Leupold ultralight 3x9x33 versus Leupold vx3 2.5x8x36

R

Rudykane1

Member
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Location
Calgary, Alberta
Wondering opinions on these two scopes on a very lightweight 308? The rifle came with the ultralight which is cool and loving the vintage look of it however i wonder about the downfalls of ultralight and a 33 mm scope which I have never had an ultralight Leupold.
 
I have both. The only downfall to the ultralight is the eye relief. I find it significantly less than a regular Leupold. Awesome little scopes otherwise. If you're looking to save ounces and need a compact optic, its' the way to go. If you're not worried about a few extra ounces, I would go with the 2.5-8x36.
 
jbmauser said:
I have both. The only downfall to the ultralight is the eye relief. I find it significantly less than a regular Leupold. Awesome little scopes otherwise. If you're looking to save ounces and need a compact optic, its' the way to go. If you're not worried about a few extra ounces, I would go with the 2.5-8x36.
Click to expand...

Very much appreciated
 
I’ve had a 3-9x33 ultralight for a few years now. It works good. Its not quite as bright as a 40mm The glass is decent though, definitely practical for hunting. Mechanically its been reliable but its not like I dial with it.

Never had a 2.5-8x36 to compare to though.Closest thing I’ve tested was the 3.5-10x40. Comparing the 2.5-8x36 sounds like splitting hairs.
 
Dim and the eyebox was miserable on the one I briefly had.
Couldn't sell it fast enough, one of the least user friendly optics ever.
 
Sun_and_Steel_77 said:
Dim and the eyebox was miserable on the one I briefly had.
Couldn't sell it fast enough, one of the least user friendly optics ever.
Click to expand...

I've never found mine dim but the eyebox and eye relief definitely aren't the greatest. I've shot game at both ends of the legal light in dark forest and never found it lacking for light. Obviously it isn't going to be as bright as something with a bigger objective but I always found it more than adequate. I use 1-4 and 1.5-5x20's no problem.
 
I never owned a 3-9x33 but own a few 2.5-8x 36 and I think they are my favourite scopes along with the 1.5-5x20! I quite like the 2-7x33 as well! I tend to like lower magnification scope it seams!
 
I too have never owned the compact but for sure the 2.5-8 has been good to me. I’m also an if it ain’t broke don’t fix it kind of guy, so if your happy with what you have then run it!
 
I had both.

I too disliked the eye relief of the VXII 3-9X33, as already been mentioned by other members. But, I did like it as I was consistent in my cheek weld. I had this optic on my lightweight Titanium.

For a brief period I also had the VXIII 2.5-8x36 with a B&C reticle. The clarity was nice but I never really liked this scope. I quickly upgraded to a Swarovski 3-9x36 as my compact scope.
 
jbmauser said:
I have both. The only downfall to the ultralight is the eye relief. I find it significantly less than a regular Leupold. Awesome little scopes otherwise. If you're looking to save ounces and need a compact optic, its' the way to go. If you're not worried about a few extra ounces, I would go with the 2.5-8x36.
Click to expand...

the upside for that short eye relief is mounting to a cz 527, they have such short rear of action that trying to get a scope remotely centering the turret block between rings it's about ideal for those rifles and recoil isn't a concern in 527 chambering either, I ran one on a tikka .270 ul build for awhile and was excellent, 7 lbs all up, had Korth put the 7/8" target knob on it and Kenton spun me up a speed dial turret and was deadly to 700 yards for test shooting afield, on game it may have gone to 520, never scoped me with 7 lb all up .270 win, uncle still has it and has killed with it all over the place
 
I have both. I would go with the 2.5-8. I find the eye relief on the compact to be a little finicky. It’s on a paddle stock 22 mag and it compliments the rifle perfectly so I can put up with it.
 
Duncan Idaho said:
I had both.

I too disliked the eye relief of the VXII 3-9X33, as already been mentioned by other members. But, I did like it as I was consistent in my cheek weld. I had this optic on my lightweight Titanium.

For a brief period I also had the VXIII 2.5-8x36 with a B&C reticle. The clarity was nice but I never really liked this scope. I quickly upgraded to a Swarovski 3-9x36 as my compact scope.
Click to expand...

I tried it at the range yesterday and this is mounted on my new ( Remington titanium gen 1 in a 308). The eye relief is a bit daunting to me for sure. I feel like it is only a matter of time before I get a kiss so decided on the 2.5x8x36 for now. Very nice scope for sure, just not for me. Thanks for the help!
 
I recently found a new 3-9x33 ultra lite that has the cds dial, for my brother. Mounted it on his new 45-70, and never looked back. Was shooting that rifle out to 200 yards in no time.

Good thing he came and took it home with him, as it was hammering my shoulder. lol.

Maybe the newer ones were better, but I never noticed a problem with eye relief, or small eye box.
 
Had an Ultralight for a while the quality of coating an glass seemed about the VXII or VariX I range
found a noticable difference with the VariX III, even the 1.75-6x32 is a great scope

newer VXIII seem about equal to the older VariX II imo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom