Leupold VX-III 4.5-14 CDS problems!!

[Rooster52]

I have not been a fan of the bullet drop type optics.It would seem to me that you are headed for trouble with any scope that you are constantly adjusting the trajectory. I sight in with the bullet and load I choose and seldom ever touch it after that. that may be why I have not notice any problems with my scopes.

 

[mtmuley]

Form, hopefully scope manufacturers are listening to complaints on forums such as this. No better way to improve than to listen to actual users. More hunters should take the time to really stretch the yardage with their equipment. I bet it would open a lot of eyes, and not just where scopes are concerned. I thought I knew stuff until I ventured into the longer ranges. Then I was back to zero again, so to speak. mtmuley

 

[TimeOnTarget]

Thank you mtmuley,


To be clear I am not trying to prove Leupold or any other brand inferrier. To me gear has about as much emotional value as what brand windshield wipers is used on my truck. It's just a tool.

However, the OP's problem is not at all unusual and not stating facts goes against the very purpose of forums. Regular hunting scopes are just not built to be dialed, even something as simple as a CDS. Yet more and more hunters are starting to shoot past 200-300 yards and realizing that dialing for elevation is a better way to go than BDC reticles.

The problem comes from a couple of angles. First is that hunters don't have the knowledge or experience in long range shooting to understand what is required of not only themselves but their rifle/scope/bullet/etc. The second is that while for a time I had thought that manufactures were deliberately marketing weak hunting scopes to LR shooters to make money, I eventually realized after talking with enough reps and even having them on ranges where their scopes failed in front of them, that they just don't know either. They don't have the background or skill to understand it.

Hitting things with a rifle especially at long range in field conditions consistently requires the rifle system, that is-

1) Action/barrel
2) Stock and bedding
3) Scope
4) Bases and rings
5) Ammo


To be completely stable every single day, every time. Now we can say " _______ scope is great sorry you had a problem but they have a great warranty", but how does that help the OP, wildwyo, or the others who have had repeated scope failures? When I can take 10 brand new scopes (and I have) unwrap them, put them in a machine and test tracking, return to zero, reticle cant, and impact testing and all 10 suffer from incorrect adjustment values, 3 out of 10 failed return to zero by over .5 MOA, all suffered canted reticles, and almost half failed impact testing by .5 MOA, that's a serious problem.


It certainly is not limited to one brand. In fact even with all of that, I would rather have a fixed 6x Leupold than just about any other regular hunting scope regardless of price.






MTgunner,

For your stated use and need, look at Nightforce NXS compacts and SWFA's SS series. As well the Bushnell LRHS is a good choice.

Form,

I know it was asked earlier and maybe I missed the answer, But just what the heck do you do for a living where you get to play with hunting gear all day?

 

[noharleyyet]

Good points on the long distance twisting resets

Form,

I know it was asked earlier and maybe I missed the answer, But just what the heck do you do for a living where you get to play with hunting gear all day?

Latin to English
1. formidilosus causing dread
2. formidilosus fear
3. formidilosus terror

So, this is how you say "formidilosus" in english.

 

[1_pointer]

Good discussion and info.

Cornell, thanks for making sure it stays civil.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

For the average guy that's not using all these newfangled adjustable turrets I think many that own Leupolds will stay with them every day of the week. They haven't been in business as long as they have with a great reputation and warranty for nothing!

 

[SunRiverMan]

People used to tell me buy Burris because they are made in America. Not anymore. I used Nikon for a long time. Now all I buy is Leupold. I never have an issue with them and trust if I do I will be taken care of.

I never heard of so many complaints against Leupold and still don't believe it. Something is wrong here. Must be a counterfeit Leupold. Peace!

 

[Formidilosus]

VAspeed,


Yes and no. For sure there are less issues for set and forget shooters, but there are still problems with impact shifts. This can be caused by recoil, drops, bumps, etc, it can happen acutely but is diffidently cumulative with the scopes erector "lifespan" going down with every shot or bump. Unfortunately there really isn't a way to really know with a lightweight built scope like Leupolds, Swarovskis, Zeiss, etc., what drop is going to cause a significant shift. Or for that matter at which round will the cumulative effects reach a point where they are noticeable to the shooter.

You could have two identical scopes and mount them on the same rifle with the same bases/rings and one loses zero from a 6 inch drop on grass and the other only shifts a half inch at 100 yards from a waist high drop. When a scope is built for weight first there is a whole list of things that can go wrong.

If for example the average "hunting" scope will last for 1,000 rounds before the accumulative effects break it and a Nightforce NXS will go 100,000 rounds before failing, it's also saying that all else being equal the Nightforce will fend abuse much better. Now most might say that the NF is overbuilt in comparison to regular scopes, however the purpose of a sight is to stay zeroed no matter what. They're pretty useless if they don't. In that case then an NXS is built "right" as far as a sighting system goes.

 

[Rooster52]

when hunting and hiking the high country ounces add up.I prefer a lightweight rifle with a lightweight scope.just my preference. I am sure there can be prolems with any scope .Just because it has never happened to me,don't mean it never will.
Getting some good info here.

 

[danr55]

Just a silly question.. Are the rings set so close to the center section of the scope that they may be impingeing on the turrets ability to move the gimble? I know it used to be SOP with fixed power scopes on heavy recoiling rifles to set the rings right up against the turret housing to prevent the scope from moving in the rings. With Variable power scopes or scopes with side focus, this practice can cause the rings to bind with the gimbles in the scope. I know this from experience.. Just one thing to check.

 

[deer_shooter]

MT,


All the people that say they've never had a problem is an interesting phenomenon and either means that they don't shoot all that much and/or don't test their scopes for tracking, repeatability and return to zero.

Bullchit.

 

[Gr8bawana]

To be clear I am not trying to prove Leupold or any other brand inferrier. To me gear has about as much emotional value as what brand windshield wipers is used on my truck. It's just a tool.

It sounds like that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking scopes whatever the brand may be and putting thousands and thousands of rounds and making adjustment after adjustment to make them fail. That is many times more that the average hunter is going to do in a lifetime, lets be realistic.
Is your job product testing?
Just seems strange that the majority of peolple with a Leoupold scope can say they have never had a problem.
Are we all lying about it?

 

[StrutNut]

It sounds like that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking scopes whatever the brand may be and putting thousands and thousands of rounds and making adjustment after adjustment to make them fail. That is many times more that the average hunter is going to do in a lifetime, lets be realistic.

I really wish more manufacturers would do the same as we would have much better products to use in the field. Its a shame when we have to spend our hard earned money to be the test team for some manufacturers.

Really, trying to make some product fail is exactly how you would test it for possible design/component improvements. Testing a product to where you know it will succeed to me seems pointless.

 

[schmalts]

I don't think comparing the vx3 to the Nightforce is fair. How many vx3's can you buy for the price of one nightforce!

 

[jryoung]

It sounds like that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking scopes whatever the brand may be and putting thousands and thousands of rounds and making adjustment after adjustment to make them fail. That is many times more that the average hunter is going to do in a lifetime, lets be realistic.
Just seems strange that the majority of peolple with a Leoupold scope can say they have never had a problem.
Are we all lying about it?

I think it's fair to say that there are different levels of the spectrum when it comes to analysis and issues. I've never had a problem with a leupold scope, but I've probably only put 1,000 -1,500 rounds against a collective 7 of them. For those that shoot thousands of rounds in a year against a single scope their analysis/needs/perspective is likely to be far more detailed than the casual shooter/hunter.

There's not necessarily a right or wrong answer, it's just where your sensitivities land and for the vast majority of us, if there are issues, we likely will not notice them as they aren't on our spectrum.

 

[jryoung]

I don't think comparing the vx3 to the Nightforce is fair. How many vx3's can you buy for the price of one nightforce!

Depends on what kind of deal you can offer?

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

I think that there is a dramatic difference in context between parties here. .5 MOA or MIL shift in zero or tracking is inpercievable to 98% of folks, but does matter when repeated dialing dope at longer ranges.

 

[Formidilosus]

I'm continuing this because the thread is about a scope marketed for LR hunting that failed. It is not to demean anyone or any brand, however shooting at LR and killing animals at LR has come into vogue, and it has done so without some very important information being understood by both the manufactures and the hunting public.

It sounds like that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking scopes whatever the brand may be and putting thousands and thousands of rounds and making adjustment after adjustment to make them fail. That is many times more that the average hunter is going to do in a lifetime, lets be realistic.
Is your job product testing?
Just seems strange that the majority of peolple with a Leoupold scope can say they have never had a problem.
Are we all lying about it?

Not thousands and thousands to make a Leupold fail. The average is less than two hundred rounds if it works correctly out of the box. That's two hundred rounds before it either stops tracking correctly or fails to return to zero.


I got it- I'm saying that your favorite scope isn't all it's cracked up to be... For most people what they buy is an emotional investment. For me it is not. I'll bet I have more Leupolds in the room that I am in, than every person in this thread has combined. 15 years ago it would have been hard to find a bigger fan of them than I.

I don't think comparing the vx3 to the Nightforce is fair. How many vx3's can you buy for the price of one nightforce!

About two 3.5-10x40mm Leupolds for one 2.5-10x32mm Nightforce. Here's a question- how many would it take to equal the lifespan of that one Nightforce? But if you want to go with price, an SWFA SS 3-9x42mm is less money than a 3.5-10x Leupold with CDS. They track perfectly out of the box, they hold zero through ridiculous amounts of abuse, and they return to zero everytime.

I think that there is a dramatic difference in context between parties here. .5 MOA or MIL shift in zero or tracking is inpercievable to 98% of folks, but does matter when repeated dialing dope at longer ranges.

I agree that most wouldn't and do not notice when their scope shifts .5 MOA and truthfully most wouldn't and don't notice if it shifts a mil (which is 3.6 inches at 100 yards btw...). The reason for that is why so many believe that 400 yard shots are "hard". Most do not get a true zero and it's not at all uncommon for even experienced hunters to have a zero that is off by at least 1 MOA. Combine that with the mythical hunting rifle that shoota .5 MOA all day for three rounds.... "If I do my part" (which means the actual cone is +/- 1.5 MOA) and a scope with a .5 MOA shift and it's very easy to get a miss by two MOA. So take that deer at 400 with it's 8in vital zone, 2 MOA is a tick over 8 inches. It's very easy to have a 1-2 MOA error built in before you ever take the shot.

 

[Formidilosus]

And just so it's understood that I have and do hunt with Leupolds. Here's a few dinks all spot and stalk....












Two were with Leupolds...

 

[Gunner46]

For me, personally, this thread is just another "too tech with myself" to add any real value beyond 99.7% of our readers. (3rd SD for those Stat & Tech junkies)

I understand the thesis. It may be correct and I'm not even going to argue the findings.

I just don't see it as meaningful for most hunting purposes and unnecessarily devalues workable in-field experience that is pertinent to the majority of us.