Print Page | Close Window

VX-II vs. VX-3

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Rifle Scopes
Forum Description: Centerfire long gun scopes
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=26685
Printed Date: March/28/2024 at 05:46
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: VX-II vs. VX-3
Posted By: Stud Duck
Subject: VX-II vs. VX-3
Date Posted: December/22/2010 at 22:28
I'm getting ready to scope a new rifle and these are the two scopes I'm focusing on.
 
I own VX-II & the "older" VX-III scopes...I know the the difference in features between the two scopes, but what I can't decide is, as far as performance and optical clarity are concerned, is the new VX-3 worth that much more than a VX-II?
 
Input appreciated.



Replies:
Posted By: Chris Farris II
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 08:40
The new VX-3 is the best value as far as what you're getting for your money under the Leupold name, but that is just my opinion. With the step up into the Twilight lens System that is a pretty big step up over the VX-II.

-------------
One day your life will flash before your eyes; Make sure it's worth watching.


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 09:30
I like the VX-3 series.  Optically, they aren't far behind the Conquest.

I thought the Vx-II series was mediocre, at best, and I owned several.


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: travis13
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:19
I believe the VX-3 is quite a bit better than the VX-II. I have used both and I feel the VX-3 is a great scope. I think there are a few scopes that are on par with the VX-3 for less money: Monarch and Elite, but the warranty and being made in the USA means alot to me. I've got Monarchs, Elite 4200's, VX-3, and Conquest. The Conquest is the best optically, but the others are not far behind. I rate the VX-3 just above the Monarch and just below the 4200. There is just a since of confidence and assurance when you have a Leupy scope on your rifle. Get the VX-3


Posted By: tjtjwdad
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:19
I agree with Chris & Matt. 


Posted By: SVT_Tactical
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:22
Originally posted by travis13 travis13 wrote:

I believe the VX-3 is quite a bit better than the VX-II. I have used both and I feel the VX-3 is a great scope. I think there are a few scopes that are on par with the VX-3 for less money: Monarch and Elite, but the warranty and being made in the USA means alot to me. I've got Monarchs, Elite 4200's, VX-3, and Conquest. The Conquest is the best optically, but the others are not far behind. I rate the VX-3 just above the Monarch and just below the 4200. There is just a since of confidence and assurance when you have a Leupy scope on your rifle. Get the VX-3
 
 
Guess I was wrong.  _EDIT
 
Edit again, I was right
iI hope that doens't mean to much cause they are only assembled in teh US, not made.  Parts still  made somewhere else
 
E


Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:28
Actually all the gold ring scopes are made in the US parts an all.  THey have a pretty neat video on their site about that.

I have an FX2 4x and will say the glass is pretty sub par IMO, not even comparable to my 4200, Sightron big sky, Trijicon scopes.  Honestly my Bushnell Legend looks better to me.   I don't have a VX3 but from what everyone says they are much better. 


-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: SVT_Tactical
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:30
Originally posted by supertool73 supertool73 wrote:

Actually all the gold ring scopes are made in the US parts an all.  THey have a pretty neat video on their site about that.

I have an FX2 4x and will say the glass is pretty sub par IMO, not even comparable to my 4200, Sightron big sky, Trijicon scopes.  Honestly my Bushnell Legend looks better to me.   I don't have a VX3 but from what everyone says they are much better. 
 
Well i learned soemthing new.  thanks ST


Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:30
I guess the glass is imported, but they can't really help that one.

-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: SVT_Tactical
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:32
Well see I was saying if it says made in the us is should be 100% made in US, not the main part somewhere else. 
 
it be like saying you where 99% straight and 1% gay, peopled still call you gay even though its only 1%Wink


Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 10:34
Laugh Above


-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 13:01
Buy the VX3 it is well worth the difference, a better question to ask is do I buy VX3 or Zeiss Conquest because if the price is anywhere close the Zeiss it the better scope.
 


-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: Stud Duck
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 13:17
Originally posted by Urimaginaryfrnd Urimaginaryfrnd wrote:

Buy the VX3 it is well worth the difference, a better question to ask is do I buy VX3 or Zeiss Conquest because if the price is anywhere close the Zeiss it the better scope.
 
 
Yeah, this is a whole other issue.
 
IIRC, the Conquests are assembled in the US...but I really like the Leupold's warranty, MOST parts and assembly here and the warranties are second to none. I've put their warranty and customer service to use on a couple different occasions and they were great.
 
One of the main reasons the Conquest isn't in the running is it's almost 4oz heavier than the Leupold and I'm trying my best to keep the weight down on this rifle.


Posted By: tjtjwdad
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 13:51
I can't say one way or the other WRT a Bushnell Elite by my Leupold VX-3 (8.5-20x50) is a better scope than my Nikon Monarch (6-24x50), especially above 18x where some slight hazing takes effect.  It's no bad but it is noticable.  Below that they are both pretty equal although I would like to do a light transmission check one of these days.
 
As far as the Bushnell, I've looked thru one Elite 6500 w/o the benefit of any comparisions but it too started looking just a tad hazy above 12x (IIRC).  I did look thru a Bausch & Lomb 4-16x40 earlier this year and would have picked it up if the timing was better.  Optically it looked crisp thru the entire zoom range.


Posted By: SVT_Tactical
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 14:28
Originally posted by Stud Duck Stud Duck wrote:

 
Yeah, this is a whole other issue.
 
IIRC, the Conquests are assembled in the US...but I really like the Leupold's warranty, MOST parts and assembly here and the warranties are second to none. I've put their warranty and customer service to use on a couple different occasions and they were great.
 
One of the main reasons the Conquest isn't in the running is it's almost 4oz heavier than the Leupold and I'm trying my best to keep the weight down on this rifle.
 
Do you know how little 4oz's is?  compared to the better glass and value of the Conquest its a no brainer in my opinion.


Posted By: lucytuma
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 16:48
The VX3 now competes pretty well with the other scopes in its price range. I also have great faith in leupold and one sits on all my rifles above .300.  The only VXII that I'm really am fond of is
1-4x20


-------------
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson


Posted By: tjtjwdad
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 23:13
Originally posted by SVT_Tactical SVT_Tactical wrote:

Originally posted by Stud Duck Stud Duck wrote:

 
Yeah, this is a whole other issue.
 
IIRC, the Conquests are assembled in the US...but I really like the Leupold's warranty, MOST parts and assembly here and the warranties are second to none. I've put their warranty and customer service to use on a couple different occasions and they were great.
 
One of the main reasons the Conquest isn't in the running is it's almost 4oz heavier than the Leupold and I'm trying my best to keep the weight down on this rifle.
 
Do you know how little 4oz's is?  compared to the better glass and value of the Conquest its a no brainer in my opinion.
Maybe it's me, but I get a little perplexed when I see references to how many ounces this scope A is lighter/heaver than scope B.  For me, if a few ounces were a concern I'd try and loose it else where, but not in the optics. 
 
Am I overlooking something?


Posted By: grimreaper21
Date Posted: December/23/2010 at 23:42
I totally follow what you're saying.  for a quarter of a pound, a superior scope should be of much higher priority.


Posted By: pyro6999
Date Posted: December/24/2010 at 07:56
of 4oz is such a huge deal, eat an extra bowl of wheaties the morning of the hunt. good glass is heavy

-------------
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"


Posted By: SouthernStar
Date Posted: December/25/2010 at 08:38
i picked up a new VX3 3.5-10x40 CDS for 450$ shipped, which isnt much more than a 3-9x40 conquest and has the CDS option..



Posted By: WestOfPecos
Date Posted: December/25/2010 at 16:41
I have a VXII Ultralight, a 2.5x8 VX-3 and a 3x9 Conquest. The VX-II is noticeably inferior to the other two, and cannot be considered in the same class. I find the Conquest marginally better optically, in particular on the objective's edges. I find the VX-3 better in ergonomics, compactness, weight, and mechanicals, and slightly inferior in eyebox. All in all, they are very close in my eyes.

I totally do not believe that scopes should only be compared through their optics. They are hunting tools. Their compactness and weight (going through the brush, handiness, carry ease, balance), mechanicals, ergonomics, robustness, warranty, eyebox and optics are all important. If optics were the sole consideration, we would all be buying 35oz, 56mm bell scopes.

I consider the VX-3 and excellent choice, for me slightly better overall than the Conquest, although marginally inferior in optics performance. I would also consider the Sightron SII Big Sky, and the new Minox line as possibilities, along with the ones mentioned above thread.


Posted By: Stud Duck
Date Posted: December/26/2010 at 08:15
Originally posted by WestOfPecos WestOfPecos wrote:

I have a VXII Ultralight, a 2.5x8 VX-3 and a 3x9 Conquest. The VX-II is noticeably inferior to the other two, and cannot be considered in the same class. I find the Conquest marginally better optically, in particular on the objective's edges. I find the VX-3 better in ergonomics, compactness, weight, and mechanicals, and slightly inferior in eyebox. All in all, they are very close in my eyes.

I totally do not believe that scopes should only be compared through their optics. They are hunting tools. Their compactness and weight (going through the brush, handiness, carry ease, balance), mechanicals, ergonomics, robustness, warranty, eyebox and optics are all important. If optics were the sole consideration, we would all be buying 35oz, 56mm bell scopes.

I consider the VX-3 and excellent choice, for me slightly better overall than the Conquest, although marginally inferior in optics performance. I would also consider the Sightron SII Big Sky, and the new Minox line as possibilities, along with the ones mentioned above thread.
 
Excellent post, especially your insight in the second paragraph...well put.
 
I guess I should've explained a bit more why I was fussing over 4oz, When it comes to hunting, I take a "minimalist" approach to everything; rifles, scopes, mounts/rings, packs, whatever.
 
If all you do is sit in a stand or go to the range, this isn't much of an issue, BUT if you walk and do LOTS of it, I fall into the philosophy that ounces make pounds. Let a few slide on the rifle, a few in your pack, a few more in your boots and BAM, your humping way more weight than you planned. So to me, those ounces matter, I will justify each one.
 
I appreciate all your replies, thanks.
 
 


Posted By: Johnny
Date Posted: December/26/2010 at 10:57
I maybe older than a lot of you. I have a Jerry's back pack from from about 1970. Of course it's obsolete, but so am I!  He was one of the first builders of good back packing equipment etc. I still remember his statement of "watch the oz's. and the pounds will take care of themselves!"
It matters if you are walking to the tree stand for 1/2 mile at 800 feet or if you are walking some miles at 10-13000 ft. I really have to watch the oz's. more than ever.
Smile


-------------
Black Bear Road


Posted By: bberg7794
Date Posted: December/26/2010 at 15:08
I just spent my first season with the 3-9 Conquest, which replaced a VXIII Leupold. I like the Conquest better in every way except for the extra weight. I too hunt almost all the time on my feet with rifle in hand and won't notice an extra 4 oz. in my pack, but its effect on the balance of my rifle is noticed. I would like to try something lighter. If I were a stand hunter, I wouldn't care about the extra weight.


Posted By: 300 ultramag
Date Posted: December/26/2010 at 16:02
when buying leupold half the money is just for the name, i think a vortex viper is better optically than a vx3 or a elite 4200


Posted By: outlawskinnyd
Date Posted: December/26/2010 at 18:23
i have a vx2. i hunt with my vx2, at night too. for my next rifle scope, a vx3 is def in the running. 

< ="utf-8">
Originally posted by 300 ultramag 300 ultramag wrote:

when buying leupold half the money is just for the name, i think a vortex viper is better optically than a vx3 or a elite 4200

if zeiss was assembled in a different country other than the u.s.a. it would be cheaper. if minox was assembled in china, it would be cheaper. leupold is made in america therefore its gonna be a little more expensive. your not paying for a name, your paying for american labor.

everyone complains we need to build more stuff here. but when it comes time to pay that cost everyone looks at eachother in a way that says "well go ahead buy it, ill follow suit after you" and if one person says "no i wont buy it its over priced" so people go buy other companies scopes and say "its over priced"

then when redfield is made, a scope that blows away a nikon prostaff imo, a scope that is built with good quality in america people say "its just a vx1"...like its a piece of crap...

yet the funny thing is, i promise you that whether you have a redfield revolution or a zeiss conquest, missing your target will not be because of glass, it would be because of a scope loosing its zero from being banged up or some other reason poor quality.

when comparing my final scope choices the glass is maybe the 3rd or 4th thing on my list of comparisons.






Posted By: 300 ultramag
Date Posted: December/26/2010 at 19:59
wow better than a pro staff thats really saying something. redfield is maybe a leo rifleman quality  scope. which is junk and has the worst lens coatings available.leupold have sold on there name and they make some crappy scopes now like alot of companies,i could give a crap less where a scope is made if its good quality ill buy it. i like the vipers in have one on a ar thats been dropped and rides on my 4 wheeler and its on every time,ive had several vx2s that would only hold zero if you handled them like a newborn baby.so im not sold on leupold vx1 or vx2 i dont believe you get a leupold till you buy a vx3.


Posted By: outlawskinnyd
Date Posted: December/26/2010 at 20:15
Originally posted by 300 ultramag 300 ultramag wrote:

wow better than a pro staff thats really saying something. redfield is maybe a leo rifleman quality  scope. which is junk and has the worst lens coatings available.leupold have sold on there name and they make some crappy scopes now like alot of companies,i could give a crap less where a scope is made if its good quality ill buy it. i like the vipers in have one on a ar thats been dropped and rides on my 4 wheeler and its on every time,ive had several vx2s that would only hold zero if you handled them like a newborn baby.so im not sold on leupold vx1 or vx2 i dont believe you get a leupold till you buy a vx3.

it is saying a lot. prostaff is cheap in price and not bad in what you get for it. 

if you owned several vx2's and it didnt hold zero, why buy more?

redfield is maybe a leo rifleman quality scope? by leo you mean law enforcement quality right? i dont know where your going with it.

you said you dont believe you get a leupold till you buy a vx3...i agree with you though about the bushnell elite...very good scope...thats also in contest with the vx3 for my choice, and i would get a bushnell elite over a vx2. but over a vx3 i dont know...


Posted By: tjtjwdad
Date Posted: December/27/2010 at 11:10
I have a VX-3, a VARI-X-III and a 24X Bench rest scopes (all Leupold).  The scopes have always held zero for me and, they have always correctly corresponded to WIND/ELEV changes.  Mind you, the zero did shift but that was because of the rifle, not the scope. 
 
Don't know if I'm saying this right but (here goes) for a scope to hold its zero, it would seem to me the rifle "must" do its part and hold zero as well (bedding & stock fitting).  If it can't/won't its futle to blame the scope (for a rifle's short comings), IMO.
 
On the other hand, a busted reticle is a different matter, obvisouly a failure.  Improper adjusted paralles (on non-adjustable models) can create some hair pulling too.  



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net