Shooter next bench over had a 3.5 x10x40 MK4 I had a IOR 2.5x10x42MM. My glass was way better. Is the MK4s claim to fame the ability to hammer nails with and remain sighted in ? Any thing else ? What's tougher MK 4 or NXS ?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
- Thread starter Iron Worker
- Start date
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
For one thing, Leupold has a long history in the US. For another, they have many different models and sell alot of scopes. IMO, their "fame" is based on that history and the large number of people who use Leupolds.
For one thing, Leupold has a long history in the US. For another, they have many different models and sell alot of scopes. IMO, their "fame" is based on that history and the large number of people who use Leupolds.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Well, I guess when someone buys a Mk4 they know what to expect. They seem to be the standard to beat. Look at all the threads, including yours, "my Widget is better than this guys Mk4." Mine works fine, I know there is plenty better out there, but I dont care because it works and has a good warranty...
Well, I guess when someone buys a Mk4 they know what to expect. They seem to be the standard to beat. Look at all the threads, including yours, "my Widget is better than this guys Mk4." Mine works fine, I know there is plenty better out there, but I dont care because it works and has a good warranty...
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Iron Worker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Shooter next bench over had a 3.5 x10x40 MK4 I had a IOR 2.5x10x42MM. My glass was way better. Is the MK4s claim to fame the ability to hammer nails with and remain sighted in ? Any thing else ? What's tougher MK 4 or NXS ? </div></div>
Wait until your IOR craps out on you and you have to send it back to Romainia, like mine did.
They ship them there once or twice a year.
Chris
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Iron Worker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Shooter next bench over had a 3.5 x10x40 MK4 I had a IOR 2.5x10x42MM. My glass was way better. Is the MK4s claim to fame the ability to hammer nails with and remain sighted in ? Any thing else ? What's tougher MK 4 or NXS ? </div></div>
Wait until your IOR craps out on you and you have to send it back to Romainia, like mine did.
They ship them there once or twice a year.
Chris
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
The more I read it seems theyre still the benchmark. JML pretty well sums up the whole Mk4 thing pretty well.
I kind of noticed there is two kinds of scope snobs. Those who believe their 500 dollar scope is as good or better than a Mk4. And the Euro snobs who sware the optic they paid 3x more for is 10x better.
The more I read it seems theyre still the benchmark. JML pretty well sums up the whole Mk4 thing pretty well.
I kind of noticed there is two kinds of scope snobs. Those who believe their 500 dollar scope is as good or better than a Mk4. And the Euro snobs who sware the optic they paid 3x more for is 10x better.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
I just purchased a MK4, after many many hours of research. They may not be the best scopes, or the least expensive, but they are proven. They're just as proven as Leupold Stevens themselves. 5 generations of solid family business and customer service by an American company. The overall package of scope + company is what sold me. Only time will tell if it lives up to my expectations...
I just purchased a MK4, after many many hours of research. They may not be the best scopes, or the least expensive, but they are proven. They're just as proven as Leupold Stevens themselves. 5 generations of solid family business and customer service by an American company. The overall package of scope + company is what sold me. Only time will tell if it lives up to my expectations...
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
I have a Mark 4 M1 that I purchased in the early 90's. It has performed flawless since new. Has Lopy kept up in new technology, no. Have they been the benchmark, yes (within the price range they occupy)
I have a Mark 4 M1 that I purchased in the early 90's. It has performed flawless since new. Has Lopy kept up in new technology, no. Have they been the benchmark, yes (within the price range they occupy)
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jetmd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have a Mark 4 M1 that I purchased in the early 90's. It has performed flawless since new. Has Lopy kept up in new technology, no. Have they been the benchmark, yes (within the price range they occupy) </div></div>
I think this sums up the situation well. Years ago, pre-NF, a boosted Mk4 was the shiz when I was shooting 1000yd BR. Now it seems that their quality has either suffered or been surpassed by competitors, or both.
As far a driving nails and still hitting the target, that was the story circulated about the Unertel USMC 10X scope, and we know how that story has played out. I don't know that there is a "perfect" scope; if there were, we'd all be lining up to buy it/them.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jetmd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have a Mark 4 M1 that I purchased in the early 90's. It has performed flawless since new. Has Lopy kept up in new technology, no. Have they been the benchmark, yes (within the price range they occupy) </div></div>
I think this sums up the situation well. Years ago, pre-NF, a boosted Mk4 was the shiz when I was shooting 1000yd BR. Now it seems that their quality has either suffered or been surpassed by competitors, or both.
As far a driving nails and still hitting the target, that was the story circulated about the Unertel USMC 10X scope, and we know how that story has played out. I don't know that there is a "perfect" scope; if there were, we'd all be lining up to buy it/them.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Right,wrong,better,or worse more people who get paid to be snipers use Leupold Mk4s than any other scope. I would venture a guess to say 90% or better of those who do it for a hobby use them too. The results of a poll on this board would be atypical in relation to Leupold use. The optic snobbery runs deep on here.
There are a few better scopes,and a lot of worse ones. If you are one of the people who a 5% increase in performance is worth a 250% increase in price by all means buy your scope of choice and use it,I'm happy for you.
Meanwhile police and military snipers will get by with their Leupold Mk4s just fine.
