• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Rifle Scopes whats wrong with leupold?

Re: whats wrong with leupold?

I'm in the middle of doing a trade right now for one of the older vx-iii Tacticals, which is what the Mark 4 was before they called it the Mark 4. I'm not too hesitant with this knowing it is one of the older models that weren't prone to failure and were Made in USA. But I wouldn't stretch to put Leupold on par with Nightforce. NF is proven and if my budget allowed me, and they made a ffp in higher power, I would without a doubt go NF. Not to say Leupold isn't a good scope, but like others have already said, It's not quite up to par with some of the newer high dollar scopes and if I'm going to spend 2 grand, I could spend it better elsewhere. Hopefully the newly released ones will prove different in LL's test, but until then, I think the argument still stands that Leupold is lagging. The shitty part is that it could be fixed with better QC, not necessarily a major change in design
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

I'm so glad that someone with a ton of wisdom and credibility has chimed in here to help set things straight. Too bad that no matter LL says, the fanboys will still cry foul.

Instead of talking all kinds of shit about SHTF operators and mall-ninja comandos being too groovy for Leupold why don't you offer some substance to the converstaion and give us some of your expierences where the Almighty Leupold perservered through conditions that made the competition cry?

For instance, If you notice I never once said that Leupold was garbage, or didn't work, or anything like that. I simply stated that I thought they were behind the curve in the tactical scope game and resting their hat on their name and past reputation. Then I proceeded to talk about the Mark 4 that I had the chance to handle and explained that it didn't seem like it was worth the price.

Do you have anything constructive to add? Do you know who LL is? I'm guessing no on both counts.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Something else that bothers me about Leupold? Mark 4 doesnt really mean anything to them anymore.

Have a new product coming out? Slap it with Mark 4, it will sell a whole bunch!

Check it out, here is the Mark 4 BR/T F5 Dung Bucket!

Thats right, 100,000 sold in the first quarter alone, HAVE to have a Mark 4!

In truth these days the Mark 4 encompasses something like 3 different lines of tactical scopes all of which have some ridiculous number of models. What is a Mark 4 anymore?

I used to really be a big fan of a Leupold Mark 4 LR/T that I had. These days for the same money I can get more features and great glass from other places. Thats not to say that Leupold sucks or i would throw one away were it given to me... its just not where I am putting my hard earned dollars at this point.

 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Here in Europe mostly hunters of ages 40+ consider Leupold a good scope. If there is a good example how to mismanage a business and loose perspective and touch with reality Leupold is a clear winner. Also prices here are ridiculous Mk4 is in the range of Benders and Zeiss scopes and though people are dumb they are mostly not THAT dumb to buy Leupold at that price.

Now consider that there is Vortex and Chinese (Hawke for example - uk company but still made in China) companies getting better not to mention other more established players (IOR, Nikon) i think Leupold will be soon in trouble as it's clearly lagging behind.

You want to convince yourself people HATE Leupold or ENVY them sure be my guest whatever makes your day but if you'd offer me even an Mk4 instead of my Hawke i'd never take it...*

*not because its a bad scope but because i trust my scope and gambling on something that might die on me, has reticle somewhere in a 3% of vertical and 1 mil might be a mil sorry it's a no deal...
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wslowik</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

These problems you speak of are exaggerated by a small, vocal minority that dominates internet forums such as this one. This exact same thing takes place on another forum I frequent, www.m14tfl.com, regarding Springfield Armory, Inc. M1A rifles. They make so many more rifles than their competitors that proportionately they have more issues that pop up online. And we all know <span style="font-style: italic">everyone</span> comes to post about a problem, not so much when things are going well. </div></div>

So all of these issues are in peoples heads and Leupold is all greatness and these people buying other products are brainwashed and stupid? Leupold would sincerely love for you to believe that one!

