Leupold!

[Rifletom]

While checking on another site lately, I noticed in their optics section a LOT of Leupold bashing. Yes, there is some Leupold backing of course, me included. I just wanted to ask people here what your opinions on Leupold scope are. Rifle, shotgun or handgun. Thanks for any feedback.
I just couldn't believe all the bashing over there. Thanks again.

[BigAl52]

Ive own one or two. I dont have any issues with them but I think Burris builds an equal scope and there right here in Greeley. So if I have any warranty needs and ( I have in the past) I just drop it off at the factory. For that reason when I buy a scope its usually a Burris.

[North Country Gal]

What's with all the bashing? I like and use Leupold scopes, but I use a lot of brands of scopes and I do think some are better values. For instance, I've always found that I got better optics for the dollar with Nikon scopes, though. I'd typically have to move up to the higher levels of the Leupold line to equal the optics I could get in a less expensive Nikon. I'll also put the Bushnell Elite series (made in Japan) as better values. Yeah, I think you do pay a premium for the Leupold name, but that premium gets you the best customer service in the optics business. I can also tell you that when I sell used scopes, I can hardly get ten feet in the door at a gun show without getting an offer if I'm selling in a Leupold. Not so with any other brand. I guess my response to all that Leupold bashing would be, if you don't like Leupold, don't buy one.

[Rifletom]

Al, I only have two Leupold's myself and they seem fine to me. I have four Weaver's that are superb scopes. These with the Japanese glass.
NCG, thank you for your response. I agree; don't like something, don't buy it. As mentioned in my OP, I'm fine with the Leupold's I use. It was all the trash talk on the other forum that got my attention.

[Ernie]

I have 4 Leupold rifle scopes and I have no complaints with them except maybe the cost. I am with everyone else, buy what you like.

[Greyhawk]

I am a big fan of Leupold scopes. But, it is probably just my personal preference.
I'm not much into 'bashing' products... And I'm glad that our group, (family, crew) here at The Henry Forum isn't either. Kind of a nice place to hang out online.

[bandit1250]

A lot of the negative comments about Leupold is from the new Freedom scopes that does not use the old traditional shaped turrets that Leupold used for years. Folks that were Leupold fans just can't seem to get use to the bulky looking turrets they have now. The Freedom glass is very clear in my
3-9x33 EFR scopes but there clicks are not real positive like you would expect from Leupold. I took one of my CZ Grand Finales that has a Vari-X II 4-12x40 on it and is before the Freedom scopes came out and it was sighted in. So one evening I sat in the living room and I clicked it 40 clicks down and then 40 clicks back up to where I started. Then 40 up from the original setting and back again. I repeated that for at least ten times. Then I did the same with the windage left and right. I then had it back where I started and then I counted about 20 clicks each way and the clicks felt more positive and actually made a more distinct click when moved. I read an article once where you should break your adjustments in when new to wear any burrs in the notches to smooth them out and get a more positive click that is consistent. So that is another complaint I hear is the inconsistency of the click values in their scopes. I used the 40 clicks from where this scope was sighted in on this rifle because I will never use up that amount of adjustment from where it is now. This may well be my favorite 4-12 Leupold if it continues to perform like it did the last time at the range. I moved it from its sight in and returned back to where it was and it was right back on target. I plan to do the same thing with my other Vari-X II 4-12 scopes. The Weavers and the Nikons are nice scopes but are no longer made. They will still have their warranty but with Weaver they send you a Bushnell that may be a lower priced version than the Weaver you returned. Happened to my best friend and he threw a fit with Weaver and they sent him a better one. Nikon may substitute a pair of binoculars if no scope is available for warranty on the broken one. Leupold has a warranty that matches the Henry warranty and that says a lot about a company. Sorry for the long winded reply.

[Rifletom]

Long winded reply is fine. I certainly like the way you fine tuned those Leupold's clicking. Most sites I look at regarding optics seem to like Leupold's; lower end or high end. Most people don't shoot as much as some I've read about, but, for the average shooter, like myself, my scopes all work perfect.
I've had a couple of clunkers, only a couple, and they weren't Leupold's. Or [older] Weaver's. Or Burris. Thanks for your post bandit.

[Mags]

I have no complaints about the Leupold scope I have.

[Hatchdog]

I have a couple of the new Freedoms and yes, the turrets look funky compared to older Leupold. Both of mine are on rifles that once I sight them in I have no intention of moving the turrets again. As long as they hold zero I don’t see the turrets being an issue. I have a Votex Viper target scope with target turrets that I adjust as I change distances/shooting conditions which makes the clicks a more important feature. So far I’m perfectly happy with my Leupold Freedoms scopes.

[Mags]

.
The only Leupold scope turret in their current product offering that looks 'bulky' to me is the turret on their service rifle scope.

[roddy]

I have 3 Leupolds now. I would have more if they were less expensive, and less if Nikon hadn't decided to pull the plug on riflescopes. Like NCG, I have found that performance for dollar, Nikon was one of the best, and the brand I usually turned to. If I had any complaints about Nikon (and I do), it would be that they are one of the worst for getting carried away with eyepiece size. There is no need for a 44mm diameter eyepiece on a scope that has a 32mm objective lens. I like to mount my scopes low, and that 'feature' has forced me to Burris or Leupold on a few occasions, just to clear a bolt handle.
Burris makes good glass, but leans more towards hunting applications. The glass is great, but the reticle is usually a little thicker than I like, and they really like their BDC feature. I prefer a thin crosshair with no BS, other than maybe a target dot. Their Timberline 4.5-14 X 32 AO is a nice compact scope, and would be a good alternative to the 3-9 X 33 EFR Leupold (at a better price point), except for the reticle. The single brightest/clearest scope I have is a Burris...a 2.5-10 X 42 Veracity with a 30mm tube.
Leupold has been one of the better manufacturers at resisting the trend of using oversized eyepieces, and I appreciate that. Their 3-9 X 33 EFR is the only scope I could find that would mount on my 77/22 with low rings. The Nikon 3-9 X 40 EFR wouldn't even fit with Medium rings (due to bolt handle clearance). The above mentioned Burris fit with mediums (and room to spare), but just kissed the bolt handle with lows. Also, as mentioned above, is price...up here in Canada, things are usually more costly due to our Dollar. This difference seems disproportionate when it comes to certain things, and Leupold's products are one of those things. For example, that VX Freedom 3-9 X 33 EFR scope is usually $500 plus tax (13% here in Ontario) up here. I can get the Nikon 'equivalent' for under $300, and the Burris for just over $300. That alone is the main reason I don't have more Leupolds.

[Yornoc3]

I have quite an assortment of scope brands, but the most common are Weaver, Burris and Leupold. I find that when I'm looking to upgrade I seem to go with Leupold. I think they're the best combination of quality, light weight and ease of mounting, not to mention the warranty. And I'm totally on board with their models that still have traditional turret design and slender eyepieces. Some of the other current scopes could benefit by starving off a few ounces .