Leupold reminds me of Harley Davidson, an American company stuck in the past that really doesn't have any idea on how to be relevant in an environment where the customers are not the customers of old. The new generation is much more informed and more demanding. If you don't make what they want they will buy from someone who does. It's a shame really because both have the might, money and know how to do it but for some reason they don't. Maybe both companies need a new design and engineering department...
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Why the hate for leupold ?
- Thread starter Jmccracken1214
- Start date
@TheHorta does that from time to time...hes a boomer gotta cut him some slack when he's not taking his old people meds....
It’s my anti-psychosis meds. It’s the only reason I’m able to remain so sane.
I don't know man...
The mk5 line really does not seem to really be lacking anything compared to NF's ATACR line.
I think there are better optics out there than leipold no question, but I just don't think there is any optic out there that is soo much better as to justify a 2 to 3x premium
What's the issue with the 35mm tube? Badger offers pretty much any height in 35mm.
An atacr 4-20 is like 3200ish with tremor 3
A mk5 3-17 is like 2600ish with tremor 3
If one wants to forgo illumination they can save around 500 bucks
Personally I think the atacr is a slightly better optic but in no way is it 600 dollars better. If one factors in the mil price on both, it would actually be kind of silly to consider the NF over the mk5.
The fact that you have to pay an extra $500-$600 for illumination is asinine. I really want to try a MK5HD, but I need illumination and I'm not paying extra for it when it comes standard literally everywhere else.
I wouldn't pay >$2K for anything Leupold. I'd buy a used NF, SB, or similar brand on the PX long before I spend retail dollars with Leup.
Kia makes a great car, but I ain't dropping >$60K on their very nice K900 sedan either.
Just my very personal $0.02.
Kia makes a great car, but I ain't dropping >$60K on their very nice K900 sedan either.
Just my very personal $0.02.
There are way more options in 34mm versus 35mm, I don't want to be limited in the few options of 35mm. As someone else stated, $500 option for illumination is a total rip off. Illumination comes standard on everything from a leaper to you name except for Leupold. Like I said, I'm sure it's a good scope but it doesn't lure ME back to the brand.
So even though the atacr and mk5 compare closely and the mk5 is around 600 less than the atacr when both are configured with illumination, offering a cheaper base model is an issue?
All the reading I've done has the Mk5 comparing more closely to the NX8, in which case I can get an NX8 w/illum for the same price as a Mk5 without. I could also get an AMG for about the same price.
what do you mean way more options? They are scope rings, historically they are used bolt an optic to a rife. If you want to mount a 35mm optic to a bolt gun, low rings exist. if you want to flex on poors, Spurh, or badger make gucci mounts.
You need to enter the Nightvision section and you will quickly learn.
I'm mostly a gas gun guy, so the mounts I chose have more models for 34mm than 35mm. I don't run any Spurh or Badger rings or mounts. I typically don't run the lowest ring setting either, I know what I like and I set my rifles to work for me and my oddball size. Again, the Leupold isn't for me. I'm glad it works for you and whomever else.
The 34mm vs 35mm seems like a principled issue for me.
If the 35mm tube actually gave me a distinct advantage over a 34mm scope then I wouldn't care.
But there are lots of 34mm tube scopes out there that they have the same amount of elevation, the same mechical reliability and glass that is the same (+/- a but depending in scope).
Atleast when ZCO went for a 36mm tube it seems to be for good reason as proven by how good they perform, whereas a Leupold Mark5hd performs middle of the pack but requires me to buy specific rings that should I decide to sell the scope will be useless for most other scopes and if they don't suit the new owner I'll be stuck with them.
Add to that the FOV on the Mark5hd is reduced from that in the Mark6, the reticle options (until now) have been subpar and the cost for illumination is so outrageous why would I choose one?
The only redeeming feature is the light weight but for most people in this game a few extra ounces really doesn't matter.
If the 35mm tube actually gave me a distinct advantage over a 34mm scope then I wouldn't care.
But there are lots of 34mm tube scopes out there that they have the same amount of elevation, the same mechical reliability and glass that is the same (+/- a but depending in scope).
Atleast when ZCO went for a 36mm tube it seems to be for good reason as proven by how good they perform, whereas a Leupold Mark5hd performs middle of the pack but requires me to buy specific rings that should I decide to sell the scope will be useless for most other scopes and if they don't suit the new owner I'll be stuck with them.
Add to that the FOV on the Mark5hd is reduced from that in the Mark6, the reticle options (until now) have been subpar and the cost for illumination is so outrageous why would I choose one?
The only redeeming feature is the light weight but for most people in this game a few extra ounces really doesn't matter.
If someone like @TheHorta already has owned 6 or more scopes in 34mm and has multiple mounts in different heights for said 34mm scopes then why should he have to buy a 35mm mount for no advantage?
Someone who isn't former military.
Agreed 100. I run mostly Spuhr and have almost a dozen 34mm and atleast a dozen 30mm. I have a 4001 sitting on the shelf from my Kahles I sold waiting for the next scope. If I buy a Mk5HD now I gotta go buy a 35mm Spuhr and if I want to change it out later, I'm stuck selling that mount because I don't want any other 35mm scope out there (Steiner, Valdada, ?) The other brands that I would look at - Vortex(ignoring the old Razor), Kahles, Nightforce, ZCO, S&B, TT are 30/34/36mm. As another poster said, at least ZCO has a benefit to going to 36mm.
hey, at least people are willing to admit they bought crap without doing any research or making any effort to determine if the product was any good before they spent their money on it.
what fucking good does it do to have a lifetime warranty if it’s always in their shop and i’m out the shipping. just like a craftsman drill i had years ago. you can be a fan boy if you want but i will spend my money on optics aren’t notorious for being crap. the. again they are fine unless you want to be able to dope your turrets with a predictable outcome.
You mention what good is a warranty if its always in the shop... Has it ever gone to the shop. Things break man.... you know people spend like 50k on a new vehicle, and most major car companies have multiple recalls per year.
I am just not tracking keeping a 20 year old piece broken gear around that can be fix and sold for the cost of a flat rate shipping box. why not back, toss them on gunbroker, when get back and get something better
if leupold made vehicles obama would have had to bail them out more than once.
nice, but there were years that i wouldn't have bought anything from ford that wasn't a truck,
doesn't mean that they haven't and can't make a good car.
if we judge every brand by it's worst product, we might not like many brands at all.
so something else is causing the hate.
bandwagon?
sour grapes from uninformed purchases?
glorifying .gov glass and finding it is over-priced and still broke on your scar 17, causing you to hate everything .gov and scars?
in your village or elsewhere? do you even know that outsideyour border is a whole world, which is way ahead than america?
Village. Probably was Baghdad. I got to see the world while floating there on a ship.
What were you doing then?!
Leupold was better than the Unertl IMHO
Last edited:
Now that extra $600 for illumination? Is that still covered by a 1 year warranty, or have they decided to follow the market?
What Leupold does well is make a light weight SFP scope. I have several and I like them. Mine are tactical and hunting scopes. But I agree with those that say the market left them behind years ago. I would like to see them make a comeback. But I can't see giving up my Razor or Cronus for them, even if they did.
What Leupold does well is make a light weight SFP scope. I have several and I like them. Mine are tactical and hunting scopes. But I agree with those that say the market left them behind years ago. I would like to see them make a comeback. But I can't see giving up my Razor or Cronus for them, even if they did.
Leupold and a Remington 700
a match made in heaven.
failed to innovate, Stuck in the past, and beloved by Fudds everywhere
a match made in heaven.
failed to innovate, Stuck in the past, and beloved by Fudds everywhere
Man O man, did your parents beat you with a Leupold scope when you were growing up ?
Lets see where these other scope manufacturers are in a 100+ years ?
My guess is that Leupold will be around long after their gone, much to Peterpans disdain.
Not sure if I've posted before, but, this:
1. optics aside, stuff such as spotting scope covers and spotting scope tripods are made in China.
2. Some of the product just doesn't impress me. I bought a ...I can't recall the exact model...Pig hunting scope w/t idiotic reticle and it was no better in quality than a 40 year old Bushnell fixed 4x.
3. The top of the line used to be the M4. I bought one and it's excellent. The M4 rings however, when compared to modern Badger, are of lesser quality.
4. The top of the line/most expensive Leupolds are not price/performance compatible with Euro scopes. Possibly/probably even Vortex scopes.
The days when Leupold Gold Ring scopes were the leader are long gone.
1. optics aside, stuff such as spotting scope covers and spotting scope tripods are made in China.
2. Some of the product just doesn't impress me. I bought a ...I can't recall the exact model...Pig hunting scope w/t idiotic reticle and it was no better in quality than a 40 year old Bushnell fixed 4x.
3. The top of the line used to be the M4. I bought one and it's excellent. The M4 rings however, when compared to modern Badger, are of lesser quality.
4. The top of the line/most expensive Leupolds are not price/performance compatible with Euro scopes. Possibly/probably even Vortex scopes.
The days when Leupold Gold Ring scopes were the leader are long gone.
I have a Mk4 16x. Called Leupold first. Sent it to them to put in a TMOA or WindPlex ret. returned with a TMR. They said then they couldn't put in the TMOA, Didn't have the engineering for it. Haven't bought a Leupold since.
khales was founded in 1898. so what.
i’m all for made in america products. but they need to work properly.
I'll never purchase another Leupold product. My last two purchases were an EOtech 512 with lbc and a Vortex Venom for a pistol. Next is the Burris Eliminator 4 for a Weatherby 30-378. I used to think Leupold was the pinnacle. They lost this customer recently when I called and asked for a custom elevated turret knob. Leupold said "Their custom shop is closed right now but I should call Kenton Industries". I did and made my donation. Total waste of money and time. Knob didn't fit. Kenton said they would make me another one for half price? Leupold didn't believe they sent me to Kenton Industries. Reputation and integrity mean a great deal to the hunting / marksman fraternity. As far as I'm concerned, neither Kenton nor Leupold exist. They may not if they don't lose their almighty attitude.
It's cheaper to clothe and feed my rifles than it is to feed a child. Have you read all the stats on how much it costs to raise a kid? Now imagine what you could buy with all that $$$.
The glass in an NXS vs an NX8 or ATACR is night and day difference. You have to compare HD glass to HD glass.
My guess has Leupold getting the grumbles because they don't cater to a very small market of precision shooters. Probably 90% of hunters will take their game at distances that could be handled with open sights so they buy reasonably priced scopes that will get the job done mounted on reasonably priced rifles. A 200 yard shot is "long range" for most hunters. When we go out to a shooting range, how many of the others present are using any kind of "science' to dial in their accuracy? Truth is, most of them blow though a case of ammo before getting anything dialed in. Leupold's marketing research has likely identified the average shooter as their most buyer of product, while also determining the "average shooter" has tens of thousands more participants than precision shooters. It's always about the money. So do you sell a few hundred $4,000 scopes or thousands of $1,500 scopes?
Lol, HD is just a marketing term nowadays that means little. Also, the NX8 and ATACR aren’t “HD” they are ED.
All I can find is “optical instrument production”. Their rifle scopes where used on the K98k for sniper rifles in WWII. The German snipers detested the odd recoil of the rifle with a scope mounted. But the Germans preferred the zeiss scopes so much to the Soviet ones that they put up with it.
Or tactical shooters or competition shooters. The question is, who's setting the tone for what the "average guy" market thinks is cool? Is buying off Tim Kennedy and sending free review samples to magazines fewer and fewer people read really going to be enough in the long-term, compared to actually putting out products that work for more of the market?
I will say that I like Leupolds, I like the picture/view I get from them. I actually like them better than the tint that I get from my Nightforce NXS which seems to have a greyish hue.
I used a Leupold MRT in Baghdad 2005-2006 1.5-5 illuminated. Nice optic, works really well. I have a couple of other Leupolds that perform well. Most are Mark 4 tubes.
They make some good optics for the price and I run them pretty hard. With that I still love my S&B and my USO so
I don't like how they screwed over Premier.
I used a Leupold MRT in Baghdad 2005-2006 1.5-5 illuminated. Nice optic, works really well. I have a couple of other Leupolds that perform well. Most are Mark 4 tubes.
They make some good optics for the price and I run them pretty hard. With that I still love my S&B and my USO so
I don't like how they screwed over Premier.
That's exactly the rub. Quit leading and you're on the trailing edge, which is a slippery slope.
I think Leupold thinks the market looks like a bell curve:
But I think the market looks more like an airplane wing:
That's not a recipe for growth. And furthermore it's not too many steps from real trouble when you have overhead like Leupold does. Without some adjustments to their strategy, I think Leupold will be restructuring/downsizing their company.
Leupold has fallen from #1 in the USA in sales dollars, but imagine the decline if it were expressed in idealized market share. There was a time when 90% of the rifles in this country would have had Leupolds on them if money were no object. What's that number today?
Leupold has fallen from #1 in the USA in sales dollars, but imagine the decline if it were expressed in idealized market share. There was a time when 90% of the rifles in this country would have had Leupolds on them if money were no object. What's that number today?
I had a vortex viper and leupold bx4 Bino at one point. After looking through both I sold my viper. I am shopping for a spotter now and I plan to get leupold.
for scope, however, there’s just nothing in the leupold line that is below 1k that meets my need.
for scope, however, there’s just nothing in the leupold line that is below 1k that meets my need.
I'm an early adopter of the MK5HD 3.6-18x and I've been very happy with it. It's lightweight, compact, has a very nice reticle (CCH) and great features. It suits the role I use it for perfectly. Considering the rifle it sits on and other weapons in my arsenal I wouldn't consider myself a "poor" or a "fudd", but I guess I understand why people might judge other's by their choice of gear. I can only control my own ego and not others. I get the general apprehension for the brand based on Leupold resting on its laurels and lagging behind in terms of innovation, but they did a good job with this model (MK5HD), albeit being reactive to the market as opposed to being proactive and leading the market. I do have to give them credit for having one of the best discounts for current and former warfighters. Also to add, being lightweight doesn't equate to cheap build quality. There are plenty of heavy scopes out there that "feel" like they might be high quality, but that shouldn't be used as a sole gauge to determine overall quality. Just putting that out there based on a comment I saw here. Thanks.
