The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - What do you think about the Zeiss Conquest?

dmazur · September 14, 2012, 10:14 PM

I had Leupold VX-II 3-9's with the LRD reticles on two rifles. They were OK, but I needed something with 1/2" more eye relief to eliminate the need for offset rings (Ruger No. 1's).

The Zeiss Conquest 3-9's did the trick. Nice, sharp images and 4" of eye relief. I got the Rapid-Z 600 reticles, because these match the ballistics of the .30-06 w/ 150gr and .243 with 95gr fairly well.

Also, the Zeiss reticles are etched and the Leupold's are not. I believe you have to step up to the VX-III's to get etched reticles from Leupold, but I may be misinformed...

The only complaint I had was the knurled rubber ring on the occular. It prevented mounting Butler Creek scope protectors. After removing it, there was no trouble getting a good fit.

September 14, 2012, 10:14 PM	#5
dmazur Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 2007 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 1,310	I had Leupold VX-II 3-9's with the LRD reticles on two rifles. They were OK, but I needed something with 1/2" more eye relief to eliminate the need for offset rings (Ruger No. 1's). The Zeiss Conquest 3-9's did the trick. Nice, sharp images and 4" of eye relief. I got the Rapid-Z 600 reticles, because these match the ballistics of the .30-06 w/ 150gr and .243 with 95gr fairly well. Also, the Zeiss reticles are etched and the Leupold's are not. I believe you have to step up to the VX-III's to get etched reticles from Leupold, but I may be misinformed... The only complaint I had was the knurled rubber ring on the occular. It prevented mounting Butler Creek scope protectors. After removing it, there was no trouble getting a good fit. __________________ .30-06 Springfield: 100 yrs + and still going strong