Rifle Scopes 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

BaileyMoto

BaileyMoto

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jul 13, 2010
211
0
44
Basra, Iraq.
www.mk12.net
#1
So I ordered my first dedicated LR bolt rifle yesterday, which will be the FN SPR A2 (McMillian A4 stock with 24" heavy brl, Timney trigger) and now need to decide on an optic. I am trying to decide between the Leupold 4.5-14 and the 6.5-20 with the M5 (.1 mil) turrets. Looks as if they are only 1oz difference in weight.

Rifle is going to pretty much be just a range rifle with the likelihood of getting involved with the local matches. I've shot 10x and 12x scopes out to 600-700 yards and although I felt they were plenty, I always sorta wished I had a bit more.

Any feedback would be appreciated, thanks.
 
#3
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

I have a a Leupy 4.5-14 x 50 on my Savage. I have no trouble targeting a 12"x12" steel at 1000. My partner has a 10x Leupy, and he has no trouble targeting/hitting the same steel at 1000. When shooting paper, I find it makes NO difference what power Ive got - I just need something circular to quarter nicely. On a 600 yard service rifle target, the black is something like 36" in diameter. I can drill the x ring by quartering the black on 4.5 power, or by quartering the 10 ring (outlined in white) on 14 power. That target is "ideal" conditions. I also have a S&B 5-25, and a NF 8-32. It always comes down to quartering the target, and the target being an appropriate size to "eyeball" the quartering.

More magnification is helpful for irregular targets - and sometimes, finding them.

Bottom line - get the one you find a better deal on.

Also - makes me feel all warm and fuzzy when I can see the "X" on the target and hold on it - but my scores are NO higher when I hold on the X at 32x, or quarter the (small) black at 4.5x.
 
#4
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

How are mirage, air clarity [including humidity, haze, dust, etc.] in most of the areas you'll be shooting? Such bears considering, as it's a factor in terms of how much magnification will actually be usable at longer distances.
Ditto if picking up a used optic is under consideration, as the 4.5-14x's come up for sale on here fairly often. Relatively speaking I mean, when compared to the frequency of some other makes & models of glass being resold in the classifieds.
 
#5
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jean Lafitte</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How are mirage, air clarity [including humidity, haze, dust, etc.] in most of the areas you'll be shooting? Such bears considering, as it's a factor in terms of how much magnification will actually be usable at longer distances.
Ditto if picking up a used optic is under consideration, as the 4.5-14x's come up for sale on here fairly often. Relatively speaking I mean, when compared to the frequency of some other makes & models of glass being resold in the classifieds. </div></div>

I live in the southwest (ABQ) so humidity is generally low and air quality is good. Like anywhere, mirage is present, especially during hot summers.

I'm mostly considering Leupold due to the military discount...nothing else really compares in price vs. features. Btw, I am looking at the TMR reticle and FFP.
 
#6
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

I made mention of air quality as some aren't familiar with how it can at times, limit the upper end of usable magnification. It was once new to me, prior to playing with anything with more than 10x. So I figured I'd pass the info along.

As to reticles, if you can swing it, yeah FFP's the way to go. Though it's worth looking though what you're considering buying first. Because it really varies with who built it, & the reticle's line width, as to at what magnification the mil/moa marks become useful. Ditto as to whether or not the reticle lines are so thin as to disappear under some types of poor viewing, & lighting conditions.

Premier's Gen II conversions of Leupolds are great in terms of the mils being usable on lower powers. Where as with some others, having the FFP reticle is kind of moot, as it's not usable until you crank it up to 8-10x minimum.

And as a general FYI, it's easier for some manufacturers to do reticle swaps than it is for others. Leupold for example from what I hear, is pretty happy to replace say a mildot with a TMR, for a fee mind you. Such isn't always the case with other makes.
So, that said, if you run across a great deal on a used Leupold, but it doesn't have the reticle you'd prefer, it's worth checking to see if they can change things over to what you want for a non exorbitant fee.

I hope this stuff isn't too much in the way of old news for you. But given the giant numbers of new members in the last year or three, odds are that hopefully it'll be useful for some.
 
#7
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

4.5 is great for the low end, and 14 is plenty for longer ranges. Rarely use any magnification higher than 16x when it's available. The TMR in FFP sounds like a great choice. Reticle matched with turrets is the way to go too. good luck.
 
#9
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

With the Promotive pricing, these are really tough to beat. If I had not had to opportunity to get in on the group buy for the the SS 5-20x50, I would almost certainly have ended up buying the 6.5-20 in the same configuration you mentioned. The difference in low-end will be far less of a hindrance for most types of shooting (this is long range, after all) than the difference in high-end will be an advantage.

It is funny to me that many people who will tell you a fixed 10x is fine for shooting out to 1000 yards will scoff if you buy an 8.5-25 scope, claiming the low-end magnification ruins it.
 
