Rifle Scopes Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

#51
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

I get what you are saying but its hard not to get angry at a brand when theye have consistently given you nothing but in consistent products and bad cs ... its not just me multiple hide frequenters do not rate them and have had problems with them if I can prevent one more person from existing there money on a leopold ill be happy not coz I hate leopold but because theye don't deserve to be in the market on the same level as a nf or s and b I have sat there in silence and watched people pay nf prices for them in gun shops and it pains me to see it because people think there amazing here ( due to being uneducated ) ps I didn't say I had a tracking problem I was tryna respond to a question about poi changing after re zero... I'm sorry I just dnt think that leopold should even get a mention next to nf and I'm sure a lot of experienced ( a bell of a lot more then me ) shooters will tell the same story about in consistency I just want consistency out of them and I might change my mind
 
#53
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: whippet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">at the end of the day you get what you pay for... it is just a pity leupolds are so expensive in Oz </div></div>

amen to that. if you make everything, from cheap stuff to expensive stuff, you spread yourself too thin. personally, i like to see a company consistently improving and doing new things to get better. i cannot say Leupold has done that, some of there optical systems are 10 years old at this point
 
#54
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: whippet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">at the end of the day you get what you pay for... it is just a pity leupolds are so expensive in Oz </div></div>

Yet our dollar is at an all time high better off buying a nf from the states then buying a leopold here

Buerocracy....
 
#57
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

This thread intrests me greatly because I am looking at moving up from my Super Sniper in to something higher end and have considered both these brands. I was leaning pretty heavy towards the Mark 4 when I found this thread.

I went to NF's website and clicked through all their models and it looks like the NXS Compacts and F1 are the only ones they have tagged as made in the USA.

I would really like to keep my dollars in the US but the F1 looks way out of my budget.
 
#60
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

All NF scopes are assembled in Idaho. The F1 and the compacts carry enough US made parts to be marked Made in USA. The others are marked Made in Japan due to parts. Was told this by NF reps when we used to shoot for them.
 
#61
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

My biggest complaint with Leupold is that they have not had much innovation over the last 15 years. That seems to be changing now,only time will tell. I still think they are great scopes.

The cost of an NF F1 3.5-15 is $2,290, the cost of a MK4 ER/T 4.5-14 is $1599 for a difference of $691. Clearly price wise they are not in the same catagory. For that $691 you get High Speed turret,with a zero stop and illumination. I like all three of those features, I just don't know that I like them $691 worth.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/night-force-nxs-f1-model-riflescope-zero-stop-feature-nxs1550f1.html

http://www.opticsplanet.net/leupold-mark...l-re-fbcab.html

I like Leupolds TMR reticle better than the MLR NF offers. I don't use the illumination on the scopes that have them enough to really worry about it. I can get out to 1,000 yards with two turns on with the M5 turrets. The zero stop is a nice feature, but again I wouldn't use it very often. I have done pretty well over the last 23 years without that feature on any of my work scopes. I like Leupolds smaller size. The glass on the ER/T is suppose to be better than the older MK4's. I always find glass to be a little subjective. I expect the MK4 to have good tracking, if not I will give Leupolds customer service a go.

Now I think both scopes are over priced. I know you will say how you can find both scopes cheaper. This is true, I get discounts from both Leupold and NightForce. I am not going to publish what they are but I will say, Leupolds discount is substantially greater, so the price difference becomes even more pronounced.

When you look at the actual cost of making either scope, I am willing to bet the production costs on both scopes are under $600. There is no way for me to prove that as niether company is going to publish the actual production cost. However,one of my other hobbies is astronomy. For some reason my dollar buys better optics on that side of the house and those scope makers are making a fairly good profit off me as well. For the price of a NF F1 I can buy the scope below from the same site for $2,399

http://www.opticsplanet.net/meade-lx90sc-telescope-10in-schmidt-cassegrain-w-uhtc.html

This scope comes with a heavy duty tripod, a gps as well as a computer to guide the scope. It is much more expensive to build as the glass lens are bigger yet held to a higher standard. The tracking on this scope can't even be compared to a NF or Leupold. It can track a star as it moves across the sky with almost no input from the user. It can correct any errors in its tracking, so that as you use it more it becomes more accurate. The list of features are on the page so I won't go on. Meade and optics planet both make a profit on this scope.

Why is a scope like a NF even in the same price range? Do you truly think "you get what you pay for" when buying a NF F1. I think all rifle scope are driven by what the company producing them can get from the consumer. I don't think we as shooters are very discerning but rather pay more for the latest flavor of Koolaid.

