wisconsinteacher
Handloader
- Dec 2, 2010
- 1,980
- 293
Do you feel upgrading from a Bushnell 3-9 Trophy that is 16 years old to a Leupold 3-9 VXII will improve groups?
Scope ?
- Thread starter wisconsinteacher
- Start date
wildgene
Handloader
- Jul 4, 2011
- 1,597
- 2
...I'm betting the new VX-2 will give you a much sharper sight pic than the old Busnell...
..."Aim small, shoot small"...
...easier to identify "shooter faults" if yer not chasing the bull...
..."Aim small, shoot small"...
...easier to identify "shooter faults" if yer not chasing the bull...
G
Guest
Guest
If this is on your 338WinMag, it certainly could not hurt to try a different scope. If the price is right, Leupold will make the scope "like new" on the inside for you if there's any issue. It may be that the Trophy just hasn't held up to the recoil of the big 338, if that's what it's on. I'm not a Leupold fan, as I think there are much better values in new scopes on the market, but if you get a deal, that might make it good. New or used? If new, also consider a Minox, Meopta, or Zeiss Conquest. You can pick up a like-new Meopta MeoPro in 3-9x42 for under $300 from Mark's Outdoors:
http://www.marksscopefinder.com/invento ... cope-42mm/
Or a Minox from Cameraland for the same price:
http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/minox.pl?page=66000
Just some thoughts. Any of these should be well suited to the recoil of a 338WinMag.
http://www.marksscopefinder.com/invento ... cope-42mm/
Or a Minox from Cameraland for the same price:
http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/minox.pl?page=66000
Just some thoughts. Any of these should be well suited to the recoil of a 338WinMag.
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,542
- 6,615
dubyam,
Those are excellent prices on a couple of highly underrated scopes. The Meopta is woefully underrated, and the Minox is a real steal. Either would serve someone well. I believe you are correct that these would be perfect on a 338WM.
Those are excellent prices on a couple of highly underrated scopes. The Meopta is woefully underrated, and the Minox is a real steal. Either would serve someone well. I believe you are correct that these would be perfect on a 338WM.
Without a doubt! I have the 2-10 Minox on my 338 and love the crap out of that scope. I would try the Leupold, just to verify, but like Dub said, if your buying, there are some great deals out there that will eat a VX2 for lunch in the glass department.
- Thread starter
- #7
wisconsinteacher
Handloader
- Dec 2, 2010
- 1,980
- 293
I have a new Leupold on the .338. I am looking to up grade my 30-06. I get a discount on them. I was able to get my 06 to shoot 1.5" groups last summer and hope that the new glass will help me shoot better. The Bushnell compared to the Leupold on my .338 is night and day difference.
Oldtrader3
Ammo Smith
- Nov 6, 2009
- 8,406
- 6
The Bushnell Trophy was always pretty low on the quality hierarchy of Bushnell scopes and has been ever since the 1960's when I first saw this scope. I have trashed a couple of Leupold VXII, 3-9x40 scopes on various .338 Win Mag rifles since 1968 when I bought my first .338. They will shoot fine for 2-3 years and suddenly loose the ability to hold zero. However, the new VX-2 Leupold scopes are rated better optically and are an upgrade mechanically from the VXII so they may be a better scope application for continuous .338 WM use and recoil. I personally would not mount less than a VX3 Leupold scope on a .338 WM for continuous use.
The VX2 most certainly would be an upgrade from a Bushnell Trophy scope. I still have one VXII Leupold which I had rebuilt last year by the factory. It was bought in 2001 and has mostly been mounted on a .243 Win and a .204 Ruger (CZ 527), at least it was until it lost zero, and had to be rebuilt by Leupold. This VXII scope works fine now after being refurbished.
My Win Model 70 .30-06 has a Minox, 2-10x40 BDC scope on it with TPS rings and is very accurate (1/2 MOA) with this setup and shooting good handloads. I have been shooting this setup for over two years without any issues.