Right,wrong,better,or worse more people who get paid to be snipers use Leupold Mk4s than any other scope. I would venture a guess to say 90% or better of those who do it for a hobby use them too. The results of a poll on this board would be atypical in relation to Leupold use. The optic snobbery runs deep on here.
There are a few better scopes,and a lot of worse ones. If you are one of the people who a 5% increase in performance is worth a 250% increase in price by all means buy your scope of choice and use it,I'm happy for you.
Meanwhile police and military snipers will get by with their Leupold Mk4s just fine.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are a few better scopes,and a lot of worse ones. If you are one of the people who a 5% increase in performance is worth a 250% increase in price by all means buy your scope of choice and use it,I'm happy for you</div></div>
Interesting post!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are a few better scopes,and a lot of worse ones. If you are one of the people who a 5% increase in performance is worth a 250% increase in price by all means buy your scope of choice and use it,I'm happy for you</div></div>
Interesting post!
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
i am still running my Mk4's
shot the m1 3.5-10x40 front focal plane today
did a variable power test , using the same point of aim , started on the lowest power setting, shot, then dialed up to the next setting, shot , all the way up to 10x;
then straight down to 3.5x , back to 10x , four times
15 total shots, and they all went into the same group
which is what it should do
they are not perfect but ... for me they work well
i am still running my Mk4's
shot the m1 3.5-10x40 front focal plane today
did a variable power test , using the same point of aim , started on the lowest power setting, shot, then dialed up to the next setting, shot , all the way up to 10x;
then straight down to 3.5x , back to 10x , four times
15 total shots, and they all went into the same group
which is what it should do
they are not perfect but ... for me they work well
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChrisGarrett</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Iron Worker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Shooter next bench over had a 3.5 x10x40 MK4 I had a IOR 2.5x10x42MM. My glass was way better. Is the MK4s claim to fame the ability to hammer nails with and remain sighted in ? Any thing else ? What's tougher MK 4 or NXS ? </div></div>
Wait until your IOR craps out on you and you have to send it back to Romainia, like mine did.
They ship them there once or twice a year.
Chris </div></div>
Huh?? IOR is in Colorado. They have great customer service now.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChrisGarrett</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Iron Worker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Shooter next bench over had a 3.5 x10x40 MK4 I had a IOR 2.5x10x42MM. My glass was way better. Is the MK4s claim to fame the ability to hammer nails with and remain sighted in ? Any thing else ? What's tougher MK 4 or NXS ? </div></div>
Wait until your IOR craps out on you and you have to send it back to Romainia, like mine did.
They ship them there once or twice a year.
Chris </div></div>
Huh?? IOR is in Colorado. They have great customer service now.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
here's a story for you, went on a 2wk field problem, we were roping in to our lz when the crew chief knocks my 24 out of my hands and 120ft later it hits the ground and the stock breaks off right behind the palm swell where the bedding block ends. so we take it to the armorer to get a field expedient repair, he drills a hole in the back of the stock puts in a dowl rod and hundred mile an hour tapes it up. we shoot to re-zero only the gun is still zeroed. dont know what they use now but back then we used a lupy mk4 m3a. been out almost ten years now but use them on all my guns.
here's a story for you, went on a 2wk field problem, we were roping in to our lz when the crew chief knocks my 24 out of my hands and 120ft later it hits the ground and the stock breaks off right behind the palm swell where the bedding block ends. so we take it to the armorer to get a field expedient repair, he drills a hole in the back of the stock puts in a dowl rod and hundred mile an hour tapes it up. we shoot to re-zero only the gun is still zeroed. dont know what they use now but back then we used a lupy mk4 m3a. been out almost ten years now but use them on all my guns.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The <span style="font-weight: bold">optic snobbery </span>runs deep on here.
</div></div>
LOL. The perfect term. Mind if I use that?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The <span style="font-weight: bold">optic snobbery </span>runs deep on here.
</div></div>
LOL. The perfect term. Mind if I use that?
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: beltfed74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I kind of noticed there is two kinds of scope snobs. Those who believe their 500 dollar scope is as good or better than a Mk4. And the Euro snobs who sware the optic they paid 3x more for is 10x better. </div></div>
You forgot the other types
The people who have US made optics that did pay several times more than a lupey for the 5-15% performance increase
The people that buy a counter sniper because of the really cool adds, "If they cost $50,000 but I can get one for $325, what a hell of a deal!!!"
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: beltfed74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I kind of noticed there is two kinds of scope snobs. Those who believe their 500 dollar scope is as good or better than a Mk4. And the Euro snobs who sware the optic they paid 3x more for is 10x better. </div></div>
You forgot the other types
The people who have US made optics that did pay several times more than a lupey for the 5-15% performance increase
The people that buy a counter sniper because of the really cool adds, "If they cost $50,000 but I can get one for $325, what a hell of a deal!!!"
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
lol
yeah funny stuff there Subdued !!
factor in that leupold is really the only manufacturer that bridges both markets (hunting and tactical)
and it becomes apparent there is a alot going on up in Oregon at Leupold
if ALL they did was tactical scopes , wow , watch out
but for every Mk4 they sell , i wonder how many vari-x 2, 3, 7, etc., they sell to hunters ?
lol
yeah funny stuff there Subdued !!
factor in that leupold is really the only manufacturer that bridges both markets (hunting and tactical)
and it becomes apparent there is a alot going on up in Oregon at Leupold
if ALL they did was tactical scopes , wow , watch out
but for every Mk4 they sell , i wonder how many vari-x 2, 3, 7, etc., they sell to hunters ?
