just wondering your guys oppinion of the leupold variable 3 verses variable 2. i will be putting it on my remington 700 vs 22-250. i had one about 4 years ago and regret EVER getting rid of it. it had a variable 6.5-20x 40 mil on it. but it came with the gun. i really dont think i need that kind of power for myself. i am thinking of getting something around4-12,4.5-14, or 6-18. i am just wanting your personal oppinions of the 3 and the difference of the var. 3 to the var 2 other than price. thanks
variable 3 or variable 2
- Thread starter mrcoon
- Start date
In my opinion, a Vari X III 3.5X10X40 is about all, 90% of all predator hunters will ever need. My second choice would be the 4.5X14, but I don't understand all the interest in high power variables? A very high percentage of my coyotes are shot at about five or six power, occasionally up to 10 or 12, but I never felt the need for more than that. I don't feel you can get on a coyote fast enough with a 6X20, but use what makes you happy.
Good hunting. LB
Good hunting. LB
mrcoon,
I have 2 Vari-X II 3-9x40's and one Vari-X III 3.5-10x50. I bought the last one because I wanted to see the difference firsthand because like you, I had wondered if it was worth the extra money.
Honestly, it depends on what you are going to do with the rifle. If you will spend lots of time looking through the scope at targets or p-dogs, it might pay to get the vari-X III but for a calling rifle you will never see the difference. Anything that you can kill with one you can kill with the other. The only difference I can tell is looking at targets my eyes strain slightly after looking through the II for long lengths of time. Opinions will vari, but thats mine.
Good luck!
Daryl
------------------
[This message has been edited by Daryl (edited 04-30-2001).]
I have 2 Vari-X II 3-9x40's and one Vari-X III 3.5-10x50. I bought the last one because I wanted to see the difference firsthand because like you, I had wondered if it was worth the extra money.
Honestly, it depends on what you are going to do with the rifle. If you will spend lots of time looking through the scope at targets or p-dogs, it might pay to get the vari-X III but for a calling rifle you will never see the difference. Anything that you can kill with one you can kill with the other. The only difference I can tell is looking at targets my eyes strain slightly after looking through the II for long lengths of time. Opinions will vari, but thats mine.
Good luck!
Daryl
------------------
[This message has been edited by Daryl (edited 04-30-2001).]
Curt Barrett
New member
Have to agree with Leonard. I generally have my scope set between 6 and 10 power when I pull the trigger. I dunno Leonard. I think some of the high magnification guys are watching the Sceery videos. He likes running them dang telescopes on his rifles too. HA!
I definitely prefer the "telescope" scopes I have been using mine for years.I use the Redfield 6x18 and love it.When calling I generally keep it on 8 power but it sure is nice to crank that baby up when wiley hangs up around 300 yards.
a coyote at that range is a lot better target on 16 or 18 power than the target on 8 or 9 power,its like shooting a coke can as compared to a 5 gallon bucket.Just my opinion...Good hunting
well, we might be getting away from the main thrust of the question, which seems to be, is the vari X III a better scope, and worth the money.
But first, about the "telescope" affectionados. Sure, I can play that game. But, there isn't a high powered scope on the market that is effective under low light conditions. Conversly, anything over 12 or 14 power, and you have a mirage problem after ten A.M. Then there is the problem of acquision, but anyway, we can all agree that there is different strokes for different folks.
Now, about lens design and multicoat 4. This light transmission business doesn't begin to become a factor until you have a dusk or dawn condition. It has been estimated that it is worth about thirty to forty minutes per day, and some say big deal. Others say, well, that's the most productive part of the day. Might not be completely true, but it's not wrong either. Any scope that has more apparent brightness is worth considering. Boy, they sure charge a premium for state of the art quality. Hard to say. I have developed an appreciation for european design, but the technology available from Leupold is also impressive. For me, it is quality instead of quantity, and sometimes visa versa. A lot to consider.
Good hunting. LB
But first, about the "telescope" affectionados. Sure, I can play that game. But, there isn't a high powered scope on the market that is effective under low light conditions. Conversly, anything over 12 or 14 power, and you have a mirage problem after ten A.M. Then there is the problem of acquision, but anyway, we can all agree that there is different strokes for different folks.
Now, about lens design and multicoat 4. This light transmission business doesn't begin to become a factor until you have a dusk or dawn condition. It has been estimated that it is worth about thirty to forty minutes per day, and some say big deal. Others say, well, that's the most productive part of the day. Might not be completely true, but it's not wrong either. Any scope that has more apparent brightness is worth considering. Boy, they sure charge a premium for state of the art quality. Hard to say. I have developed an appreciation for european design, but the technology available from Leupold is also impressive. For me, it is quality instead of quantity, and sometimes visa versa. A lot to consider.
Good hunting. LB