Scope for LWRC REPR MKII 7.62mm NATO 16.1"

[JimmyNJ]

Hi everyone,
I just wanted to take advantage of this forum's wealth of knowledge and see if anyone has sound advice.
I got LWRC REPR MKII 7.62mm NATO 16.1" and am now looking for a scope. I would love to go up to 900 (maybe 1000?). Primary use is mid-long range. Although it would be nice to maintain some CQB functionality, I am assuming (!) that the red dot on top should cover me in that area. I am okay paying for alpha-level scope, but it would be nice to stay under 5k. I've read as much as I can, and I am "leaning" towards the following choice (but I don't want to discount anyone's opinion) in the order that I believe would be the best options:

1. Schmidt Bender 5-20x50 PM II Ultra Short MSR2
2. Schmidt Bender 5-25x56 PM II MSR2 (or P4FL)
2. Swarovski Z8i 3.5-28x50 PL Illuminated 4W-I SFP
3. March FX Tactical 4.5-28x52mm FML-3 Illuminated

Thank you for your opinion

 

[oldrifleman]

ZCO 5-27 your pick of reticles (you are at about 4600 all in if you buy new, 4100 used).

 

[JimmyNJ]

ZCO 5-27 your pick of reticles (you are at about 4600 all in if you buy new, 4100 used).

You wouldn't go for ZCO420? its shorter and lighter, but then again missing the paralax

 

[oldrifleman]

I couldn't recommend it as I have never used (or even seen in person). I do know just how good the 527 is though.

 

[Jack_L]

I shoot a lot of 16" 308 and 6.5 gas guns, for both live-target and competitive events. I shoot both NRL Hunter and Quantified Performance (of which I am a part owner) competitive mid to long range matches. I have competed in PRS Gas Gun (when it was a thing) and then "normal" PRS when they did away with it as a separate series.

My hands-down favorite optic for these tasks is the NightForce ATACR 4-16x42. I have both T3 and Mil-XT reticles, and I like them both. If you don't like T3, the Mil-XT is great.
I prefer the 4-16x42 due 75% to the parallax forgiveness of the optic. I don't have to make much, if any, adjustment for midrange targets, and that saves time, giving me more time to build the position and prepare the shot.
The image is wholly acceptable all the way through the magnification range and lighting conditions (within reason), and the zero stop (once set correctly) works as expected.
They are robust, and leave room for inline NV. If you are shooting with NV, the reticle illumination is decent as well.

Setting the zero stop might require actually reading the instructions, and that's really the only thing that comes close to a criticism of the optic from my side.
I have been using them since about 2016. I do get demo units for work, but my personal optics are individually purchased.

There are some really nice optics out there, and on your list, but for the applications that I most shoot large-frame gas guns, parallax forgiveness allows me to go faster, and thus the NF 4-16x42 takes the top spot for me.

 

[koshkin]

For quick target transitions depth of field is a big deal. Nightforce 4-16x42 is excellent in that regard. Tangent 3-15x50 is probably the best, so far. ZCO 4-20x50 is very good as well. I prefer the Tangent TT315M, but it is expensive.
Out of your list, I also have a lot of mileage with S&B 5-20x50 and March 4.5-28x52.
The choice, to a good degree comes down to what is important for you. If you are ever going to have thermal clip-on in front of it, I'd go with a 3-15x50 Tangent. If you like a little more magnification, but want to keep the scope compact, go with the March 4.5-28x52.

ILya

 

[JimmyNJ]

I shoot a lot of 16" 308 and 6.5 gas guns, for both live-target and competitive events. I shoot both NRL Hunter and Quantified Performance (of which I am a part owner) competitive mid to long range matches. I have competed in PRS Gas Gun (when it was a thing) and then "normal" PRS when they did away with it as a separate series.

My hands-down favorite optic for these tasks is the NightForce ATACR 4-16x42. I have both T3 and Mil-XT reticles, and I like them both. If you don't like T3, the Mil-XT is great.
I prefer the 4-16x42 due 75% to the parallax forgiveness of the optic. I don't have to make much, if any, adjustment for midrange targets, and that saves time, giving me more time to build the position and prepare the shot.
The image is wholly acceptable all the way through the magnification range and lighting conditions (within reason), and the zero stop (once set correctly) works as expected.
They are robust, and leave room for inline NV. If you are shooting with NV, the reticle illumination is decent as well.

Setting the zero stop might require actually reading the instructions, and that's really the only thing that comes close to a criticism of the optic from my side.
I have been using them since about 2016. I do get demo units for work, but my personal optics are individually purchased.

There are some really nice optics out there, and on your list, but for the applications that I most shoot large-frame gas guns, parallax forgiveness allows me to go faster, and thus the NF 4-16x42 takes the top spot for me.

