Rifle Scopes Is there a market for a good MPVO

[Glassaholic]

Think of this thread as a petition to manufacturers to show there is serious interest in this type of scope if done right.

First I think we need to define what an MPVO is so we don't confuse this with a crossover scope or a hunting scope et al. The term MPVO is a natural progression of the term LPVO which stands for Low Powered Variable Optic and traditionally the "low" has been referred to as 1x. What are LPVO scopes designed for, by and large, the gas gun platform especially with the AR being America's most popular sporting rifle. But maybe you've discovered that while your beloved 1-8 or 1-10 LPVO is amazing in its own right, it struggles a bit with longer range engagements and PID. You might also have caught on to the trend of piggybacking or offsetting a RDS sight and recognizing the advantages this brings. The MPVO then becomes a natural progression of the LPVO that fills the gap between the LPVO and the Crossover style scope with the "M" standing for "medium" and thus medium powered variable optic and along with a piggyback/offset RDS bridges the gap nicely.

So here are my thoughts on what would make an effective MPVO:

• FFP design with generous FOV (EDIT and adjustable parallax
• Above 1x and no more than 2.5x on the bottom of the magnification range (anything more and we get into the Crossover market)
• At least 10x top magnification
• Lighter weight, preferably under 25oz
• No more than 12" long because this needs to also work for the night hunters using thermal clip-ons
• Low profile exposed turrets (remember we might be piggybacking an RDS and need to be able to see the dot)
• Capped windage
• Given that in general larger objective scopes weigh more, probably keep the objective below 50mm
• Must have a reticle that is usable for fast and close engagements at the bottom of the mag range (think of most LPVO style reticles) but also work at the top mag ranges (so a hybrid of both LPVO and long range FFP reticle).
• EDIT: Excellent illumination would be a plus, center daylight bright.

Why have so many MPVO style scopes failed? Personally I think many of the existing scopes that come close to the above have struggled, not because there is no demand, but because the manufacturers blow it on one of the above criteria. We are finally seeing some movement in this area with the new ZCO 2-10x30, the Leupold Mark 5 2-10x30 (especially with new CMR-Mil reticle), the Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42, the March 1.5-15x42 and one of the older designs in the Athlon Helos BTR G2 2-12x42.

Share your thoughts and ideas...

UPDATE 02/20/2025:
Okay, after almost 1 week we have 154 entries into the poll.

For political polls they are often using a sample polling size of about 2000 to 3000 people to represent the 150,000,000 people who vote in our country. Let's take the high number of 3000, that is just 0.00002 of the people represented which if I have my numbers right means the 154 respondents above represent 7,700,000 shooters (that's right, almost 8 million shooters , that is if I did my math correctly which was never my strong suit).

So according to the above numbers, manufacturers take notice, that means that 42% would like to see a 2-12x42 scope that fits the MPVO criteria laid out in the OP above, or put another way, 3,249,400 (three million two hundred and fifty thousand) shooters are interested in an MPVO done right.

Let's be clear once again and I'll start by stating what an MPVO is not, an MPVO IS NOT a crossover scope (though it could be used for crossover applications on a hunting rifle that is also used for long range steel shooting). An MPVO IS the next evolutionary step from an LPVO and is intended first and foremost for the gas gun crowd; therefore, it cannot have a higher bottom magnification than 2.5x (any higher puts it into the crossover category). An MPVO serves as an alternative to the limitations of the LPVO for PID and longer distance engagements while still maintaining a lighter weight, this is a short/compact FFP scope with parallax adjustment, lower profile exposed elevation turret (locking ideal), bright illumination and most importantly a reticle that works for quick engagements at the bottom magnification with a mrad hash option that works at higher magnifications for longer distance engagements.

By the way, this was meant to be somewhat in jest with the above numbers, we understand that polling can be a bit skewed (especially when they focus in the wrong area to represent a fair demographic) but it does help to understand a sampling of interest from a community.

 

[John?]

@Glassaholic

Your list is almost exactly the same as my list. I would add proper illumination (i.e., not the entire reticle, just the aiming point and bit around it), and limit the objective to 44mm. I appreciate your rationale as well.

I do a bit of target shooting for fun and social aspects of local matches. Mostly shooting pests and predators around our homestead and fall hunting season. Night coyotes are always on the agenda. Lighter weight and clip-on compatible are a tough combination to find. Price matters so quality offerings in the $1500-$2k range are viable (I have many sons to outfit… March and Tanget are beyond the budget).

Thanks for asking. Your posts here are very useful.

 

[JWG]

I would really like a company like Nightforce to have dropped that Eotech shortboi in 2-3 to 12x. Throw an FC-DMX in it. That said, go ahead and make the obj. 50-55mm. Gather ALL the light. Tube size can be crazy if you go with an integrated mount with ACOG footprint. 20-22oz without mount is max. ACOG mounts are pretty light, and that puts it at 24-26oz on gun.

 

[ma smith]

I don't care, just get the reticle right at bottom and top magnifications!

This and get the weight correct. IMHO it needs to be 17-22oz

 

[steve123]

I don't want to hype it too much but Athlon just about killed it with this new Ares BTR G3 2.5-15x50 I received today! Almost, almost, almost - a great MPVO. Nevertheless it's a keeper. I'll start a thread about it tomorrow with some initials.

 

[Glassaholic]

@Glassaholic

Your list is almost exactly the same as my list. I would add proper illumination (i.e., not the entire reticle, just the aiming point and bit around it), and limit the objective to 44mm. I appreciate your rationale as well.

I do a bit of target shooting for fun and social aspects of local matches. Mostly shooting pests and predators around our homestead and fall hunting season. Night coyotes are always on the agenda. Lighter weight and clip-on compatible are a tough combination to find. Price matters so quality offerings in the $1500-$2k range are viable (I have many sons to outfit… March and Tanget are beyond the budget).

Thanks for asking. Your posts here are very useful.

You’re absolutely right about illumination, I felt I was forgetting something when I hit send, with all the new illumination tech ot shouldn’t be too difficult.

When you say limit to 44mm I assume to not go over 44mm right?

 

[Glassaholic]

I would really like a company like Nightforce to have dropped that Eotech shortboi in 2-3 to 12x. Throw an FC-DMX in it. That said, go ahead and make the obj. 50-55mm. Gather ALL the light. Tube size can be crazy if you go with an integrated mount with ACOG footprint. 20-22oz without mount is max. ACOG mounts are pretty light, and that puts it at 24-26oz on gun.

Interesting thought with the integrated mount, the new Eotech 3-9 is very interesting but would want FFP. Built in mounting plate forward of the turret housing would be ideal too.

 

[Glassaholic]

This and get the weight correct. IMHO it needs to be 17-22oz

I’d like to see lighter too, but wouldn’t want to impede optical or mechanical integrity so there is a balance. The ZCO and Leupold 2-10x30’s I think are too heavy for 2-10x30’s and a big part is because they took existing erector and eyepiece designs and incorporated into the smaller optical formula, this is a cheaper (from R&D standpoint) and quicker way to bring a design to market. If another manufacturer designs a 2-10x30 with a 30mm tube I bet it can be lighter while still maintaining optical and mechanical integrity. I’d still like to see a good 2-12x42 design, but at this point I’d almost take anything as long as the reticle works which is why I currently have the March 1.5-15x42 even though it has some compromises with 10x erector it has a great DFP reticle and decent weight with phenomenal turrets, I may try to get a ZCO 2-10 even though I’m not thrilled with the weight or the 36mm tube but am guessing it will be shockingly good optically with an extremely forgiving design that might be worth the other drawbacks.

 

[wigwamitus]

I resisted the LPVO world for years. I just didnt want to pay extra for the 1x on the bottom, so I went thru a pocket full of 2 to 10ish scopes of that day.

trijicon credo 2-10x ffp
nf nxs 2.5-10x sfp
vo 2-10x ffp pstg2
l&s mk4 2.5-8x sfp (late model)(had 2 of these)
l&s 3-9x mil dot sfp

The credo was almost there, but i was disappointed the illum wasnt DLB. Other than that, I think it was there.
I wouldnt rule out giving it another go with an rds pairing. But boy the price sure has gone up ..

The nxs was great, i had milr and that was probably the best reticle of the bunch. I only sold that one cause somebody begged.

vo was worst of the bunch, tunneled below 3x and had dark glass.

Mk4s I kept the longest. Smallest and lightest of the bunch and great dialers. My favorite dialers I ever had.

L&s 3-9x i got for a build i got for a neighbor. It had the firedot for illum.
Amazing for what it was. Small light and useable reticle.

==
But then I moved and had to sell lots of stuff to fund the bridge loan.

When I was time to buy back in, i jumped in to LVPO, in part due to terrain change, plains to forest.
Have 5 lpvo now.