I think both NF and Leupold make nice scopes. I like some of the features of the NF better, I feel like I get gouged less with Leupold. I would like to see Leupold come out with more adjustments per revolution, zero stops and illumination, but even without them its a nice scope and I can buy it for significantly less than I can buy a NightForce. I don't think either scope will make me hit more targets, shoot smaller groups or get higher scores. I think I will be better off taking the money I save on the ER/T M5 and putting it towards ammunition and shooting my rifle.

The NF F1 is close enough in price to a USO that I would just order exactly what I wanted from them and call it good. I still may do that down the road, but for now there is a ER/T 8.5-25X50 with a TMR reticle and M5 turrets waiting at my home for me to try out when I come home in a few months. I thought it was the better buy. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, that is why they make chocolate and vanilla icecream. I happen to like both but don't want to pay the extra cost for one flavor, so I am going to settle for the best flavor for my dollar.
 
#62
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

I looked through a Nightforce on my buddies benchrest gun over the weekend. Wasnt overly impressed with it. Dont get me wrong, it was nice...but I really do not see what all the "whoha" is about with the NF. My Mark 4 i thought was a little more clear. The NF looked hazy to me. I personally would not cough up the extra $$$ for the NF. I would rather use the savings towards ammo or another stick.
 
#63
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

I expect the MK4 to have good tracking, if not I will give Leupolds customer service a go.

have you had much experience with leupold cs in this matter? i may have to test them out myself and i would like to know of other peoples experiences
 
#64
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

I have both, and if you allow me to split hairs than I will declare the NF the better scope.

The only thing "big" advantage NF has over my Leupold is the nice HS turrets. Clicks are fast and a lot more positive.

Another positive is my NF has is a MOA reticle that matches the MOA knobs. I no longer consider this a big deal though as I have no problem with my mismatched TMR reticle. Every tick mark is 14 clicks, and every half tick is 7 clicks, that's all you have to know (if you have 1/4 MOA turrets).

Ranging is also not a big deal, I just range in Mils, and I make my adjustment in mils too, just that my scope takes a weird number of clicks to go 1 mil (14 instead of 10). Again, not a big deal.
 
#65
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

"Another positive is my NF has is a MOA reticle that matches the MOA knobs. I no longer consider this a big deal though as I have no problem with my mismatched TMR reticle. Every tick mark is 14 clicks, and every half tick is 7 clicks, that's all you have to know (if you have 1/4 MOA turrets)."

<span style="color: #FF0000">I have been wanting to know how to do that, I wanted to get custom turrets marked to represent points closest to the mils but did not have a chance to map it out. You dont know how much money you just saved me on new optics!</span>
 
#66
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

I was in the process of buying a new "MK4 ER/T 6.5-20x50 FFP M5"
(damn what a name)

Now what I mean by "in the process" was I had it ordered and was told it would be here that week (within 6 days roughly)

Needless to say I cancelled that order because it has been well over 2 weeks and the dealer was very difficult to contact by my gunshop.

I believe this worked out in my favor because I have also been waffling on my purchase.

I needed a scope that would:
*Track perfect (and nothing less)
*Have a rangefinding reticle
*20+ top power
*And have top quality glass

I believed the leupold to have all of these (tracking permitted)

The MK4 I looked through had very good clarity and color all the way to the edge. The FFP was a very nice addition to the reticle (TMR).

Now the reason for the waffling - Yes the FFP was very nice along with the reticle and MATCHING M5 mil knobs, but even with my discount I was still $250 over the price of a used NXS that could do everything that I ask! I do not need Illumination, Hi-Speed turrets, FFP, or a zero stop (although all are very nice features). Another main thing to consider is RESALE VALUE! How many of you will buy this scope (be it a Leup. or a NF) and hold onto it until you (or it!) die? Many of us WILL upgrade at somepoint, and this is where that $1300 used NF will continue to bring a premium whereas the $1700 Leupold will PROBABLY only net you ~$1450 come time to sell it.

So I have decided to pass on the FFP, gain the illumination, Resale value, and hopefully perfect tracking.

JUST MY $.02 <--------Read this before you Reply
 
#67
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

Im running a 4.5x14 lupy and that is the extent of magnafaction
I would go with that they offer going as high as you are
I would go with the NF .
 
#68
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Togeneral99</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> So I have decided to pass on the FFP, gain the illumination, Resale value, and hopefully perfect tracking.</div></div>
If choosing between FFP and illuminated reticle, I would pick FFP every time. Good luck with your purchase- it should fill two of your four "needs."
 
