Rifle Scopes Is there a market for a good MPVO

[Glassaholic]

Okay, we are just over two weeks into the poll and at 185 total votes; however, with 30 some more votes than last week, we went from 42.2% to 41.6%, so rounding shows we are staying at a steady 42% for the 2-12x42. Hopefully this gives manufacturers something meaningful to chew on and consider. The next higher percentage below is from the "I don't care" crowd who just want something with a better reticle in a FFP scope - something that works well at bottom magnification and at top and the third highest percentage is what I would call a hybrid between a crossover and an MPVO with the 2.5-15x44. Unfortunately, it takes at least a couple years to flush out a design, what we need is a good LOW 2-12x42 design that other manufacturers can OEM and put in their reticles (reticles designed for MPVO/crossover) and their turrets (lower profile).

 

[WyoChance]

But for my money, I’ll take a dual focal plane 3-18 with exposed locking turrets, a Christmas tree reticle, and 1/2 and 1/4 mil hashes because the human brain intuitively does halves and halves of halves better than decimals. And, give it an illuminated donut of death.

You know what, build in provisions for a RDS, like the ACOG does. And, rings are for losers. Build it with an integrated mount so we can have a few less “I don’t know how to level my scope” threads. And, include a good set of flip up scope caps. Those plastic and shock cord things are hot garbage.

As I was reading through this thread I was thinking about exactly what I want, something that Ive been thinking about for a long time and searching for.

This very nearly nails it with one more provision, light, or at least not boat anchor heavy. Under 30 Oz if it includes a mount would be a bare minimum. Optics like the VCOG (32 Oz) and the T6Xi 3-18 (34.4 no mount) all strike me as far to heavy for a small frame gas gun, especially when optics like the Marchs 1-10 and 1.5-15 come in at 20-25 oz and the Mark 5 3.6-18 are 26 oz. I really wanna like the LHT at 22ish oz but that may be a good example of too many compromises for the sake of weight.

The March 1.5-15 dfp comes so close to what I want but the 10x erector ruins it for me. If it were a 3-15 or 2.5-16, wide angle eyepiece, shurkin turrets, DFP, I suspect it would be a slam dunk at 25 oz and change. I think March may be in the best position to provide the optic we all want. They just needa get over the 8x/10x erector as their main marketing/selling point. I only have extensive experience shooting in unconventional positions with 2 high erector optics and I despise both the 1-10 Razor and 1-8 VCOG so I may be unfairly biased.

I'm more then happy to give up extreme magnification range and I little off the bottom and off the top to have better glass and a usable eyebox. Im really not even sold on 6x. For example Id prefer 4-20 or 3-15 with, all things being equal, better eye box and optical performance, over a 3-18. Of course if I can get a 6x thats as good as a a 5x of course Ill take it, but assuming these optics are paired with an offset dot, going up to 4x with good FOV is no issue for me. Im unlikely to fire through my main optic inside 100 yards, and especially 50, and have shot enough with piggyback dot for it to be natural, far more so then changing my magnification.

To be clear, with an MPVOs the low end range isnt all that important the difference in 2x and 4x matters little to me, what does matter is FOV. 35+ ft @100 yards (ACOG Like) is where I start to be happy, regardless of the bottom end.

A lot of this is theory as personally owned longer range rifles are currently equipped with an ACOG/RMR, 2.5-10 PST Gen 1 FFP/RMR (10 years and time for an upgrade) and S&B 5-25.
Perhaps the March 1.5-15 would be forgiving enough with adequate optical performance. From what @Glassaholic has said the March 4.5-24 could be what I need.
Maybe I should get over the weight issue but my current optic stack on my go to rifle is under 25oz and on my GPR its only 16oz. The setup I'm looking at for mount and dot is gonna be 8-12oz, and if I'm not carful I could easily end up with a 3+ pound optic setup...

My priorities in order:
Glass quality
Easy/comfortable to get behind
Good FOV at low mag
Mil based tree with decent ilm (DFB would be cool)
Lightweight (as close to 18oz without compromised reliability)
Low profile turrets
Not 5k+ (S&B)
Nothing weird or goofy... (unlocked/easily bumped turrets, stiff controls, finicky parallax, rotating ocular (night force), tall turrets, push button illumination controls (vortex LHT), non standard batteries (Stiener)

Edit before someone says it, the TT315 is about what I'm describing but does have 6 mil turrets (goofy) and is really starting to push it in the cost department.

 

[Red_SC]

I have scope with nuclear illumination like the NX8 1-8. More important to me is one that will go LOW enough. Many are too bright on the lowest setting, and wash out the target in low light.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

I have scope with nuclear illumination like the NX8 1-8. More important to me is one that will go LOW enough. Many are too bright on the lowest setting, and wash out the target in low light.

This.

 

[hlee]

Yeah, that’s what the “0” position on the illumination is for.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

Yeah, that’s what the “0” position on the illumination is for.

? Not even close.

 

[hlee]

? Not even close.

Maybe I should have use a smiley emoji. Regardless, this thread is only good for the lols at this point. The answer is still “Yeah, but likely no. And, if there is, no one will agree on what or where it is.”

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

I can’t even remember what this thread was about. But I have had two scopes that when you needed a small amount of illumination at the very end of shooting light just to see the reticle, the lowest setting would blow out the image and ruin my night vision.

 

[hlee]

I can’t even remember what this thread was about. But I have had two scopes that when you needed a small amount of illumination at the very end of shooting light just to see the reticle, the lowest setting would blow out the image and ruin my night vision.

If I can’t see the reticle or the target, and the light from an illuminated reticle is ruining my night vision, it’s past legal shooting light…

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

Legal shooting time is questionable around here I wish I could see my MSR2 on 3x on my T6Xi when I hunt, especially early or late. It all but disappears against the forest backdrop. But thank goodness the illumination goes very dim which makes it usable. It’s probably the second best thing they did right and something I now look for when choosing a scope. Anyway, just my two cents on illumination.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

Legal shooting time is questionable around here I wish I could see my MSR2 on 3x on my T6Xi when I hunt, especially early or late. It all but disappears against the forest backdrop. But thank goodness the illumination goes very dim which makes it usable. It’s probably the second best thing they did right and something I now look for when choosing a scope. Anyway, just my two cents on illumination.

Agreed. I wish it would go brighter on the top setting, though.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

100 percent. It’s really my only complaint.

 

[Tictacticaltimmy]

I'm a huge proponent of the MPVO for the types of shooting I do. When getting in to NV I put a dot on everything. After a lot of experimenting to get the ideal offset dot position, the dot came to eclipse the 1x on my LPVO. A red dot is far superior to the best 1X scope for a number of reasons:
-unlimited eye relief and basically unlimited eyebox are a massive benefit for dynamic shooting
-daylight bright battery life measured in years, not in weeks
-ergos for passive aiming become identical to daytime shooting, no new muscle memory to train

That led me to see what it would be like to just forego the LPVO and find an MPVO to replace it. That means the MPVO needed to not add significant weight over the LPVO (at least not enough to change the balance/handling of the weapon significantly), and needed to have a good fast reticle at lowest mag when I need to take offhand shots with more precision than an offset dot gives.
I went through a fair number of options, and by far the most successful has been the (unfortunately recently discontinued) PA GlX 2.5-10. The big ass chevron is the only thing that enables good times for quick offhand shots, every other reticle I've tried has been a let down in this area. The chevron sucks for long range work but to overcome that I simply use the tree and do not dial. If I need a precise aiming point for zeroing or shooting paper I dial 1mil down and use the -1mil line as my aiming point. What really makes this scope work is the light weight (22.5oz) and a reticle design that is truly usable at both 2.5x and 10x.
This scope is not all puppies and rainbows, the turret lock/zero design is dogshit and the 10x top end is still a bit limiting, and I have some minor gripes on the reticle. But overall it is the best I have tried.
One scope I had high hopes for but ended up getting rid of was the much praised Helos 2-12. The Helos just wasn't nearly as fast/precise on 2x as the GlX was on 2.5x. On top of that it weighed 4oz more, and those two things together made its admittedly better high end and turret design not worth the sacrifice compared to the GlX. At 26oz I would rather lug a couple more oz around and get a 3-18. I have the Meopta6 3-18 with Ilya's Mrad reticle, and that optic is at least as fast as the Helos while being massively more capable for real precision work... it has found a home on my .308 Revolution where I feel it is perfect.

All of that is to say that to me the mag range is really not that important. The reticle design and weight are massively more important. And given that a wider mag range tends to add weight, I would prefer to sacrifice that and stay with a 2.5-10 or 3-12, if I can get a durable lightweight scope with a great reticle on the low and high end.
Unfortunately the reticle is where virtually every company shits the bed here. The h6xi could be great... but the reticle is trash for anywhere near 2x. I also want to note that I don't care about the illumination on the reticle very much... my dot stays illuminated and I don't need to worry about battery life, I want a reticle that I can see in complex dark environments with no illumination.
The other area where companies shit the bed is by trying to add too many features and ending up with something that is a crossover or HPVO due to its weight, but totally disqualified as an MPVO. The new PA 2.5-20 is a great example of this. I had huge hopes when I heard the announcement, but when I saw that it is a 34mm tube and weights the same as my Meopta.... all my interest was lost. I would rather pay 1/2 as much and buy another Optika6. I'll have a less optically compromised optic with the 6x vs 8x erector, which will probably perform nearly as good at the top end while having a far better reticle for the low end, for the exact same wieght. My guess is they will find some way to shit up the next gen 2.5-10 as well.

And for those who say 'why not just use a 1-10 lpvo' sorry the performance is not there. The compromises to get a 10x mag range in a compact optic are just too much. Shooting my glx 2.5-10 next to my friends Vudu 1-10 for long range steel banging, the glx shits all over it. The eyebox is massively more forgiving and once parallax is adjusted it is significantly easier to resolve tough targets. And I have a proper elevation turret for dialing. I think its fair to say the Vudu is one of the better LPVO's for long range work on the market.
On top of that shooting drills with my glx at 2.5 vs the Vudu at 1x, I get about the same times and accuracy, since the GlX reticle is faster to pick up and the Vudu is not daylight bright. Both have way worse scores than when I use my offset dot on drills.

 

[Glassaholic]

I'm a huge proponent of the MPVO for the types of shooting I do. When getting in to NV I put a dot on everything. After a lot of experimenting to get the ideal offset dot position, the dot came to eclipse the 1x on my LPVO. A red dot is far superior to the best 1X scope for a number of reasons:
-unlimited eye relief and basically unlimited eyebox are a massive benefit for dynamic shooting
-daylight bright battery life measured in years, not in weeks
-ergos for passive aiming become identical to daytime shooting, no new muscle memory to train

That led me to see what it would be like to just forego the LPVO and find an MPVO to replace it. That means the MPVO needed to not add significant weight over the LPVO (at least not enough to change the balance/handling of the weapon significantly), and needed to have a good fast reticle at lowest mag when I need to take offhand shots with more precision than an offset dot gives.
I went through a fair number of options, and by far the most successful has been the (unfortunately recently discontinued) PA GlX 2.5-10. The big ass chevron is the only thing that enables good times for quick offhand shots, every other reticle I've tried has been a let down in this area. The chevron sucks for long range work but to overcome that I simply use the tree and do not dial. If I need a precise aiming point for zeroing or shooting paper I dial 1mil down and use the -1mil line as my aiming point. What really makes this scope work is the light weight (22.5oz) and a reticle design that is truly usable at both 2.5x and 10x.
This scope is not all puppies and rainbows, the turret lock/zero design is dogshit and the 10x top end is still a bit limiting, and I have some minor gripes on the reticle. But overall it is the best I have tried.
One scope I had high hopes for but ended up getting rid of was the much praised Helos 2-12. The Helos just wasn't nearly as fast/precise on 2x as the GlX was on 2.5x. On top of that it weighed 4oz more, and those two things together made its admittedly better high end and turret design not worth the sacrifice compared to the GlX. At 26oz I would rather lug a couple more oz around and get a 3-18. I have the Meopta6 3-18 with Ilya's Mrad reticle, and that optic is at least as fast as the Helos while being massively more capable for real precision work... it has found a home on my .308 Revolution where I feel it is perfect.

All of that is to say that to me the mag range is really not that important. The reticle design and weight are massively more important. And given that a wider mag range tends to add weight, I would prefer to sacrifice that and stay with a 2.5-10 or 3-12, if I can get a durable lightweight scope with a great reticle on the low and high end.
Unfortunately the reticle is where virtually every company shits the bed here. The h6xi could be great... but the reticle is trash for anywhere near 2x. I also want to note that I don't care about the illumination on the reticle very much... my dot stays illuminated and I don't need to worry about battery life, I want a reticle that I can see in complex dark environments with no illumination.
The other area where companies shit the bed is by trying to add too many features and ending up with something that is a crossover or HPVO due to its weight, but totally disqualified as an MPVO. The new PA 2.5-20 is a great example of this. I had huge hopes when I heard the announcement, but when I saw that it is a 34mm tube and weights the same as my Meopta.... all my interest was lost. I would rather pay 1/2 as much and buy another Optika6. I'll have a less optically compromised optic with the 6x vs 8x erector, which will probably perform nearly as good at the top end while having a far better reticle for the low end, for the exact same wieght. My guess is they will find some way to shit up the next gen 2.5-10 as well.

And for those who say 'why not just use a 1-10 lpvo' sorry the performance is not there. The compromises to get a 10x mag range in a compact optic are just too much. Shooting my glx 2.5-10 next to my friends Vudu 1-10 for long range steel banging, the glx shits all over it. The eyebox is massively more forgiving and once parallax is adjusted it is significantly easier to resolve tough targets. And I have a proper elevation turret for dialing. I think its fair to say the Vudu is one of the better LPVO's for long range work on the market.
On top of that shooting drills with my glx at 2.5 vs the Vudu at 1x, I get about the same times and accuracy, since the GlX reticle is faster to pick up and the Vudu is not daylight bright. Both have way worse scores than when I use my offset dot on drills.

I hear you Timmy! It is frustrating to see some get close but miss the mark in other areas. I think what we’re seeing is manufacturers afraid to take the step with the reticle. Like you mentioned, the best opportunity on the market today for a decently priced MPVO is likely the Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42, but they missed it on the usability at 2x.

What gets me is reticle is one of the easiest things to change in a scope, yes, a manufacturer has to commit to a design and has to order a minimum amount but in the end its a laser etching on some glass.

Chatter has been high on the GLx 2.5-10 you mentioned and the Athlon 2-12, but you’re right with the Athlon being a bit chonky. H6Xi got it right… but like you, I have no desire because the reticle is not usable at 2x.

For those of us who’ve been around long enough, we remember a little company called Premier Reticles who made a very successful business custom designing reticles for Leupold's scopes among others. We need something like this again! Of course no mfr will honor warranty but maybe thats fine.

Someone posted earlier in the thread the Tremor8 reticle and while I generally can’t stand Horus reticles the Tremor8 is a great design for an MPVO, I would be happy to pay the Horus up charge if Steiner would put this in the H6Xi

Like you, I was really hoping PA would come out with a better design to the GLx 2.5-10 and while the PLxc 2.5-20 is interesting it is not a replacement and certainly not an MPVO even though mag range goes down to 2.5x due to the weight, I think the NF NX8 2.5-20 is better suited due to a bit lighter weight.

For some reason most manufacturers think massive erectors sell (and maybe they’re right to a point) and thats the low hanging fruit everyone wants.

 

[smcfarland]

I think the easy takeaway from all of this is that the Athlon 2-12 is the standard, or “best in class” option. If you want my money, prove/justify why your new product is better than it. Less weight, better reticle, better glass, better turrets, etc…. Show me why. If not, or no significant price savings, don’t waste my time. Anyone looking to get into this style of optic would likely benefit from trying it first. Easy proof of concept for the cash outlay, especially if getting on sale or using Expert Voice. Wise man told me decades ago that perfection is the enemy of good enough.