Rifle Scopes Lightweight...12-16x top end...sub-24oz/13" mid-range optics?...why aren't they a thing?

[dms416]

I mean...I know. Everybody either wants 1-8x or 5-25+x big dog scopes...cause everybody's either a wannabe doorkicker or PRS shooter. Anything in between seems to be a mid-range power is geared toward hunting. The only real middle ground seems to be the "Ultra Short" territory and even those are plenty stout...weight wise as well as price wise. The NF 2.5-10x42mm is a nice little optic, but I find I want a bit more.

Something like a 4-16 ATACR or Leupold Mk6 3-18x44 is about as close as one can get. Tangent Theta 30mm 3-15x50 is pretty close to the mark too...

With small frames like 224 Valkyrie and rifles like "The Fix" and hunting/precision rifle combos becoming more popular, there would be a place/more interest for more optics in the above class. I know some of you don't have any hesitation slapping a 5-25x56 on an AR15 and going to town. Just wondering if I'm completely alone on this...

Think about the S&B Precision Hunter concept, but update it to today:
34mm main tube
3-12x42mm (15x would be nice, but no less than 12x)
Preferably 22ish ounces and not much more than 13" in length
Simple PMII single-turn turrets that could get me at least 9 mils of elevation travel
Adj parallax
A FFP reticle that is consistent with today's tech but isn't worthless for the lower mag ranges. (would love to see an adapted MSR2 for this range)
Could take or leave illumination...if it trims the price down, ditch it.
$2k ish out the door territory

 

[W54/XM-388]

S&B has some nice 4-16 range hunting scopes, but you'll probably want a different reticle than the hunting style ones.

The big issue is unless the weight & size is really critical, $2k is getting into the standard PMII territory.

 

[dms416]

S&B has some nice 4-16 range hunting scopes, but you'll probably want a different reticle than the hunting style ones.

The big issue is unless the weight & size is really critical, $2k is getting into the standard PMII territory.

I mean...I loved my 4-16x42 PMII, but that sucker was LOOOOOOOOOONG for what it was. Scale SOB back on length...if it means having to drop it back on the magnification...so be it. Do away with the illumination wart and there ya go. I could give up a 1/2" here, an ounce there and a few hundred $'s to make it work. The problem with the hunting as you noted are the reticles and more importantly the adjustment range...

There were some cool Klassik's that have P4 in a 3-12x42, but something like 3.5 mils of elevation...

 

[W54/XM-388]

I have a 4-16 Klassik that is really nice, but it's only mil-dot and the elevation range is tiny.
I'm assuming however that it's designed for a hunter that will set a 100 or 200 yard zero and never be taking game more than 400 to 500 yards away.

 

[dms416]

I have a 4-16 Klassik that is really nice, but it's only mil-dot and the elevation range is tiny.
I'm assuming however that it's designed for a hunter that will set a 100 or 200 yard zero and never be taking game more than 400 to 500 yards away.

Yeah, I remember talking to Alex @ Euro about them back in the day. I remember him saying that for the Klassik/Precision Hunter with exposed BDC, a flat/fast chambering and a 200y zero might get you to touch 600y.

 

[newguy2k3v2]

I'm kinda looking for the same thing for a 18" Grendel and 5.56 that had a 2-5-10x32 nxs and possibly The Fix.
Mk6 3-18 is about perfect on paper.
I would have tried a mk5 if not for the 35mm tube.
March 3-24 is light but not crazy about the reticle or the price.

The Fix has an Amg on it presently. A 3-18 or 4-16 short Amg would be perfect.

I'm trying out the 5-25 Vudu w/h59. I'd prefer a 3-4x low end, closer to 20oz and a simpler tree reticle like a vortex but we'll see how it does. It is indeed super short and the turrets aren't quite as large and in the way as pictures make it look.

 

[5RWill]

I want a 224v 18" SPR as well and am eyeing the MK5 for it. But plan to go proof just to relieve a little weight. But yeah the market for lightweight, mid mag, Mil/Mil optics is super thin. And the ones that are there are very expensive and still weigh every bit as much as a full size optic. That said if you want that decreased form factor and can put up with 6-10 more oz they're hard to beat. The Mk5 especially considering it's price.

 

[koshkin]

Mark5 3.6-18x44 is your best bet at the moment.

If you are on a budget, try SWFA SS 3-15x42. It gets you half way there for not much cash.

