today. I haven't considered Leupold in a long time. Either unimpressive scopes or grossly over-priced (or both). Anyway, the reason I'm considering this vs. an SS 3-9 is the 4 oz. lighter weight. They both have their pluses and minuses.

The Patrol has illum, which is rarely useful to me, but I might be able to use it a pig hunting trip sometime. The SS has FF, which I prefer. But I don't mind SFP on a scope with 10X or less on the high end. This is also going on a rifle that has an effective range of 300 yards so I might dial in 1.5 mils. I'm not going to get lost on a turret with no revolution marks.

On the other hand, I like the turrets/markings on the SS 3-9. I know it's a very dependable scope. The glass is really good. I haven't ever looked through a VX-R, but from what I've read it sounds fine in that department. And, yes, I did search on the topic, but this is asking for a specific recommendation for this type of rifle. I'm certainly open to other suggestions as well.

 

[RFutch]

The "tmr style" in the patrol and mark ar sucks. It's too thick and the .5 mil and 1 mil marks are almost the exact same shape and size. I sold mine because of this. It was almost impossible to tell what line was 2.5 mils (for example) in a hurry.

 

[Crosshair]

I think as stated above, it's comes down to the reticles. I too don't need FFP in a 10x optic, I do need a well executed reticle. The SS is tuff to beat at $599. The Leupold does have good glass, basically on par with the SS. If they both had the mil-quad reticle it'd be a tough choice, but the TMR in this version sucks, I'd rather it just be plain mildot like the Mk AR series. SWFA sure brings a lot to the table for value in every scope they offer.

 

[SomeOtherGuy]

If you don't need illumination, the SS gets you FFP, a glass-etched reticle, IMHO a better reticle design, and better turrets. I've looked at the Leupold a couple times but own two of the 3-9x SS scopes. (Also own a 2-7x VX-R which I'm fairly happy with, but not the same model you're considering).

One small twist - the SS has noticeable tunneling below 3.75x. The VX-R should not have tunneling (my 2-7x doesn't) but instead your true magnification range is only about 2.5:1, not 3:1. End result is almost the same, but some people care one way or the other.

Oh, and the SS has a terrific field of view at 9x and pretty much from 4x on up, while the VX-R has an average to very slightly above average FOV within its limited but non-tunneling magnification range.

I'd get the SS.

 

[azimutha]

Thanks guys. I think I'll stick with the SS 3-9. I've never had a problem with the one I've run and only replaced it because I got the SS 3-15 (for a longer-range rifle). Back when I had a NF 2.5-10x32 I compared it side-by-side and could find very little to recommend the $1500+ scope over the $600 scope. That was even a generation earlier. The last SS 3-9 I had was assembled perfectly. Also, a strike against the Leupy is if it really only hits about 7.5 or even 8.5X I don't care to buy a product that exaggerates its magnification range. It's true the SS has some tunneling but that hasn't bothered me hunting with it.

 

[SomeOtherGuy]

If you look at the VX-R as marketed for hunters, Leupold advertises a magnification range of 3.3x to 8.6x:

Leupold Optics VX?R 3-9x40mm CDS (30mm) - | Leupold Optics

If you look at the same scope marketed for police, they advertised 3.0x to 9.0x:

Leupold Optics VX?R Patrol 3-9x40mm (30mm) - | Leupold Optics

Yet the stated FOV at low and high magnification is identical. I do not think that Leupold used different glass in the Patrol model to get the greater magnification range with identical FOV. Just an inconsistency in specifications, and the 3.3-8.6x spec is the right one. I'm glad that Leupold is honest about the real magnification range of its scopes (I suspect some brands aren't), but it's still a rather limited range.