There was a day when this was true of Leupold. You rarely if ever heard a bad word spoken about them. Simply not the case anymore. Again you can bury heads in the sand and accept second rate for your dollar. or you can complain that you will not accept it anymore.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Snipedogg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm in the middle of doing a trade right now for one of the older vx-iii Tacticals, which is what the Mark 4 was before they called it the Mark 4. I'm not too hesitant with this knowing it is one of the older models that weren't prone to failure and were Made in USA. But I wouldn't stretch to put Leupold on par with Nightforce. NF is proven and if my budget allowed me, and they made a ffp in higher power, I would without a doubt go NF. Not to say Leupold isn't a good scope, but like others have already said, It's not quite up to par with some of the newer high dollar scopes and if I'm going to spend 2 grand, I could spend it better elsewhere. Hopefully the newly released ones will prove different in LL's test, but until then, I think the argument still stands that Leupold is lagging. The shitty part is that it could be fixed with better QC, not necessarily a major change in design </div></div>

if its pre mark4 is a ultra.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

The difference between then and now, is simply a better educated consumer, who knows that a box test done on an 8.5X11 sheet of paper is meaningless, that a 3 degree cant in their reticles is unacceptable, this is why you are seeing these issues.

People are actually using the scopes, and testing them prior to committing to them in full. No more blind acceptance to a brand, but an earned respect through use.

It's not 1992 anymore... what you did then doesn't count if you can't do it today.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wslowik</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Sure plenty of scopes are made overseas, but their failure rate is not reflected on their location. For a company like NF, who is bringing things on shore, and is used every bit alongside Leupolds in the military, the failure rate cannot be compared... it's easily 5 to 1, maybe even 10 to 1.</div></div>

Which is it, 5 to 1, or 10 to 1? I mean, you pulled those numbers right out of the air. Why even make claims like that without backing them up at all?</div></div>

I can back it up, I can tell you every single military class we have, between 15 & 20 shooters using Leupold we have between 2 and 5 failures per class... Same classes but with Crane supplied rifles, using NF, we have very few if any failures... the worst we see with the NF is people over tightening the Zero Stop and binding the turret, loosening it helps fix the problem.

Fanboys always focus on one aspect of the conversation, ignoring all the substance, trying to focus on a single issue.

The NF failure rate is low, very low in fact. We've had polls on here mister 30 posts, and NF ranks up there for reliability in a place Leupold can't even see. </div></div>

Seriously, a stab at my post count? Classy.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

He mentioned your post count to illustrate the fact that there's a lot of history here (on the forum) detailing the numerous failings of Leupold across the membership base which you may not be aware of seeing as you're new (30 posts).

That's how I read it anyway. Alternatively, he may be pissing in your cornflakes...
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">He mentioned your post count to illustrate the fact that there's a lot of history here (on the forum) detailing the numerous failings of Leupold across the membership base which you may not be aware of seeing as you're new (30 posts).

That's how I read it anyway. Alternatively, he may be pissing in your cornflakes... </div></div>

I've been here two days longer than you mister 512 posts. What does that illustrate?
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Like I said, you can't focus on the substance, only a single line...

I get it, it's easier than debating the facts we see more and more issues with the line everyday.

We see "hundreds" of scopes a year, both military and civilian so if you want stats, I am happy to make it public and loud every time a scope breaks, no matter's who's it is... why, because I know through my experience who the winner will be in that little showdown.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: C.K</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

if its pre mark4 is a ultra. </div></div>

Not necessarily, I have a Vari-X III Tactical sitting right here. It's 30mm tube, 50mm objective, mildot reticle and the target turrets like they have on their varmint scopes. I have a mark 4 in the same magnification range and all it looks like they did is swap out the varmint/target turrets for the M1? turrets that are exposed.

edit: glass is just as good as a mk4 too. I hear the new mk4 FFP scopes have improved glass but we'll see.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jackh</div><div class="ubbcode-body">could other people with bad attitudes towards leupold chime in and explain why they feel the way they do? all my buddies swear by them on their hunting scopes. the companies been around for a long time and in my opinion makes quality stuff. i dont have experience with their mark4 line or their customer service though. </div></div>

You ask for it,

Have a old and I mean old Veri XIII 2.5X8X32 never an issue, but it don't get knob twisted either. In 2002 bought a Veri X III 3.5X10X40 was just one cut above a Bushnell Banner to me. Sold it, bought two 4.5X14x50 Mark 4's those POS's went back to Leupold 3 times each and were never right. None tracking POS's, also could not get both target and reticle in focus at the same time. Close but no cigar. Sold both and bought my first USO, now own 3 USO's.

If you and your hunting buds that never knob glass like we do want to buy Leupold fine by me. Same with LE, or Military, if low bidder and the % of fail is good for them by all means go for it. Don't think for a minute Leupold is not in the numbers game in to days world. That is about all they have going, at this point in time.

That said, there are now many glass company's that used to run second fiddle to them back when, but it's a brave new world and others have passed them by in many venues. Market share is one thing, Failures are another, as is QC now done on the buyer's gun.
The bulk of the today's Leupold buyers think there getting quality of old, and that is not the case at all from those scopes I've owned or tested lately.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wslowik</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Seriously, a stab at my post count? Classy. </div></div>

You're reachin' here, Slowy. And of those 30......now 31, most don't offer any contribution what so ever.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Here is some insight... at least I think it is a bit telling
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Calvin Johnston will take over July 19 as president and CEO of Leupold & Stevens Inc., the optics manufacturer based near Beaverton.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Johnston has been group president and CEO of Russell Athletics and the president of public safety equipment company Galls.</span> He has a bachelor's degree from the University of Florida and a master's degree in marketing and business strategy from Northwestern University.

Like Galls, part of Leupold's business comes from supplying the military and police officers. Leupold, a family-owned company, manufactures gun scopes, binoculars, flashlights and rangefinders, and it employs more than 600 people.

<span style="font-weight: bold">In announcing the appointment, the company cited Johnston's record of improving sales and profitability at other companies.</span> </div></div>

They appointed a guy who worked for a clothing and catalog company... so where is the focus, -- sales and profitability, not quality.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Frank

using the items i listed several posts above in this thread

what scope(s) in your mind CLOSEST fits this list ?

1. front focal plane
2. mil/mil or moa/moa scope (matching reticle to adjustment, no conversions)
3. solid warranty
4. low to high variable power range( in the 5-6 times range, ie., 3-18 or 2-10 or 1-10 or 3-15 etc.,)
5. reticle that is usable at all power ranges , not just the high one
6. reticle marks that make sense and easily divide the target
7. glass that is clear, fuzz free and shows true color(coatings)
8. accurate, true (1/10th mil or 1 moa) repeatable adjustments, every time
9. generous eye relief
10. less than $2000
11. if i was LE or mil than illuminated
12. high speed turrets to get me out to 1000 and back in one turn






 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
You ask for it,
</div></div>

Your sig line is awesome.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Is there a certain mk 4 thats failing?
What should I be looking for? Im running a 4.4x14
and have had no issues im aware of unless im the small percentage that got one thats good to go?
I had an issue with one of the hunting scopes but none so far with the mk 4 Any info would be great.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: banshee sws</div><div class="ubbcode-body">frank using the items i listed several posts above in this thread

what scope(s) in your mind CLOSEST fits this list ?

1. front focal plane
2. mil/mil or moa/moa scope (matching reticle to adjustment, no conversions)
3. solid warranty
4. low to high variable power range( in the 5-6 times range, ie., 3-18 or 2-10 or 1-10 or 3-15 etc.,)
5. reticle that is usable at all power ranges , not just the high one
6. reticle marks that make sense and easily divide the target
7. glass that is clear, fuzz free and shows true color(coatings)
8. accurate, true (1/10th mil or 1 moa) repeatable adjustments, every time
9. generous eye relief
10. less than $2000
11. if i was LE or mil than illuminated
12. high speed turrets to get me out to 1000 and back in one turn

</div></div>

What I would recommend, not in any specific order is

Bushnell,
Vortex
Super Sniper HDs

The list is really geared towards $2000 + when you consider all of it...

I see you listed IOR, but their track record is terrible in the reliability department, hence the GEN4 model of the 3-18X...<span style="font-style: italic"> (I still hate it is called a "hide edition" since Me and the Hide had nothing to do with it. ) </span>

If they got it right with the GEN 4, well okay, its got good features based on your list.

But the closest I see to that list is the 3 mentioned. If you simply follow the list I think Vortex is the only one that meets those requirements.

Honestly, I would not be short changing myself if my requirements where that specific. If you want all that, spend the money and the $2000 scope.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Of the two people that are taking part in this thread that suppourt Leupold we still do not have a thread of justification why they are worth their salt. On the other hand there have been a ton a examples showing that Leupold has dropped the ball on quality, price(read value), and QC.

Just wondering but do either of you own a leupold tactical scope? Ever had the chance to compare it to other brands? Why the seemingly blind following? Seriously, you are branding others as brand-bashing fanboys when they provide constructive information, yet you give nothing defending your argument in return. You do realize that you look foolish to say the least, simply based on the way you are conducting your argument.

"My pappy told me that Leupold was the best so it must be true."
grin.gif


In the words of the Colonel Sanders Prof from Billy Madison "Pappy's wrong again!"
grin.gif
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wslowik</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">He mentioned your post count to illustrate the fact that there's a lot of history here (on the forum) detailing the numerous failings of Leupold across the membership base which you may not be aware of seeing as you're new (30 posts).

That's how I read it anyway. Alternatively, he may be pissing in your cornflakes... </div></div>

I've been here two days longer than you mister 512 posts. What does that illustrate? </div></div>

It illustrates a Lack of Participation on Your Part !!!!
laugh.gif
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeo556</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
"My pappy told me that Leupold was the best so it must be true."
grin.gif

</div></div>

Same, I was raised Leupold for everything. You could have a piece of shit or a Leupold.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

i listed IOR cause i am impressed thus far with mine - but only have 400 rounds on it

and i went from a LEUPOLD to it , lol

recently had range time with some shooters who had Hensoldt, S&B, and doing a quick glance from my IOR to the Hensoldt and the S&B, the reticle was useless in the S&B at low power, so fine i couldn't see it when placing it over a natural target , not a white steel or light colored background

the Hensoldt was off the hook nice but it should be for the price; reticle was way more useful than the S&B

IOR for me has what i need ; not all the stuff on my list but close

without spending way more money . .. . is what i am saying

george
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

S&B has more reticles than the one you probably saw... chances are the user had a P4F, I use the P4, or the Klein is a much better reticle usable at lower power.

The Klein in my opinion is the best of the GEN 2 type reticles and pre-dated Premier with the GEN 2... the Klein is their best.

Issue with IOR, the internals are terrible or have been in the past. Great, they have awesome glass, nice reticles, but we have a GEN 4 version of that scope for a reason, if the turrets don't track or can't hold up to recoil, what is the point. Mount a spotting scope on your rifle that is what you have. If you have one that works, awesome... but I favor repeatability over pretty glass, not that am compromising with my European choices, I am just saying I have never missed a shot with my NFs because the glass wasn't up the task.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: banshee sws</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i listed IOR cause i am impressed thus far with mine - but only have 400 rounds on it

and i went from a LEUPOLD to it , lol

recently had range time with some shooters who had Hensoldt, S&B, and doing a quick glance from my IOR to the Hensoldt and the S&B, the reticle was useless in the S&B at low power, so fine i couldn't see it when placing it over a natural target , not a white steel or light colored background

the Hensoldt was off the hook nice but it should be for the price; reticle was way more useful than the S&B

IOR for me has what i need ; not all the stuff on my list but close

without spending way more money . .. . is what i am saying

george </div></div>

I would really consider a Premier 3-15X50 GEN II Mil-Dot. Either single or double turn. It's cheaper than the Hensoldt. Check out also Ilya's thread High End Tactical II, he's written an excellent article comparing NF, SB, Hensoldt, Premier, IOr etc etc.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Tell you story, we can illustrate the difference between Nightforce and Leupold...

