zeiss conquest 6.5- 20 rapid z 800 vs leupold 8.5-25 vx 3 varmint hunters ret.?

Discussion in 'Scopes, Optics, LRFs, Spotters, BoreScopes' started by fordwrench, Apr 1, 2010.

  1. fordwrench

    fordwrench

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    118
    in anyones honest opinion which scope would be better suited to long range varminting and some limited bench work? this would be used on a med weight walking varminter rem 700 6.5x47 lupua , 123-140 class bullets
     
  2. fordwrench

    fordwrench

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    118
    was looking at nightforce np2 reticle i think. its just a guess on where my extended bullet drop impacts would be? sightron looks good also i guess im limited on reticle choices.
     
  3. big eddie

    big eddie

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3
    I have a Lupe with a varminter rectical and would not use anything else, unless it is a nightforce with a np-r1 rectical . The lines are much easier to see by to place your shoot at any distense. But that is just my $0.02
     
  4. fdshuster

    fdshuster Site $$ Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    4,080
    I have a Zeiss 6.5-20x 50mm "Conquest", and considered it my top-of-the-line rifle scope until I just got my first Nightforce 12-42x BR, all I can say is WOW! p.s.: the Zeiss and my Leupold's are now relagated to second class "citizenship". ;D
     
  5. SooStan

    SooStan

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    156
    After I got the night force I sold the Zeiss. I came to the same conclusion. Zeiss was nicer then my Lupy Mk4 but the turrents turn opposite of the Night Force and Lupy. I got tired of making the wrong adjustments when in a hurry.
     
  6. fordwrench

    fordwrench

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    118
    how is that npr1 reticle designed to be used/ i guess im just hung up on the hold over reticles. im worried of losing my orignal zero from dialing elevation changes too much. i have never owned either and would like to by the best i can . i can only buy one... {poor}
     
  7. sscoyote

    sscoyote

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    331
    I have a 3.5-15x NXS with NP-R1 reticle and it's just fine. Reticle reference for long-range shooting is just based on where your bullet impacts along the MOA reticle stadia lines. No different than any ballistic reticle really besides the fact that it doesn't add up to even hundred-yd. intervals--as designed at least.
     
  8. maverick2

    maverick2

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    If you don't opt for the Nightforce, I'd go with the Zeiss 6.5-20 with the Varmint Z reticle (rather than the Z-800). I just received a 4.5-14 Zeiss with the Z-800 for the same type of shooting you do, and once I opened it and looked thru it, suspect the reticle will be too heavy for long range varmint work or bench rest shooting. I had not looked thru a Z-800 prior to that (only a Varmint Z) and was surprised at the reticle thickness once it was in hand. After talking with Zeiss reps, I learned the Z-800 was designed more for big game and as such, set up with a reticle thickness that would be easy to pick up in low light. The Varmint Z reticle (and I believe the Z-1000 as well) have reticle thicknesses geared toward what you want to do (less than half the thickness of the Z-800). I found Zeiss reps great to deal with, and their ballistic calculator program allows you to match pretty closely the etched ballistic lines of the scope with the specific ballistics of your particular rifle and load. This is my second Zeiss Conquest, and I find myself preferring the Zeiss over Leupold. Only downside the Zeiss might have is the lesser amount of elevation adjustment when compared to the Leupold, but use of the ballistic holdover lines should negate that anyway.
     
  9. HEAD0001

    HEAD0001

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Messages:
    40
    Both scopes are great quality scopes. Neither one will let you down. I own both, and both serve me well. No real noticeable difference in the quality. Especially if you are looking at the new VX-3 and not the old VXIII.

    Nf scopes are also good scopes. But I do not believe the glass is any better in the NF. I would give the best glass edge to the Zeiss, but only slightly. For the shooting you described I personally do not believe you will notice any difference.

    If you are going to drive nails then buy the NF. No doubt it is a heavier built scope. But you give up a lot for that ruggedness. Like excess weight, and a bunch more $100 bills. As I said the NF is a great scope, but not necessary for what you described. And it will be a bit detrimental if you use the rifle as a "walking varminter".

    IMO the Rapid Z reticle is a bit cluttered. I like the Leupold VH reticle a little bit better. And obviously the NF reticles are great, as long as you can live with the NF down falls of weight and substantial additional pricing. Tom.
     

Share This Page