Leupolod Comparison

HOGGHEAD

New member
When comparing the new Leupold VX3 against the Leupold Mark IV scope. What are the real differences?? The VX3 has more internal adjustment. Is the erector system on the VX3 as repeatable as the Mark IV?? Are both erector systems flawless?? Tom.
 
There are only 2 "real" Mark 4's IMO. 10x40 and 16x40. These 2 models are far and away tougher than any other Leupolds. They are the original Mark 4's. They have thicker tubes all the way around and dual bias springs. They are obviously tougher because they are fixed power. All the other Mark 4's are nothing but glorified VX3s. Thinner tubes, same internals.

As far as internal adjustment goes, you cannot say the VX3 has more, as it totally depends on the model. I can tell you the Mark 4 that I own has more internal adjustment than any other Leupold made. 140moa elevation. 160 with a 20moa rail. That is a TON. You can shoot into the next zip code with one......
 
When I say the VX3 has more adjustment I should have been specific. I am comparing the VX3 8.5X25 to the Mark IV 8.5X25 scope. So my comparison was meant to be scope to scope. Tom.
 
Some interesting news, Tom. I just called Leupold and asked them why if the 8.5-25x50 VX3 variable and same Mark 4 variable were the same internally, why one would have more internal adjustment than the other. He told me that the tube on the Mark 4 was thicker and that some of the internals were "beefier" also. Allowing less adjustment out of a tube of the same diameter(30mm). This makes sense. He said you could not swap out lenses or anything else between the 2 scopes because they would be different sizes. This also makes sense.

What's interesting about this is that a different tech told me the exact opposite. He told me only the fixed powers were thicker/different in any way. I know this is what a LOT of guys think. I've heard it said many times over on the Hide. I always thought the same thing. Apparently, even some of the Leupy techs do also. Your question is what got me to thinking that it may not be so.

Anyway, I'm gonna have to agree with the first guy.

They both told me the 16x40 was in a class by itself and that no parts on them were interchangeable with ANY other scope. They also said it has a specially designed (smaller) erector tube that allows for it's huge amount of adjustment. Hence the price.......
 
My main concern is how well the scope tracks. I have had a few problems in the past with the tracking on Leupold scopes. It seems like my Swaro's always did a better job on a box test. As a matter of fact the only perfect box test I ever did was with Swaro. optics.

My existing 8.5X20 is close, and to be honest it could be user mistakes as well.

So I just wonder does Beefier mean-better tracking ability-or does it mean that it can take more of a "licking".

I do not put my scopes through abuse, so if the VX3 tracks just as well, then that would be adequate for me.

The tracking was the main reason I was considering a NF, but I can not find any one who owns one who will say that the NF tracks better than the VX3?? So why pay so much more money for the NF??

This long range scope purchase is turning into a head ache. I just wish I had the cash to buy the S&B and be done with it. Tom.
 
There may be something to the Mark IV being "beefier". When I compare apples to apples on the Leupold web site the Mark IV weighs 2 ounces more(22.5 oz.) than the new VX3. The internal elevation adj. for the MK IV is 75 MOA, and the VX 3 is 94 MOA. Tom.
 
Yep. That'what tells you tube has to be thicker. Seeing as how they are the same 30mm outside diameter, they would have the same amount of internal adjustment if everything inside were the same.

I use a Mk 4 16x40 and I will tell you for 600yd prone matches there is nothing I like better. Tracks perfectly, and is a good combination of FOV, eye relief, power, and lack of parallax. It is also one [beeep] for stout scope. 140moa elev. is pretty nice too. The only other scope I regularly use @ longer ranges is a Weaver T-36. Best target scope out there for the money IMO. They are known to track well, and do. I don't care much for the adj. dials or the 1/8 clicks, but when I want higher power, that is what I turn to. Once you get used to using M1's a lot, everything else sucks IMO.

I have always been satisfied with Leupold overall for a lot of reasons. Have had over 30 of them. I find them to be worth their asking price. Rugged, reliable, and easy to get fixed without a bunch of hassles. I'll leave the Euro crap for somebody else to over spend on.....
 
You got a Swaro to pass a box test? I admit I have only messed with 3 of them but the glass was awesome and the adjustments were... well... not good.
 
If the adjustments on your Swaro. do not work then I would definitely send it back. I only have experience with a handful of them, but the tracking was flawless in all of them. Tom.
 
I have no real world field experience with Swaros. 2 men whose opinions I respect very much tell me they have great glass but are nowhere near as tough as a Leupold......
 
Back
Top