I looked at NF LPVO, but didn't even consider the ATACR as scope - you don't think 16 mag would be a limitation? meaning wouldn't I outgrow it fairly soon and will just want more at some point?

 

[JimmyNJ]

For quick target transitions depth of field is a big deal. Nightforce 4-16x42 is excellent in that regard. Tangent 3-15x50 is probably the best, so far. ZCO 4-20x50 is very good as well. I prefer the Tangent TT315M, but it is expensive.
Out of your list, I also have a lot of mileage with S&B 5-20x50 and March 4.5-28x52.
The choice, to a good degree comes down to what is important for you. If you are ever going to have thermal clip-on in front of it, I'd go with a 3-15x50 Tangent. If you like a little more magnification, but want to keep the scope compact, go with the March 4.5-28x52.

ILya

ILya
Why choose March FX 4.5-28 instead of the new SB 5-20x50 PM II Ultra Short? Do you think SB is better or at least slightly higher from a longevity and glass perspective?
Between TT (4100) and March (3600 latest), there is not that match of difference, so that would not be my deciding factor.
Based on money NF ATACR is a better choice at "only" 2200

 

[koshkin]

ILya
Why choose March FX 4.5-28 instead of the new SB 5-20x50 PM II Ultra Short? Do you think SB is better or at least slightly higher from a longevity and glass perspective?
Between TT (4100) and March (3600 latest), there is not that match of difference, so that would not be my deciding factor.
Based on money NF ATACR is a better choice at "only" 2200

In terms of longevity, there is not going to be really any difference. All of these are built very well. In terms of image quality, S&B is a little better on the edges. March is a better in terms of center field performance. Both have very nice turrets (assuming you would go with DTII+ turrets on the S&B).

In terms of bang for the buck, ATACR for $2200 does get you more for your money. Once you get to alpha scopes, you are in the diminishing returns realm. More expensive scopes are usually better. There is a reason I am so fond of my Tangents, but you are paying a good bit more money for a visible, but not enormous improvement in performance.

ILya

 

[koshkin]

I looked at NF LPVO, but didn't even consider the ATACR as scope - you don't think 16 mag would be a limitation? meaning wouldn't I outgrow it fairly soon and will just want more at some point?

Magnification is very personal. I do the bulk of my shooting at longer distances in the 12x to 15x range.

That's why I pointed out that if you like higher mag designs, March 4.5-28x52 gets you more magnification in a rather compact package and with very wide FOV.

ILya

 

[1911hombre]

I shoot a lot of 16" 308 and 6.5 gas guns, for both live-target and competitive events. I shoot both NRL Hunter and Quantified Performance (of which I am a part owner) competitive mid to long range matches. I have competed in PRS Gas Gun (when it was a thing) and then "normal" PRS when they did away with it as a separate series.

My hands-down favorite optic for these tasks is the NightForce ATACR 4-16x42. I have both T3 and Mil-XT reticles, and I like them both. If you don't like T3, the Mil-XT is great.
I prefer the 4-16x42 due 75% to the parallax forgiveness of the optic. I don't have to make much, if any, adjustment for midrange targets, and that saves time, giving me more time to build the position and prepare the shot.
The image is wholly acceptable all the way through the magnification range and lighting conditions (within reason), and the zero stop (once set correctly) works as expected.
They are robust, and leave room for inline NV. If you are shooting with NV, the reticle illumination is decent as well.

Setting the zero stop might require actually reading the instructions, and that's really the only thing that comes close to a criticism of the optic from my side.
I have been using them since about 2016. I do get demo units for work, but my personal optics are individually purchased.

There are some really nice optics out there, and on your list, but for the applications that I most shoot large-frame gas guns, parallax forgiveness allows me to go faster, and thus the NF 4-16x42 takes the top spot for me.

THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^. All Day Any Day. The Gem of the ATACR line. Built for a large frame gas gun.

 

[Jack_L]

I looked at NF LPVO, but didn't even consider the ATACR as scope - you don't think 16 mag would be a limitation? meaning wouldn't I outgrow it fairly soon and will just want more at some point?

I'm definitely not going to tell you that 16x with the ATACR is *better* than 20x with a ZCO, but I have not had an issue with visually processing the results of shots out past 2,000 meters (using a Prism to get the needed added elevation at that range). I do most of my shooting at 13x with the ATACR, but I will go up to 16x for zeroing and reading waterlines when truing, or when doing "long range" stuff (over 1k) or small targets, depending on situation. I have not felt limited by the optic when it comes to 16" 7.62 rifles in this application.

 

[Jack_L]

For quick target transitions depth of field is a big deal. Nightforce 4-16x42 is excellent in that regard. Tangent 3-15x50 is probably the best, so far. ZCO 4-20x50 is very good as well. I prefer the Tangent TT315M, but it is expensive.

