No Leupold love
- Thread starter Gman
- Start date
Not a competitive shooter by far but down thru my 50 plus years of shooting C F rifles I WAS a Leupold owner and thought they had the best scope for the money. I owned as many as 11 at one point and time ranging from 4 x 14 x 40 all the way up to the 45 x 45 Comp models. Not long ago a friend of mine showed me an Arken ad and I decided to look into the EP-5 5 x 25 x 56. I purchased one to see if I could warm up to it. I found better glass, better turret tactile and click audible, better POI holding and cosmetics is as good or better than Leupold. Within a couple of months I sold all the Leupolds and replaced them with the EP-5. I am happy with my choice and probably won't own another Leupold. Just my .02 on the subject.
Could it be that Leupold rode their benchmark Vari-X line the same way as Remington rode their 700 line? They were the standard for many years but the world passed them by. Remington was the last company to get on the 6.5 Creed line, years after everyone else, losing a lot of market share. And Leupold simply raised their prices to compete with the higher end models and were the last to even offer a zero stop. Technology in the world of optics has come a very long way in a very short time. @Bill Norris gave an excellent example.
Could it be that Leupold rode their benchmark Vari-X line ?
I believe to some degree Leupold did ride the wagon much too long. and was complacent in trying to stay in the loop with the advances in technology and the "extras" that has become the norm with many other scope manufacturers. It seems as if they were thinking their position in the market was too solid to be "bumped around" by any other scope builder. As you mentioned the zero-stop which is a simple add-on could have been incorporated into the Leupold design years ago. Better tracking and more positive "click" turrets and more easier to read markings would have helped as well.
tough crowd
Big_Daddy
Gold $$ Contributor
Not being "tough" at all.
But to insinuate that top shooters would be moved by marketing hype over performance is well you know...LOL
When I started Benchrest some 30 years ago Leupold 36’s were the Gold standard. The glass was as good as anything on the market and for the most part it did a fine job at holding POI. If it broke you could send it in and they could fix it. The customer service was second to none. The Leupold 36 peaked with the “D” model. It was a fine scope for it’s time. The price was around 550.000 for one. That slightly took our breath away.
Then Leupold came out with the Competition Series. It had much better glass, a 30MM tube, and a side focus! No more reaching up and adjusting the front bell and tightening the lock ring. But for the time it came with a healthy price tag, I believe around 900.00. This was a huge jump in price since most shooter were use to paying around 450.00. The problem was the scope had issues holding point of aim. Talking with the Late Great Gene Buckys he told me the scope had a design flaw that kept them from holding POI from shot to shot. Gene came out with with his own adjustable mount (TSI I believe was its name). So now to get your Competition Leupold to shoot, you’d send it to Gene and for 500.00 dollars or so he would internally freeze your scope and sell you one of his adjustable external mounts with it. At this very point in time is when I believe the door opened for other manufacturers to break into the market!
Now the curtain rises on March Scopes. Lou Murdica and Turk Takano (sp) were the two key players that first brought the scope to market (to the best of my knowledge). The market was ready for a rock solid scope with good glass that you didn’t have to freeze and have an external mount. To get the Competition Leupold to work you were into 1400.00 dollars or so. That made the at the time exorbitant price of 1800.00 dollars for a March seem not that bad.
Once March was on the scene it was the beginning of the end of Leupold’s market dominance with the accuracy community.
Bart
Then Leupold came out with the Competition Series. It had much better glass, a 30MM tube, and a side focus! No more reaching up and adjusting the front bell and tightening the lock ring. But for the time it came with a healthy price tag, I believe around 900.00. This was a huge jump in price since most shooter were use to paying around 450.00. The problem was the scope had issues holding point of aim. Talking with the Late Great Gene Buckys he told me the scope had a design flaw that kept them from holding POI from shot to shot. Gene came out with with his own adjustable mount (TSI I believe was its name). So now to get your Competition Leupold to shoot, you’d send it to Gene and for 500.00 dollars or so he would internally freeze your scope and sell you one of his adjustable external mounts with it. At this very point in time is when I believe the door opened for other manufacturers to break into the market!
Now the curtain rises on March Scopes. Lou Murdica and Turk Takano (sp) were the two key players that first brought the scope to market (to the best of my knowledge). The market was ready for a rock solid scope with good glass that you didn’t have to freeze and have an external mount. To get the Competition Leupold to work you were into 1400.00 dollars or so. That made the at the time exorbitant price of 1800.00 dollars for a March seem not that bad.
Once March was on the scene it was the beginning of the end of Leupold’s market dominance with the accuracy community.
