Re: whats wrong with leupold?
I'm in the middle of doing a trade right now for one of the older vx-iii Tacticals, which is what the Mark 4 was before they called it the Mark 4. I'm not too hesitant with this knowing it is one of the older models that weren't prone to failure and were Made in USA. But I wouldn't stretch to put Leupold on par with Nightforce. NF is proven and if my budget allowed me, and they made a ffp in higher power, I would without a doubt go NF. Not to say Leupold isn't a good scope, but like others have already said, It's not quite up to par with some of the newer high dollar scopes and if I'm going to spend 2 grand, I could spend it better elsewhere. Hopefully the newly released ones will prove different in LL's test, but until then, I think the argument still stands that Leupold is lagging. The shitty part is that it could be fixed with better QC, not necessarily a major change in design
I'm in the middle of doing a trade right now for one of the older vx-iii Tacticals, which is what the Mark 4 was before they called it the Mark 4. I'm not too hesitant with this knowing it is one of the older models that weren't prone to failure and were Made in USA. But I wouldn't stretch to put Leupold on par with Nightforce. NF is proven and if my budget allowed me, and they made a ffp in higher power, I would without a doubt go NF. Not to say Leupold isn't a good scope, but like others have already said, It's not quite up to par with some of the newer high dollar scopes and if I'm going to spend 2 grand, I could spend it better elsewhere. Hopefully the newly released ones will prove different in LL's test, but until then, I think the argument still stands that Leupold is lagging. The shitty part is that it could be fixed with better QC, not necessarily a major change in design