KAC lpr ammo and Glass suggestions

[bp7178]

The point is, at the price NF is selling their optics, FFP should be a given. NF used to be a good value/performance but that time has come and gone. The only two products they sell that are interesting are the 2.5-10x24 (only to mil) and the new BEAST(which is $3K). Anything else they sell has a better option on the market cheaper, better or both. A good reticle can be used at low end, and at high end (ALA Bushnell G2). No one is using holdovers at 3x on higher mag scope.

For 1-4 or 1-6, FFP is not needed. Getting above that, where you will actualy be dialing your elevation (and windage unless you use holdover) FFP is a godsend.

Plenty of people out there running the new Vortex 2.5-10x32 FFP, and LOVE IT. It owns that segment. Once you go FFP, you never want to go back. I can dial in where I want and not worry about converting the calcultions or holdovers. Its easier, quicker and less error prone. Mirage is not always a factor, and is location dependent. If it was such a killer, then all the top end scopes wouldnt be 5-25x.

Illumination is not needed. the 3.5-21x50 Bushy was speced by a specail operations unit. None of the Horus or G2 retticles are illuminated, nor are there plans to (Strait from Alpha@ Bushy Mil's mouth). The 3-18x does not have illume, and its not needed. Why are you arguing for illumination when the scope you champion does not even have it? Why buy the Mk6 Illume 3-18 Tremmor 2 for $3300 @ Mil price when you can buy the MK8 3-25 with Illum for less than $2500 Mil price. Makes zero sense. Bushnell also came out with a New 3-12x, if you would have read my post, that fixes those issues you talk about. The fact that George Gardner is behind it, tells you all you need to know.

I would say on the 3-15x NXS, I'd like to see FFP. Same with the ACTAR or whatever its called. On a 2.5-10x FFP isn't ideal IMO. Its too hard to make out the reticle on the low end of the power range. I don't think the Vortex FFP owns anything. If you want an unbiased review of one, ask someone who just sold theirs.

Mirage is a factor where it gets warm, and its got nothing to do with the top end 5-25x scopes. If they are FFP, and I previously wrote in that power range I'd want FFP, you don't HAVE to be on 25x. If you have heavy mirage or want an expanded field of view you can dial it back. Just because it runs up to 25x, doesn't mean you always need to be there. On something like a 2.5-10x, in all likelihood you'll be on 2.5 or 10x. So FFP is much less critical.

Everyone goes to how whatever alphabet .mil using spec'd a scope and it doesn't have illumination. Well guess what, those same units have clip on NVDs and thermal devices. I don't. Can't afford it, doubtful that will ever be the case. I don't shoot when its pitch black, but at dusk and early dawn I want illumination. So lacking AN/PVS-27s, I'll be buying a scope with illumination.

The scope model I "champion" does have illumination and I never mentioned wanting a tremor reticle.

The guy from GA Precision putting his name on it doesn't sway my opinion about the updated 3-12. I'm sure it fits his needs fine, which are different from mine.

[TurretGunner]

It's crazy how illumination on the mk6 3-18s adds $800 - $1300 to the cost.

The Mk8 3.5-25 with illum is not less than $2500 mil price. Mk8 3.5-25 with illum tremor2 is slightly more than a mk6 3-18 with illum tremor 2. Mk8 with illum mil dot is much more than a mk6 with illum tmr.

I am looking at the MIL/LEO Spreadsheet directly from Leupold from 3 months ago:

116448 Mark 6 3-18x44mm (34mm) M5C2 Illum. Front Focal Tremor 2 $3,333.53
115943 Mark 6 3-18x44mm (34mm) M5B2 Front Focal TMR $1,518.08
115062 Mark 8 3.5-25X56mm (35mm) M5B2 Illum Front Focal H-58 $2,445.30
115150 Mark 8 3.5-25X56mm (35mm) M5B2 Illum Front Focal Mil Dot $2,346.83

[TurretGunner]

I would say on the 3-15x NXS, I'd like to see FFP. Same with the ACTAR or whatever its called. On a 2.5-10x FFP isn't ideal IMO. Its too hard to make out the reticle on the low end of the power range. I don't think the Vortex FFP owns anything. If you want an unbiased review of one, ask someone who just sold theirs.

Mirage is a factor where it gets warm, and its got nothing to do with the top end 5-25x scopes. If they are FFP, and I previously wrote in that power range I'd want FFP, you don't HAVE to be on 25x. If you have heavy mirage or want an expanded field of view you can dial it back. Just because it runs up to 25x, doesn't mean you always need to be there. On something like a 2.5-10x, in all likelihood you'll be on 2.5 or 10x. So FFP is much less critical.

Everyone goes to how whatever alphabet .mil using spec'd a scope and it doesn't have illumination. Well guess what, those same units have clip on NVDs and thermal devices. I don't. Can't afford it, doubtful that will ever be the case. I don't shoot when its pitch black, but at dusk and early dawn I want illumination. So lacking AN/PVS-27s, I'll be buying a scope with illumination.

The scope model I "champion" does have illumination and I never mentioned wanting a tremor reticle.

The guy from GA Precision putting his name on it doesn't sway my opinion about the updated 3-12. I'm sure it fits his needs fine, which are different from mine.

NF makes/made a FFP 3-15, the F1 around $2-2200. It has shitty glass and at that price should not look at that bad. It has NXS guts, so reliability and tracking are first rate.
You don't need to make out the reticle at 2.5x. All you need is the cross hairs for fast shots. Crank it up if you need to use the reticle/subtensions.
Feel free to go over to the hide and talk to the guys who are S/S, B4 or heavy into Tactical shooting. Most will tell you illum is not needed or not really the big deal it is cracked up to be.
The Mk6 illum sucks balls anyway. its the biggest drawback to that class of optic. The Glass, size and weight are what makes it a good value in that price range and a decent SPR/SCAR17 optic.

[bp7178]

The pictures I saw of an illuminated TMR reticle in a Mark 6 didn't look bad at all. Definitely not as ball sucky as the Bushnell 3-12x. I'm not expecting or wanting it to be illuminated like an Aimpoint/Eotech.

I'm on the Hide as well and am well aware of other people opinions on illumination; both for and against. Doesn't matter. They aren't shooting my rifle.

[TurretGunner]

The pictures I saw of an illuminated TMR reticle in a Mark 6 didn't look bad at all. Definitely not as ball sucky as the Bushnell 3-12x. I'm not expecting or wanting it to be illuminated like an Aimpoint/Eotech.

I'm on the Hide as well and am well aware of other people opinions on illumination; both for and against. Doesn't matter. They aren't shooting my rifle.

The only illume for the 3-12 is the Green Mildot I belive. The G2 and the newer modified G2 dont have illum so its really not an issue. People bag on the turrets, but they are large, tactile and track perfectly. They work great wearing gloves and making adjustments in the cold.

Point taken, no one can tell you what you need, just trying to point out some popular views and experinces.

[Koshinn]

I am looking at the MIL/LEO Spreadsheet directly from Leupold from 3 months ago:

So am I, and that's not what mine reads.

ETA: Sorry, mine is from two months ago, email from Jan 2014, "2014 FED Mil Price List". It's completely possible they've changed prices since 3 months ago. My email also said not to disclose the actual price, so I won't be doing that. But I will say that none of your prices are the same as what I'm reading.

[TurretGunner]

So am I, and that's not what mine reads.

ETA: Sorry, mine is from two months ago, email from Jan 2014, "2014 FED Mil Price List". It's completely possible they've changed prices since 3 months ago. My email also said not to disclose the actual price, so I won't be doing that. But I will say that none of your prices are the same as what I'm reading.

Gotcha. Mine is the 2013 price list.... Have the prices changed that much?