I have two that I bought on used rifles and didn't think thet were as clear as they should have been so I sent them to Leupold for repair. I got my scopes back with a letter stating that nothing was wrong with them, If all Leupold scopes were like these two that I have,I don't think they would stay in business long, I bought Bushnells to replace them with.
Good shooting Owen
I've got one that I bought because it's American made. I compared it to side X side to a Nikon (same price) at the store, and it wasn't near as bright. That should have set off an alarm, but I'm notoriously stubborn sometimes.
I hope Leupold's other current offerings are better than the Rifleman series, because I'd classify it as borderline junk. I haven't mounted it on anything yet, and the rifle that I had intended it for deserves better glass. Think I'll sell it and buy something else.
Those things are pretty much the bottom of the Leupold barrel. If instead they had a Bushnell or Simmons name on them, those scopes would probably cost about $50-75 and be called "cheap". But a lot of people are snowed by that Leupold name.
But their clicks leave something to be desired they are not as repeatable as many other scopes. But alas for what you get for the money you pay they are too spendy.
Many other scopes at 60% of their cost offer very near quality or the same quality.
I've used Leupolds since 1975 and have yet to have a real warranty issue with one. If I only owned a half dozen or so that would be understandable but I have over 30 of them.
But I haven't bought a new Leupold now since about the mid 90's. The last 3 years I haven't even bought a used one. Most folks are so proud of those used Leupolds I can get a new Bushnell 4200 for less.
I put a 3-9 Rifleman on my 17HMR and it has workt out great! When I bought it I put it against the better Leupold's,3200elite,Burris and cheaper Nikon.The Rifleman definitely didn't have the best glass and might have ben the worst.I would have went with any of the other scopes they had that day if they would have had some kind of ranging reticle but as it was the Rifleman had the biggest area in the fine x hairs.This may not seam important at first but as it works out if I zero the top thick post junction @ 50 yards the bottom thick post junction is the maximum effective killing range of the 17HMR leaving the x hairs for average shots.
Another reason I went with the Rifleman is that the 17HMR is a walking/truck/kid gun that see's a lot of abuse.Leupold's repair reputation is second to none.As far as the glass goes all of the shooting is done in good light and the eye relief was as good and/or more forgiving than the other brands.
If I had ben INTERNET shopping I really doubt I would have ended up with the Rifleman as there are better scopes out there but on that day I made the best choice of what they had in the store,witch is a poor excuse for buying anything
Long way around the barn here but for me the Rifleman has done everything and more than I have asked of it for the purpose it has ben used for!
The rifleman series is of poor quality, the adjusters are cheesy and the glass only average.
I was told that these are imported, not assembled in the USA like the other Leupolds....
Most of the parts in the "high end" Leupolds are now imported also.
I have a couple dozen Leupolds but I don't buy them any more. I've had to send several back for repair and while the service is good, I have scopes that cost less, glass is every bit as good, have better features and never break.
3 of the Leupolds that I've sent back were not repaired the first go round, and had to send them back again.... one went back 3 times and they finally replaced it.
I don't use them for target scopes.... mine are all hunted with and some hunted hard with.
Most of my target scopes are Nightforce or fixed power Weavers.
A forum community dedicated to varmint den hunters and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, varmint calls, guides, and more!