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
How bout those of us who pay more for features that have been incorporated into the other scopes for years and Leupold is just now begining to use? Additionally, now that Leupold is incorportaing SOME of those features, Leupold is not much cheaper. i.e. $1800 for a FFP moa/mil 6.5-20 Leupold vs $2290 for a Nightforce NX1 ffp mil/mil and zero stop(with free $160 rings). Even then, you have to pay more to have your Leupy in a mil/mil configuration and zero stop is not even available as far as I know.
Nothing wrong with using Leupold if the features work for you, but calling those of us snobs who spend more because we want different features makes you no different than they guys claiming their $500 scope is as good as everything else.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Roadwild17</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: beltfed74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I kind of noticed there is two kinds of scope snobs. Those who believe their 500 dollar scope is as good or better than a Mk4. And the Euro snobs who sware the optic they paid 3x more for is 10x better. </div></div>
You forgot the other types
The people who have US made optics that did pay several times more than a lupey for the 5-15% performance increase
The people that buy a counter sniper because of the really cool adds, "If they cost $50,000 but I can get one for $325, what a hell of a deal!!!" </div></div>
How bout those of us who pay more for features that have been incorporated into the other scopes for years and Leupold is just now begining to use? Additionally, now that Leupold is incorportaing SOME of those features, Leupold is not much cheaper. i.e. $1800 for a FFP moa/mil 6.5-20 Leupold vs $2290 for a Nightforce NX1 ffp mil/mil and zero stop(with free $160 rings). Even then, you have to pay more to have your Leupy in a mil/mil configuration and zero stop is not even available as far as I know.
Nothing wrong with using Leupold if the features work for you, but calling those of us snobs who spend more because we want different features makes you no different than they guys claiming their $500 scope is as good as everything else.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Roadwild17</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: beltfed74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I kind of noticed there is two kinds of scope snobs. Those who believe their 500 dollar scope is as good or better than a Mk4. And the Euro snobs who sware the optic they paid 3x more for is 10x better. </div></div>
You forgot the other types
The people who have US made optics that did pay several times more than a lupey for the 5-15% performance increase
The people that buy a counter sniper because of the really cool adds, "If they cost $50,000 but I can get one for $325, what a hell of a deal!!!" </div></div>
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
You missed the last paragraph of my post,enjoy your scope! I don't begrudge you having the best you can buy or having the means to buy better than I can afford. I would just argue the NEED for that optic.
Most of us are not in Iraq or Afghanistan abusing our equipment or having to make 900 meter shots at last light on moving targets that shoot back. 5% less light transmission is no big deal when the $1500 I saved on my "inferior" optic bought $1500 worth of ammunition to train with. I will bet on the guy with the Leupold and $1500 worth of training ammunition over Schmidt and Bender and $100 worth of training ammunition.
You missed the last paragraph of my post,enjoy your scope! I don't begrudge you having the best you can buy or having the means to buy better than I can afford. I would just argue the NEED for that optic.
Most of us are not in Iraq or Afghanistan abusing our equipment or having to make 900 meter shots at last light on moving targets that shoot back. 5% less light transmission is no big deal when the $1500 I saved on my "inferior" optic bought $1500 worth of ammunition to train with. I will bet on the guy with the Leupold and $1500 worth of training ammunition over Schmidt and Bender and $100 worth of training ammunition.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1ZNUF</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The <span style="font-weight: bold">optic snobbery </span>runs deep on here.
</div></div>
LOL. The perfect term. Mind if I use that? </div></div>
Feel free! I am pretty sure I'm not the first to use it anyway. TJR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1ZNUF</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The <span style="font-weight: bold">optic snobbery </span>runs deep on here.
</div></div>
LOL. The perfect term. Mind if I use that? </div></div>
Feel free! I am pretty sure I'm not the first to use it anyway. TJR
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You missed the last paragraph of my post,enjoy your scope! I don't begrudge you having the best you can buy or having the means to buy better than I can afford. I would just argue the NEED for that optic.
Most of us are not in Iraq or Afghanistan abusing our equipment or having to make 900 meter shots at last light on moving targets that shoot back. 5% less light transmission is no big deal when the $1500 I saved on my "inferior" optic bought $1500 worth of ammunition to train with. I will bet on the guy with the Leupold and $1500 worth of training ammunition over Schmidt and Bender and $100 worth of training ammunition. </div></div>
And not to start any type of internet word feud, but I think you missed the point of my post. The point is, Leupold is fine if the features work for you. My choice orf Premier and Nightforce on all my guns has far less to do with light transmission or clarity than it does features. Mil/Mil, zerostop, and FFP are all things I look for and Leupold has not had them in the past. I never called your optic inferior, just said that it doesn't have the features I'm looking for. And if we're talking need, you certainly don't need a $1500 optic just as much as i don't need a $2300 optic. It's never a matter of need for me, only a matter of what i want and can affod to enjoy my hobby.