We had a class last month of guys using Crane supplied rifles and they had 2 NF prototype scopes with their new Velocity / Mil Reticle.

Well I had some questions about it, and wondered about the thinking to someone at NF... fast forward 3 days or so later, between XMAS and New Years. My phone rings and it;s Jeff Huber.

He spent an hour of his time to explain to me the thinking and giving me a class on how to better take advantage of their new reticle offerings so the end user can get the most out of it. He didn't have to do this, he could have blown it off, but because this was something new they were doing, he took the time to educate me on its optimal use. And he was spot on with his explanations. He knew the system inside and out, not casually but indepth.

Leupold knows how to get a hold of not just me but a lot of other people and can easily address any of these issues. They could set the record straight at any time during any of these debates, but instead they choose to remain silent. Back when this site first started Mike Slack from Leupold had no problem contacting me and this site, he CC'd me along with a slew of lawyers so I could be forced to remove an image of a mil dot reticle on page that explained how to mil a target. That is the difference between them and Nightforce.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Again, Glass along is not a factor for me... a scope with great glass, but with less than perfect internals is nothing more than a fancy spotting scope.

The scopes I list are rock solid, not just pretty packages.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Funny, you see the truth, you point out the problems, which happen far too often, you're a hater of the company...

When class after class the number one scope to fail is Leupold, --then people claim because so many of them are out there, well these are their "tactical" scopes and not the hunting line. When we have a competition with 92 shooters and the one brand with multiple scope failures on the line is Leupold, to the point where people can no longer continue to compete, that is not hate, but a problem within the product line.

However if I see a problem and bring it to the company and they tell me we'll look into it, and I say nothing --- people also get up in arms.

When you point out the scopes "no longer" say Made in USA, people get upset with the messenger, and don't question a company who's prices have gone up, who's failure rates has increased, and who moved to second tier parts enough to lose the Made in USA tag, we are haters.

Sure plenty of scopes are made overseas, but their failure rate is not reflected on their location. For a company like NF, who is bringing things on shore, and is used every bit alongside Leupolds in the military, the failure rate cannot be compared... it's easily 5 to 1, maybe even 10 to 1. Sure Leupolds are packaged with system rifles, but that is not based on success, but volume, the ability to produce replacements better than any other company.

Are they god awful, no not at all, but really would I invest my money in one given the choices, absolutely not. Given the same budget, there are better scopes to invest in, some for less money.

I have a new M5 here to review, I think from the outside it is a decent scope, we'll see how it performs... but other companies out there are definitely beating Leupold at their own game haters or not. </div></div>


NICELY SAID!
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: varmint6</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is there a certain mk 4 thats failing?
What should I be looking for? </div></div>

Canted reticle, knobs that don't track properly, poor return to zero.

Don't let this thread worry you, if yours is working fine then use it and be happy.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?



"Just wondering but do either of you own a leupold tactical scope? Ever had the chance to compare it to other brands? "

Did and extensive tracking test on a 3' x 5.5' pc of cardboard with 1 mil spaced grids and used a APA built .22 trainer. Manners T4, Lilja barrel, sako quad ect. I went up, down, left, and Right through the whole range of adjustments and it tracked just fine for me. All I know is it tracked for me fine. Are there better yes.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Frank are the Luppy fails you see parts not up to snuff or you think its shity builders doing the assy ?

Just wondering if the new leupolds may have a hit or miss quality or are the parts just shit to start ?

I know you see alot of scopes..
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

They asked for my Top 3... I gave my top 3 choices, if they asked for my Top 5 the answer would include two others.

USO does some very good work, and has been getting better all the time. They definitely push the envelope giving so many people what they want. Its hard to offer that much variety and have everything go right all the time.

