Leupold vx3i guys

Joined
Jan 14, 2020
Messages
859
Guys I am real torn on which optic to go with. I am set on the Leupold vx3i. I am not looking to spend crazy amount and I think this is the best bang for my buck with my budget

This is going on my tikka t3x 6.5 creedmoor super lite.

I am torn between the 3.5-10x40 or the 4.5-14x40. I want cds. I like the 4.5-14 because it comes in a 30mm tube. The 3.5-10 only comes 1 inch. I like the weight of the 3.5-10 better. But 2 oz I don’t think is a game changer. Also if you guys think the 2.5-10 is the way to go would you go 50mm instead of the 40?

I will be using it for Eastern white tail and hopefully some out west antelope/mule deer in the near future. The Eastern part says go 3.5-10 the western part tells me 4.5-14.

in your experience what do you guys think? What would you get? Thank you!
 

TxxAgg

WKR
Joined
Dec 27, 2019
Messages
1,999
10x40 is plenty

lots of guys have issues with dialing that line of Leupolds. Just something to be aware of and research.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2021
Messages
22
I own the 3.5-10 and it has been fine, but I am not doing much (anything) beyond 500 yds. The 1 inch is a bummer as if I want to swap out a scope (I'd like to get the Leupold VX5HD 3-15 at 44mm eventually) I need to get new rings as well. I will upgrade eventually, but for now like the 3.5-10. Great optics for the price. I also purchased last year and I like the zero button and CDS on the new models
 

z987k

WKR
Joined
Sep 9, 2020
Messages
1,425
Location
AK
The 3.5-10 is plenty but I don't think that comes with parallax adjustment and scopes without parallax are trash imo.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
70
Adjustable prallax is unnessesary at 10x magnafication and under, in general and certainly for your purposes. That's why most models/brands don't even offer it.

3.5-10 has a better eyebox, the 4.5-14 can feel a little narrow. I have both the 1 inch and 30mm 4.5-14x40.

I'd hold out for the new VX-3HD 3.5-10.
 

JoeDirt

WKR
Joined
Mar 6, 2019
Messages
470
I have the VX3i 4.5-15x50 side focus. Its alright my side focus moves on me when my gun is on my back. I much prefer my VX5 anymore.
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Messages
506
I have two VX3i 4.5 x 14 - 40 one inch CDS scopes mounted on a Tikka T3 SL in 7RM and Browning HCS in 300WM. I don’t want for anymore scope on either. I am not an experienced western hunter but I have the east covered. Although the 7RM is responsible for a 528 yard kill on a cow elk. I do not dial.
 

hereinaz

WKR
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
3,015
Location
Arizona
Magnification over 10 isn't necessary to hunt out to 400 and 500, so don't let that be a huge factor. I run a 3.6-18 on my hunting rifle and don't need all 18 to train with it out to 1000. And, I don't dial over 12 or 15 out to 600 for PRS matches even though I have 25 on the top end.
 

LightFoot

WKR
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Messages
1,361
Location
Texas
I have both. The advantage to the 4.5-14x40 30mm SF over the 3.5-10x40 (other than the obvious) is the windplex.

Like the previous post, I'd hold out for VX-3HD. I think eurooptic has some already.

The 3.5-10x40 VX-3i is clear enough for dusk and dawn. The 4.5-14x40 is better on the range but unnecessary in the field. Big price jump to the latter.

I think you'll be happy with the 3.5-10x40.

>>>----JAKE----->
 

z987k

WKR
Joined
Sep 9, 2020
Messages
1,425
Location
AK
Adjustable prallax is unnessesary at 10x magnafication and under, in general and certainly for your purposes. That's why most models/brands don't even offer it.

3.5-10 has a better eyebox, the 4.5-14 can feel a little narrow. I have both the 1 inch and 30mm 4.5-14x40.

I'd hold out for the new VX-3HD 3.5-10.
Parallax error has nothing to do with the magnification. Magnification isn't even a variable in the equation to figure out the error. The only variables are lens diameter, fixed parallax distance and distance to object.

It may only be a few inches at hunting ranges, but it kind of blows my mind to spend thousands of dollars on a rifle that promises sub moa groups, but at the same time can't put the bullet within 1 moa of where you're aiming due to the optic. Sure it can group them sub moa, but if that group isn't where you're aiming, it's a pretty useless metric.