And for the record, I'm willing to bet that the 500 or so rounds of precision .308 I shoot every month is more than 90% of the people here shoot a month. Saving for the stuff i want does not get in the way of my shooting.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You missed the last paragraph of my post,enjoy your scope! I don't begrudge you having the best you can buy or having the means to buy better than I can afford. I would just argue the NEED for that optic.
Most of us are not in Iraq or Afghanistan abusing our equipment or having to make 900 meter shots at last light on moving targets that shoot back. 5% less light transmission is no big deal when the $1500 I saved on my "inferior" optic bought $1500 worth of ammunition to train with. I will bet on the guy with the Leupold and $1500 worth of training ammunition over Schmidt and Bender and $100 worth of training ammunition. </div></div>
And not to start any type of internet word feud, but I think you missed the point of my post. The point is, Leupold is fine if the features work for you. My choice orf Premier and Nightforce on all my guns has far less to do with light transmission or clarity than it does features. Mil/Mil, zerostop, and FFP are all things I look for and Leupold has not had them in the past. I never called your optic inferior, just said that it doesn't have the features I'm looking for. And if we're talking need, you certainly don't need a $1500 optic just as much as i don't need a $2300 optic. It's never a matter of need for me, only a matter of what i want and can affod to enjoy my hobby.
And for the record, I'm willing to bet that the 500 or so rounds of precision .308 I shoot every month is more than 90% of the people here shoot a month. Saving for the stuff i want does not get in the way of my shooting.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JerkeeJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You missed the last paragraph of my post,enjoy your scope! I don't begrudge you having the best you can buy or having the means to buy better than I can afford. I would just argue the NEED for that optic.
Most of us are not in Iraq or Afghanistan abusing our equipment or having to make 900 meter shots at last light on moving targets that shoot back. 5% less light transmission is no big deal when the $1500 I saved on my "inferior" optic bought $1500 worth of ammunition to train with. I will bet on the guy with the Leupold and $1500 worth of training ammunition over Schmidt and Bender and $100 worth of training ammunition. </div></div>
And not to start any type of internet word feud, but I think you missed the point of my post. The point is, Leupold is fine if the features work for you. My choice orf Premier and Nightforce on all my guns has far less to do with light transmission or clarity than it does features. Mil/Mil, zerostop, and FFP are all things I look for and Leupold has not had them in the past. I never called your optic inferior, just said that it doesn't have the features I'm looking for. And if we're talking need, you certainly don't need a $1500 optic just as much as i don't need a $2300 optic. It's never a matter of need for me, only a matter of what i want and can affod to enjoy my hobby.
And for the record, I'm willing to bet that the 500 or so rounds of precision .308 I shoot every month is more than 90% of the people here shoot a month. Saving for the stuff i want does not get in the way of my shooting.</div></div>
Damn right! Leupolds are good for there price point but to say a S&B, Premier, or USO is only 5-15% better shows you have no f***ing clue what you're talking about. I shot with a MK4 for a long time, and I still have a few, but there is a huge difference when you step up to the premium line. Shoot what you like/want/have and can afford and enjoy. There's no need to knock any of them unless the company doesn't back the product with customer service.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JerkeeJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You missed the last paragraph of my post,enjoy your scope! I don't begrudge you having the best you can buy or having the means to buy better than I can afford. I would just argue the NEED for that optic.
Most of us are not in Iraq or Afghanistan abusing our equipment or having to make 900 meter shots at last light on moving targets that shoot back. 5% less light transmission is no big deal when the $1500 I saved on my "inferior" optic bought $1500 worth of ammunition to train with. I will bet on the guy with the Leupold and $1500 worth of training ammunition over Schmidt and Bender and $100 worth of training ammunition. </div></div>
And not to start any type of internet word feud, but I think you missed the point of my post. The point is, Leupold is fine if the features work for you. My choice orf Premier and Nightforce on all my guns has far less to do with light transmission or clarity than it does features. Mil/Mil, zerostop, and FFP are all things I look for and Leupold has not had them in the past. I never called your optic inferior, just said that it doesn't have the features I'm looking for. And if we're talking need, you certainly don't need a $1500 optic just as much as i don't need a $2300 optic. It's never a matter of need for me, only a matter of what i want and can affod to enjoy my hobby.
And for the record, I'm willing to bet that the 500 or so rounds of precision .308 I shoot every month is more than 90% of the people here shoot a month. Saving for the stuff i want does not get in the way of my shooting.</div></div>
Damn right! Leupolds are good for there price point but to say a S&B, Premier, or USO is only 5-15% better shows you have no f***ing clue what you're talking about. I shot with a MK4 for a long time, and I still have a few, but there is a huge difference when you step up to the premium line. Shoot what you like/want/have and can afford and enjoy. There's no need to knock any of them unless the company doesn't back the product with customer service.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Mr. Larsen
Please describe to me how a $2700(my price last month) S&B 4x16 PMII is 200% better than a $900(my price last month) Leupold 4.5X14 Mark4. I have sat them and shot them side by side and I can't.
I learned MOA adjustments and still prefer them.I understand on paper MIL/MIL is better but if I know how to run a MOA scope right whats the difference? A hit is a hit.
I hate FFP reticles. Useless for milling or holds below 8 power and too big at higher power.
