Bushnell Elite vs Leupold vx 2?

[Bushleague]

I'm in the market for another compact-ish scope, and am trying to decide between these two. I have had a 3200 2-7 for many years, it has been a good scope, I can pick up the new 3500 for $250. I do know a lot of folks who like the greater eye relief of the Leupold's and I'm wondering if the VX 2 is worth the extra $200 or so? I have a Redfield Revolution, and while the extra eye relief is nice, I prefer the Elite by a fair amount... how much better is the VX 2 than a Revolution?

Thanks for the input!

[NCC]

I bought a VXII off a buddy who replaced it with a 4200 of the same magnification as he preferred the 4200. I've looked through several 3200 and 4200's and didn't think they were nearly as good as the VXII's. I think your best bet would be to compare them side by side under varying conditions. Warranty is similar, I think that Leupolds are more durable but that is strictly my opinion as I have never seen or heard of a 4200 failing.

[elkhunter11]

I prefer the 4200 over the VX2, but I haven't tried a 3500. What I don't like about the VX2 is the eye relief changing as the magnification is adjusted.

[Rio56]

very even ... the 4200 maybe just a tad better at last light ..but clarity goes to Lupy..revolution not so sure , have a few old guns with the redfield wide angle on them and they's till nice .. otherwise pretty much like comparing Zeiss conquest HD to Swarovski 3

[260 Rem]

I think the VX 2's are much lighter than the Bushnells.

[Bushleague]

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

I think the VX 2's are much lighter than the Bushnells.

In the 2-7 its only by about 2 oz, but I can get the VX 2 in a 1-4 which would nearly cut the weight in half. For what I'm doing with it 4x is plenty so if I go that route then the VX 2 is probably worth the extra money. I could also cut the weight down by going with a Weaver fixed 4, but I think I would miss having the lower magnification.

The 4500 no longer comes in anything remotely resembling what I would call "compact", so if I go with a Bushnell it will have to be a 3500.

[Opalsasquatch]

I personally like the Leupold. Running a vx2 ultralight 3-9 on my 308. Slim, light, and mounts really low. The regular vx2 seems a little nicer to look through though.

Not feeling like I need anything more on my hunting rifle. Although, I don't make a habit out of looking through $2000 glass either, seems to turn into an expensive hobby that I can't afford


"Shuuuuuuussssshhhhh.

You can't post stuff like that, too many heads will explode."
Hillbillyreefer

[gitrdun]

Which rifle and caliber are you mounting it on?.

[Bushleague]

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Which rifle and caliber are you mounting it on?.

I'll be mounting it on my pump action carbine in .308, or possibly selling that rifle and putting in on a similar bolt carbine. Either way its going on a light, handy bush hunting setup.

[Xbolt7mm]

Save until spring and get a ziess conquest, I have four vx3s and four conquests, there won't be another Leopold in the safe. The vx's look prettier and have those snazzy lenses covers but the no comparing the lenses and clarity

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

I think the VX 2's are much lighter than the Bushnells.

This^^^

I have a Bausch and Lomb 4200 elite, I have a Redfield Revolution, and I've had plenty of VX2's and VX3's, and to be honest between the Leupolds and my Bausch and Lomb I don't notice much a difference other than physical size and mass weight, and for that reason alone I prefer Leupold. I have only had my Redfield out once and it was in the middle of the day and I only used it to sight in my rifle so I can't give an opinion one way or another. What I can say is, I recently was shopping for a light weight scope with a minimum of 3-9 magnification and a ballistic reticle. I had it narrowed down to a Leupold VX3i 3.5-10x40 with the Boone and Crockett reticle, a Zeiss terra 4-12x42 with the rzr6 reticle, and Swarovski Z3 3-10x42 with the BRH reticle, and having all three side by side there was no comparison, I picked the Z3.

I had a specific criteria in mind when I was looking for the scope, light weight, minimum 9x and be able to go as low as 4x maximum, have a ballistic reticle of some sort, and hopefully under a grand. I'm so glad I was able to have all three side by side to test them out, now I'm satisfied and it's money well spent, no second thoughts or buyers remorse. So if you have the opportunity to check them out side by side to see which one is going to fit the bill the best, I'd highly recommend it.

[covey ridge]

Clarity and the ability to see at last light are directly related to the quality of the optic.

That said between the two given choices? Either or! I have always chosen Leupold just because I always have and Leupold has never let me down. Many rave about Leupolds fantastic full life warranty. I have never had a problem with Leupolds warranty but it concerns me that so many happy Leupold owners have had to send their scopes for warranty repair.

On entry priced scopes I think there are better choices than either.