The VX2 most certainly would be an upgrade from a Bushnell Trophy scope. I still have one VXII Leupold which I had rebuilt last year by the factory. It was bought in 2001 and has mostly been mounted on a .243 Win and a .204 Ruger (CZ 527), at least it was until it lost zero, and had to be rebuilt by Leupold. This VXII scope works fine now after being refurbished.
My Win Model 70 .30-06 has a Minox, 2-10x40 BDC scope on it with TPS rings and is very accurate (1/2 MOA) with this setup and shooting good handloads. I have been shooting this setup for over two years without any issues.
cloverleaf
Handloader
- Sep 10, 2006
- 4,433
- 1,127
I have both of the scopes you mention and have had them both on the same rifle. My observations:
I bought the Trophy cause its what I could afford at the time.
I shot the smallest group of my life with the bushnell. 3 shots overlapping in a perfect cloverleaf at 100 yds .... one time. I have not duplicated that feat in the 6 years since.... :shock:
with either scope. Sadly, a fluke. I bought the Luey in hopes of doing so.... not yet.
The bushnell NEVER shot to the same point of impact on any two consecutive range sessions. Not off by much but always an inch or two.
The Luey is always where I left it....even when I dropped it hard enough to and damage the power change ring it remained so close I couldnt tell for sure it wasnt operator error.
The bushnell adjustments were not accurate, "about an inch" is the best it would do. The Leupold is spot on. Zeroed the rifle with the Luey the first time in four shots. 4 clicks was in inch.
The bushnel has a larger diameter eye piece and "appears" to give a "bigger view". The "focus on the tropy is nice but once I had the Luey set I was done (until I dropped the rifle)
Both are pretty forgiving as far as eye relief, the Luey is currently in for service as it is way to finicky with regard to eye relief and I can see some Parralax (to my eye any way). I think they were not thorough enough with the check up when I sent it in the last time.
IF you are like me and "need" to find an excuse why your groups arent what they were the last time to the range, then the Luey may be a worth while. For $15 bucks shipping I will get my scope back in a couple weeks with a clean bill of health and a note that says "its all better now" OR one that says "operator error.... go back to the range and try again". That saves ME from going out and buying a new scope once a year and indulges my neurocies with out breaking the bank. But thats just me.
Incidentally, I laid the bushnell in the rings and looked through them side by side. The Lueplod was obviously sharper, especially way to the edge, brighter, and even in its "damaged" state came quicker to the eye in terms of full field of view.
All that said it should perform better than the Bushnell. I paid 3 times as much for the Luey. Thats also why I dont worry aboout sending it back for a check up.
I have also replaced another bushnell with a used leupold. The life expectancy of the scope on a 12 ga slug gun is any bodys guess and I want the warranty and customer service of a Luey The new VX2 (as ooppsed to the VX-II) is reportedly a better scope. In the store I cant see the difference.
The bushnell remains my "Back up" scope. The comparably priced bushnells get pretty good reviews around here (cant remember what they are called ) but thats not wht your asking. Should you ditch the trophy? Well, how rich do you feel? I dont think you will be sorry you have a leupold. But if it aint broke....do you need to fix it? Not every one needs to be as neurotic as me when it comes to scopes.
My .22 still wears a 30 year old bushnell sportview 4x. I dont think I would change it if you gave me a new Luey. It stays zeroed, where i put it and works perfectly for what I need ..... Well maybe if you GAVE me one.... :grin: CL
I bought the Trophy cause its what I could afford at the time.
I shot the smallest group of my life with the bushnell. 3 shots overlapping in a perfect cloverleaf at 100 yds .... one time. I have not duplicated that feat in the 6 years since.... :shock:
with either scope. Sadly, a fluke. I bought the Luey in hopes of doing so.... not yet. The bushnell NEVER shot to the same point of impact on any two consecutive range sessions. Not off by much but always an inch or two.
The Luey is always where I left it....even when I dropped it hard enough to and damage the power change ring it remained so close I couldnt tell for sure it wasnt operator error.
The bushnell adjustments were not accurate, "about an inch" is the best it would do. The Leupold is spot on. Zeroed the rifle with the Luey the first time in four shots. 4 clicks was in inch.
The bushnel has a larger diameter eye piece and "appears" to give a "bigger view". The "focus on the tropy is nice but once I had the Luey set I was done (until I dropped the rifle)
Both are pretty forgiving as far as eye relief, the Luey is currently in for service as it is way to finicky with regard to eye relief and I can see some Parralax (to my eye any way). I think they were not thorough enough with the check up when I sent it in the last time.
IF you are like me and "need" to find an excuse why your groups arent what they were the last time to the range, then the Luey may be a worth while. For $15 bucks shipping I will get my scope back in a couple weeks with a clean bill of health and a note that says "its all better now" OR one that says "operator error.... go back to the range and try again". That saves ME from going out and buying a new scope once a year and indulges my neurocies with out breaking the bank. But thats just me.
Incidentally, I laid the bushnell in the rings and looked through them side by side. The Lueplod was obviously sharper, especially way to the edge, brighter, and even in its "damaged" state came quicker to the eye in terms of full field of view.
All that said it should perform better than the Bushnell. I paid 3 times as much for the Luey. Thats also why I dont worry aboout sending it back for a check up.
I have also replaced another bushnell with a used leupold. The life expectancy of the scope on a 12 ga slug gun is any bodys guess and I want the warranty and customer service of a Luey The new VX2 (as ooppsed to the VX-II) is reportedly a better scope. In the store I cant see the difference.
The bushnell remains my "Back up" scope. The comparably priced bushnells get pretty good reviews around here (cant remember what they are called ) but thats not wht your asking. Should you ditch the trophy? Well, how rich do you feel? I dont think you will be sorry you have a leupold. But if it aint broke....do you need to fix it? Not every one needs to be as neurotic as me when it comes to scopes.
My .22 still wears a 30 year old bushnell sportview 4x. I dont think I would change it if you gave me a new Luey. It stays zeroed, where i put it and works perfectly for what I need ..... Well maybe if you GAVE me one.... :grin: CL
RiverRider
Handloader
- Dec 9, 2008
- 1,454
- 107
I've always loved my Leupolds and every scoped rifle I have wears one, except for a muzzle loader. I know there is always something better out there but I've never felt disadvantaged using Leupolds.
Oldtraders comments are timely, though...when I got the first of a long string of recent .243s a few years back I scoped it with a Leupold VX-II 4-12x40 AO. I wish I could be sure that the same scope was on every .243 (there were six of them), but I am not 100% positive that it was always the same one. Well, the same scope is now on my 6mm x 284 which I have had about six or eight weeks. I started it out on 95-grain Partitions and got groups around MOA---some better, some not, but I was using old brass of dubious heritage and laid in a bundle of Norma 6.5 x 284 brass and about the time I got it prepped the 90-grain Accubonds appeared. I ordered some, and when they finally arrived I loaded up some pressure test loads (pairs of each charge level) and waited for the wind to stop blowing in my neighborhood.
So...Friday was a beautiful day and I was able to shoot my test loads. Since I had loaded up pairs, I figured I would shoot as carefully as I could and maybe I'd be able to see what shoots poorly---a load that shoots two shots into 1-1/2 inch isn't going to shoot five shots any tighter, is it? I had ten loads, and my targets are printed on 8-1/2 x 11 copier paper, six targets per page. As I was shooting I could see that groups were dismal. I was trying to keep track of which shots were paired up and I would have gone down range to make notations on the target but the range was too busy. The groups were so bad that by the time I was able to collect my targets I could no longer remember which holes belonged together. The rifle was truly shooting all over the place.
I really think my scope has failed. I've swapped it with another VX-II that is identical (except the reticle) and will try again soon with some of the same loads. I've seen scope failure before and that was what it looked like. Looking back, I am wondering when the scope went bad and I wonder how many tack-driving .243s I ditched! I talked to the guy who bought one of them, a Model 70 Featherweight, and he told me that it was one of his most accurate rifles. There's definitely a pattern here, no?
So I am contemplating the possible failure modes of a scope. Could it work better on some days than others? Could it work better on one rifle than another owing to the fact that it would have to be sighted in differently, which means some of the internals are in different positions or relationships? I never figured the scope had failed until last Friday, I guess in part because I did not WANT to believe it had failed. And I am still not sure that it has!
Being in aviation, I see things done in the most "bulletproof" way possible. And still, things fail---partly due to design weaknesses, partly due to manufacturing deficiencies, and partly due to poorly performed prior repairs or maintenance. I believe that things can be conceived to be sold cheaply and designed with all kinds of shortcuts and built with second-rate materials, and you'll see the expected failures. I also believe that things can be designed with reliability in mind, using no shortcuts and incorporating no compromises...reliability will be enhanced, but failures still will crop up now and then. Nothing can be perfect, except maybe a stone.
I guess folks like what they like for reasons no one else can truly appreciate, so it's each to his own. I like Leupolds and have no plans to switch, even though folks rave about the Vortex Vipers. Maybe I'll try a used one some day, but I don't think that warranty they offer will be any good if Vortex goes away and you never know how a new company will behave. All their stuff is built by another party to the specs Vortex gives them...will Vortex ever start incorporating shortcuts? Will they cheapen the product so that they can coast on their reputation and maximize their profits? They could be studying graphs and charts and curves right this moment. Will they do that and then lose their reputation and then fade away? Only time will tell.
Oldtraders comments are timely, though...when I got the first of a long string of recent .243s a few years back I scoped it with a Leupold VX-II 4-12x40 AO. I wish I could be sure that the same scope was on every .243 (there were six of them), but I am not 100% positive that it was always the same one. Well, the same scope is now on my 6mm x 284 which I have had about six or eight weeks. I started it out on 95-grain Partitions and got groups around MOA---some better, some not, but I was using old brass of dubious heritage and laid in a bundle of Norma 6.5 x 284 brass and about the time I got it prepped the 90-grain Accubonds appeared. I ordered some, and when they finally arrived I loaded up some pressure test loads (pairs of each charge level) and waited for the wind to stop blowing in my neighborhood.
So...Friday was a beautiful day and I was able to shoot my test loads. Since I had loaded up pairs, I figured I would shoot as carefully as I could and maybe I'd be able to see what shoots poorly---a load that shoots two shots into 1-1/2 inch isn't going to shoot five shots any tighter, is it? I had ten loads, and my targets are printed on 8-1/2 x 11 copier paper, six targets per page. As I was shooting I could see that groups were dismal. I was trying to keep track of which shots were paired up and I would have gone down range to make notations on the target but the range was too busy. The groups were so bad that by the time I was able to collect my targets I could no longer remember which holes belonged together. The rifle was truly shooting all over the place.
I really think my scope has failed. I've swapped it with another VX-II that is identical (except the reticle) and will try again soon with some of the same loads. I've seen scope failure before and that was what it looked like. Looking back, I am wondering when the scope went bad and I wonder how many tack-driving .243s I ditched! I talked to the guy who bought one of them, a Model 70 Featherweight, and he told me that it was one of his most accurate rifles. There's definitely a pattern here, no?
So I am contemplating the possible failure modes of a scope. Could it work better on some days than others? Could it work better on one rifle than another owing to the fact that it would have to be sighted in differently, which means some of the internals are in different positions or relationships? I never figured the scope had failed until last Friday, I guess in part because I did not WANT to believe it had failed. And I am still not sure that it has!