CDI factor means nothing to me. My optics job is to allow me to place hits on my target,not to take pictures of by my pool to make all the fanboys say "sweet setup dude" and make my internet sniper penis bigger. I do not believe a S&B allows me to place hits on my target 200% better than a Leupold. I DO however think that extra $1800 spent in training and ammunition will allow mw to be 200% more effective.
I am just trying to sum up my general thought that most of the time the folks on this site convince new guys(and themselves) that they need a Ferrari to drive to the grocery store when a Ford would do the job.
Mr. Larsen
Please describe to me how a $2700(my price last month) S&B 4x16 PMII is 200% better than a $900(my price last month) Leupold 4.5X14 Mark4. I have sat them and shot them side by side and I can't.
I learned MOA adjustments and still prefer them.I understand on paper MIL/MIL is better but if I know how to run a MOA scope right whats the difference? A hit is a hit.
I hate FFP reticles. Useless for milling or holds below 8 power and too big at higher power.
CDI factor means nothing to me. My optics job is to allow me to place hits on my target,not to take pictures of by my pool to make all the fanboys say "sweet setup dude" and make my internet sniper penis bigger. I do not believe a S&B allows me to place hits on my target 200% better than a Leupold. I DO however think that extra $1800 spent in training and ammunition will allow mw to be 200% more effective.
I am just trying to sum up my general thought that most of the time the folks on this site convince new guys(and themselves) that they need a Ferrari to drive to the grocery store when a Ford would do the job.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
trobertson5-0,
Shoot whatever the hell you want! You've got it all figured out. I don't post pictures on the web, NOT ONE, and I don't give fuck what you or anyone else has on their rig! So you can take your preconseptions and shove'um up your opinionated ass! I still manage to shoot 500-1000 rounds per month at range.
trobertson5-0,
Shoot whatever the hell you want! You've got it all figured out. I don't post pictures on the web, NOT ONE, and I don't give fuck what you or anyone else has on their rig! So you can take your preconseptions and shove'um up your opinionated ass! I still manage to shoot 500-1000 rounds per month at range.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Its been said " We shouldn't talk about religion or politics with strangers " After reading this post its "religion,politics and optics " Can't we all just get along ?
Its been said " We shouldn't talk about religion or politics with strangers " After reading this post its "religion,politics and optics " Can't we all just get along ?
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LRLars</div><div class="ubbcode-body">trobertson5-0,
Shoot whatever the hell you want! You've got it all figured out. I don't post pictures on the web, NOT ONE, and I don't give fuck what you or anyone else has on their rig! So you can take your preconseptions and shove'um up your opinionated ass! I still manage to shoot 500-1000 rounds per month at range. </div></div>
Mr. Larsen,
Touch your brakes there Sapper!
None of my comments past my initial question were pointed at you,just to point out why I don't put the weight in the options most folks do and to point out a general trend on this sight to have the latest,greatest,new scope instead of taking the time to LEARN any scope and hit with it. I swear to God it seems like if the USMC adopted the Countersniper series of scopes by mistake and one picture got posted of an honest to God 8541 using it half the rifles on here would be sporting them in a week,next to the NV mount for NV they don't have or the Surefire break for mounting the suppressor they don't have. I will always believe that the money spent on any of these would be better spend on a few cases of GMM to get trigger time or a training class to learn to drive the rifle.
Again no offence intended. I DO tend to hold strong opinions on the stuff I have learned in the real world,however I do not believe there is room in my ass for them!
Iron worker I believe I agree with you on your observation. TJR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LRLars</div><div class="ubbcode-body">trobertson5-0,
Shoot whatever the hell you want! You've got it all figured out. I don't post pictures on the web, NOT ONE, and I don't give fuck what you or anyone else has on their rig! So you can take your preconseptions and shove'um up your opinionated ass! I still manage to shoot 500-1000 rounds per month at range. </div></div>
Mr. Larsen,
Touch your brakes there Sapper!
Again no offence intended. I DO tend to hold strong opinions on the stuff I have learned in the real world,however I do not believe there is room in my ass for them!
Iron worker I believe I agree with you on your observation. TJR
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
trobertson5-0,
Glad you agree that you’re opinionated. If your scope works for "your" type, style, and needs of shooting, then by all means use it. I never stated that Leopold’s were bad in any way, but to say that people, and a SHIT TON of world class shooters fall into your BS category, are "picture takers to make all the fan boys say "sweet setup dude" and make my internet sniper penis bigger", shows your ignorance. I agree that there are those who have more money in their equipment than they are capible of effectively using and you equate premium glass to "need" and you're right most people don't "need" it, but buying quality is never a bad thing. I guess all of us competitors, snipers, etc... have no clue. I'm not the one knocking anyone or their optics and PLEASE feel free elaborate on your "real world" experience and training. I have 10 years of expert military qualifications and training to back up my mouth, not to mention 15 years of long range competition shooting!
trobertson5-0,
Glad you agree that you’re opinionated. If your scope works for "your" type, style, and needs of shooting, then by all means use it. I never stated that Leopold’s were bad in any way, but to say that people, and a SHIT TON of world class shooters fall into your BS category, are "picture takers to make all the fan boys say "sweet setup dude" and make my internet sniper penis bigger", shows your ignorance. I agree that there are those who have more money in their equipment than they are capible of effectively using and you equate premium glass to "need" and you're right most people don't "need" it, but buying quality is never a bad thing. I guess all of us competitors, snipers, etc... have no clue. I'm not the one knocking anyone or their optics and PLEASE feel free elaborate on your "real world" experience and training. I have 10 years of expert military qualifications and training to back up my mouth, not to mention 15 years of long range competition shooting!
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
All I can say is if youre still into Leupold Mk4s be like me and take advantage of the Mk5 turrets.
I just ordered another 6.5-20x by 50mm M1 for 1100 with Mk4 rings and base out the door.
Love these deals.
Oh and all I do with mine is jump on the quad and ride up on the hill to my 1000yd range with them and of course whitetail hunt.
All I can say is if youre still into Leupold Mk4s be like me and take advantage of the Mk5 turrets.
I just ordered another 6.5-20x by 50mm M1 for 1100 with Mk4 rings and base out the door.
Love these deals.
Oh and all I do with mine is jump on the quad and ride up on the hill to my 1000yd range with them and of course whitetail hunt.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Damn, seems like everytime I get on here someone is slamming another over their own preferences of optics or rifles. I( love my Mark4 and WILL buy another one. The customer service is great and the optics are fine for me, I have no complaints.
Damn, seems like everytime I get on here someone is slamming another over their own preferences of optics or rifles. I( love my Mark4 and WILL buy another one. The customer service is great and the optics are fine for me, I have no complaints.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Iron Worker. A flatter shooting rifle is more forgiving of range estimation errors. What you said was completely true though. If you know your rifle and load and EXACT range the flatter cartridge will show no advantage in hitting a target farther out. Keep in mind usually flatter shooting fast cartridges buck the wind better too so there is another advantage to going faster.
On the flip side of that these cartridges burn more powder,recoil more,and eat barrels quicker. I have never fired a round from a 7 like yours but they look good on paper and I see enough of them to know they must have something going for them! TJR
Iron Worker. A flatter shooting rifle is more forgiving of range estimation errors. What you said was completely true though. If you know your rifle and load and EXACT range the flatter cartridge will show no advantage in hitting a target farther out. Keep in mind usually flatter shooting fast cartridges buck the wind better too so there is another advantage to going faster.
On the flip side of that these cartridges burn more powder,recoil more,and eat barrels quicker. I have never fired a round from a 7 like yours but they look good on paper and I see enough of them to know they must have something going for them! TJR
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
TJR,
I get it, you like your MOA adjusted Leupold and think FFP, Mil/Mil is unnecessary, but take a moment and look at what the other 3 quarters of the sniping world uses... especially when you step past a line unit in our Army.
I guarantee and have seen it, within our own Army, that properly trained on a FFP Mil / Mil scope, you increase combat effectiveness when it comes to comparing Leupold and the other scopes available, particularly something like Mil/Mil FFP. If you like I can provide current active duty combat testimonials from guys who started out on Team Leupold and have since moved to Team Anything But Leupold.
Just because they taught it that way, and you used effectively doesn't mean it's the best choice, especially for new shooters, even in combat as the work required is cut by a large percentage. Remember the system and scope you used was state of art circa 1982, so I think we have progressed since then, remember, it's 2010 now.
TJR,
I get it, you like your MOA adjusted Leupold and think FFP, Mil/Mil is unnecessary, but take a moment and look at what the other 3 quarters of the sniping world uses... especially when you step past a line unit in our Army.
I guarantee and have seen it, within our own Army, that properly trained on a FFP Mil / Mil scope, you increase combat effectiveness when it comes to comparing Leupold and the other scopes available, particularly something like Mil/Mil FFP. If you like I can provide current active duty combat testimonials from guys who started out on Team Leupold and have since moved to Team Anything But Leupold.
Just because they taught it that way, and you used effectively doesn't mean it's the best choice, especially for new shooters, even in combat as the work required is cut by a large percentage. Remember the system and scope you used was state of art circa 1982, so I think we have progressed since then, remember, it's 2010 now.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Many people fear progress.
Some fear it because they don't think its progress.
Some fear it because they invested too much in the learning of the old process, and don't want to invest anything to learn more.
Some fear it because they are ignorant.
Some fear it because they were TOLD to fear it by someone they trust.
Doesn't change the fact that its progress.
Many people fear progress.
Some fear it because they don't think its progress.
Some fear it because they invested too much in the learning of the old process, and don't want to invest anything to learn more.
Some fear it because they are ignorant.
Some fear it because they were TOLD to fear it by someone they trust.
Doesn't change the fact that its progress.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
Oh, and PS,
Take a look at that AI you guys are wrenching on, that is what they call a real sniper rifle compared to that "24" you have in your hand, and that scope sure as heck isn't from Oregon either. LOL
Tell the truth, if someone offered one of those at the time for the rest of that deployment you wouldn't have been all over it, recognizing the superior system sitting next you.
Oh, and PS,
Take a look at that AI you guys are wrenching on, that is what they call a real sniper rifle compared to that "24" you have in your hand, and that scope sure as heck isn't from Oregon either. LOL
Tell the truth, if someone offered one of those at the time for the rest of that deployment you wouldn't have been all over it, recognizing the superior system sitting next you.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LRLars</div><div class="ubbcode-body">trobertson5-0,
Shoot whatever the hell you want! You've got it all figured out. I don't post pictures on the web, NOT ONE, and I don't give fuck what you or anyone else has on their rig! So you can take your preconseptions and shove'um up your opinionated ass! I still manage to shoot 500-1000 rounds per month at range. </div></div>
What the hell do you do for a living that you are either required to shoot that much .308 or can AFFORD to shoot that much .308?
I gotta get out of this cop business . . . . it doesn't pay me enough.
And you might be solely responsible for the ammo shortage in the US.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LRLars</div><div class="ubbcode-body">trobertson5-0,
Shoot whatever the hell you want! You've got it all figured out. I don't post pictures on the web, NOT ONE, and I don't give fuck what you or anyone else has on their rig! So you can take your preconseptions and shove'um up your opinionated ass! I still manage to shoot 500-1000 rounds per month at range. </div></div>
What the hell do you do for a living that you are either required to shoot that much .308 or can AFFORD to shoot that much .308?
I gotta get out of this cop business . . . . it doesn't pay me enough.
And you might be solely responsible for the ammo shortage in the US.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
SPDSNYPR,
I no longer shoot a .308. I've been enlightened to the 6.5x47L and .260 and will NEVER go back.
I'm just love to shoot and compete and I have a very supportive wife.
TJR
I agreed with one of your comments that hardly accounts for half.
SPDSNYPR,
I no longer shoot a .308. I've been enlightened to the 6.5x47L and .260 and will NEVER go back.
TJR
I agreed with one of your comments that hardly accounts for half.
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
LL,
I would have given my left one for that AI system and told all those guys(the best I could through a terp)"We have a heavily modified deer rifle,this is a sniper system". I got pretty used to the system and the scopes. Our M24s (or our ammunition) would shoot tighter groups then their AIs though,with us or them shooting them.
I said in my first post in this trainwreck that MIL/MIL is a better system,and I stick by that. But,MOA/MIL worked and still will if the rifle driver knows how to use it. If I were in the buisness of military sniping anymore I would want a MIL/MIL system. I shoot at old scraps of cardboard and steel now,which I prefer,so I don't NEED MIL/MIL and FFP. For the guys who do to make them more combat effective or get them more points in a match,drive on. However I think you would agree the average guy doing this for a hobby would be better served with a lesser scope and more training then vice versa. I would imagine running a school you get the student every now and then who has the best shit but has only zeroed the rifle and shot it from a bench.
As far as the problems you see with the Leupolds,I just haven't seen them. You will see more rounds fired under a Leupold in the next month then I or most people here will see in the next 10 years so I respect your observations on them,but my experience is different so I trust them,or at least trust MINE. I DO NOT consider them the end all be all of optics!!!! I just consider them more scope for the money than ones costing 3X as much.
Good shooting, TJR
LL,
I would have given my left one for that AI system and told all those guys(the best I could through a terp)"We have a heavily modified deer rifle,this is a sniper system". I got pretty used to the system and the scopes. Our M24s (or our ammunition) would shoot tighter groups then their AIs though,with us or them shooting them.
I said in my first post in this trainwreck that MIL/MIL is a better system,and I stick by that. But,MOA/MIL worked and still will if the rifle driver knows how to use it. If I were in the buisness of military sniping anymore I would want a MIL/MIL system. I shoot at old scraps of cardboard and steel now,which I prefer,so I don't NEED MIL/MIL and FFP. For the guys who do to make them more combat effective or get them more points in a match,drive on. However I think you would agree the average guy doing this for a hobby would be better served with a lesser scope and more training then vice versa. I would imagine running a school you get the student every now and then who has the best shit but has only zeroed the rifle and shot it from a bench.
As far as the problems you see with the Leupolds,I just haven't seen them. You will see more rounds fired under a Leupold in the next month then I or most people here will see in the next 10 years so I respect your observations on them,but my experience is different so I trust them,or at least trust MINE. I DO NOT consider them the end all be all of optics!!!! I just consider them more scope for the money than ones costing 3X as much.
Good shooting, TJR
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JerkeeJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JerkeeJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
trobertson5-0 said:
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Piston Pete</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JerkeeJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Piston Pete</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JerkeeJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
trobertson5-0 said:
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-size: 17pt"><span style="color: #CC0000">The optic snobbery runs deep on here.</span></span></div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF">THAT !</span></span></span> is why i am returning all 6 (SIX) of my Counter Sniper scopes to Dark Ops this morning by UPS, then i will use the refund to buy the scopes i listed in another post, but, to remind everyone here, they are,
NF 3.5-15X 50
Lupy 4.5-14X 50
Trijicon 5-20X 50
and maybe,
Leatherwood 2.5-10X Camputer (yes, it is spelled correctly !)
actually, folks i am returning them because NONE of them will hold zero, i can get a good 5 shot group, then the longer i shoot, a 20 rnd. mag., they start to drift, the 19th & 20th rnd. is usually about 6" to 8" from point of aim.
if any of you folks have some recommendations other than what i listed above, i sure would like to consider them.., <span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF"> OK ?</span></span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-size: 17pt"><span style="color: #CC0000">The optic snobbery runs deep on here.</span></span></div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF">THAT !</span></span></span> is why i am returning all 6 (SIX) of my Counter Sniper scopes to Dark Ops this morning by UPS, then i will use the refund to buy the scopes i listed in another post, but, to remind everyone here, they are,
NF 3.5-15X 50
Lupy 4.5-14X 50
Trijicon 5-20X 50
and maybe,
Leatherwood 2.5-10X Camputer (yes, it is spelled correctly !)