ILya

 

[Just Macca]

Bushnell LRHS 3-12 is what currently fills that role. But you're right, it's a glaring niche in the market at the moment. I wish the new TT H series (whenever it comes) was a bit lighter. Or maybe the new rumoured Schmidt 3-21x50 hunter, but I guarantee it'll come out at 30oz. Also, maybe the rumoured Minox ZL5 FFP line will have a lightweight 3-15.

We'll see.....

 

[gr8fuldoug]

There's lots of great options in our Schmidt & Bender 1 Week Super Sale
You may also consider the Steiner P4Xi 4-16x56 SCR Reticle Riflescope only $1,199.99

 

[bob7-08]

[QUOTE="newguy2k3v2, post: 7297956, member: 28913 A 3-18 or 4-16 short Amg would be perfect.

send an email at vortex asking for it,i will do it to!

 

[claytonm]

Mark5 3.6-18x44 is your best bet at the moment.

If you are on a budget, try SWFA SS 3-15x42. It gets you half way there for not much cash.

ILya

Ilya - how much of a difference will the MK5 be if coming from that SWFA? I have the SS, and the Leupold is what I am considering to put on my Fix in it's place, but I don't have a place to check these optics out. I was considering the Steiner T5xi's and Vudu 5-25 too, but those are all a bit heavier. I'm kind of hoping to fill the role of something general purpose hunting/long range-ish target shooting.

 

[jbuck88]

This is exactly what I’m looking for as well.
I am thinking a 4-16 ATACR or s&b US. But I feel both of those Carry a weight penalty. I would like to see a decent 3-15 or 3-18 that can dial. I places I hunt have timber and well as wide open rolling prairie. So having a lower power is better for quick shots, but I still want the ability to turn the power up and dial when the need arises.

The Mk6 looks great on paper but haven’t tried one yet. I haven’t had the best luck with dialing and Leupolds. Some have been perfect and some always seemed to be off a little.

So if Vortex would come out with a AMG in that size and power range I’d probably have to try it.

 

[C_R_Slacker]

I agree, a 3-12 and/or 4-16 Vortex AMG would be awesome.

 

[Tx_Aggie]

The Bushnell Elite LRTS/LRTSi scopes in 3-12 and 4.5-18 are around 27-28oz and 13-14 inches in length. They're nearly the same scope as the LRHS, just with a locking windage turret in place of the capped turret on the hunting scope.

A shooting buddy recently purchased the 4.5-18 and it's nice. We both think it's slightly better than the DMR II he has mounted on another rifle.

 

[memilanuk]

@Tx_Aggie i keep hearing good stuff about those scopes. One friend of mine (who has a fair amount of experience with glass) said they were one of his favorite scopes in terms of features, size and price. Another friend was shooting a stage I helped RO this year and had one on his gun... Looked awesome, not too big, not too small... he said he thought they were one of the best kept 'secrets' out there.

I came across a good buy on a lightly used LRTSi 4.5-18x the other day and went for it. Sure hope they (and you ) are right!

 

[Tx_Aggie]

@milanuk If yours is anything like the one my buddy ended up with you will be pleased!

 

[jakelly]

I’ve spoken to my Vortex rep about this a few times. Hopefully he doesn’t have too much input, because he could not be less interested in this niche. Speaks like it’s not even a hole in the marketplace, and questions whether anyone should want a scope like that. From the sounds of it, if Vortex fills this gap it’ll be pure luck.

 

[Geno C.]

I’ve spoken to my Vortex rep about this a few times. Hopefully he doesn’t have too much input, because he could not be less interested in this niche. Speaks like it’s not even a hole in the marketplace, and questions whether anyone should want a scope like that. From the sounds of it, if Vortex fills this gap it’ll be pure luck.

That’s disappointing to hear. The 4-16 amg is the top of my wishlist currently. Ideally it would be 3-18 but I’d deal. Who did you talk to?

 

[Dirty8404]

I’d love a 4-20 or 3-18 AMG, that rep is clueless.

The AMG only having 6x on the bottom end and the accompanying 20ft FOV is what’s keeping me from buying one.

 

[newguy2k3v2]

I’d love a 4-20 or 3-18 AMG, that rep is clueless.

The AMG only having 6x on the bottom end and the accompanying 20ft FOV is what’s keeping me from buying one.

I've never really cared for any 6-24 scopes for this reason. I bought an amg because I got a great deal on it. Everything about it is close to perfect except the 6x low end and it could be a bit shorter.

 

[morganlamprecht]

i agree this area is slim pickins

i looked all over last month and kept coming back to bushnell LRHSi...its hard to beat in this area even tho its slightly over the 24oz...i really like this scope

seemed like everything i looked at that was lighter weight was SFP or had a lame BDC reticle...usuable, but not interested

 

[dms416]

Well...glad to know I'm not the only one.

 

[stello1001]

Definitely a topic of high interest for me. I have an LRHSi which I sent in for warranty and I won't get it back til December or maybe even January. This puts me without a scope for hunting season. I wanted something short, light, and a magnification range with no more than 4 on the bottom end. I looked hard at the mark 5 3.6-18, I looked hard at the tango 6 3-18 as well as the 4-24. While I did want something short, the magnification range from the 4-24 drew me to buy that one over the 3-18. I honestly prefer 3-18 for hunting but being that this will be a temp hunting scope for me, I didn't mind having the extra magnification up top so I could use for banging steel and spotting for myself. I kinda regret it and wish I had gone with the mark 5 but oh well. The tango 6 isn't too bad except for the ugly graphite color. I'll end up painting it OD green so it could match my rifle, not really a big deal. Oh, one more thing, the weight is also relatively high on the Tango6 line but I really really liked the magnification range that the 4-24 has to offer which is why I made some exceptions! Ideally, if an AMG could be had in 3-15 or 3-18 id be all over it. Id also prefer it a tad bit shorter but if they couldn't make it shorter, id still settle on it if the magnification was brought down to previously said range!

 

[Just Macca]

Whilst we're wishing for things that may never happen, it's extremely important to me that this hypothetical scope meets the above criteria in ADDITION to being very parallax insensitive. Tier one glass clarity/brightness is also a requirement. My understanding is that the TT 3-15M (and H) is the only scope that approaches meeting these requirements.

Is the Leupold Mk 5 forgiving with its parallax settings?

 

[J-Hon]

Have a Fix, been wanting the same thing for quite some time now. The SWFA SS 3-15 is currently what I'm using (which I am rather fond of).

Really, the SWFA is pretty close. I wish it had a 10mil turn turret, and I have used reticles I liked more (though I don't think the current one handicaps me much). I personally wouldn't care if they went 5-15 on the zoom, with the theory being that less zoom ratio = less lenses and would be cheaper/brighter/less to go wrong. A 30mm main tube doesn't bother me either.....

In general, I'd like a couple more 'less is more' type of optoins. SWFA seems like the only ones really interested in that market.

 

[beetroot]

This is exactly what I’m looking for as well.
I am thinking a 4-16 ATACR or s&b US. But I feel both of those Carry a weight penalty. I would like to see a decent 3-15 or 3-18 that can dial. I places I hunt have timber and well as wide open rolling prairie. So having a lower power is better for quick shots, but I still want the ability to turn the power up and dial when the need arises.

The Mk6 looks great on paper but haven’t tried one yet. I haven’t had the best luck with dialing and Leupolds. Some have been perfect and some always seemed to be off a little.

So if Vortex would come out with a AMG in that size and power range I’d probably have to try it.

I'd give the MK6 a try if it meets all your requirements, with the new updated M2C turrets they seem to get predominantly positive reviews.
There are still some that may suffer from tracking issues, but they are capable of tracking well.
I'd buy one and before I mounted it do a tracking test to see how it functions and send it in for repair if its not right, Leupold tend to fix these things pretty quickly, so could be worth a shot!

In fact from now on, any new scope I buy I'll do a tracking test on just so I dont waste time and ammo on a scope with a fault from day one.

On the subject of a smaller AMG, totally agree that they should make a 3.5-18 version, similar to the MK5hd, I think it'd make an awesome cross over scope.
If they could make a 5-25 also which kept the great FOV (unlike Kahkes), they would hit a home run.
Similar to what Leupold has done with their MK5hd line, but keep 30mm tube, the reticle, and don't sacrifice on optical performance for compactness quite so much.

 

[stello1001]

Have a Fix, been wanting the same thing for quite some time now. The SWFA SS 3-15 is currently what I'm using (which I am rather fond of).

Really, the SWFA is pretty close. I wish it had a 10mil turn turret, and I have used reticles I liked more (though I don't think the current one handicaps me much). I personally wouldn't care if they went 5-15 on the zoom, with the theory being that less zoom ratio = less lenses and would be cheaper/brighter/less to go wrong. A 30mm main tube doesn't bother me either.....

In general, I'd like a couple more 'less is more' type of optoins. SWFA seems like the only ones really interested in that market.

One scope that I really truly liked was the weaver tactical 3-15. Natchez has the non illuminated model at 500 bucks. I believe the glass is pretty damn good for the price. Many will argue the reticle sucks. Since the one I owned I used for hunting, I didn't mind the reticle. As a matter of fact, I like very simply reticle for hunting so for me the mil dot was perfect. I kind of regret selling mine tho! I always wanted to see how it compared to the SWFA!

 

[claytonm]

Have a Fix, been wanting the same thing for quite some time now. The SWFA SS 3-15 is currently what I'm using (which I am rather fond of).

I have almost exactly the same setup, aside from the can. It just feels like I'm doing a bit of a disservice to the Fix for putting the SWFA on it, haha. Great optic for what it is in it's range though.

 

[lash]

As has already been mentioned the current Bushnell LRTS/LRTSi does exactly what you are asking. The 3-12 is shorter and lighter than the 4.5-18, but they both fit really nicely on a small frame AR.

I have one of the discontinued LRHSi 4.5-18 on my .224 Valkyrie and think that it is exactly the thing for that rifle. The reticle is very visible at low power for quick close hunting shots and yet it has glass that is good enough for past 1000 yards when banging steel. To me the glass is better than my older HDMR 3.5-21.

It certainly is no TT 3-15, but for 1/3 if the price it’s all I could ask for for this application. FWIW, mine does not seem very sensitive to parallax in the mid ranges of 200-800 yards.

 

[jakelly]

I’ve owned the Weaver Tacs, the SWFA 3-9, and the LRHS scopes. I still own and use many of these scopes. The LRHS scopes are a cut above, that 3-12 is extra sweet.

 

[lancetkenyon]

Tangent Theta TT315M
March F 3-24×52
Premier Heritage Light Tactical 3-15×50

 

[XTREM HTR16]

I’ve owned a few of the LRHS 3-12x44’s, they’re 25.6 oz so not lightweight.
I have a S&B 3-12x50 PMII ST base model, no parallax or illumination, it has 13 mils but it’s 34mm tube and almost 26 oz.

I used the S&B 3-12x42 Klassik Precision Hunter this fall on my WY hunt. It’s 20.6 oz and the dial gives 3.2 mils with @ zero stop. It tracks perfectly. For a hunting rifle where you won’t go over 500-600 yards, the P3 reticle and dial work better than most other options out there.

IMO the most bombproof hunting scope is the PMII 10x42 with P3 reticle. 13 mils elevation. Under 21 oz. It’s what I have on my 6.5 Gap 4S. Not much to break or go wrong there....

 

[Just Macca]

Tangent Theta TT315M
March F 3-24×52
Premier Heritage Light Tactical 3-15×50

March 3-24x52 would be ideal, except due to its parallax issues and relative lack of depth to its image.

I still feel the TT is the money. Can't wait to see this H series.

 

[withoutwarning]

I struggled to decide which optic for my fix also. I went with an illuminated tmr mark 6.
Seems like the perfect scope. Just a shame it seems to be the only scope with daylight bright illumination, a tmr like reticle, great glass and fit the weight and size requirements. Surely there’s plenty out there with DMRs and lightweight hunting rigs that want a lightweight and compact FFP optic.

If I end up not liking it I’ll go the lighter and simpler route of a Nightforce 2.5-10x24 or a March 1-10x24 I think.

 

[C_R_Slacker]

Do any of the zeiss, Swarovski, leica, etc. hunting scopes have simple mil hash or moa hash reticles with matching turrets? I don't know much about them, but they generally seem to be obsessed with bdc reticles and custom turrets.

But i think nightforce 2.5-10x42 might be the best option still. It's lacking top end magnification, but it checks every other box. And realistically, 10x is enough to take any shot at any distance on game...unless it's prairie dogs or something similar.

 

[C_R_Slacker]

I'll add that if more top end magnification is important, the leupold mk5 is the way to go. That's what i would do. Bushnell lrhs 3-12 is a compromise between the two.

 

[withoutwarning]

Do any of the zeiss, Swarovski, leica, etc. hunting scopes have simple mil hash or moa hash reticles with matching turrets? I don't know much about them, but they generally seem to be obsessed with bdc reticles and custom turrets.

But i think nightforce 2.5-10x42 might be the best option still. It's lacking top end magnification, but it checks every other box. And realistically, 10x is enough to take any shot at any distance on game...unless it's prairie dogs or something similar.

I looked over pretty much all of the European brands and I don’t remember finding any with simple mildot like reticles that fit the weight and size of a Mk6. Either duplex reticles or weird bdc reticles.

Hopefully nightforce do something in between the 2.5-10 and the 4-16 soon because there’s no doubt they’d nail it.

 

[dirthead1]

March 3-24x52 would be ideal, except due to its parallax issues and relative lack of depth to its image.

I still feel the TT is the money. Can't wait to see this H series.

I have a March 3-24x52 on my hunting rifle. The focus is very touchy. At 100 yards, just the slightest movement of the parallax knob makes a huge difference. I also think it excels from 8x - 18x, from 20x-24x the image gets dark and distorted. Below 8x it's very hard to see the reticle. I have the FML-1 mil reticle. It is thicker than most, but I don't think it's too thick. I actually really like the simple reticle with center dot. I also love the size and weight of the scope. I have a Tangent Theta 315P on my long range rifle. If I had it to do over again, I would buy the TT315M for my hunting rig. Focus/parallax on the TT "P" model is the most forgiving I've ever personally seen, and I've had a lot of high end scopes. The March is by far the most touchy. If the TT "M" model is even close to the "P" model, that would be enough to make my decision. The March is a very high quality build. The knobs are really nice. It seems to be very durable. Glass is nice (not TT or S&B nice). Maybe if the focus was more forgiving I would rate the glass higher, but I don't think the image is quite as clear and crisp as my TT or S&B.

 

[Covertnoob5]

I have a March 3-24x52 on my hunting rifle. The focus is very touchy. At 100 yards, just the slightest movement of the parallax knob makes a huge difference. I also think it excels from 8x - 18x, from 20x-24x the image gets dark and distorted. Below 8x it's very hard to see the reticle. I have the FML-1 mil reticle. It is thicker than most, but I don't think it's too thick. I actually really like the simple reticle with center dot. I also love the size and weight of the scope. I have a Tangent Theta 315P on my long range rifle. If I had it to do over again, I would buy the TT315M for my hunting rig. Focus/parallax on the TT "P" model is the most forgiving I've ever personally seen, and I've had a lot of high end scopes. The March is by far the most touchy. If the TT "M" model is even close to the "P" model, that would be enough to make my decision. The March is a very high quality build. The knobs are really nice. It seems to be very durable. Glass is nice (not TT or S&B nice). Maybe if the focus was more forgiving I would rate the glass higher, but I don't think the image is quite as clear and crisp as my TT or S&B.

The 315m is the same as the P when it comes to parallax.

 

[TacticalPlinker]

Bushnell Elite Tactical LRHSi 4.5-18

 

[morganlamprecht]

I have a March 3-24x52 on my hunting rifle. The focus is very touchy. At 100 yards, just the slightest movement of the parallax knob makes a huge difference. I also think it excels from 8x - 18x, from 20x-24x the image gets dark and distorted. Below 8x it's very hard to see the reticle. I have the FML-1 mil reticle. It is thicker than most, but I don't think it's too thick. I actually really like the simple reticle with center dot. I also love the size and weight of the scope. I have a Tangent Theta 315P on my long range rifle. If I had it to do over again, I would buy the TT315M for my hunting rig. Focus/parallax on the TT "P" model is the most forgiving I've ever personally seen, and I've had a lot of high end scopes. The March is by far the most touchy. If the TT "M" model is even close to the "P" model, that would be enough to make my decision. The March is a very high quality build. The knobs are really nice. It seems to be very durable. Glass is nice (not TT or S&B nice). Maybe if the focus was more forgiving I would rate the glass higher, but I don't think the image is quite as clear and crisp as my TT or S&B.

i was sighting in a buddy's rifle this past weekend and i noticed the same thing on his March 3-24...if the knob wasnt in the perfect spot the image degraded really fast. never seen a scope that touchy

 

[Just Macca]

Damn shame. Would be cool if March developed a reduced magnification range FFP 4-20x52mm.

Perhaps that would reduce some of the pressures on the optical system in exchange for more depth to the field of view and less sensitivity to parallax.

Is that a realistic impression of how optical systems function in regards to the relationship between breadth of magnification range and it’s negative impact on parallax sensitivity/depth of image @koshkin?

 

[koshkin]

Damn shame. Would be cool if March developed a reduced magnification range FFP 4-20x52mm.

Perhaps that would reduce some of the pressures on the optical system in exchange for more depth to the field of view and less sensitivity to parallax.

Is that a realistic impression of how optical systems function in regards to the relationship between breadth of magnification range and it’s negative impact on parallax sensitivity/depth of image @koshkin?

Within limit, yes. If you try to shove a large erector ratio scope into a 30mm tube, depth of field is one of the things that suffers. If you are willing to go for a larger tube and higher weight, it can be mitigated.

ILya