Leupold Rifleman scopes

Salvo · 03-16-2010, 11:18 PM

I am asking for opinions about the bargain model Leupold Rifleman scopes. I have a Rifleman 3-9x50 and would like to know what to expect.

I already know that I'll have to mount it up higher than I like, due to the 50mm objective lens, but I can live with that if the scope will hold up OK and give a reasonably clear sight picture.

I took it out of the box and peered through it out in the front yard, but it's hard to tell much that way.

I appreciate any comments, positive or negative. Don't worry about hurting my feelings, I just want the straight scoop. - I don't have anything to mount it on right now for a trial and wonder if I ought to hang onto it, or look for something different.

The gun will be a Savage hunting rifle ( on its way from the custom shop ) in .243 that will be shot off of the bench 90% of the time, plinked with every once in a while, and occasionally utilized for its intended purpose. ( Hunting varmints, hogs or whitetail deer )

**rjtfroggy** · 03-17-2010, 07:04 AM

Salvo I had the rifleman scope and did not like it at all. It would not hold zero on my 7mm, it was dark and blurry.Leupold does stand behind it though but after a return trip I just ended up trading it away. It was the 4-12 model.

**BobT** · 03-17-2010, 12:42 PM

The only Leupold I have ever returned for repair was a Rifleman 2-7. I was in a jam and needed a scope and that was the only Leupold available at the time, I put it on my .50 cal. M/L and it gave up the ghost after about 25 shots, it was still nice and clear but would not hold zero. I still use only Leupold scopes but I stick with the VX-2 and up. I hunt with a couple of other guys that use them one of them went back for repair for the same reason but has held up fine since, the other one has had no problems. Both of these scopes are on hard kickers, I would say you will be fine on a .243, just my humble opinion.

Bob

Salvo · 03-18-2010, 07:08 PM

My new rifle came in and I mounted the scope, but haven't had a chance to get away and shoot it yet.

The Leupold Rifleman 3-9x50 will get me by until i can do better. Later I hope to change over to Conetrol mounts when I upgrade to a better scope.

I'm pretty sure that I will go for a 3-9x40mm, mounted as low as possible. I have not decided which brand or model I will go with yet.

The rifle is a .243 with a 24" barrel. I have great hopes for it, but you never know until you shoot it a bit.

[img width=600 height=450]http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff206/arwatch/Firearms/IMG_1307.jpg[/img]

uad7116 · 03-18-2010, 07:18 PM

I have 2 rifleman scopes and they both are great, ones a 2x7x32 and its on a .30-06 and the other is a 3x9x40 and its on a .338-06 and they both hold zero very well. They may not be as good as the higher class vx's, but there way way better than the lower end scopes (you know the ones I'm talking about). These rifleman scopes are about all I can afford to spend on a scope and they have not ever let me down, and compared to the more spendy models, my eyes may not be that good or trained enough but I cant really see the 2 to 5 hundred dollar difference.

davemuzz · 03-18-2010, 07:33 PM

I have two of 'em. One on my .243 Encore ProHunter barrel that does a great job, and the other on my Savage in 6.5x55 Swede. Clear picture and they both hold the zero.

My only complaint is the adjustments don't "click", and when you are sighting 'em in, you can move the adjustment slightly, and the crosshair won't move. Then you will move it slightly again.....and you will get BIG movement.

But, once you get it on......it stays there. (Unless you drop it on a thick piece of ice during deer season and have to re-sight it in. Hey.....don't ask me how I know this. I only dropped it like.....4 feet. Well, maybe it was 4.5 feet. OK...it was 5 feet!!!! Happy now!!!) Yeah.....it wasn't loaded. I was getting it out of the truck. I hate when that happens.

Dave

Salvo · 03-18-2010, 07:35 PM

Originally Posted by uad7116

I have 2 rifleman scopes and they both are great, ones a 2x7x32 and its on a .30-06 and the other is a 3x9x40 and its on a .338-06 and they both hold zero very well. They may not be as good as the higher class vx's, but there way way better than the lower end scopes (you know the ones I'm talking about). These rifleman scopes are about all I can afford to spend on a scope and they have not ever let me down, and compared to the more spendy models, my eyes may not be that good or trained enough but I cant really see the 2 to 5 hundred dollar difference.

I'm with you on that! It'll be a cold day in hades before I spend over 300 bux on a scope again. I have had dozens of scopes over the years, some of them quite pricey.

One inexpensive scope that I have really been impressed with is a Nikon 3-9x40 with the BDC reticule that I bought for my Savage 93R17 BTVS in .17 HMR... It cost around 115 bux at Wal-Mart and gives a bright-sharp image. The BDC reticule is handy for shooting at various ranges with the .17 HMR. It has proved itself in the field.

To be honest with you, the Nikon on my .17HMR gives a better image than the Leupold Rifleman that cost twice as much, but I dunno how well it would hold up on a centerfire.

I guess I could buy another one and give it a try.