For those that have them, which do you prefer and why? Curious, can't make up my mind which one I want to get in the near future. Thanks for any input.
Printable View
For those that have them, which do you prefer and why? Curious, can't make up my mind which one I want to get in the near future. Thanks for any input.
I own the Nikon and really like it. Haven't seen a reason to buy a Leupold yet. Never been impressed with them before looking at the price and get much less impressed after.
Thanks. What was it about the Leupold that you weren't impressed with?
I have the Nikon. While it's nice for the price, I find myself wanting a bigger brighter sight picture when ever I'm shooting on the higher power setting's. I have a set of Nikon 10x50 bino's and they are so much brighter than the scope it's unreal. Sorry can't compare it to the leupold as I have not looked thru one in that class yet.
You did not say what your main use for the scope would be. I don't think you'll see much difference in the quality of the glass between the two. But everyone eye's are different. So try and compare them side-by-side. The Nikon is a true 6-18 power while the Leupold is not. You can get the Nikon with side focus which many folks prefer over the AO. The Leupold is a little more compact and a few ounces lighter. I don't like to fool with click adjustments in the field, so I did not get much use out of the finger adjustable turrets on the Nikon. I do like the Leupold LRV and Varmint reticule better than the Nikon BDC reticule which has too much clutter IMO. I like the look and fit of the Leupold alumina scope cap/flip-up caps and sun shade better than the aftermarket plastic caps. I've found the Leupold scopes hold their value better than other brands when you decide to sell them and try something different. From what I've read the Nikon warranty may not be as hassle free as Leupold's. I would also take a hard look at the Vortex Viper 6.5-20x44 which appears to combine the best features of the Leupold and Nikon with impressive glass and hassle free warranty. All are good scopes that will get the job done.
No I didn't specify what I'd be using it for because that wasn't the point. I just asked which you prefer and why. I've read Nikon's warranty and it seems pretty straightforward to me. It's transferrable just like the Leupold. It says you don't have to have a receipt or warranty card etc, so I don't see it being a big deal. I too have noticed that the Leupolds are not really the magnification that they're labled as which is a little troubling. Don't understand why they can't make it what they say it is. I've heard a lot of mixed feelings about Leupold in the past. I know they're warranty is great but I've heard a lot of people say that they weren't impressed with the quality/optics for the amount of money they cost so I'm a little hesitant to get one because of that and the fact that the magnification is less than what the model is called. Thanks for all your input.
I like both manufactures. Have not had a 6-18 leupold but have/had several. I have a 6-18 nikon BDC on my .243. Took a little while to get used to the BDC. I do like the target turrets it came with for long range target shooting. You may need a 20 MOA base to make up for the lack of adjustment if your going long depending on caliber. Now that they came out with one in Mil-Dot I will be getting one of those when I get the funds for it.
It comes down to price without sacrificing quality for me. I have found Nikon hard to beat in all areas. Plus I have two fine young Americans I need to put through college in the near future so I'm on a budget.
You can't go wrong with either one.
I have the buckmasters on savage model 12 fcv and really like it. Advantage is $ saved over leupold. Have a monarch on a 7mm mag and like it too. Can't tell why the monarch is more expensive than the buckmasters. Bill
"Can't tell why the monarch is more expensive than the buckmasters."
You're not the first person I've heard say that. Also if I remember correctly, the monarch doesn't have as much windage/elevation adjustment range as the buckmasters.
I have two Leupold 6-18X40 AO Targets and a Nikon Monarch 5-20X40 with side focus and knobs. The only advantage the Nikon has is the side focus. They are very similar in image quality and repeatability. The Leupolds have a little bit better eye relief.
Leupold...period.
If you can compare side by side, you will notice a little difference. If you could compare each in field conditions, the Leupy would win hands down. Clear and a lot more eye relief.
Run a box test......at the beginning and at the end. See which scope succeeds.
...and real LIFETIME warranty???
...and yes...I do have some Nikons, but they are the older flavors.
"...and real LIFETIME warranty???"
Can you explain? Have you had issues with Nikon's warranty before?
Leupold has a real lifetime warranty.
Ship the scope off, they fix it.
I actually bought a scope with a known problem when I bought the scope. Called Leupold. They said ...send it in. Leupold sent back a new scope - no charge.
I even told the original seller that the scope has a lifetime warranty and he should send it in. He declined.
was given a leupold with a lens out, i called leupold and advised it was given to me and broke they said send it in, got it back a week later looks brand new no charge.
AMERICAN MADE!!!!!!!
leupold has my business forever.
I'm all about American made too and try to buy as much American made stuff as I can but you're still not telling me how their warranty is any different than Nikon's. Nikon's warranty also says you don't have to be the original owner. I've heard of people doing the same with other companies besides Leupold and getting the same results. Now I know not all of them are that good. Heck, I called Swift about a problem I had with one of their scopes. The AO wasn't calibrated correctly or something because it wouldn't come into focus past about 250 yards. I called them and told them what it was doing and they also said send it in. A couple weeks later I got home to find a brand new scope sitting at my front door, no questions asked. The only thing that troubles me about the Leupold is that it's not actually the power that it's labeled to be. Don't call it a 6-18x when it's not. Call it what it is. It's 6.7-17.1x so if they're going to round the numbers it at least ought to be called a 7-17x. If I'm buying a 6-18x I want it to actually be 6-18 or at least a whole lot closer than 6.7-17.1.
efm77,Quote:
Originally Posted by efm77
My Nikon Monarch UCC 6.5 X 20 44 MM trube w/ fine cross hair and 1/8" target dot is actually a 6.5 X 19.5. The scopes from just three years ago were mainly 3X times the lower power on the highest setting. Many of the newer scopes are 4X the lower setting. Example 6X24, 3X12, 4X16 etc. The front focus is still very tight and a little difficult to adjust. Once it is set it doesn't move a speck. When you finally get the AO adjust and fine tune the clarity you can read detail wording on the top of a target at 100 yards. Quiet clear for the money.
Pete K.
ALL scope manufacturers do this. Same with actual glass size.Quote:
Originally Posted by efm77
Nikon is the worst. If it is 44 or 42 mm, don't just make the plastic AO 44 mm to compensate for a 34-36mm glass.
"ALL scope manufacturers do this."
I know a lot of them do but it seems that Leupold's is a bigger difference. If it were 17.8 or 17.9x it would be a little more understandable. However, whether they're telling the truth or not, Nikon's specs still shows the actual magnification of theirs to be 6x and 18x. Who knows, I may just go all out and get a VXIII 6.5-20x40. ;) It's only 19.2 on the top end but it least it's over 18x which is what I want. I at least want 18x on the top end.
Pete K.: I know how the zoom ratio works but they should be able to put enough adjustment in it to get to the power they advertise it to be. This should especially be easy with a 6-18. 6x3=18 so with their actualy magnification on the Leupold 6-18 being 6.7 and 17.1 this is only a little over 2.5x zoom ratio. :(
Try to compare a couple brands of scopes. It does make a difference.
Also remember, not everybody's eyes are the same. To me, newer Nikon scopes are fine, as long as there is lots of daylight. I believe it is the difference in the color of the coatings they apply...and my eyes.
so if glass is similar warranty similar why wouldn't you buy the American made tube??????? buy american and americans work! besides japanese tubes are all infected with radioactive material that will give you eye cancer. :o
"Also remember, not everybody's eyes are the same."
Very true.
"so if glass is similar warranty similar why wouldn't you buy the American made tube? buy american and americans work! besides japanese tubes are all infected with radioactive material that will give you eye cancer. "
Already said I buy American as much as possible and never said that I had decided against the Leupold. I haven't decided at all yet. The problem with wanting to stay American with scopes is you don't have much choice other than Leupold. Burris doesn't make anything American that's in my price range anymore, and I can't afford a Nightforce, US Optics, or Trijicon either. You know I think Leupold gets their glass from Japan so it could be radioactive too. :o Anyway I'll probably end up with the VXIII 6.5-20x and have been thinking about a Bushnell Elite too lately but will probably get the Leupold first. I've even bought quite a few Swifts lately and have been very pleased with them for the money. They're made in Korea but Swift claims they use American made glass in them so I still feel like I'm supporting Americans when I buy them as well.
Thanks for all the replies, I appreciate your input.
My Nikon Monarch is made in the Phillipines but my Weavers are made in Japan. ???
I have 6 Leupolds... Two fixed 24power competition, two 6.5-20x40 competition(1 old and 1 new), an old fixed 12x and a 6-18x40.
I have a 4.5-14 Nikon Buckmaster and a 6-18 Buckmaster. In the field and at the range the Leupolds win hands down in clarity. On nice clear days the Nikon Buckmasters are fantastic scopes and I think they are a great "bang for the buck(master)" scope. When lighting goes to pot, or when the mirage really starts to kick up that is when the Leupold scopes shoot way ahead in what you see through them. Their clarity is absolutely a step above the Nikon Buckmaster.
Leupolds are expensive, but it is EASY to find deals on them. Buy them used and you can find some great deals. With a warranty like Leupold has I will NEVER have a 2nd thought about buying used ones.
I shoot in silhouette competitions 4 times a month and have traveled to some big matches. You can stand at one end of the line and walk down and all you will see are gold ring Leupolds (with a very few old Weavers mixed in). I have not seen a Nikon on the line in 2 years.
I do like my Nikon 6-18 though. Like I said, it is a great value. The Leupold is better glass, period.
The VX-3 Leupold scope definitely has better glass/coatings than the older VX-III they replaced a few years ago. I bit the price bullet a couple of years ago and replaced my Nikon Buckmaster 6-18x40 with a Sightron Big Sky in 4.5-14x42 with AO because it had better clarity and contrast than the Leupold VX-III's and Nikon Buckmaster I was using for comparison. When Leupold released the VX-3 models I had to try a 6.5-20x40 LR with side focus, 30mm tube and varmint reticule. The Sightron Big Sky had a very slight edge over the Leupold VX-3 in terms of contrast and clarity in the field. However, the VX-3 with the side focus and varmint reticule beats AO and turret turning hands down when the P Dog shooting is fast and furious. Somewhere in there I also tried a Leupold VX-II 6-18x40 with AO and LR reticule. Based on my experience, I could of bought a couple of Leupold VX-3 for what I lost in resale value trying lower priced scopes that never quite measured up to my expectations and the marketing hype.
ther are only a handful of glass makers in the world 4 or 5 i think. leupold has stated it uses glass from other countries as well as the usa. usa glass cannot supply the needs of leupold, leupold makes a tremendous amount of tubes. the key to glass is not the glass per say but how the end user cuts it and with what they use to coat it. by leupolds own admission glass and a few screws are purchased over seas the rest is made here in the usa. it may seem im not a fan of nikon but thats not true i think they make good quality optics for their price point i just think leupold is ever so slightly better and the icing is its made here. do not downplay the fact we are in a huge depression and even one scope purchase helps!