2 x atacr 1-8x dmx
1 x nx8 1-8x dmx
1 x vo rzr g3 1-10x bdc/wd
1 x vo pst g2 1-6x mil


The 1-6x is on the 22 and its perfect there paired with olde apollo42 clipon for night work

Of the others the atacrs are my favorite except for price

The vo 1-10x with the bdc and wind dots is great for fast shooting.


But if I was buying today i'd get another nx8 1-8x dmx. Light, tiny does it all except smaller exit pupil, though that hasnt seemed to have effected hits on critters.

So, why an mpvo ?


I voted for
both 2-10x
2.5-10
2-12

small, light, holding reticle, circle dot illum, dlb

But It might be impossible to beat the weight of the nx8.

I've been sniffin at the steiner 2-12x havent figured out if the reticle is bdc ?

And dont rule out the l&s mk5 2-10 ... hecque of a dialing range !

 

[stanley_white]

The Leupold MK4 2.5-10x42mm with the Illuminated TMR and SFP is quite impressive in this category.

And yes, SFP because ain’t nobody using wind holds below 10x.

The only thing that could make this better would be a 56mm objective.

That being said, for me it’s either an LPVO or a 5-25 as if I must run a piggyback red dot, my magnified optic is going to be as powerful as my length and weight requirements will tolerate. Also, because moderation is for cowards.

-Stan

 

[Burdy]

First I think we need to define what an MPVO is so we don't confuse this with a crossover scope or a hunting scope et al. The term MPVO is a natural progression of the term LPVO which stands for Low Powered Variable Optic and traditionally the "low" has been referred to as 1x. What are LPVO scopes designed for, by and large, the gas gun platform especially with the AR being America's most popular sporting rifle. But maybe you've discovered that while your beloved 1-8 or 1-10 LPVO is amazing in its own right, it struggles a bit with longer range engagements and PID. You might also have caught on to the trend of piggybacking or offsetting a RDS sight and recognizing the advantages this brings. The MPVO then becomes a natural progression of the LPVO that fills the gap between the LPVO and the Crossover style scope with the "M" standing for "medium" and thus medium powered variable optic and along with a piggyback/offset RDS bridges the gap nicely.

So here are my thoughts on what would make an effective MPVO:

• FFP design with generous FOV
• Above 1x and no more than 2.5x on the bottom of the magnification range (anything more and we get into the Crossover market)
• At least 10x top magnification
• Lighter weight, preferably under 25oz
• No more than 12" long because this needs to also work for the night hunters using thermal clip-ons
• Low profile exposed turrets (remember we might be piggybacking an RDS and need to be able to see the dot)
• Capped windage
• Given that in general larger objective scopes weigh more, probably keep the objective below 50mm
• Must have a reticle that is usable for fast and close engagements at the bottom of the mag range (think of most LPVO style reticles) but also work at the top mag ranges (so a hybrid of both LPVO and long range FFP reticle).
• EDIT: Excellent illumination would be a plus, center daylight bright.

Why have so many MPVO style scopes failed? Personally I think many of the existing scopes that come close to the above have struggled, not because there is no demand, but because the manufacturers blow it on one of the above criteria. We are finally seeing some movement in this area with the new ZCO 2-10x30, the Leupold Mark 5 2-10x30 (especially with new CMR-Mil reticle), the Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42, the March 1.5-15x42 and one of the older designs in the Athlon Helos BTR G2 2-12x42.

Share your thoughts and ideas...

The exposed turret must lock.
Most will want PA adjustment here as well.
I voted for the 2-12 and the 2.5-15x44 BTW.

 

[VandelayIndustries]

I don't want to hype it too much but Athlon just about killed it with this new Ares BTR G3 2.5-15x50 I received today! Almost, almost, almost - a great MPVO. Nevertheless it's a keeper. I'll start a thread about it tomorrow with some initials.

How’s the reticle on low/ high mag? That’s the biggest thing imo

 

[John?]

You’re absolutely right about illumination, I felt I was forgetting something when I hit send, with all the new illumination tech ot shouldn’t be too difficult.

When you say limit to 44mm I assume to not go over 44mm right?

Yes. 44 is as high as I’d want to go for field use.

 

[al22300]

Yes, there is a market. No, the scope companies are not willing/not able to get it right.

 

[jh2785]

I’ve got a Zeiss V6 2-12x50. It’s SFP, but man, I love that scope. It sits on a 308 hunting rifle.

 

[DM1975]

I don't want to hype it too much but Athlon just about killed it with this new Ares BTR G3 2.5-15x50 I received today! Almost, almost, almost - a great MPVO. Nevertheless it's a keeper. I'll start a thread about it tomorrow with some initials.

I have to agree with you on that. The only reason I went with the gen2 was for the full reticle illumination and sale price. Other than that the crosshairs are the same thickness, but I do like the crosshair design in the gen3 a little better. I will eventually need another one and might get the gen3 next as I like the overall design of it better as well.

 

[Glassaholic]

I’ve got a Zeiss V6 2-12x50. It’s SFP, but man, I love that scope. It sits on a 308 hunting rifle.

Do you think there would be interest for the V6 2-12x50 and V8 1.8-14x50 with exposed turrets and the AHR reticle? Not thrilled with SFP but might be what some are looking for? Here's the reticle with DLB center illuminated dot...

 

[Glassaholic]

I resisted the LPVO world for years. I just didnt want to pay extra for the 1x on the bottom, so I went thru a pocket full of 2 to 10ish scopes of that day.

trijicon credo 2-10x ffp
nf nxs 2.5-10x sfp
vo 2-10x ffp pstg2
l&s mk4 2.5-8x sfp (late model)(had 2 of these)
l&s 3-9x mil dot sfp

The credo was almost there, but i was disappointed the illum wasnt DLB. Other than that, I think it was there.
I wouldnt rule out giving it another go with an rds pairing. But boy the price sure has gone up ..

The nxs was great, i had milr and that was probably the best reticle of the bunch. I only sold that one cause somebody begged.

vo was worst of the bunch, tunneled below 3x and had dark glass.

Mk4s I kept the longest. Smallest and lightest of the bunch and great dialers. My favorite dialers I ever had.

L&s 3-9x i got for a build i got for a neighbor. It had the firedot for illum.
Amazing for what it was. Small light and useable reticle.

==
But then I moved and had to sell lots of stuff to fund the bridge loan.

When I was time to buy back in, i jumped in to LVPO, in part due to terrain change, plains to forest.
Have 5 lpvo now.

2 x atacr 1-8x dmx
1 x nx8 1-8x dmx
1 x vo rzr g3 1-10x bdc/wd
1 x vo pst g2 1-6x mil


The 1-6x is on the 22 and its perfect there paired with olde apollo42 clipon for night work

Of the others the atacrs are my favorite except for price

The vo 1-10x with the bdc and wind dots is great for fast shooting.


But if I was buying today i'd get another nx8 1-8x dmx. Light, tiny does it all except smaller exit pupil, though that hasnt seemed to have effected hits on critters.

So, why an mpvo ?


I voted for
both 2-10x
2.5-10
2-12

small, light, holding reticle, circle dot illum, dlb

But It might be impossible to beat the weight of the nx8.

I've been sniffin at the steiner 2-12x havent figured out if the reticle is bdc ?

And dont rule out the l&s mk5 2-10 ... hecque of a dialing range !

You might be one of the most prolific night hunters here wig... interesting where you're journey started and where you are now. You ask "why an MPVO" because some guys don't have or don't want clip-ons but want a scope that is still usable in low light, also, do you take your LPVO's out beyond 500 yards during the day? I am tempted to send you my March 1.5-15 and see what you think... (let me know).

The Credo was probably the first MPVO scope that caught my eye years ago, but reticle and some IQ issues always put it on the backburner for me...

Finally, what would you think if NF introduced a NX8 1.5-12x42 with FC-DMx reticle???

 

[Glassaholic]

The exposed turret must lock.

I agree, locking turret would be ideal but how much weight would this add, would you be willing to give up a bit of weight for that feature?

Most will want PA adjustment here as well.

Excellent point, yes, parallax adjustable is preferred, I will edit my original post.

 

[steve123]

How’s the reticle on low/ high mag? That’s the biggest thing imo

For me the reticle at 2.5x without illume on is still not easy to see on darker backgrounds but on contrasted backgrounds it's visible. Our grass is dead so it's a blonde color and I could make it out well against the grass.

It looks like Athlon gave this G3 brighter illumination compared to the G2 4.5-27 I had a few years ago, so it's pretty much like my ETR 15-60 now, which is just short of very DLB, which I'd classify the Cronus G2 as being very DLB.

Basically yesterday we had a storm coming through and the cross of the reticle was lit enough to see plainly in the middle of the day on 2.5x and that cross is picked up by the eye really fast.

 

[Burdy]

I agree, locking turret would be ideal but how much weight would this add, would you be willing to give up a bit of weight for that feature?

Excellent point, yes, parallax adjustable is preferred, I will edit my original post.

Absolutely. Given the entire feature set you listed, only two things would immediately and absolutely disqualify it for me. Not being FFP (which you mentioned) and not have a locking elevation turret.