Bart
Dusty Stevens
Shiner
If leupold scopes were good it wouldnt matter if they were double the price and they never spent a single cent on advertising they would be on most every gun on the line. Shooters that win dont buy scopes because of ads. Theres a leupold on every hunting gun i own, and a box on the shelf with leupold 36 and various comp models. Theres a valdada on all my target guns yet ive never seen ad ad for one.
Dusty Stevens
Shiner
Arnold jewell made a nice set of adjustable rings as well
agree
jghoghunter
Gold $$ Contributor
Here is a perfect example of what is being said. You paid top money for top of the line scope at the time. Then because you didn't trust it you paid more top money for a mounting system and adjustment system to get rid of the one that was on the scope because it wasn't reliable. Then because they refuse to make higher powered scopes which was becoming the norm you put an optical booster on the back of it for more money.
This is why you don't see many leupolds on winning guns anymore.
Just for a reference almost all my hunting guns have leupold on them.
AlNyhus
Silver $$ Contributor
In the world of competitive, sanctioned real-deal Benchrest competition (with a capital 'B') there's no room for any piece of equipment that doesn't perform. People that don't compete simply don't understand how hard this game is. It's a hard sport and serious competitors simply can't and won't tolerate stuff that doesn't stand up. Marketing hype and interweb chatter make zero difference. It's the performance of any piece of gear that counts.
In the vast majority of cases, performance issues of a scope (for example) that wouldn't be tolerated on a real Benchrest rig will simply be unrecognized on a casual or even a semi-serious rig built with what would seem to be
the same components as National level, winning guns.
Real competition teaches much...and teaches it quickly. The lessons aren't always kind, the numbers on the results page don't lie and your real name is right there with your results. It's not for the soft and smooth or the thin skinned.
Good shootin'
-Al
In the vast majority of cases, performance issues of a scope (for example) that wouldn't be tolerated on a real Benchrest rig will simply be unrecognized on a casual or even a semi-serious rig built with what would seem to be
the same components as National level, winning guns.Real competition teaches much...and teaches it quickly. The lessons aren't always kind, the numbers on the results page don't lie and your real name is right there with your results. It's not for the soft and smooth or the thin skinned.
Good shootin'
-Al
Last edited:
Then why if it does not say Night Force or Huskamar (?) do so many look down on everything else. Marketing hogwash and people buy into it. More an ego trip than value.
But everyone can spend their money as they wish, that is for sure. And have thier own opinion.
They seem to be behind on production to. I am leupold vip have been for years just never seems like thers ever anything to buy on ther website
I just recently used an ep5 but darn was that thing heavy heavy to heavy for my style of dual purpose rifle's
flintcreek6412
Bob Petillo
Lots of my hunting buddies use Leupold. They set it and leave it with low expectations. Leupold is the name they all know and respect from 30-40 years ago. But only one actually bought a high end Leupold and most are in the $300-600 range for simple 0-150yrd shots.
I've been in the market to add a lighter hunting rifle scope. The Vortex Razor Gen II is a boat anchor. Great for comp but terrible for treking the woods. The VX6HD caught my attention. It's listed at $2300 and comes with bad tracking reviews. Most say glass is good but tracking is not. Even with my VIP membership it's significantly less expensive but I haven't seen the one I'd pick in stock for over a year so the VIP is basically worthless for that model.
So I can pay $2300 for an iffy scope that may not hold zero or I can spend $2600 for a March 2.5-25x. It's a freaking no brainer to me. If you are going to pay up for a high end scope Leupold just won't make the cut.
Leupold still carries a good name for the weekend warrior crowd but I don't know anyone in any competitive environment that is will to risk points on the name. And even as hunter, I'm not about to risk it on a 300yrd shot at a drop tine we are chasing this year.
I've been in the market to add a lighter hunting rifle scope. The Vortex Razor Gen II is a boat anchor. Great for comp but terrible for treking the woods. The VX6HD caught my attention. It's listed at $2300 and comes with bad tracking reviews. Most say glass is good but tracking is not. Even with my VIP membership it's significantly less expensive but I haven't seen the one I'd pick in stock for over a year so the VIP is basically worthless for that model.
So I can pay $2300 for an iffy scope that may not hold zero or I can spend $2600 for a March 2.5-25x. It's a freaking no brainer to me. If you are going to pay up for a high end scope Leupold just won't make the cut.
Leupold still carries a good name for the weekend warrior crowd but I don't know anyone in any competitive environment that is will to risk points on the name. And even as hunter, I'm not about to risk it on a 300yrd shot at a drop tine we are chasing this year.
Similar threads
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.