Solitary Man

Rammer, you might also want to consider a Zeiss Conquest with Rapid Z reticle. It's similar to the B&C.

liquidorange

i have to agree. i love leupolds eye relief and what ever they use for guts sure is beefy. cant speak of those european glass guts but at some point you gotta buy something.

North Texan

When I compared the two, looking through them I thought there was enough difference between the twothat Ipurchasedthe VX-III. I bought the VX-III, put it on top of my 25-06, and have never looked back.

stalkingbear

Leupold is my all time favorite brand. I've used em for almost 29 years.
If you have the money,go for the 3. They seem to be a bit sharper, especially in less than optimum conditions. If money isn't issue,go for the 3s.

SwampCollie

Its difficult to tell the difference in clarity between the II and III at the gun counter. However, its easy 15 minutes before dark when a deer steps out.

The major difference here is that the VX-III has index matched lenses. Not all pieces of glass are exactly the same. While glassmakers do their best, there are always gonig to be small imperfections. Leupold says that their scopes have 98% light transmission, and while I use VX-IIIs nearly exclusively, I'll tell you right now that number is not so. The brightest scopes in the world will only transmit about 92%, and thats through each piece of glass. What you have is a copy of a copy of a copy. What makes a scope bright and clear is the purity of a glass, as well as the quality of the coatings on the glass, which is probably a little bit more important. Leupold looks at each individual lens, and coats it so that it maximizes light transmission and minimizes reflection. This is a feature you get on VX-IIIs and the VXL and now I suppose the new line that replaced the LPS.

Now, thats not to say that the VX-II is a bad scope, its certainly not, but I will vouch that the III is better, and in my opinion, certainly worth the extra money.

NVMIKE

they are both very good scopes and youll like either, but the V-III is going to give you a clearer view WHEN CONDITIONS ARE BAD. If you can afford it, get it if not the V-II will do fine.

falcon

Do notcare forvariable scopes myself. Leupold makes a six power scope called the FX-III. Theyalso make FX-II scopes in various powers. Got6X42 FX-III scopes on a couple of my rifles. They are fantastic in low light.

Agshooter

I don't think anyone mentioned this or how much it matters to you, but I think the VX III's zoom adjustment is easier to turn because it has a bigger "knob" to turn than the VX II's groove & "bump." My dad has an older VX-III & I have a VX II. The IIis very clear, but it ishard to turn--& has been since it came out of the box. I'm not sure if all VX II's come this way, but if you wear gloves while hunting then it could a problem. Bottom line, I would get a VXIII, even if I had to save up a little longer to get it.

retrieverman

I have owned both VX II and VX III, and both are "visually" pretty much equal to my eyes. If you are looking seriously at the VX III, I would go with a Zeiss Conquest instead.

redhead522

I find it humerous when the poster of the topic asks that people not make suggestions for other scope brands, and yet every three or so replies recommend another brand (Zeiss, Nikon, etc.)

Personally, I have a VX-II and love it, all of my future scopes will be Leupold. Whether it's worth the extra money is your call.