Leupold VX3 vs Sightron SIII

W

Waffen

Guest
Hey Guys,

I've just completed building a new Savage/Shilen .260 Remington build, and I'm looking to top it with some new optics. It will primarily be a bench gun spending time at 100-700 yards, but may see 1-2 white tail trips a year.

I'm looking for something in the 6-20ish power range, with around 100MOA of internal adjustment. I've got a Vari-X III mounted on a .223 bench gun that I absolutely love. I would buy another, but it doesn't have enough adjustment internally, and it's got the standard hunter turrets.

In the past I've had a VX3 8.5-25x50LRT on a 300 RUM that was a good scope, but it started "boiling" and getting a bad mirage at anything past 20 power in less than perfect conditions. I also felt my older Vari-X III has better optical clarity, with just as precise adjustment.

I had all but settled on a new Leupold VX3 6.5-20x50LRT with a fine duplex reticle, but I've tried to keep an open mind and look at alternatives. To me the Leupold is a constant, a bench mark, and solid glass. That being said, I can't help but think it's slightly overpriced for what you get.

Over the past few days, I've been frantically searching for feedback & reviews on scopes in this relative price range ($700-$1000) with these features.

I've noticed the Sightron SIII series seems to be getting a good bit of publicity on several forums, and I wanted to get some feedback from those that have used them. I have seen them compared to Leupolds, NightForce (BR series mostly), and other high end optics. In most cases the reviews seem to indicate they are better than the Leupold and "on par" with a NightForce BR scope.

I don't have a Sightron dealer close to me, so I was hoping I could get some feedback from those of you with an SIII and other high end optics. What would you do?
 
Glass quality and clarity in the kind of benchrest found on BR Central is not very important. But the first poster, Waffen, isn't building a bench rifle as found on BR Central, so maybe our experience isn't relevant to his needs.

As to "overpriced" -- it depends on your needs. In anything, once you get to a certain level of quality, small increments of improvement come with a big price tag. If you go and look at the match results by guys shooting here, pay less attention to the size of the groups than to the difference between first place and tenth place -- from .020 to .050 for 125 shots.

What is most important to us is, if you don't touch he scope, it should stay put. Amazing how hard it is to make a scope that does that and still allows for some adjustment.

BTW, I have seen some negative reviews of the big Sightron on the Midway site, concerning the parallax setting. IIRC, it was more a frustration than a problem. If it meets your needs, go for it.
 
Hey Guys,

I sincerely appreciate the replies. This is the kind of info I've been looking for, but haven't been getting on some less knowledgeable boards.

I've seen those reviews you've posted, and they are pretty favorable. I've actually spent the past 2 days doing almost nothing but searching about these scopes :)

Although it's not always the case, I just assumed that most scopes in this price range would track pretty well, and stay put once there. Is that assumption incorrect?
 
Waffen said:
Although it's not always the case, I just assumed that most scopes in this price range would track pretty well, and stay put once there. Is that assumption incorrect?
Click to expand...

Yup. If you go back a few years on BR Central, the big thing was to "freeze" the internals of a scope and make provision for changing where the cross-hairs point part of an external mount. It is also the reason for the $2,500 March scope; when first released, the new $1,000 Leupold Competition scope had some unwanted point-of-impact change issues. Not as bad as most other brands, and maybe they've been pretty much solved.

Now for a hunting rifle, you just don't care just which flap of the mitral valve the bullet hits. Any will do. Not so in benchrest.

Formal benchrest is shot at known distances, using stationary targets, where sight-in shots are allowed. Moreover, when you adjust a scope, most scopes need a few shots to settle down. When I shoot short-range benchrest, I might adjust the sight during the warmup match. After that, I don't touch it unless we change for 100 to 200 yards. At 1,000 yards, most of us do change the sight, because there is no feedback on exactly where the shot printed (you can't see the bullet hole), and holding off "somewhere in the white" not conducive to repetition.

As for moving the sight when I do sight in, I don't worry about how accurate those clicks are. After the first shot, (second, really) I hold where I held making the first shot, then click to where the bullet printed. (At 1K, for sighting in only, you've got spotter disks in the target you can see, or you can see the bullet splash in the dust.)

I'm not going into all this to try and convince you to buy the high-dollar scope, but rather to point out what a hot-house sport competitive benchrest is. Your rifle will not be competitive at 100, 200 or 300 yards. No *maybe* at all. It just *might* be at 600 yards, the only formally contested distance in benchrest within your parameters. But those rifles weigh 17 pounds, and have flat forearms, not conducive to a hunting rifle, or probably even a tactical one.

Finally, I'd get the adjustment range you need it the scope base, which opens up the scopes you can look at. The gunsmith Dave Tooley once made a scope base that let him, without removing the scope & using offset rings, shoot from 100 to 1200 yards. He never made any for sale, and having a smith design and make one for you would cost a bit, but would still likely be a better use of your dollars.

Good luck with it. And someday come to one of our long-range matches & see what they are about.
 
Last edited:
You might consider a Weaver T36 which sells at a very reasonable price and...shows up quite often in the top finishers in Benchrest. Couple this scope with a pair of Burris Signature rings with an extended insert kit, and that takes care of your elevation requirements.

Virg
 
I had a 36brd now I have in a box a big sky 36 that I havent taken out yet.
But back to the original question. I shot a friends long range rifle in match. It had one of the 8?x50x scopes. 600 yd match. Loved it. Also I won the match for whatever thats worth. Very clear and easy to use. Never shot that gun before.
 
I've been shooting with SIII scopes for the past three years, and have been pretty well satisified with them (have four 6-24x50s & one 8-32x56). I also have several Leupold VXIIIs - 6.5-20 & 8.5-25 - and like them very much. IMHO, the SIII's optical quality is a bit better than the Leupolds' - and at least as good as NF (did a side-by-side comparison with a NF dealer's scope while he was here to pick up a SIII 8-32x56).

As far as the accuracy & repeatability of the SIII's clicks goes, I've had absolutely no problems in that respect, and in fact, am looking to buy another 6-24 SIII right now. I'm not sure what's going on, but my usual wholesaler isn't listing any of the several versions of the SIII 6-24x50 as available.
 
I know I want the 6x24x50. Just looking for the best price at the time. I've been happy with my Bushnells 4200 Elite in 6x24's but now it's time to try the SIII.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top