 

[Glassaholic]

Absolutely. Given the entire feature set you listed, only two things would immediately and absolutely disqualify it for me. Not being FFP (which you mentioned) and not have a locking elevation turret.

Good to know. How about how forgiving the scope is? For example, would you take a 2-10 if it had a much more forgiving eyebox over a 1.5-12 or 2-16 that was a lot more finicky to get behind?

 

[DM1975]

For me the reticle at 2.5x without illume on is still not easy to see on darker backgrounds but on contrasted backgrounds it's visible. Our grass is dead so it's a blonde color and I could make it out well against the grass.

It looks like Athlon gave this G3 brighter illumination compared to the G2 4.5-27 I had a few years ago, so it's pretty much like my ETR 15-60 now, which is just short of very DLB, which I'd classify the Cronus G2 as being very DLB.

Basically yesterday we had a storm coming through and the cross of the reticle was lit enough to see plainly in the middle of the day on 2.5x and that cross is picked up by the eye really fast.

I’ve been trying my gen2 out on several different backgrounds. In the trees around here and in shadows I can still pick the reticle up decently. Where I start to have issues is when I try it out against brick walls across the street from me. On the red brick walls I don’t have much of an issue but there is a wall of very dark grey bricks and I start to lose it on that. Especially when I get over the blue and white handicapped parking sign bolted on that wall. I need to get it out to the ranch and test it out further but so far I like it. Of course illumination does help. I’m still waiting on a bright sunny day to test the brightness out on that though.

 

[Burdy]

Good to know. How about how forgiving the scope is? For example, would you take a 2-10 if it had a much more forgiving eyebox over a 1.5-12 or 2-16 that was a lot more finicky to get behind?

Forgiveness trumps top end magnification and magnification range for me

 

[Glassaholic]

Forgiveness trumps top end magnification and magnification range for me

So a super forgiving 2.5-10 would be preferred over a slightly more finicky 2-12, is that what you're saying? But if the 2-12 had the "right" reticle and the 2.5-10 had a sucky reticle, which would you prefer then? Just trying to get an idea of priorities with regard to design...

 

[Burdy]

Correct, I would take the 2.5-10.
As for the reticle question, I guess it depends on how sucky is sucky and how finicky is finicky. If the sucky reticle was at least mil based and had numbers in the vertical so I didn't have to count, I'd probably still take it over a tight eyebox and something like a FC-DMX.

 

[dms416]

Forgiveness trumps top end magnification and magnification range for me

Same

 

[wigwamitus]

Finally, what would you think if NF introduced a NX8 1.5-12x42 with FC-DMx reticle???

That sounds pretty interesting, I'm just not sure what I'd put it on
Right now, my SA bolt guns - rem700s with 20/22 in barrels and 7.62x51 - have mk6 3-18x t3 and nx8 2.5-20x t3 ... which I consider to be "not MPVO" ... i.e. the next rung up ... whatever that is maybe "small long distance scopes".
And my DMRishes (mk12ishes and mk11/m110 ishes) have the atacrs on them.
Don't have anything in between to put an MPVO on at this point.

parallax adjustable is preferred

I have to disagree on this one. I specifically got the nxs 2.5-10x to have both zero stop and parallax ... and had that as a requirement on my MPVO list back then. But as I shot the 2.5-10x I realized the adjustment necessary to parallax at 100yds vs 800yds was so tiny, that actually, I didn't need it.
I spoke to a guy who was involved in the spec for this scope and he told me similar story. He thought it was a requirement but after he got experience with the finished product in the field, realized it wasn't.

 

[Glassaholic]

Correct, I would take the 2.5-10.
As for the reticle question, I guess it depends on how sucky is sucky and how finicky is finicky. If the sucky reticle was at least mil based and had numbers in the vertical so I didn't have to count, I'd probably still take it over a tight eyebox and something like a FC-DMX.

I know you were super excited about the ZCO 2-10x30 even though it's pretty heavy, I assume it's going to be a very forgiving design but you said after seeing the reticle through the scope at SHOT that you will likely pass, so was the reticle that "sucky"???

 

[Glassaholic]

That sounds pretty interesting, I'm just not sure what I'd put it on
Right now, my SA bolt guns - rem700s with 20/22 in barrels and 7.62x51 - have mk6 3-18x t3 and nx8 2.5-20x t3 ... which I consider to be "not MPVO" ... i.e. the next rung up ... whatever that is maybe "small long distance scopes".
And my DMRishes (mk12ishes and mk11/m110 ishes) have the atacrs on them.
Don't have anything in between to put an MPVO on at this point.

The Mk6 and even Mark 5 are more crossover designs, same as the NX8, this fulfills the mid-range magnification category of FFP scopes...

I have to disagree on this one. I specifically got the nxs 2.5-10x to have both zero stop and parallax ... and had that as a requirement on my MPVO list back then. But as a shot the 2.5-10x I realized the adjustment necessary to parallax at 100yds vs 800yds was so tiny, that actually, I didn't need it.
I spoke to a guy who was involved in the spec for this scope and he told me similar story. He thought it was a requirement but after he got experience with the finished product in the field, realized it wasn't.

So you should check out the Leupold Mark 4 2.5-10, it does not have parallax adjustment and may fit... Depending on how forgiving the design is, parallax may be a bigger deal than others, but I tend to agree, if the design is very forgiving DOF wise then adjustable parallax may be more of a minor issue...

 

[Burdy]

.
I have to disagree on this one. I specifically got the nxs 2.5-10x to have both zero stop and parallax ... and had that as a requirement on my MPVO list back then. But as I shot the 2.5-10x I realized the adjustment necessary to parallax at 100yds vs 800yds was so tiny, that actually, I didn't need it.
I spoke to a guy who was involved in the spec for this scope and he told me similar story. He thought it was a requirement but after he got experience with the finished product in the field, realized it wasn't.

I'm pretty anti-parallax but at 42mm I would want it, especially if the they fixed it at something like 100 yards. If they fixed at 200, it's on the fence. I could dial it out with .25 MOA turrets but not with .1 mil. Most will want it though and having it would certainly increase sales.

 

[wigwamitus]

... you should check out the Leupold Mark 4 2.5-10 ...

I think I'm more interested in the mk5 2-10x primarily due to the huge dialing range. Not that I dial - other than zeroing ... since I sold the SPFs ... but I don't want to forget how, so having one dialing scope would be good. The nx8 1-8x is not a good dialing scope with 0.2 mil clicks but the dmx is a good holding reticle.

Scoping the 7PRC is a different question ... right now it has a 2.5-20x t3 on it - and there that will stay until the priority comes around to push up a bit more. I just don't have places to shoot right now over 1200yds.

 

[wigwamitus]

... Most will want it though and having it would certainly increase sales ...

Can't argue with that !!

 

[Burdy]

I know you were super excited about the ZCO 2-10x30 even though it's pretty heavy, I assume it's going to be a very forgiving design but you said after seeing the rcle through the scope at SHOT

In the case of that optic I love the reticle design but it resolved to thin for my tastes. I got to be able to see it first. This is purely subjective.

 

[dms416]

Speaking of "sucky reticles", I think we all agree that there is a delicate sweet spot to cover the most ground. Shit like a Tremor is going far too much for most (some will still insist).

As a baseline, I've felt
4x and above for a traditional mildot to be useful
6x-12x 1/2 mil stadia at most (G2 mildot)
12x+ for 0.2 mil stadia to be worth a damn

And with that, certain stadia/features can be highlighted/bolder than others in comparison to the magnification used.

Personally, I have no love for Leupold, but I'm not so sure a page doesn't need to be taken from their book on the CQBSS specifically with the TMR reticle. For those not familiar, they used 3 different crosshair thicknesses to be visible.
While I don't need a Short Dot level dot brightness as I would prefer for an LPVO, but a nicely illuminated fine crosshair like on the SAI 1-6 at the bottom end would be just dandy.

Some shitty pics of the CQBSS TMR for those unfamiliar

 

[ma smith]

Optically all you have to do on 10-12x is match the x42 atacr.

 

[Burdy]

Scoping the 7PRC is a different question ... right now it has a 2.5-20x t3 on it - and there that will stay until the priority comes around to push up a bit more. I just don't have places to shoot right now over 1200yds.

I'm in love with the 7PRC. If this thing was short action it would be my only bolt action caliber. It may end up that way anyway.

 

[Glassaholic]

I think I'm more interested in the mk5 2-10x primarily due to the huge dialing range. Not that I dial - other than zeroing ... since I sold the SPFs ... but I don't want to forget how, so having one dialing scope would be good.

So the 30 mrad elevation the Mark 4HD offers isn't enough for you in the 2.5-10???

 

[Glassaholic]

I'm in love with the 7PRC. If this thing was short action it would be my only bolt action caliber. It may end up that way anyway.

I'm not, if they simply necked down the 300 PRC to 7mm I'd be more in love, but shortening the round altogether is one of the few mistakes that Hornady made IMO. I would rather see a necked up 6.5 PRC to 7mm in short action, something to compete with 7mm SAUM but with good factory match ammo to support it...

 

[stanley_white]

So the 30 mrad elevation the Mark 4HD offers isn't enough for you in the 2.5-10???

It wasn’t for a friend of mine who needed to buy a 20 MOA scope mount for his AR 308 to get the MK4 where he needs it to be.

-Stan

 

[Glassaholic]

Optically all you have to do on 10-12x is match the x42 atacr.

You mean match the IQ of the 4-16x42 with something like a 2-10x42?

 

[DM1975]

My thoughts on this as I’ve been going down this path for the last several months is that the right reticle is a must and makes up for a whole lot of shortcomings in other ares provided they’re not so bad as to make the scope too difficult to use. I would give a certain amount of leeway to other aspects if the reticle was done right. I understand that you have to strike a compromise somewhere, but I think allot of reticles/scopes do this in the wrong area.

I was seriously considering the Athlon Helos 2-12x but the 1moa center dot for me wasn’t what I was looking for. For one of the rifles I wanted that for it would be replacing a Leupold Mk3hd SFP 3-9x with a Firedot TMR and would end up not solving the issue I have with the reticle being too thick.

I like the regular TMR reticle but the Firedot version doesn’t have a floating center dot and it just too thick to get the fidelity out of it I want for certain things. For hunting it works well, but that’s just one aspect of what I was looking for. I also don’t think it’s a proper reticle for a SFP scope. The crosshairs are just too thick for that.

I decided to forego locking or capped turrets in favor of a thicker reticle (0.06 mils) with a floating dot. So far I’m ok with that decision but still need to further test it out. It’s a 2.5-15x and at 15x it starts getting a little picky to get behind but it’s not that bad in my opinion. I would rather have the extra magnification and it be a little finicky to get behind, but if it was too hard then no. It’s not a perfect reticle or scope but it’s the closest I’ve found to what I want out of an MPVO.

I have been thinking allot about if they could take the TMR reticle (not the Firedot version), make the hashes a little thinner (not the reticle itself) and add a simple tree with floating dots that it would be about perfect for what I want. I don’t need to see the hashes at low power, I don’t need to see the tree at low power, I don’t need to make out the center dot at low power. At the distance I need the lowest power available I just need to be able to pick up the crosshairs.

I prefer locking turrets or a capped windage, but a compromise had to be made. As for the objective lens 44-50 mm would be where I would want it. Illumination is a must and I prefer the entire reticle to be illuminated. And of course for me anything at or past 10x I would want it FFP. As for parallax adjustment I’m on the fence. And I think if you’re going to top mount a red dot anyway then that affords you a little bit of leeway on the reticle at the lower end.

These are just my opinions. I know I’m not an authority on optics by any means but I do shoot in a variety of conditions and places that affords me the opportunity to find shortcomings that some might not initially realize and what I need in an optic and reticle others might not. For instance my NRL22 optic has no illumination and for that purpose it’s fine. I don’t use it to hunt with though.

 

[wigwamitus]

So the 30 mrad elevation the Mark 4HD offers isn't enough for you in the 2.5-10???

Well mk5 is 165 moa "adjustment range" and mk4 is 85 moa and 165 > 85 (almost double) ... Is 85 enough ? For 556 mk12 ish 18" probably, but for something 30 cal ish ... probably not.

 

[NHR]

Speaking of "sucky reticles", I think we all agree that there is a delicate sweet spot to cover the most ground. Shit like a Tremor is going far too much for most (some will still insist).

As a baseline, I've felt
4x and above for a traditional mildot to be useful
6x-12x 1/2 mil stadia at most (G2 mildot)
12x+ for 0.2 mil stadia to be worth a damn

And with that, certain stadia/features can be highlighted/bolder than others in comparison to the magnification used.

Personally, I have no love for Leupold, but I'm not so sure a page doesn't need to be taken from their book on the CQBSS specifically with the TMR reticle. For those not familiar, they used 3 different crosshair thicknesses to be visible.
While I don't need a Short Dot level dot brightness as I would prefer for an LPVO, but a nicely illuminated fine crosshair like on the SAI 1-6 at the bottom end would be just dandy.

Some shitty pics of the CQBSS TMR for those unfamiliar

That looks very usable.

I want a Mark 4HD but the TMR desperately needs some numbers so you don't get lost.

 

[Glassaholic]

It wasn’t for a friend of mine who needed to buy a 20 MOA scope mount for his AR 308 to get the MK4 where he needs it to be.

-Stan

You lost me on this one, are you simply saying your friend needed a 20 MOA cant in order to get his AR 308 out to distance? Presumably 1000 yards?

My 14" LMT 308 with Federal T308T ammo gets me to 1000 yards with 13 mils at sea level, theoretically the 2.5-10 Luepy should get me there without any cant???

 

[stanley_white]

Unpopular opinion:

MPVOs are too high powered for close range work and too low powered for long range work.

As such, they do both poorly.

If so much discussion is required to determine what makes the best MPVO, then the use case is not self evident, and thus the manufacturers are right in not really developing this market.

-Stan

 

[stanley_white]

You lost me on this one, are you simply saying your friend needed a 20 MOA cant in order to get his AR 308 out to distance? Presumably 1000 yards?

My 14" LMT 308 with Federal T308T ammo gets me to 1000 yards with 13 mils at sea level, theoretically the 2.5-10 Luepy should get me there without any cant???

We bore sighted his AR using the scope with traditional rings and it had 8 MRAD of elevation remaining, which was not enough.

-Stan

 

[Glassaholic]

Well mk5 is 165 moa "adjustment range" and mk4 is 85 moa and 165 > 85 (almost double) ... Is 85 enough ? For 556 mk12 ish 18" probably, but for something 30 cal ish ... probably not.

You lost me on moa, what is that? Morons Of America???

 

[Glassaholic]

My thoughts on this as I’ve been going down this path for the last several months is that the right reticle is a must and makes up for a whole lot of shortcomings in other ares provided they’re not so bad as to make the scope too difficult to use. I would give a certain amount of leeway to other aspects if the reticle was done right. I understand that you have to strike a compromise somewhere, but I think allot of reticles/scopes do this in the wrong area.

I was seriously considering the Athlon Helos 2-12x but the 1moa center dot for me wasn’t what I was looking for. For one of the rifles I wanted that for it would be replacing a Leupold Mk3hd SFP 3-9x with a Firedot TMR and would end up not solving the issue I have with the reticle being too thick.

I like the regular TMR reticle but the Firedot version doesn’t have a floating center dot and it just too thick to get the fidelity out of it I want for certain things. For hunting it works well, but that’s just one aspect of what I was looking for. I also don’t think it’s a proper reticle for a SFP scope. The crosshairs are just too thick for that.

I decided to forego locking or capped turrets in favor of a thicker reticle (0.06 mils) with a floating dot. So far I’m ok with that decision but still need to further test it out. It’s a 2.5-15x and at 15x it starts getting a little picky to get behind but it’s not that bad in my opinion. I would rather have the extra magnification and it be a little finicky to get behind, but if it was too hard then no. It’s not a perfect reticle or scope but it’s the closest I’ve found to what I want out of an MPVO.

I have been thinking allot about if they could take the TMR reticle (not the Firedot version), make the hashes a little thinner (not the reticle itself) and add a simple tree with floating dots that it would be about perfect for what I want. I don’t need to see the hashes at low power, I don’t need to see the tree at low power, I don’t need to make out the center dot at low power. At the distance I need the lowest power available I just need to be able to pick up the crosshairs.

I prefer locking turrets or a capped windage, but a compromise had to be made. As for the objective lens 44-50 mm would be where I would want it. Illumination is a must and I prefer the entire reticle to be illuminated. And of course for me anything at or past 10x I would want it FFP. As for parallax adjustment I’m on the fence. And I think if you’re going to top mount a red dot anyway then that affords you a little bit of leeway on the reticle at the lower end.

These are just my opinions. I know I’m not an authority on optics by any means but I do shoot in a variety of conditions and places that affords me the opportunity to find shortcomings that some might not initially realize and what I need in an optic and reticle others might not. For instance my NRL22 optic has no illumination and for that purpose it’s fine. I don’t use it to hunt with though.

Have you seen Leupold's new CMR-Mil reticle for the 2-10, might be what you're looking for... personally, they should have brought the main horizontal stadia with wind holds inside the donut, at least with dots, they way it is right now would be frustrating with light winds and dialing the elevation turret...

 

[Glassaholic]

Unpopular opinion:

MPVOs are too high powered for close range work and too low powered for long range work.

As such, they do both poorly.

If so much discussion is required to determine what makes the best MPVO, then the use case is not self evident, and thus the manufacturers are right in not really developing this market.

-Stan

I guess you missed the part where we piggyback a RDS on the MPVO thus enabling the short range work.