#10
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: stiletto raggio</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

It is funny to me that many people who will tell you a fixed 10x is fine for shooting out to 1000 yards will scoff if you buy an 8.5-25 scope, claiming the low-end magnification ruins it. </div></div>

You noticed that too, eh?
smile.gif
 
#11
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

If those are the two choices then get the 6.5-20x by all means. The low end will rarely get used and even if it does the 6.5 is fine. I run 5-25x scopes. I like haveing more magnification if i need it although I usually shoot around 10-15x.

I have said it many many times, you can always turn the 6.5-20x down to 14x but you can't trurn the 14x up to 20x.

That said there are many other scopes on the market in those price ranges that should be looked at like the 5-20x Super Sniper, Vortex PST, Bushnell HDMR, Bushnells 4200s, and others. The scope market has really given the shooters alot more options in the past couple of years. Do some research before jumping into a purchase. Figure if you want FFP or SFP also.

Forgot to mention you can save a good amount by buying from the for sale section here on the Hide. Keep an eye on it.
 
#14
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

Both are fine scopes but the 6.5-20x50 is the best selling scope for us, hands down. It does everything pretty well, and causes us no headaches at all.

The reticle will also appear larger in the 6.5x vs the 4.5x, so the TMR hashes are easier to pick up (at least in the SFP version)

Good luck on your selection.

Scott
 
#15
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LibertyOptics</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The reticle will also appear larger in the 6.5x vs the 4.5x, so the TMR hashes are easier to pick up (at least in the SFP version)
</div></div>

I guess I never thought about it that way, but it makes sense since the SFP scopes are "indexed" at max magnification.

That said, if you can swing the extra couple hundred bucks, I think FFP is worth it. It definitely seems to help on resale value.
 
#16
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

Yea, FFP is what I was/have been considering...which is why NF was somewhat off the table. Not only are they about 2x the price, the only FFP scope they have comes in 15x.

If I were going to pay full price, there would be other scopes I would consider. I've been happy with the 4200 Tactical line of Bushnell, but I figured I wanted to step up a notch or two on this particular rifle. Matter of fact, I have a 6-24x Bushnell 4200 just collecting dust. =/
 
#19
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

I'm going to bring up the Vortex Viper PST 6-24X50 again. It an illuminated FFP with a choice of Mill or MOA. I got the MOA and it is great. It has better resolution than my Leupold Mark 4 4.5-14X50 and is easy to get behind.
 
#20
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

I am in the same boat, as I am trying to find out which scope to get, as far as brand...although I am pretty much set on something in the 20/24x for high end magnification...

I keep hearing a little voice that whispers..."Vortex PST...." though....

grin.gif
 
#21
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

If the scope is to be a good light daytime only target scope then a higher low end isn't a disadvantage. I use mine in very low light and hunt fast moving game like running feral hogs. Being able to go under 6.5X is a boon.

But you are not going there. If you are going out past 700 yards alot then one thing I will mention is not all 20X scopes are created equal and in the high heat of summer mirage can eat you alive. I found the higher priced scopes like NightForce could stay on double the magnification I could with my Loopy scope at 1000 yard matches in the summer afternoon heat.

I was doing well enough until the afternoon, when the mirage was fierce. If you quit before lunch in the summer you may avoid the worse mirage of the day and can use the higher magnification of a Loopy.

Just something to consider, Good Luck
 
#22
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

I run a 6.5-20x50mm on one of my setup I really like the Leupold MK4 M5. I Like the 4.5-14x50mm but it is nice at times to have that extra power. We sell a lot of the 8.5-25x and the 6.5-20x Mark 4 M5 scopes.

<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CuygTsi7Lpo"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CuygTsi7Lpo" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

Mike @ CST
 
#23
Re: 4.5-14x vs. 6.5-20 Mark 4 for new FN .308

With only 1 oz difference in weight this choice is a no-brainer for me- get the 20X. The difference between 14x and 20x is substantial for those long range smaller targets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes Steiner T6Xi 3-18x56 Review and comparison with NF ATACR 4-16x42, S&B US 3-20x50 and March 4.5-28x52
Replies
139
Views
20K
Denys
Denys
biometrician
SOLD [SOLD] ARC Nucleus Gen 2 + 6.5 & .308 barrels & 4 MDT mags
Replies
2
Views
526
biometrician
biometrician
N
SOLD New Vortex Razor HD Gen II 4.5-27x56 w/ EBR-7C and NF ultralite unimount, 34mm 20moa 1.44"
Replies
15
Views
1K
Nivium
N
Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes March FFP 1.5-15x42 MPVO Review and Comparison (w/ Nightforce and Athlon)
Replies
247
Views
33K
Meir Sigal
Meir Sigal
Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes Alpha Class Long Range Scope Review - TT, ZCO, Schmidt, March, Vortex
Replies
205
Views
40K
Dutch308
D
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts