JD IN ALBERTA

I figured about the same...I' m really surprised no one even mentioned weaver though. I have heard some great things about the new Grandslam series. Maybe not enogh people have tried them. Outdoor life had a pretty good test and it beat out all Zeiss, Loopy and Bushnell elites. Looks like we have a winner LEUPOLD! I' m sure if we all had $$$ to burn the majority would put Zeiss (VM/V) atop our favorite rifles.[:-] JMHO JDinAB

3030win

Tasco is by far the best!

1SHOT_1KILL

My opinion that Leupold is over rated has nothing to do with light transission. I for one would not be able to tell 92% vs 95% light transmission. But I can and have seen the noticable difference in the clearity and sharpness of the optice between Leupold vs Zeiss and Swarvoski. And there is a noticable difference, in the the Zeiss and Swarvoski are clearer and sharper, and as oldelkhunter stated, transmitts more light. I own a couple Zeiss and one Swarvoski, and about a dozen Leupolds.

The reasons I have for thinking that Leupold is over rated, is that for many years they set and were the industry standard. Leupold is what all others were judged by. I beleive this caused them to become complacent and content to maintain that same quality and standard. Well, over the past decade others in the scope industry has closed the gap some what, a few have closed the gap completely. and a couple have surpassed them. It seems to me that in just the past couple years Leupold has made an ernest attempt to recapture the industry lead and market new and upgraded scopes. But it is my opinion that for the past decade they were riding on the reputation that they earned back in the 70' & 80' s. Don' t get me wrong, I do own and use about a dozen Leupolds. But they have all been reworked and modified by Dick Thomas of Premier Recticles. Premier Reticles turns a good scope into a most excellent scope. My Leupolds are a better scope now than when they left Leupold' s factory, because of Premier Reticles.

It is also my opinion that if one has a lot of experience with scope manfactures customer service dept' s, then they must have an awful lot of problems with an awful lot of scopes. Makes me wonder if it is the scope or the individual? To me a more accurate mark of a good scope is not how good the customer service is, but how many NEVER HAVE TO USE THEIR CUSTOMER SERVICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JMHO.

Deer Magnet

I like both of my Leupold VX2' s

oldelkhunter

OneSHot if your referring to me with your comments let me tell you about what I returned and why. That is how infrequently I deal with customer service departments. I like dealing with them about as much as I like dealing with incompetent gunsmiths maybe even more.

Swarovski scope that had ring marks caused by myself not putting the rings on correctly...got it back in 3 months. This prior to the opening of repair center in the US... New 1" scopes are nice but terribly overpriced.

Burris scopes... 2 out of 3 had to be returned because they were all over the target...one day the guns are shooting 1 - 1/2 and the next they are shooting scatter gun groups. In all the cases without exception it was a month before they came back and in one case the fullfield II came back filled with water after they leak tested. They profusely apologized and paid UPS to come get it. They have poisoned the well .

Nikon...brand new Monarch 3x9x40 with a gloss finish...mounted the rifle on a 280 rem Number 1 ...Beautiful sight picture...but didn' t like the way it sat on the rifle so I took it off and the paint/finish on the tube came off. Called Nikon and they said they would repair not replace it so I kicked it back to Bass Pro shops and got a Leupold. Friends that have sent them in for service have had them show up months later. Great clear optics but no Leupold construction wise. Never again.

Zeiss scopes...never a problem but reported problems and rumours do not give me a comfort level to buy one again.

Bushnell...only one I owned stopped tracking but it was an el cheapo anyway. Like the clarity on the 3200 /4200 but don' t like the design. too heavy/bulky and little eye relief.


Leupold- scopes never returned for any reason other than to add Mil dots to a 6.5x20 (2 week turnaround) and to have the zoom detents removed on a 2.5x8 to match the newer models(no charge and 2 weeks turnaround). I would conservatively estimate that I have had /have at least 25-30 of their scopes. Anytime you need a mounting screw(s) or a replacement turret cap for a used scope I buy from time to time they are no charge and always there for me the consumer. They know where their bread is buttered and they are made in the good old USA. Yes their design is a bit dated but I have never had one fail me ever.

Schmidt & Bender... never a problem with one ever.

Pentax scopes..one 3x9 that I owned ...beautiful sight picture and not a problem and the best part it' s built by Burris.

By the way this is over a 32 year period .

1SHOT_1KILL

No, oldelk, I was not directing that statment toward anyone in particular, just making a broad (maybe to broad) general statement, about the over emphesis that customer service may have in the decision as to what brand/make of scope that one may buy. That' s all. Leupold' s customer service is the best and every scope maker should be trying to emulate it. Like I said, the mark of a good scope is how many do not have to use the customer service, but it' s a good to know that a company has good customer service when and if it is needed.

As I said, Leupold is a good scope. I honestly don' t believe anyone could go wrong by purchasing one. I wish they did come with some kind of lens covers though. But I don' t buy off the shelf Leupolds for myself any more. I buy them from Premier Reticles reworked/modified to the way I like or want them. I strongly beleive that Dick Thomas makes a good scope even better.

I think that there is a certain gap that scope manufacturers fall in and fill in. Not every rifle is destain to wear a Leupold, Zeiss, S&B, Swarv., etc. Also not everyone can afford one, so someone has to step in and fill that gap with a decent scope at an afforable price. For instance, I couldn' t justify putting Zeiss or Swarv. on a NEF Handi-Rifle. Maybe some could, but I would lean toward a decent scope like a Nikon, Burris F-filed II, or Leupold VX-I or something along that price and quality wise. On the other hand, I would not consider putting a tasco or Simmons on anything, except maybe a 22 LR, but not a centerfire. Nor would I consider putting a $200 scope (not even a Nikon, Leupold VX-I, or Burris F-filed II) on a $800-$1000 rifle or one of my custom builts, either. My rough rule of thumb is, whatever price range the rifle happens to fall in, I look at paying about as much for a good piece of glass to put on it.

I also look at the application in which the rifle/scope combo is going to be used. For tatcial I think U.S. Optics are the best scope going at this time. For target and varmint rfiles, I like Leupold, from Premier Reticles, of course. For big game hunting I like Zeiss. On my muzzleloaders I use Nikon, but that doesn' t neccessarily make them the best, just very serviceable for the job. I also have a Nikon on my Mossberg 835 3.5" mag turkey shotgun, that held up well to the recoil of that shoulder thumper. Decent scopes, very servicable, and affordable, but not what I consider the best scope on there is.

The only scopes I have had problems with are Simmons. A few years ago I bought 8 Aetecs 3.5-10x44, because I needed 8 scopes in a hurry for testing 8 Savage 10ML-II' s muzzleloaders, and they were available. Over the course of 2 weeks shooting, all 8 were render to junk. I never bothered sending them back to Simmons, I just round filed them in the thrash can.

JD IN ALBERTA

I' d like to bring up a point here maybe some of you could shed some light on. Some of you are extremely knowledgable with optics so, could you tell me the difference between the Conquest and lets say the VM/V series. I have looked at the websites and even looked over the Zeiss info they send out when you request a package. I have looked at the Conquest and find it very bright and clear. How can they justify a $800-1000.00 difference to the other series? Are the coatings on the conquest that sub-par from the VM/V? Is the light transmission way lower? Is the glass that much better? or is it where they are manufactured and put together. I haven' t heard of one problem with a high end Zeiss on this board yet. I guess what I' m saying is...is it worth to buy the VM/V series and never experience problems. Has anyone compared a Conquest series to a similar powered/obj. VM/V? Is the conquest that much less of a scope? No bashing here just trying to compare apples with apples. I guess the LPS Leupold should go against the VM/V and the VariX-III against the Conquest. I always like to justify the $$ I spend, and if a conquest is a " cheap" Zeiss, then why not go for the " best" one? Would you rather go for a cavalier made by cadillac just because Cadillac makes them or buy the real deal? [] JDinAB

308TIKKA

JD,
I think if I could afford the top end zeiss I would get it. It will be better in low-light(darkness) than just about any scope in the world (swarovski and nightforce are also excellent).
Seriously, how many times are you going to need it in the dark though? the top Zeiss' s have their famous T coating which is better than the coating on the conquest but is it worth the difference? Depends on who' s money buying the scope.
So yes the top zeiss are better but I wouldn' t say the conquest is cheap or lacks quality in anyway. FOR ALMOST ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES, I THINK THE CONQUEST IS ONE OF THE BEST VALUES IN RIFLE OPTICS.

archerick

Well, The Topic being the best Quality scope and not best value my vote would be either German made Zeiss or Schmitt & Bender. The best scope for the money in my opinion is the Leupold VXIII.

The Zeiss Conquest is also a good moderately priced scope but you can' t compare the quality of them to the German made Zeiss. They are two entirly different companies with entirely different optics. The upper end Zeiss' s are completly made and assembled in Germany and the Conquest scopes import the optics and they assemble them in the US. The Conquest is still a very good scope with good light gathering abilties and a pretty good price tag too.

woodseye

Rick,not to argue but some statements you made on Zeiss need to be clarified.Its not two different companys,its the same one,the conquest and the zm/z line are both assembled in the US now.They are both also repaired in this country also.The lenses are made in Hungary and a lot of parts are made in Germany and they are then assembled in the US.This is not unlike any of the other scope manufactures here or abroad except Burris who still grind their lenses and make the majority of their internal parts here in this country(how long this will continue with Bereta ownership remains to be seen). The conquest was made and priced to compete with the mid priced scopes(vari x lll) and is not the price of the high end line that is made and priced to compete with the Swarovski and Schmidt and Bender scopes.The conquest lenses are made in the same plant but recieve a different lens coating MC instead of T*.Zeiss is saving money assembling over here by avoiding market tariffs(as high as 20%) and lower worker wages compared to Germany.It won' t surprise me at all to see them start to assemble the vm line in this country soon also as this is where their main consumer base is located and the tariffs cost them a lot of profit. Cheers

woods