But beyond just the error in shot placement, the image clarity alone due to the scope being out of focus is a reason to never own a non parallax adjustable scope unless all your hunting is more or less at 100 yards.
And since the OP say's he wants CDS, I have to assume he's dialing and planning on shooting a bit past 100. Parallax adjustment brings the image into the same focal plane as the reticle. Non-parrallax scopes are like binos you can't adjust the focus on. I guess they'd work as long as everything you want to look at is at 100 yards.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
70
Parallax error has nothing to do with the magnification. Magnification isn't even a variable in the equation to figure out the error. The only variables are lens diameter, fixed parallax distance and distance to object.

It may only be a few inches at hunting ranges, but it kind of blows my mind to spend thousands of dollars on a rifle that promises sub moa groups, but at the same time can't put the bullet within 1 moa of where you're aiming due to the optic. Sure it can group them sub moa, but if that group isn't where you're aiming, it's a pretty useless metric.

But beyond just the error in shot placement, the image clarity alone due to the scope being out of focus is a reason to never own a non parallax adjustable scope unless all your hunting is more or less at 100 yards.
And since the OP say's he wants CDS, I have to assume he's dialing and planning on shooting a bit past 100. Parallax adjustment brings the image into the same focal plane as the reticle. Non-parrallax scopes are like binos you can't adjust the focus on. I guess they'd work as long as everything you want to look at is at 100 yards.
To say "it may only be A FEW INCHES at hunting distances" is a gross exaduration. It's much much less than "a few inches" at hunting distances.

You're putting words in my mouth and then telling me I'm wrong about things I didn't say. Ever heard of a strawman logical falacy? You're doing that repeatedly.
 

N2TRKYS

WKR
Joined
Apr 17, 2016
Messages
3,954
Location
Alabama
I have VX3I 3.5-10x40 cds and 4.5-14x40 cds scopes with 1” tubes. I much prefer the higher magnification.
 

Spoonbill

WKR
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
689
I have both. My 4.5-14 is a 1" tube without the cds. One thing I noticed this year is the light transmission really drops off after 10x on the 4.5-14. You probably won't notice it unless you are hunting in crap conditions. That being said, if I were to do it again I would just get the 3.5-10 because it has a wider field of view and the fact that after 10x the 4.5-14 (at least mine) drops off pretty dramatically in light transmission.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
70
You can calculate the maximum parallax error of any scope with a free online calculator thie this one:

In a perfect shooting scenario, your head position would be perfectly consistent on the stock thus eliminating parallax error. But in real life our shooting position is never perfectly consistent especially between groups or even between shots in a group if you lift your head off the stock between shots.

How much patallax you actually experience depends on the consistency of your technique and position. It might be very llittle parallax error, like 25% error. Or it might be maximum parallax error if you're sloppy or rushed, like 100% parallax error.

The MAXIMUM parallax error in a Leupold VX-3 3.5-10x40 scope (fixed parallax at 150 yards) at typical hunting distances is minor. Maximum meaning in the worst possible scenario. It will never be more than the maximum, and it will usually be much less than the maximum. Let's look at the math.

At 300 yards, the MAXIMUM parallax error is 0.787" in the worst case scenario. So if you only have 50% parallax error due to inconsistent head/eye position that's only 1/3" at 300 yards. Big deal. You'll never even notice on a hunting rifle. You'll have a difficult time even holding within 1/3" error in aiming point with a low magnification scope because your reticle is likely thicker than 1/3" at 300 yards.

At 500 yards, the MAXIMUM parallax error is only 1.837" in the worst case scenario. 50% error is less than 1" at 500 yards.

If you need more precision than that, you probably need more magnification and yes adjustable parallax. But for typical hunting rifles with shots way under 300 yards, it's likely more trouble and expense than it's worth.

The higher your magnification, the more parallax becomes apparent. The longer distance you shoot, the more parallax error becomes significant. But at lower magnifications and closer distances parallax error is much less consequential.

50874645813_4ace4c5fda_c.jpg
 
Last edited:

Achigan1

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jan 4, 2019
Messages
146
Location
TEXAS
I bought one of each to try on my mountain rifle. The 3.5-10 had vertical adjustment gremlins and went back to Leupold who fixed the erector system promptly and under warranty. The 4.5-14 (1”) worked good but the eyebox is pretty tight and glass was just OK IMHO.
She’s wearing a Leica ERi now @ 19 ounces.
I had high hopes but am beginning to think reasonable magnification, solid repeatability and light weight can’t (or won’t) be done with spectacular glass.
I’d pay serious money for a VX-III 2.5x8x36 remake with an exposed elevation turret, great internals and alpha glass.
 
Top