Being in aviation, I see things done in the most "bulletproof" way possible. And still, things fail---partly due to design weaknesses, partly due to manufacturing deficiencies, and partly due to poorly performed prior repairs or maintenance. I believe that things can be conceived to be sold cheaply and designed with all kinds of shortcuts and built with second-rate materials, and you'll see the expected failures. I also believe that things can be designed with reliability in mind, using no shortcuts and incorporating no compromises...reliability will be enhanced, but failures still will crop up now and then. Nothing can be perfect, except maybe a stone.
I guess folks like what they like for reasons no one else can truly appreciate, so it's each to his own. I like Leupolds and have no plans to switch, even though folks rave about the Vortex Vipers. Maybe I'll try a used one some day, but I don't think that warranty they offer will be any good if Vortex goes away and you never know how a new company will behave. All their stuff is built by another party to the specs Vortex gives them...will Vortex ever start incorporating shortcuts? Will they cheapen the product so that they can coast on their reputation and maximize their profits? They could be studying graphs and charts and curves right this moment. Will they do that and then lose their reputation and then fade away? Only time will tell.
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,587
- 9,730
I have a couple older VX II scopes and they have help up over the years. The new VX-2 scopes are much better but I buy VX-3's. They are very bright and hold their zeros. I had an older VX III 2.5-8x36mm on my 338 RUM for a few years and it held up fine, no problems at all.
If it were me, I would put the VX2 3-9x40mm on the 30-06 and get a VX-3 2.5-8x36mm on the 338 WM and call it done.
JD338
If it were me, I would put the VX2 3-9x40mm on the 30-06 and get a VX-3 2.5-8x36mm on the 338 WM and call it done.
JD338
- Thread starter
- #13
wisconsinteacher
Handloader
- Dec 2, 2010
- 1,980
- 293
I have to wait until November to get the scope. I only can get one a year. My plan is to get the .338 up and running, hunt with it, order a new scope, after deer season I will set up the 06 with a new scope or the VX-II and put the new 2.5-8 on the .338. By this time next year, both will have Leupolds and ready to smack some venison.
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,587
- 9,730
SJB358":20lpb8rb said:
Its even move impressive with a 338 RUM. :mrgreen:
WT,
The fellas are right, the 338 WM is an impressive round. You can even load it down for deer, bear and hog hunting, the larger fontal area hits really hard.
JD338
- Thread starter
- #17
wisconsinteacher
Handloader
- Dec 2, 2010
- 1,980
- 293
The real reason for the post was to ask about rescoping the 06. I have had the gun for 18 years and the scope for the same amount of time. It was all I could afford when I was 12 years old. I am excited about the .338, but the 06 will hunt every year I go to the woods. Mom and Dad got if for me and I have killed a lot of Wisconsin deer with it. I just want to make it feel better with new glass on it and ammo that shoots sub 1 MOA.
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,587
- 9,730
WT
I am familar with the program and there is not much of a price difference between the VX-2 3-9x40mm and VX-3 2.5-8x36mm. The VX-3 is an excellent scope and very bright. I hunt cedar swamps and have no trouble seeing deer and horns during the last few minutes of legal shooting hours with a VX-3.
The std reticle on 8x fits nicely into a 6" black bull at 500 yds. Go with the VX-3 on your 30-06 and don't look back.
JD338
I am familar with the program and there is not much of a price difference between the VX-2 3-9x40mm and VX-3 2.5-8x36mm. The VX-3 is an excellent scope and very bright. I hunt cedar swamps and have no trouble seeing deer and horns during the last few minutes of legal shooting hours with a VX-3.
The std reticle on 8x fits nicely into a 6" black bull at 500 yds. Go with the VX-3 on your 30-06 and don't look back.
JD338
Greg Nolan
Handloader
- Nov 25, 2004
- 2,143
- 18
Another scope might be a good idea. It eliminates one possability and may even be a cure. I've used and use Bushnel trophy scopes and the older ones were made in Japan and have never failed me on my old 338 and several magnums. the newer ones made in the Phillipiness have failed out of the box twice for me. All the scopes mentioned on the site are excellent and a great long term investment.
Greg
Greg