I have no idea what the problem is, something in the erector assemblies or how they are adjusted. Not the erector tubes, but the springs, because when they go, they go hard. I would bet a re-design of the spring system is necessary if I had to guess. I bet they get knocked off and out of whack right there... so the they no longer track true or hold zero.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Sure there are better scopes out there than Leupold. Everyone has their preferences sort of like fords vs chevy. Of course, Ferarri won't be bitched about by many people, and neither will Schmidt & Bender, Hensoldt, and a couple of others.

I think the posting noting how some people want to jump onto the "me too" bandwagon of criticism was spot on. I'm not denying that Leupold, or most other large companies usually go through periods of "adjustment" or have teething problems when putting new products into their line.

The only Leupold that ever gave me problems was a really old beat up second hand 2-7 I got at a gun show for around $50. It didn't seem to track right, so I sent it to Leupold asking that they go through it. I got back the same scope, completely refinished. The only way I knew it was the old tube was there was one really deep nick in the edge of the objective lens...it was still there. The lenses were replaced, and everything was refurbished...oh, yeah..at no charge.

So, I have no beef with Leupold. I still have about a half dozen of them now on various rifles. I use them quite hard, lots of dialing up, down, banging around in the rocks. They just keep on working.

Sure, there are better scopes out there. But dollar for value on the Leupold line is pretty tough to beat. I expect a scope I pay $3500 for to be far better than a scope I pay $1250 for.

However it is similar to having a $2000 rifle that I can't outshoot..until I can outshoot the rifle, I don't need a $6000 rifle. As my $1250 Leupolds do everything I ask them to, I don't yet need a $3500 scope. It is the same with the wonderful scopes that cost $3500. I'm just too damn cheap to pay another $2000 for features that I will get very limited use out of because I just don't need those features yet.

They are great scopes, and I would love to have one, but for now, I think I would be better off using that $2000 to buy more practice ammo. When I can out shoot my rifle, and my scope no longer is enough, then it is time for me to spend that other $2000.

The one thing I have noticed with Leupold is difficulty resolving edges of orange/red targets clearly. There is something about their lens coating that makes the edges of red/orange targets fuzzy. My group size shrinks noticeably when I shoot targets in the blue/green/ end of the spectrum. (black is best).
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

For a $1250 scope, Leupold is worth about $800 max, that is where their quality tops out at...

Take SWFA with their new Super Sniper Line, that is an $800 worth $1200, not the other way around.

Dollar for Dollar what you get to what you receive, Nightforce makes the best scope on the market. They have features, choices, and rock solid reliability that is not compromised. The SFP scopes are every bit as bulletproof as their FFP model.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

I certainly have no disagreement over the quality of Nightforce's scopes. Solid performance, options, and from what I hear, they are responsive to customer input. Being responsive to customer input is quite unusual, and very noteworthy.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wslowik</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Sure plenty of scopes are made overseas, but their failure rate is not reflected on their location. For a company like NF, who is bringing things on shore, and is used every bit alongside Leupolds in the military, the failure rate cannot be compared... it's easily 5 to 1, maybe even 10 to 1.</div></div>

Which is it, 5 to 1, or 10 to 1? I mean, you pulled those numbers right out of the air. Why even make claims like that without backing them up at all?</div></div>

I can back it up </div></div>

LOL. Fuckin dumbass. Nice way to challenge the owner of this forum with your 30 posts. </div></div>

I posted one comment earlier and have been following it all day, but come on now. If you have something contructive to add to either side of the argument that is fine but lets be profesional here. Facts are facts, opinions are opinions. As I said earlier, I have used Leupolds for decades now since I was a child. Do I love the company? Yes, because of the memories I have with their equipment. I have 2 Mark 4 Spotting scopes, an old FXIII and have used their equipment, M3s, under life and death circumstances for years now. All of this equipment was & is still great. But as a loyal customer I also have to be honest and say as I did earlier that their QC has degraded. We had 2 out of 3 M1s on our 107s with terribly canted reticles. To an untrained or inexperienced observer it wasn't noticable. But to us it was, and I find that unaccepatable. For a company to have a contract with the government and know that lives are on the line and to have a 3% margin of error on something that involves lives. Sorry but that is unacceptable. So yes, when it comes to scopes I spend my money else where, 1 Hensoldt, 1 USO, and my trusty FX. But for spotting I still find my Mark 4s hard to beat
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

I have Leupold scopes I got back in the early to mid 90's I still use to this day on my hunting guns and they are tanks.

But recently I compared a Leupold Vx II to a Nikon Prostaff and I ended up going with the cheaper Prostaff because it just seemed to be of better quality when I looked through them. I have had a few slips and falls when hunting and the Prostaff has withstood it all.

As far as their tactical scopes, I would not pass up a used Mk4 LR/T if the price was right. I just don't want to take a gamble so I'll just get a NF NXS mil/mil MLR.

If Leupold would improve their QC and offer more options the would not have a hard time getting back some market share.

While Nightforce I'm sure makes a shit load of money as a company, Leupold makes a FUCK TON of money so they can afford a few bad apples and write it off as an acceptable failure rate.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While Nightforce I'm sure makes a shit load of money as a company, Leupold makes a FUCK TON of money so they can afford a few bad apples and write it off as an acceptable failure rate. </div></div>

Unfortunately.
As long as they are winning gov't contracts, everybody else is second rate in their eyes. The whole, screw you then don't buy it attitude. Which they can have with gov't contracts backing them up.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Just received my second Nightforce, a 5.5x22x50 NXS with zero stop, high speed turrets, MOA/MOA with the NPR1 ret. The other NF is the 12x42x56 BR model.

Having owned several Leupolds in Var-XII through Mk4 I can say I've never experienced a failure but, so far, the NXS and BR models have been superior to my Leupolds in everyway. I see another NXS in my future.

Over the last two years, when asked by clients what scope to get, I've been recommending the Nightforce NXS or the S&B PMII. The Vortex HD Razor will also be on that list in the future.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Hi here in Australia we seem to be the dumping ground for many companies the theory is send them to Australia as it is a lot harder to send them back or that is what it seems.

I shoot a lot of long range F Class and the first problem with Leupold is they dont have a scope that is suitable over 25 power so you are very limited then we get to real issues. on the range most shoot from 300 to 1000 yards i shoot to 150 yards in competition and when you are winding the turrets up and down then winding wind on and off all day the first scopes to die are Leupolds well in quality scopes some shitty 400 dollar scopes are never going to work no matter on the brand. Hell even fixed weaver 24 and 36 power scopes trach perfectly for long times but unfortunatly their optics have deteriorated badly in recent times.

Also we have other shooters that once their rifle is zero's with a leupold scope they can not wind the turrets at all or the scope does not move until the recoil then go's a mile.

As for the guy that tested a scope on a 22 trainer and thinks it is now good t go you are totaly wrong throw it on a heavy recoiling rifle and mabe a muzzle break to reverse the recoil impulse and realy hurt a poorly manufactured scope once again the Leupold seems to break before others. I personaly have had a Nightforce BR scope shit it self in the middle of a state championships and when lent a friends NXS won the last day so it was an individual scope problem. yes nightforce can have problems but we reccomend and sell more of them for F Class than any other scope because they generaly work well for along time. Although we have found that some of the high mag nightforces can be a pain with focusing the reticle or th target and not liking to have both clear without paralax but then Nightforce will actualy tell you to return the scope for free as they send you the replied paid number then they will send the scope back to the US to be examined and fixed but i have never seen a report come back stating there was ever an issue with the scope they always seem to say no fault found so if there is any issue they are keeping it in house and fixing the problem.

So for long range target shooting i would never use a Leuopld or long range hunting or if my life was depended on it.

I have a few old leupold scopes a VXII 3-9 and a VXIII 2-10 thay ae OK for the money but my long range scope is a Premier 5-25 and my other main scope that gets used for munting is a kahles then i have a March 10-60X52 for target shooting they realy have broken new ground in the scope market for target and tacticle users but i dont know how well their tacticle scopes will handle the realy rough stuff i also have a 2.5-10 Nightforce for my hunting rifle it works very well and is Mill/Mill with zero stop and also illumination what else could you need for a big game scope.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter19802003</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While Nightforce I'm sure makes a shit load of money as a company, Leupold makes a FUCK TON of money so they can afford a few bad apples and write it off as an acceptable failure rate. </div></div>

Unfortunately.
As long as they are winning gov't contracts, everybody else is second rate in their eyes. The whole, screw you then don't buy it attitude. Which they can have with gov't contracts backing them up. </div></div>

Sad truth, I know. But where one company fails due to shitty products or ethics, others rise right up. Like Vortex and their PST series. Once they get all of the bugs worked out of the first run of PST's, I'm hoping Viper PST becomes the Leupold MK4 killer.

Plus they're cheaper. However, I haven't gotten hands-on with a PST yet so I can't compare the quality and glass to a Leupold MK4.

Maybe Frank can offer his opinion on that??
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Well to be perfectly fair I don't think that anyone should expect the PST to be "better" that the Mk IV's and I really like Vortex. Besides you are trying to compare a SFP scope to a FFP scope here.
I would imagine that the glass might be a push, but the turrets and mechanics of the MK IV "should be" superior. I am not a Leupold hater, just won't pay them what they want for their products anymore.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McKinneyMike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well to be perfectly fair I don't think that anyone should expect the PST to be "better" that the Mk IV's and I really like Vortex. Besides you are trying to compare a SFP scope to a FFP scope here.
I would imagine that the glass might be a push, but the turrets and mechanics of the MK IV "should be" superior. I am not a Leupold hater, just won't pay them what they want for their products anymore. </div></div>

The FFP Viper PST mil/mil is like $850 man:

http://swfa.com/Vortex-4-16x50-Viper-PST-30mm-Rifle-Scope-P44561.aspx

The SFP are only $649 so for someone on a budget they are a really good option.

The glass on my Nikon optics is just as good as Leupolds at almost twice the cost so I'm hoping Viper PST can give Leupold a run for their money.

Completely agree with you though, I won't pay Loopy for what they want for what they offer anymore either.
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoreSnake08</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Crossing the $1500 mark for me on an optic to go on a factory remington with upgraded stock is out of the question for me. </div></div>

me too! im just trying to find the absolute best bang for buck i can get at that price range. the list of things banshee posted are all things i like. i guess the thing to do is rate those items in the order that i want the most, then find scopes in my price range that fit the bill.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vprtoad</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I feel the new M5 mil/mil FFP is a one of the best value's on the market. I did a tracking test on mine and it work's fantastic

wish I could post some pics

Nothing wrong with lupy's YMMV of course </div></div>

go to tinypic.com and host them on there for free. copy and paste the image link into the thread. and what does YMMV mean?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If you and your hunting buds that never knob glass like we do want to buy Leupold fine by me. </div></div>

i dont own any leupolds. what do you mean "knob glass like we do"?
 
Re: whats wrong with leupold?

YMMV = your mileage may vary, meaning you may get different results.

Knob Glass = using the turrets for elevation and/or windage correction rather than holds. The tactical shooter typically use their turrets more than the conventional hunter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Rifle Scopes Slide locking adjustment knobs
Replies
0
Views
156
Keokuk
K
eboggs
Spotters Looking for a mid-level 18x pair of Binos.
Replies
3
Views
174
Glassaholic
Glassaholic
Prsshooter25
SOLD WTS Leupold Mk 5 HD 3.6-18
Replies
3
Views
332
Prsshooter25
Prsshooter25
L
SOLD Leupold VX6 3-18x44 CDS Illuminated Scope
Replies
3
Views
116
Cswedeen
Cswedeen
H
Zeroing optic with a previously adjusted zero stop
Replies
2
Views
202
HeShootsHeScores
H
Top Bottom
Back