Leupold vs. Vortex warranty

[Jcann]

For years Leupold suffered from not listening to customers wants/needs. They were late to the party in offering modern reticles, zero stops, and other amenities the long range shooter/hunter desired. Leupold was totally absent in the game of PRS and was considered your granddads scope by many who had moved on to NF, S&B, Vortex, ZCO, Tangent Theta, Kahles, Bushnell, etc. They have upped their game and are finally making their mark in this community now.

 

[Jcann]

I think the majority of us would be surprised with high end scopes (>$2000) inability to correctly/precisely track. Frank over at snipers hide evaluates every scope of his students prior to a long range class. His findings were fascinating on the amount of scopes both medium and high end that needed an elevation and/or windage correction factor. My Razor on my 7WSM has an elevation correction factor of 0.9

 

[WoodsCraft]

For years Leupold suffered from not listening to customers wants/needs. They were late to the party in offering modern reticles, zero stops, and other amenities the long range shooter/hunter desired. Leupold was totally absent in the game of PRS and was considered your granddads scope by many who had moved on to NF, S&B, Vortex, ZCO, Tangent Theta, Kahles, Bushnell, etc. They have upped their game and are finally making their mark in this community now.

No sir not correct the Ultra and Later Mark 4 scopes were there early on as were their varmint and BR offerings . I do not like to make assumptions about other members especially when I don't know em , but making statements like that indicates you're not all that long in the tooth from a shooting perspective .

Vortex wasn't in business at all when Leupolds were winning precision rifle competitions , Bushnell was still cranking out mediocre quality "value" optics . They've never been known for making top quality optics.

I still have a couple Leupold BR scopes that are absolutely still competitive today on rifles.

 

[dennishoddy]

I think the majority of us would be surprised with high end scopes (>$2000) inability to correctly/precisely track. Frank over at snipers hide evaluates every scope of his students prior to a long range class. His findings were fascinating on the amount of scopes both medium and high end that needed an elevation and/or windage correction factor. My Razor on my 7WSM has an elevation correction factor of 0.9

How do they establish that correction factor? Use a ransom rest to take the human part out of the equation?
Edited for punctuation.

 

[JEVapa]

The only complaint I and everyone else has with it is it’s stiff magnification ring.

That's why you gotta get a throw lever...makes life much easier. I had them on mine and it works great.

 

[JEVapa]

How do they establish that correction factor? Use a ransom rest to take the human part out of the equation.

There's a methodology/methodologies for evaluating a scope's tracking capability. The best way we've found is to use a 10 mil scale for 100m on a target board. You lock the platform at 100m (you will also see if the reticle really is correct too) from the target at its start point, and adjust the EL turret to ten and back. That a simpleton explanation of it, but there will be various test procedures done in all that that can take all day.
You have to have a collimator and a lab setup with a camera to assess without a human eyeball in the mix. Still need thumb and forefingers to turn the turret and eyeballs for the turret marks.

 

[Jcann]

No sir not correct the Ultra and Later Mark 4 scopes were there early on as were their varmint and BR offerings . I do not like to make assumptions about other members especially when I don't know em , but making statements like that indicates you're not all that long in the tooth from a shooting perspective .

Vortex wasn't in business at all when Leupolds were winning precision rifle competitions , Bushnell was still cranking out mediocre quality "value" optics . They've never been known for making top quality optics.

I still have a couple Leupold BR scopes that are absolutely still competitive today on rifles.

I’ve been in the long range game a long time. Please school me on which Mark 4 scopes fifteen years ago had zero stops, first focal plane, 34mm tubes, illumination, 30 or more MRAD of adjustment a usable reticle other than mil dot. Leupold enjoyed a fat and happy life as an optic for the everyday hunter but when the everyday hunter needed more and asked for it Leupold didn’t respond. Sure they had something for the bench rest shooter but that scope doesn’t serve a purpose in the mountains of Colorado after elk or in the plains after antelope

My argument isn’t that Leupold makes a bad product. They make a very good product. My argument is they are much slower in meeting the needs of the customer, and if I’m going to spend thousands of dollars on a lifetime product, they damn well better take care of me in a timely manner. Also, Vortex is veteran owned. I would rather support them than the liberals out in Oregon.

 

[Jcann]

That's why you gotta get a throw lever...makes life much easier. I had them on mine and it works great.

I’ve got one and it’s still very stiff

 

[dennishoddy]

I’ve been in the long range game a long time. Please school me on which Mark 4 scopes fifteen years ago had zero stops, first focal plane, 34mm tubes, illumination, 30 or more MRAD of adjustment a usable reticle other than mil dot. Leupold enjoyed a fat and happy life as an optic for the everyday hunter but when the everyday hunter needed more and asked for it Leupold didn’t respond. Sure they had something for the bench rest shooter but that scope doesn’t serve a purpose in the mountains of Colorado after elk or in the plains after antelope

My argument isn’t that Leupold makes a bad product. They make a very good product. My argument is they are much slower in meeting the needs of the customer, and if I’m going to spend thousands of dollars on a lifetime product, they damn well better take care of me in a timely manner. Also, Vortex is veteran owned. I would rather support them than the liberals out in Oregon.

Off topic, but Leupold is also involved in instrumentation. We used one of their level recorders to record lake levels when I worked at Sooner Power Plant.
Back on topic, I've owned one VariX-II. It had the worst parallax of any scope I've ever owned and never bought another one. That was in the 80's and it went out the door with one of the few rifles/guns I've ever sold.
Good to hear they have upped their game.

 

[Jcann]

There's a methodology/methodologies for evaluating a scope's tracking capability. The best way we've found is to use a 10 mil scale for 100m on a target board. You lock the platform at 100m (you will also see if the reticle really is correct too) from the target at its start point, and adjust the EL turret to ten and back. That a simpleton explanation of it, but there will be various test procedures done in all that that can take all day.
You have to have a collimator and a lab setup with a camera to assess without a human eyeball in the mix. Still need thumb and forefingers to turn the turret and eyeballs for the turret marks.

Frank basically does it like you said but he removes the scope from the rifle and places it on an extremely heavy base which is bubble leveled with a milled pic rail