#69
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

The only time I've sat down and actually compared 2 similar scopes (that weren't ACOGs), it was a Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x40mm next to a similarly equipped Swarovski(don't remember what it was at the time). One thing that was obvious, was that the Swarovski had a crisper brighter image.
 
#70
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

i just accidently posted an answer to your response on a different thread sorry


i agree 110% about how over priced things are and its consumer driven but nf in my opinion worth the extra dosh over a leup i just have had too many bad experiances with leop heres a link this is what i meant to post to u http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...503#Post2216503 i think that somes up my position on the matter
 
#71
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Re25</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Another positive is my NF has is a MOA reticle that matches the MOA knobs. I no longer consider this a big deal though as I have no problem with my mismatched TMR reticle. Every tick mark is 14 clicks, and every half tick is 7 clicks, that's all you have to know (if you have 1/4 MOA turrets)."

<span style="color: #FF0000">I have been wanting to know how to do that, I wanted to get custom turrets marked to represent points closest to the mils but did not have a chance to map it out. You dont know how much money you just saved me on new optics!</span> </div></div>

It's simple Math, 3.5 MOA = ~1 Mil. 1 MOA = 4 clicks, therefore 3.5 MOA = 14 clicks.

It's approximation but dam close enough. Remember when you manual ranging it's all approximation anyways so may you will error on the side of being more right =)

I also just memorize 2 tables, one is:
15
30
45
65
85
110
140

The other is:
5.5
2.75
1.8
1.4
1.1
.9
.8
.7
.6
.55

Now your probably wondering what the heck are these numbers? Will the first table is my 300 yard zero ballistic table with 175gr SMK. 15 represents how many clicks up at 400 yards. 30 represents how many clicks up to 500 yards, etc, etc For 100 yard I holdover 1.5 mils high, and 200 yards I hold over 2 mils high. These are approximates but gets me dam close.

I zero'd and remember the click values, as opposed to MOA values because they are in increments easy to remember, 15, 30, 45, 65, 85, 110, 140. Easy as pie! Also have to be fast at dividing by 4 because you don't want to be counting 140 clicks. 100/4 = 25, 40/4 = 10.. so therefore you have to go up 35 MOA at 1000 yards (with my 300 yard zero).

The other table is my ranging table with a mil reticle, 5.5, 2.75, 1.8, 1.4, 1.1, .9, .8, .7, .6, .55. Basically it works like this, if target is 5.5 mils across it means he is 100 yards away, 2.75 mils accross he is 200 yards away. 1.8 mils he is 300 yards away, etc, etc, EASY AS PIE.

I am so use to the MOA mil conversion that matching MOA knob-reticle is really not a big deal with me anymore.
 
#72
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Enmerdeur</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A lot of hatin' on the Leupold here. Are they really that bad or are all the NF fans just using this thread as a pile on? </div></div>

Notice that they are raggin on the MK4s, mor the VX or MKIII

Also notice the happy owners seemto have the older ones.

Guess the MK4 has gone the way of Kimber Custom, making money off of the name, not quality control.
 
#73
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: matchking</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Togeneral99</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> So I have decided to pass on the FFP, gain the illumination, Resale value, and hopefully perfect tracking.</div></div>
If choosing between FFP and illuminated reticle, I would pick FFP every time. Good luck with your purchase- it should fill two of your four "needs." </div></div>

I do believe there are several here that would argue that the NF could meet all four needs

-NP-R1 (set on correct power) will act quite well as a rangefinding reticle (1)
-The 5.5-22x56 obviously meets the 20+ magnif. (2)
-I doubt there are many that will say that the NF won't track (3)
-or that it's clarity suffers (4)

But then again what do you really get for the $1700 spent on the leupold? FFP (Bushnell, SWFA, & IOR all offer that for same or less money) Optical clarity? yes leupolds are very clear, but the bushnell 4200 series is nothing to scoff at and neither are the IOR's. The SS 10xHD is said to have extreamly clear optics also.

Leupold has a very broad market - Mainly hunters <---They can afford to lose a few customers to "them being picky about tracking"
Nightforce - A much small niche market <---Customer service and REPEATABLE quality matter, or they'd be out of business

As for FFP over illumination, well it's rather hard to range soomething when you can't see the crosshairs.........right
 
#74
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Driftwood</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This scope comes with a heavy duty tripod, a gps as well as a computer to guide the scope. It is much more expensive to build as the glass lens are bigger yet held to a higher standard. The tracking on this scope can't even be compared to a NF or Leupold. It can track a star as it moves across the sky with almost no input from the user. It can correct any errors in its tracking, so that as you use it more it becomes more accurate. The list of features are on the page so I won't go on. Meade and optics planet both make a profit on this scope.

Why is a scope like a NF even in the same price range? Do you truly think "you get what you pay for" when buying a NF F1. I think all rifle scope are driven by what the company producing them can get from the consumer. I don't think we as shooters are very discerning but rather pay more for the latest flavor of Koolaid.
</div></div>
Well, for one thing I doubt the Meade telescope can be submerged in water to 100 ft for 24 hours or have to pass a 1200g deceleration test. And Meade sure doesn't have to deal with "mil-spec" requirements for their telescopes. If they did, that same $2400 telescope may be $5000 or more. I agree they are probably marked up at least 50% over cost of manufacture, but there are significant costs involved in making sure the scope meets the mil-spec requirements.

just my 2 cents,
madd0c
 
#76
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Togeneral99</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I was in the process of buying a new "MK4 ER/T 6.5-20x50 FFP M5"
(damn what a name)

Now what I mean by "in the process" was I had it ordered and was told it would be here that week (within 6 days roughly)

Needless to say I cancelled that order because it has been well over 2 weeks and the dealer was very difficult to contact by my gunshop.

</div></div>

I think the issue stated above has more to do with your dealer. I placed my order on the 12/1 it was "in processing" until 12/3 and the scope arrived at my door 12/7. It was much quicker than I had expected.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: madd0c</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Well, for one thing I doubt the Meade telescope can be submerged in water to 100 ft for 24 hours or have to pass a 1200g deceleration test. And Meade sure doesn't have to deal with "mil-spec" requirements for their telescopes. If they did, that same $2400 telescope may be $5000 or more. I agree they are probably marked up at least 50% over cost of manufacture, but there are significant costs involved in making sure the scope meets the mil-spec requirements.

just my 2 cents,
madd0c </div></div>

I like NF NXS scopes. I think if I were getting a SPF scope they would definately be in the hunt. I still think they suffer from overpricing. The "mil spec" argument doesn't fly too well with me as I use a lot of "Mil Spec" equipment. The specs are only as good as the person or committee writing them. Many times they are written purposefully to exclude other competitors with a superior pruduct. I would point out that there are far more "Mil Spec" Leupolds in government service than NF, USO and S&B combined. That certainly doesn't make Leupold better or more expensive than the other three.

I wanted to taste the FFP Koolaid, I have used fixed or dylsexic SFP scopes my whole life and have become very comfortable with them. I have been a SFP "Fanboy" for quite a while, so this is me stepping out of my comfort zone.

There are some great features on a NF NXS scope, I don't think the scopes are worth as much as NF does. Leupold is not the turd that people like to make it out to be. It's true they have not been very innovative in the past, hopefully that will change. I think they are overpriced as well, but in the case of FFP scopes, they are a better bargain. The only NightForce scopes that are in Leupolds FFP price range are all SFP and the Leupold still comes in cheaper.
 
#77
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Togeneral99</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I do believe there are several here that would argue that the NF could meet all four needs
</div></div>
I have no doubt there are many that believe they meet all 4 requirements, as many people haven't used "top quality glass" and most owners will never know if their scope "tracks perfect."

As for the FFP vs. illuminated reticle argument, we obviously desire different things from our scopes. While I prefer FFP scopes with illuminated reticles, I rarely use the illumination and mostly turn it on to make sure the battery is still good. In fact, in most situations where guys around me are using illumination, I will not have mine lit.

Good luck with your purchase- I am sure you will be happy. If I was choosing between those two scopes, I would go with the FFP Leupy; however, if I was buying a new scope, neither would be a candidate.
 
#79
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

i have 2 nf scopes and not overly impressed with either, you guys are talking about trading for leupolds (or s&b or uso) lets do it. it is a 12 x 42 nxs w/ the npr-1 reticle. i want something close with the horus h58 reticle. i also have a 5.5 x 22 nxs, same deal but the 12 x 42 goes first. also know where a 12 x 42, but the guy says it is not a nxs is he will sell or trade for a leupold that is similar, also for a s&b, or uso, if asking.
 
#80
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

Why should a scope sell for more than it's price of materials and labour.

You guys never cease to amaze me. Go work for free for ten years then report back with why you think you might be missing the point.

Telescopes don't get dropped 4m to concrete every day

Telescopes won't kill you if they fail.

Telescopes have no design limitations.

Telescopes vs scopes. Not quite apples.
 
#84
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crnkin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why should a scope sell for more than it's price of materials and labour.</div></div> I never said that. I was just pointing out the mark up on rifle scopes is high and was responding to the statement "You get what you pay for". I used a scope that obviously cost more to make as an example of what you get when you pay for a precision optic used for astronomy contrasting with what you get when you pay the same money for a precision rifle scope. I pointed out that it seems apparent that you get more with astronomy optics, than you do with those associated with shooting. If you don't think Meade is making a healthy profit on that scope, I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crnkin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys never cease to amaze me. Go work for free for ten years then report back with why you think you might be missing the point.</div></div>
Its obvious to me by your suggestion that you were missing my point. No one suggested that they work for free. I still pay the same inflated prices, but even a dog knows the difference between getting tripped over and kicked.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crnkin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Telescopes don't get dropped 4m to concrete every day.</div></div>
If your riflescope is being subjected to this, I suggest you switch to iron sights. I will be the first to say they are designed for different purposes, however the cost value of "getting what you pay for" seems to not be as great when dealing with precision rifle scopes. Unless its the ability to repeatively drop it from 4m onto concrete everyday. For what its worth, my Meade LX200 has survived a few topples itself without any scratches, but I wouldn't make a habit of dropping it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crnkin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Telescopes won't kill you if they fail.</div></div>
I actaully laughed out loud when I read that. Can you even find a single case where someone was killed because their scope failed them, if so how far back did you have to go? Are we talking theory or real world situations? That sounded like an "internet commando" drama statement if I have ever heard one. I am not calling you one, but seriously. I would bet the telescopes produced today are more durable than most of the rifle scopes put into real world use in WWII. I love USO scopes, and the ability to hammer a nail into a piece of wood with your optical sight is not to be underated, but I think a hammer would be more appropriate. I do think that a combat scope needs be durable, but there comes a point when things become overengineered. There is always a trade off.

I once decided I was going to build the ultimate hunting truck, I focused so much on one aspect, that I designed a great mudbogging truck that didn't work too well driving around narrow mountain roads. It was too high up to really be used to haul anything even though it could handle the wieght it with ease.

My sgt's much smaller Ford "Ranger" made a better hunting truck, as it could drive on mountain road easily and actually get to the places we hunt. You didn't need a ladder or ramp to put anything in the bed. Most importantly, you could actually see the edge of the road so you didn't drive off the mountain side.

I didn't start out with the intention of making a "mud bogger". I just thought of different problems encountered in the past and thought of fixes for them. When I was finished my truck design suffered from mission creep and overengineering. It no longer resembled anything you would take hunting. It was a great mud bogging truck though. I think designing a scope to be dropped 4 meters on to concrete everyday approaches the same sort of mind set.

Riflescope should be durable yes, indestructble? at what cost?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crnkin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Telescopes have no design limitations.</div></div>
What limitations are you talking about? Size, durability, price? I really didn't get that statement.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crnkin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Telescopes vs scopes. Not quite apples.</div></div>
No its a cost and value comparison of precision optics used in astronomy vs cost and value of precision optics used in shooting. I think the telescope makers give you more for you buck while padding their wallets than the riflescope makers do based on that comparison. You are free draw your own conclusions.
 
#85
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

During my last match before deploying (July, Quantico), something let loose in my S&B PMII 5x25, causing the parallax knob to cease functioning. I was fired my last group for record at 1000 with the scope dialed down to 5x, and things were still fuzzy. Yes, a .50 BMG is a bit punishing, but my point here is that ANY scope can fail. I packed it up, sent it in, and it was repaired. When I worked retail sales for a major shooting supplies distributor, I witnessed all manner of returns. Many customers had issues with the vender, and the company I worked for went out of its way to keep customers happy. Customer service should absolutely be a consideration. If you think you can't break it, you are mistaken. Fifteen years and counting of military service, I have seen put to the test.
 
#87
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

I went and fondled a NF today. I was very impressed by the build quality. I now understand why everyone raves about the turret knobs. Very nice, positive feel to them. Glass looked real good throughout the magnification range (5.5-22X50)

The only negative I came up with from my brief encounter was I did not like how the entire eye piece rotates when changing magnification. Must make having flip ups a pain.

You got me thinking...
 
#88
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All NF scopes are assembled in Idaho. The F1 and the compacts carry enough US made parts to be marked Made in USA. The others are marked Made in Japan due to parts. Was told this by NF reps when we used to shoot for them. </div></div>


Thanx for clearing that up I was unsure of the true origin of my nf...
 
#89
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

I admit it would be sick to have a gps guided scope!

Maybe they are overpriced, but it's like saying why pay 20 bucks for a 10c DVD.

I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall, but I'm sure you can understand that no one along the supply line are billionaires, so they can't be charging THAT much...

Chris
 
#90
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gamedogs4life</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All NF scopes are assembled in Idaho. The F1 and the compacts carry enough US made parts to be marked Made in USA. The others are marked Made in Japan due to parts. Was told this by NF reps when we used to shoot for them. </div></div>


Thanx for clearing that up I was unsure of the true origin of my nf... </div></div>

After doing some research it would appear even Leupold Mark 4 is not 100% USA. So there ya go. Products of our Global market.
 
#91
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Enmerdeur</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So is NF made in the USA like Leupold? </div></div>

I have a two year old NXS 5.5-22x50 that was made here (USA)

Got another one this week 3.5-15x50 that was made in Japan with tube from China.
 
#93
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

After doing some research even the Leupold contains foreign matter and they can no longer use the Made in the USA moniker. Best we can do in this global market place assembled in the USA perhaps.
 
#94
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

The Most Leupold's are made here in the USA. I have been told the glass in not made here in the USA.

As for Nightforce there 1-4, 2.5-10x, and 3.5-15x50mm F1 are made here in the USA. The glass they use is form Japan.


Mike @ CST
 
#96
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

Ijust got back from another white tail hunt using my Remington 700P 300winmag with Mark 4 ERT M5 TMR. I get a stiffy every time I take this gun out. Every thought I ever had about getting a nightforce has gone right out the window. My Mark 4 works fantastic, and the optic quality is the best Ive looked through, even compared to my friends zeiss and nightforce scopes.
 
#97
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Verminator2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am wondering how close the two scopes are to each other?</div></div>Put them next to each other and measure the distance.
laugh.gif


Serioulsy, though: The warranty is good, but that's because with Leupold YOU are the quality control. When all things are considered, NF is the better value.

I would say: Buy a used NF without zero stops from someone here, for the price of a new Leoplodder.
</div></div>

Why "WITHOUT" zero stops?
 
#98
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

If you like it bud that's great like I said consistency is my primary concern with the leupolds hopefully you've got a great scope there.... as for being as good in the glass department as a ziess well that's an opinion that I may not share with you....
 
#99
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

i know it is off thread and i apologise for that, but i can think of a few reasons why a rifle scope would cost more than a telescope, mainly a telescope barely moves off its' bipod/tripod, so durability is virtually a non-issue,a telescope does not have to deal with recoil of any kind, you say your telescope has taken 'a few bumps' i think you are very right not to test this. Also weight is a non-issue, let alone weight to durability. Seals will not even come into consideration or pretty much anything to do with moisture, you can attach anything to a telescope, eg a GPS and it will not have to be too solidly attached as you will not have to drag it through any rough terrain or test the attachments or the GPS devices very thoroughly to look at the stars or the moon as you would trying to hunt something down and lug it home with you through rivers, thick bush, over mountains or the countless other ways riflescopes get tested. while i am not sure of the profit margins any rifle scope or telescope company charges, i feel you are testing a UFC fighter against a fashion model.
 
#100
Re: Leupold Mk 4 Vs. Nightforce

Ok true but who would get the bigger pay check the guy making it or the primary share holder/owner or whatever some ones gotta be making the money and the bigger the money gap between the boss and the guy producing it the worse the product is that's just industry.... but you wanna see real stupidity have a look at the bs laws we have here in oz now that is a joke a sad sad joke what's it like over there ? More relaxed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Spotters FFP Spotters: Leupold Mark 4 vs Bushnell LMSS2
Replies
3
Views
291
white_rushin
W
C
Somebody please explain the Nightforce SHV vs NXS to me
Replies
45
Views
3K
chevy_man
C
loveha
Rifle Scopes Vudu 5-25 or Mark 4HD 6-24
Replies
4
Views
535
Dogtown
Dogtown
Rolltide
Leupold Mark 5 5-25 or Nightforce NX8 4-32?
Replies
12
Views
2K
RKBArmory
RKBArmory
Rpatton73
Optics OPTICS For Sale... US Optics, NF, S&B, Meopta, Leupold, March, Zeiss, Alcan and more.
Replies
50
Views
3K
Rpatton73
Rpatton73
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts