Rifle Scopes Leupold Mark 4HD

I apologize if this has been asked, I scanned the thread and didn't see it being addressed. Just got a MK4HD, is it a feature or a defect that the indicator on the dial lines up with left side of the line on the scope body. Curious what others look like. If it's supposed to be like that I'll learn to live with it but it is really messing with my OCD.
1000006094.jpg
 
I apologize if this has been asked, I scanned the thread and didn't see it being addressed. Just got a MK4HD, is it a feature or a defect that the indicator on the dial lines up with left side of the line on the scope body. Curious what others look like. If it's supposed to be like that I'll learn to live with it but it is really messing with my OCD.View attachment 8488627
No way this is a feature. I remember one time the bushnell lrhs scopes had this same issue and the entire hide threw a fit. Bushnell got them fixed.

Supposedly leupold has good warranty too, I'd go that route.
 
I apologize if this has been asked, I scanned the thread and didn't see it being addressed. Just got a MK4HD, is it a feature or a defect that the indicator on the dial lines up with left side of the line on the scope body. Curious what others look like. If it's supposed to be like that I'll learn to live with it but it is really messing with my OCD.View attachment 8488627

This is just poor design, and sadly, probably normal for the model. They missed a couple/few things IMO, like the zero indicator line being relatively big and 3x as thick as the short itty bitty .1mil lines, and the 2 set screws used to secure the turrets are really small too, so they kind of make any turret play/slop seem worse.
 
This is just poor design, and sadly, probably normal for the model. They missed a couple/few things IMO, like the zero indicator line being relatively big and 3x as thick as the short itty bitty .1mil lines, and the 2 set screws used to secure the turrets are really small too, so they kind of make any turret play/slop seem worse.
Yeah, so far I'm not very impressed. Hopefully the glass makes up for it but I gotta say, that's very disappointing for a $1500 optic. It's replacing an Arken, and the Arken is better in every way when it comes to the turret feel and marking. Which should be a ridiculous statement but it's true.

I contacted Leupold, I'm curious what they will say. In all reality it could be fixed simply by laser engraving the markings on the dial 0.05 mils counter clockwise. The giant line on the scope body just is what it is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tikkaguy
Yeah, so far I'm not very impressed. Hopefully the glass makes up for it but I gotta say, that's very disappointing for a $1500 optic. It's replacing an Arken, and the Arken is better in every way when it comes to the turret feel and marking. Which should be a ridiculous statement but it's true.

I contacted Leupold, I'm curious what they will say. In all reality it could be fixed simply by laser engraving the markings on the dial 0.05 mils counter clockwise. The giant line on the scope body just is what it is.
Maybe not ideal, but certainly an option is to order a custom turret label from someone like IDTS Dryfire or similar and just place it where you need it. You may prefer their label anyways to the factory read/font.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CK1.0
Maybe not ideal, but certainly an option is to order a custom turret label from someone like IDTS Dryfire or similar and just place it where you need it. You may prefer their label anyways to the factory read/font.
I'll keep that in mind, certainly an option. Hopefully Leupold takes care of it.
 
Yeah, so far I'm not very impressed. Hopefully the glass makes up for it but I gotta say, that's very disappointing for a $1500 optic. It's replacing an Arken, and the Arken is better in every way when it comes to the turret feel and marking. Which should be a ridiculous statement but it's true.

I contacted Leupold, I'm curious what they will say. In all reality it could be fixed simply by laser engraving the markings on the dial 0.05 mils counter clockwise. The giant line on the scope body just is what it is.

I agree that the turrets kind of suck…

That said, its glass punches way above its weight for a $1500 optic, it’s better than a Gen2 Razor’s and nipping at the heels of the Gen3 Razor (which is neck and neck with a $4k ZCO’s) for about a thousand bucks less. And IMO the PR3 reticle is the best out there right now.

I’m willing to bet the next gen Mark5HD will fix all the shortcomings of the Mark4HD (at least it better, because it’ll cost more too).

I ordered a turret tape from IDTS which hopefully at least makes it easier to read/dial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dzeke
I apologize if this has been asked, I scanned the thread and didn't see it being addressed. Just got a MK4HD, is it a feature or a defect that the indicator on the dial lines up with left side of the line on the scope body. Curious what others look like. If it's supposed to be like that I'll learn to live with it but it is really messing with my OCD.View attachment 8488627
Looks like the lines on the turret simply hold left edge of the line on the body.

Always left edge right? 😀
 
I took a small file on both of mine and opened up the slot that the detent fits in until the turret lined up. I can get pictures tomorrow.

I just got another one and it looks just like the pic @dzeke posted (damn Leupold :mad:), elevation turret is off in the same manner.

I'm hoping your fix is simple because I'd like to mount it, shoot it, and be happy... instead of having to send it back and waiting for it to be made right first.

The good news is the turrets have less slop/play in them as compared to my first one.
 
They did a drop test over on Rokslide...was not impressive results.

I just read through that thread and am now dumber than I was before. I don’t think I’d factor any of that nonsense into any opinion of anything.

It’s not a flagship scope, it’s a price-point scope, so expecting the world is unreasonable IMO and it does have some warts.

That said, my impression of Leupold isn’t good, and I love the reticle and am still saying that. IDK how they expect anyone to pony up for their flagship stuff when spending ~$1500 leaves one feeling far from satisfied.

I dig the scope enough to run it for a while and bought it, sold it, and re-bought it, but when talking to every other shooter I’ve shown it to I’ve started by saying “if you can look past all the crap Leupold missed it actually looks good”… not the greatest endorsement.

TBH I hope Vortex borrows their idea and comes out with their own version of a PR3 type reticle, I know it will be built way better for the same price Leupold is charging.
 
The drop test where it was sliding in the rings for their flawed test and when the dumbass finally figured that out and tightened the rings it was fine? That drop test? 😂
I want to like those drop tests but I've determined they're basically a shit show. I don't think they prove anything and are very dependent on the shooter AND nothing else on the rifle system being at fault after being dropped. Truthfully, I wouldn't expect any scope to hold zero after being dropped from 3' and landing smack dab on the elevation turret like what 9 times? I certainly wouldn't trust it and would feel very lucky if that rifle was still zeroed.

One way or another, those guys half assed tests have definitely caused some damage to Leupolds reputation.
 
It would be difficult to conclude much from a test like that, especially considering the dimensional differences of optics in general and how that effects the outcome. The only thing you can really draw from it is if there is a scope that continues to get put through this "test" and does not fail, its probably well built.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fortify503
There comes a point where the whole torture test/drop test/ice test/etc nonsense just becomes dumb. There’s a lot of fake ass self declared “operators” out there.

2-3 paragraphs into dude’s post with him bragging about having never put a patch through his rifle I could guess I wasn’t going to glean anything useful.
 
Last edited:
There comes a point where the whole torture test/drop test/ice test/etc nonsense just becomes dumb. There’s a lot of fake ass self declared “operators” out there.

2-3 paragraphs into dude’s post with him bragging about having never put a patch through his rifle I could guess I wasn’t going to glean anything useful.
Supposedly that “operator” over there was AF reserve HSLD. Someone went off on a rant on another forum about him.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: redneckbmxer24
If you’re not hammering nails with an Arken, then dropping it off a conex while it bounces into a swimming pool, you’re not testing shit!!!💩
 
The 2.5-10x42 is just about the perfect hunting scope for me. I really like both of mine.
If you don’t mind me asking, what versions did you get? I’m tickled by the ffp version but would love to know if the reticle is usable on lowest mag when in the brush with or without illumination? My lease has several spots where I’m limited to 30-50 yards and would love to be able to use it at low mag for more fov in there…

Thank you!
 
If you don’t mind me asking, what versions did you get? I’m tickled by the ffp version but would love to know if the reticle is usable on lowest mag when in the brush with or without illumination? My lease has several spots where I’m limited to 30-50 yards and would love to be able to use it at low mag for more fov in there…

Thank you!
A close friend bought the 2.5-10x42 Illuminated TMR in SFP because he didn't envision using the wind holds on less than 10x.

I think he made a good choice.

-Stan
 
If you don’t mind me asking, what versions did you get? I’m tickled by the ffp version but would love to know if the reticle is usable on lowest mag when in the brush with or without illumination? My lease has several spots where I’m limited to 30-50 yards and would love to be able to use it at low mag for more fov in there…

Thank you!
I have the illuminated TMR FFP 2.5-10x42. It works very nicely on low power. I shoot a little below 10x in the wind a fair bit, so holding for the wind with the reticle below max power is very useful for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: supercorndogs
I have the non-illuminated FFP TMR and to me it is still usable on 2.5 power. My experience with the illuminated version is that it is almost too thick.
What conditions are we talking about? Low light? I'm the woods?

I'm seriously tempted to get a FFP non illuminated. I have an NXS 2.5-10 mil dot but I'd like a FFP version with 1/2 mil lines.

The illuminated reticle looks thick in the PDF specs