actually, folks i am returning them because NONE of them will hold zero, i can get a good 5 shot group, then the longer i shoot, a 20 rnd. mag., they start to drift, the 19th & 20th rnd. is usually about 6" to 8" from point of aim.
if any of you folks have some recommendations other than what i listed above, i sure would like to consider them.., <span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF"> OK ?</span></span>
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Piston Pete</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-size: 17pt"><span style="color: #CC0000">The optic snobbery runs deep on here.</span></span></div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF">THAT !</span></span></span> is why i am returning all 6 (SIX) of my Counter Sniper scopes to Dark Ops this morning by UPS, <span style="font-weight: bold"> folks i am returning them because NONE of them will hold zero, i can get a good 5 shot group, then the longer i shoot, a 20 rnd. mag., they start to drift, the 19th & 20th rnd. is usually about 6" to 8" from point of aim.</span>
if any of you folks have some recommendations other than what i listed above, i sure would like to consider them.., <span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF"> OK ?</span></span> </div></div>
funny you should have just listened when we told you they were crap
hindsight is always 20/20
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Piston Pete</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-size: 17pt"><span style="color: #CC0000">The optic snobbery runs deep on here.</span></span></div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF">THAT !</span></span></span> is why i am returning all 6 (SIX) of my Counter Sniper scopes to Dark Ops this morning by UPS, <span style="font-weight: bold"> folks i am returning them because NONE of them will hold zero, i can get a good 5 shot group, then the longer i shoot, a 20 rnd. mag., they start to drift, the 19th & 20th rnd. is usually about 6" to 8" from point of aim.</span>
if any of you folks have some recommendations other than what i listed above, i sure would like to consider them.., <span style="font-size: 20pt"><span style="color: #3333FF"> OK ?</span></span> </div></div>
funny you should have just listened when we told you they were crap
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
5.56 nato is a very different beast than precision .308.
500 rounds precision .308 = $750 x 12 = $9000 per year (At commercial prices, give or take a couple bucks a box. I have no idea what my reloads cost per shot.)
2000 rounds of 5.56 per month is about the same (Again at commercial prices.) I usually shoot a lot of 9mm and a fair amount of 5.56 also. The point is, I shoot A LOT. You also shoot A LOT. You likely fall in the 10% (by my best guess) of people here who shoot as much as I do or more.
Joe
5.56 nato is a very different beast than precision .308.
500 rounds precision .308 = $750 x 12 = $9000 per year (At commercial prices, give or take a couple bucks a box. I have no idea what my reloads cost per shot.)
2000 rounds of 5.56 per month is about the same (Again at commercial prices.) I usually shoot a lot of 9mm and a fair amount of 5.56 also. The point is, I shoot A LOT. You also shoot A LOT. You likely fall in the 10% (by my best guess) of people here who shoot as much as I do or more.
Joe
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Please describe to me how a $2700(my price last month) S&B 4x16 PMII is 200% better than a $900(my price last month) Leupold 4.5X14 Mark4. I have sat them and shot them side by side and I can't.</div></div>
More to a scope's performance than sitting behind it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I hate FFP reticles. Useless for milling or holds below 8 power and too big at higher power.
</div></div>
Who mils under 8X that may actually want to make a hit at distance?? SFP's useless for holds at any power other than max unless you have all the right subtensions memorized and can accurately recall that info under stress every time-and the scope is actually marked where it really subtends what you think it does.
Reticles on a FFP are the same size in relation to the target ALL the time!!
So you learned on an M3 and can use it best, good for you. I can run a moa adjusted mildot fine, but its not my preference.
The only Leupy I still have is a 90's era MK4 fixed.
But you have exposed me for the truth, I run USO's because they <span style="font-size: 17pt"><span style="font-style: italic">make my internet sniper penis bigger and the CDI</span>!!!</span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Please describe to me how a $2700(my price last month) S&B 4x16 PMII is 200% better than a $900(my price last month) Leupold 4.5X14 Mark4. I have sat them and shot them side by side and I can't.</div></div>
More to a scope's performance than sitting behind it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I hate FFP reticles. Useless for milling or holds below 8 power and too big at higher power.
</div></div>
Who mils under 8X that may actually want to make a hit at distance?? SFP's useless for holds at any power other than max unless you have all the right subtensions memorized and can accurately recall that info under stress every time-and the scope is actually marked where it really subtends what you think it does.
Reticles on a FFP are the same size in relation to the target ALL the time!!
So you learned on an M3 and can use it best, good for you. I can run a moa adjusted mildot fine, but its not my preference.
The only Leupy I still have is a 90's era MK4 fixed.
But you have exposed me for the truth, I run USO's because they <span style="font-size: 17pt"><span style="font-style: italic">make my internet sniper penis bigger and the CDI</span>!!!</span>
Re: So the MK4s claim to fame is ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trobertson5-0</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Piston Pete said:
Similar threads
Rifle Scopes
So I bought a “Just As Good”, Burris XTR3