That's super interesting. I have very limited experience with the TT line other than finger-banging them at SHOT. Given that the 4-16x50 ATACR is less forgiving than the 4-16x42, it's pretty impressive that TT is beating the ATACR 42mm objective with a 50mm objective.
Interested in your thoughts on that if you have any.

 

[koshkin]

That's super interesting. I have very limited experience with the TT line other than finger-banging them at SHOT. Given that the 4-16x50 ATACR is less forgiving than the 4-16x42, it's pretty impressive that TT is beating the ATACR 42mm objective with a 50mm objective.
Interested in your thoughts on that if you have any.

Depth of field is one of the things Tangent is known for. Objective lens diameter is not the only thing that determines that. Focal lengths of different optical systems in the scope together with the limiting apertures is what determines depth of field.

ILya

 

[dogman]

"I hate the ATACR 4-16x42" said no one ever.

Great match for a 308 gas gun (I have one on my LMT MWS) and I have a second one coming, hopefully today, for my SPR. You get 90%+ of the performance of ZCO or TT for about 1/2 the price.

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

For quick target transitions depth of field is a big deal. Nightforce 4-16x42 is excellent in that regard. Tangent 3-15x50 is probably the best, so far. ZCO 4-20x50 is very good as well. I prefer the Tangent TT315M, but it is expensive.
Out of your list, I also have a lot of mileage with S&B 5-20x50 and March 4.5-28x52.
The choice, to a good degree comes down to what is important for you. If you are ever going to have thermal clip-on in front of it, I'd go with a 3-15x50 Tangent. If you like a little more magnification, but want to keep the scope compact, go with the March 4.5-28x52.

ILya

Since you brought up thermal clip-on:

I've run a clip-on in front of the TT 315P, ZCO420, and March 1.5-15. Glass in all is stellar, but the magnification was the real game-changer for me. Being able to utilize the entire image at a 1.5-2.5 mag is invaluable for the way I use thermal. As much as I love the ZCO420, I don't love it at all with a thermal out in front. The TT is great at everything and hands down easiest to get behind of this bunch, but I still don't love a bottom end of 3X.
If thermal is of no interest, you can't go wrong with the TT or ZCO. That said, the more I use the March, the more I love the March; a mag range of 1.5-15 is about perfect for anything but printing tiny groups at very long range.

 

[koshkin]

Since you brought up thermal clip-on:

I've run a clip-on in front of the TT 315P, ZCO420, and March 1.5-15. Glass in all is stellar, but the magnification was the real game-changer for me. Being able to utilize the entire image at a 1.5-2.5 mag is invaluable for the way I use thermal. As much as I love the ZCO420, I don't love it at all with a thermal out in front. The TT is great at everything and hands down easiest to get behind of this bunch, but I still don't love a bottom end of 3X.
If thermal is of no interest, you can't go wrong with the TT or ZCO. That said, the more I use the March, the more I love the March; a mag range of 1.5-15 is about perfect for anything but printing tiny groups at very long range.

I have the March 1.5-15x42 on my 8.6BLK Fix and a big reason for that is that I want to run it with a clipon. Low magnification really helps there.
However, at distance, TT 3-15x50 is better and 3x works much better with most clip-ons than 4x.
It also depends on the clip-on, of course. If your clip-on has a 50mm lens and a 12um core, it will work pretty well with a 3x scope of acceptably wide FOV, like the Tangent. However, if you are working with a 25mm or 35mm clip-on, lower magnification is definitely a significant advantage.
The clip-on I have been using a lot is Burris' 1st Gen BTC50 that has 7.8deg HFOV. Tangent on 3x has 7.3deg FOV. It is not a perfect match, but it is close.
With iRay's RH25 (25mm optic), Tangent was not a great fit. With Leica Calonox, it was quite respectable.
I plan to try it with the 75mm iRay Hybrid in the near future. That should work well even on 4x.

ILya

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

Steiner C35 here. There are things to dislike about that thing (brick like, 35mm objective) and things to love (bluetooth integration, phone app, menu is awesome, battery life is too.) Where the Steiner goes, the March 1.5-15 goes too, it is a perfect match.

My go-to 308 gasser wears a NF2.5-10x42 and I love it for the application. I am no fan of a huge scope on a gun that will be used offhand in real world scenarios.

 

[JimmyNJ]

Magnification is very personal. I do the bulk of my shooting at longer distances in the 12x to 15x range.

That's why I pointed out that if you like higher mag designs, March 4.5-28x52 gets you more magnification in a rather compact package and with very wide FOV.

ILya

Question: What is the main difference between Tangent TT315M and TT315P. do you think the "P" is an overkill?

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

“M” is for the poors.

Carry on.

 

[JimmyNJ]

“M” is for the poors.

Carry on.

lol
In all seriousness, it's "H" (Hunter), then "M" (Marksmen), then "P" Professional Marksman.
From "M" to "P," it looks like MOA adjustments are higher and tube size is increased from 30 > 34mm, and it's heavier.
What I want to confirm is: if it is an overkill for 16" 308. My gut tells me it is, but I want to confirm

 

[clcustom1911]

I looked at NF LPVO, but didn't even consider the ATACR as scope - you don't think 16 mag would be a limitation? meaning wouldn't I outgrow it fairly soon and will just want more at some point?

My view:

I shoot out to 1200-1500 on a 15" plate with 15x. Whenever I do PRS shit I don't even look at the magnification ring. I just turn it until the field of view and target "looks good". Whenever I get done with the stage I take note of my magnification. It's usually 8-12x for 400-1000y depending on the target size.

 

[koshkin]

Question: What is the main difference between Tangent TT315M and TT315P. do you think the "P" is an overkill?

Tube diameter, adjustment range, turrets.

TT315P is pretty heavy. In that weight budget, unless you need to use it with coupon, might as well step up to TT525P.

ILya

 

[dms416]

"I hate the ATACR 4-16x42" said no one ever.

Great match for a 308 gas gun (I have one on my LMT MWS) and I have a second one coming, hopefully today, for my SPR. You get 90%+ of the performance of ZCO or TT for about 1/2 the price.

"Hate" is a strong word...twice, I've "wanted to love" an ATACR 4-16x42 for a gasser...but quickly went either up or down from that point to an LPVO or Ultra Short...but that's me.

@JimmyNJ It's not on your list, but I know where there's a lovely 3-20US MSR-2 for sale in the EE

 

[JimmyNJ]

"Hate" is a strong word...twice, I've "wanted to love" an ATACR 4-16x42 for a gasser...but quickly went either up or down from that point to an LPVO or Ultra Short...but that's me.

@JimmyNJ It's not on your list, but I know where there's a lovely 3-20US MSR-2 for sale in the EE

Where is that "lovely 3-20 US MSR-2" at? can you please send me the link? Thank you

 

[dms416]

Where is that "lovely 3-20 US MSR-2" at? can you please send me the link? Thank you

Optics - S&B 3-20x50US (MSR2, CCW) w/Spuhr Rings

Excellent condition. Glass is perfect, only some minor finish wear on the the windage cap and parallax knob Schmidt & Bender PMII 3-20x50mm Ultra Short MSR-2 Reticle Counter-Clockwise (CCW) adjustments 0.1 Mil adjustments Tenebraex lens caps Spuhr HPC40-30A: Picatinny Aesthetic Rings - 34mm...

www.snipershide.com

 

[MadMaxx]

Hi everyone,
I just wanted to take advantage of this forum's wealth of knowledge and see if anyone has sound advice.
I got LWRC REPR MKII 7.62mm NATO 16.1" and am now looking for a scope. I would love to go up to 900 (maybe 1000?). Primary use is mid-long range. Although it would be nice to maintain some CQB functionality, I am assuming (!) that the red dot on top should cover me in that area. I am okay paying for alpha-level scope, but it would be nice to stay under 5k. I've read as much as I can, and I am "leaning" towards the following choice (but I don't want to discount anyone's opinion) in the order that I believe would be the best options:

1. Schmidt Bender 5-20x50 PM II Ultra Short MSR2
2. Schmidt Bender 5-25x56 PM II MSR2 (or P4FL)
2. Swarovski Z8i 3.5-28x50 PL Illuminated 4W-I SFP
3. March FX Tactical 4.5-28x52mm FML-3 Illuminated

Thank you for your opinion

I am a huge fan of the EOTech vudu 3.5 x 18. The absolute most crisp and clear scope I’ve ever looked through without wasting excess money on a night force which isn’t any better of a scope… Just more expensive. I think you reach a pinnacle of The “best” scopes around $2000 and anything above that is just a waste of money, IMO

 

[rustyinbend]

I have the REPR Elite in 6.5-CM, and the scope I love on it is the Leupold Mark 5 HD 3.6-18x44 ... it's an awesome choice for what you're targeting, and a much better price performer than several that have been suggested. Why pay $4,500 for an AR-10 scope when $2,200-ish gives you the same results? (IMHO)

 

[David Slagle]

I was in the same dilemma for my 6.5 Creedmore REPR MKII. I ended up getting the Nightforce ATACR 4-20x50

 

[Ikeman83]

For an AR 10, I'd run a K328i over that Z8i if that's the glass you're looking for

 

[rustyinbend]

My REPR MKII Elite in 6.5-CM absolutely loves the Leupold Mark 5HD 3.6-18x44 ... maybe overkill for a gas gun but it works for me out over 1,200 yards.