Why isn't this scope more popular?

[No Bananas]

Is this Special Purpose Reticle from Leupold seems like it would be good to me. It has the circle for close quick work and seems like it would be good for more precise work with the holdover marks.

[Zanshin]

they're hunting scopes.. you're not gonna get much "precision" out of them. but like ryan says, they're tuff. thats what leupold does.

i have a VXII that's taken some pretty serious abuse through the moutains of oregon in the last 12(?) years, atop a magnum and then a recce. they'll give you DCOM at any distance you're capable of, but don't expect tight groups unless you've got a super-glue cheekweld.

Having better glass does not relieve the shooter of their obligation to maintain good form and hard hold on the rifle. If the scope holds its zero the shooter should be able to shoot tight groups assuming he/she can fix on a point of reference to aim at. There is no such thing as a "forgiving" scope. A good scope just allows the shooter to shoot to their full potential (and that of the rifle and ammo).

RE: VXII vs. VXIII vs. VX3

I believe that current VXII glass is the same as what Leupold puts on their new Mark AR lines of scopes, which are roughly in the same ballpark as far as price is concerned.

VXIII glass was the same as the glass put in the Mark 4 LR line. I think the latest incarnation, dubbed the VX3, has better than Mark 4 glass (though only marginally). Mark 4 is way more expensive, but you paying for expensive turrets and reticles. I think that structurally they are now otherwise the same.

The VX3 is Leupold's flagship scope. VXIIIs are pretty close to the same thing and can be had for bargains now that the VX3 is out. Either way they are considerably more expensive than the VXII, but the glass is thought to be way better.

I also have a VXII on a hunting rifle. It takes a beating but its a killer.

Dom

[Alaskapopo]

I hear a lot of folks talking about the need for a 1-8x type scope. This one does that (well, it's 1.25). It has a long 6" eye relief, but it's supposed to be constant. It also has a standard plex type reticle, no illumination, and no BDC. So, I'm guessing that those missing elements are keeping it from popularity. I'd be willing to give it a go, provided the eye relief was constant throughout zoom.

http://swfa.com/Bushnell-125-8x32-El...pe-P13138.aspx

I had the 2.5-16 version. Its actually a quality optic. However the down sides are. No illumination at all. Second the reticle options are not very fast to use. Mine had mil dots. So even if you did not require illumination you were stuck with a slow to use reticle design.
Pat

[No Bananas]

That has been something that I'm having to consider a reticle that can be fast, and has BDC for the 200-300 yds (or more, on very rare occasion). For those reasons, I'm considering the Burris XTR 1-4 and the Leupold MR/T 1.5-5 with the special purpose reticle. I like the extra magnification of the Leupold, and I think I like that reticle better.

[lethal dose]

I assume you're talking about the Vortex HD 1-4 model? Why would you pick this one? Constant Eye Relief?Better than Nightforce?

No, not better then nightforce.

[C4IGrant]

No, not better then nightforce.

I am going to change out my 1-4 NF with the Vortex 1-4HD. I think it might actually be a better scope.


C4

[lethal dose]

I am going to change out my 1-4 NF with the Vortex 1-4HD. I think it might actually be a better scope.


C4

Interesting. How do you base your claim? My buddy has a higher power nf and the glass is stunning on it. Personally, I've never looked through a vortex hd but have read lots of good things about them... but I have also read a few spotty reviews. Maybe I jumped the gun. With that being said, I (personally) wouldn't buy either. If I was going to buy a 1-4, I'd go with trijicon's offering... hands down.

[BLACK LION]

The Sightrons have received good reviews.
I have an elite 4200 that I will never get rid of since I personally beat the piss out of it on my .50 before transfering to my 6.8... now its going on my 5.45 Saiga.

I was very interested in the elite 6500 1-8x but there is no illumination in the reticle. My 4200 has an illuminated dot.
It is japanese glass and it is very clear. They are heavy scopes too and very rugged.

Why not IOR 1.1-4X or 1.5-8x26???
Why not a Trijicon Accupoint 1.25-4x???

[No Bananas]

Why not IOR 1.1-4X or 1.5-8x26???
Why not a Trijicon Accupoint 1.25-4x???

The IOR is a little heavy, but it's damned near perfect. At $1359, there's no way I could afford it.

I'm leaning more toward the Burris XTR or the Leupold MR/T 1.5-5 w/ no illumination. The illumination on scopes (except the trijicons) never show up in daylight. I like the reticle of the Leupold the best, and the added magnification, but I'm not at all a fan of the variable eye relief.

[lethal dose]

Although the trijicon accupoint 1-4 is more $ then the 1.25-4, I'd spend the extra $ and grab the 1x.