SPR Optic Options

[BrigandTwoFour]

If you haven't made a decision yet..

I've a similar use casein mind. These have been the standouts:

Steiner T6xi 3-18x56 with SCR2 reticle ($$$, and the size is probably overkill for a Mk12- the 56mm objective would be awesome for low light, though)
Brownells MPO 3-18x50 (Japanese glass, on sale for $900 right now which is a screaming deal and I would buy it right now if I had the funds)
Vortex Viper PST 3-15x44 (Good standby option, much more budget friendly)

Another one that caught my attention, and it will probably be on the budget side, is the new Primary Arms GLx 3-18x44. It's not out yet, but should be soon.

[grizzman]

The NXS would probably be more clone appropriate but the eye relief on that scope is not so great.

I've been considering the 2.5-10 x 42 for a 6.5 G AR Its eye relief is specified as 3.3 inches. Is it 3.3 across the magnification range, or does it get even shorter than 3.3. I've got a few scopes that are 3.6 at the low end, and they're definitely usable. If it's a fixed 3.3, with careful placement, I think that could be made to work well enough.

[Wake27]

With 1-8s and 1-10s being what they are now, I don’t know why anyone would limit themselves to 10x on a true SPR. Seems 14-18 is a much more reasonable high end. No one says you have to use it all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[titsonritz]

With 1-8s and 1-10s being what they are now, I don’t know why anyone would limit themselves to 10x on a true SPR. Seems 14-18 is a much more reasonable high end. No one says you have to use it all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I'd agree with that. One roll of an SPR is observation, higher magnification allows it to be at greater distances. I have a 3-15x on my SPR'ish gun.

[Biggy]

I use a Leupold VX6HD 3-18x44 ( 19oz, 13.5" OAL ) scope on my 18" Proof barreled SPR/DMR type rifle. Due to not having the best corrected vision in my right eye, I need more magnification and I also have to use SFP reticles that are not to thin or busy. So from around 3-600yds I use a *good* laser range finder and dial.

[mack7.62]

With 1-8s and 1-10s being what they are now, I don’t know why anyone would limit themselves to 10x on a true SPR. Seems 14-18 is a much more reasonable high end. No one says you have to use it all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

What is a true SPR, that is the question isn't it. My take is a SPR is a fighting rifle that needs to be usable for CQB out to 7-800. That means it needs to be light and nimble and have a scope reticle that's quick to pick up non illuminated up close. Human nature is to want more, why stop at 10 when for just a little more weight and a little loss of low end performance I can get 14-18. If you sacrifice any low end up close for more high end then you are moving from SPR to DMR and again human nature is "I can have both in one rifle" but can you really? Yes a 2.5 x 10 is a compromise, but it's a compromise that fills the SPR design philosophy at this time, I would argue that the 4 x 14-18's do not. Possibly a 3 x ?? can edge out the 10 but I don't see it without adding weight.

[Wake27]

What is a true SPR, that is the question isn't it. My take is a SPR is a fighting rifle that needs to be usable for CQB out to 7-800. That means it needs to be light and nimble and have a scope reticle that's quick to pick up non illuminated up close. Human nature is to want more, why stop at 10 when for just a little more weight and a little loss of low end performance I can get 14-18. If you sacrifice any low end up close for more high end then you are moving from SPR to DMR and again human nature is "I can have both in one rifle" but can you really? Yes a 2.5 x 10 is a compromise, but it's a compromise that fills the SPR design philosophy at this time, I would argue that the 4 x 14-18's do not. Possibly a 3 x ?? can edge out the 10 but I don't see it without adding weight.

Personally, if it doesn’t start at 1x, I’m going to have some type of offset or top mounted dot. I’ve never had the desire to do that compensation of CQB type stuff with anything over 1x. So the low end isn’t too important to me.

Weight does become a balance but at a quick glance of the more budget Vortex optics, just because I’ve heard of those more, the new Strike Eagle 3-18 is literally one ounce heavier than the Viper 2-10. Both are chonky and they’re not in the same class but quickly looking around, it seems like a lot of similar offerings (all Vortex) are within two or so ounces. That’s not nothing, but one ounce more, a lower tier, and 3x vs 2x on the low end may be worth it considering it’s the newest design and it’s almost doubling the top end.

I’m using Vortex for this heavily because I’m getting closer to buying a larger scope for accuracy testing and the occasional mid-range work and that’s who I’m looking at. My points could be fully negated by other brands or higher tiers, I don’t know, that’s partly why I’m posting.

You are right on DMR vs SPR vs whatever else. Personally I don’t really use the terms because they aren’t set in meaning to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MegademiC]

If weight is not an issue, im really liking the brownells mpo 3-18 for a 1kyd gun. Its a $1k scope, so dont expect leupold mk5 clarity, but its useable, tracks well, and I love the reticle.

Its a pig though at 33oz.

I use mine at 700 often and have gone to 900 and 1k a couple times with the 16" 556.

[mack7.62]

But that's the thing, weight is an issue when you start talking about actually using a rifle, for me 10 lbs or less is the sweet spot. And yes offset red dots are an option but if you ever fall down a mountain like Lone Survivor how long is that red dot going to last.

[MegademiC]

Mk3 4-12 (do these have parallax?)with a 12oclock aimpoint?

My previous post was for the OP.
That said, a 12oclock in a solid mount is no issue.