MK12 optics discussion

[MegademiC]

I really like having > 10x for 1000. Im currently runni g 3-18 and like it.

[R0331]

I am running a vortex pst 2-10 on one of my mk12ish builds. It’s an older gen 1 that I built up years ago. Looking at the new Leupold 2-10 mk5 makes me very tempted to switch some things around.

[hotrodder636]

I really like having > 10x for 1000. Im currently runni g 3-18 and like it.

Ditto. That is the nice thing about a 3.5-18x, I can set it on 10-12x and that is not on the max edge of the magnification.

[Stickman]

https://youtu.be/uyDZvxSZ5Cg

When I was looking for an optic for my 16" I was looking at anything from $600-2500nf) and after 2 months of research I did go with the glx 2.5-10.

I really didn't want to give my money to them but damnit the fact that the illumination sucks it did everything I needed and didn't have an extra grand on the price tag for shit.


The 3-9 is dead and an lpvo on a "dmr" is stupid.

I remember reading a post somewhere I forget that went on about how scopes work with a lot of math way above my head about why an lpvo should be 1-4 and a 1-6 could be acceptable if you don't mind reduced performance at max zoom.

To make a 1-10 really work you need to step out of the "short dot footprint".

As much as I want a legit mk12 this is as close as I will get.
The concept is definitely over though for magnification and I don't have a compromise for the low end.

Somewhere in here is a discussion about the spr/mk12 scope concept.
It's still a good listen if you will but Brock goes on a tangent about scopes for this ranged ar15 in 223/556.

https://www.youtube.com/live/IoV5trMN5W0?feature=share

I hadn't thought about the GLx 2.5-10, thought I have looked at it and liked the overall package it seems to provide.

Regarding the 3-9... I'm not sure about being dead, as they are still as effect now as when they were first produced. When I think 3-9, I do tend to think more in the vein of hunting, but that doesn't mean it won't work. I also have a few different platforms that I need to throw optics on, so that 3-9 will end up on something or other.

I agree that a LPVO comes up short in a areas, but as mentioned above, the optics need to go on something. I still lean towards the 1-10s for my 16" 308 guns, but I may toss a 1-6 on one. The Razor lineup is good clean glass, but its a matter of putting the right glass on the right gun.

[BobinNC]

My assessment of the PA GLx 2.5-10x44mm as a DMR type scope is unfavorable for the following reasons:

First the reticle is more of a LVPO Type and unsuitable for long range work. For most LR shooting you dial for elevation and hold for wind. The GLx reticle however has no wind holds on it's base line.
Second, the field of view is very small at 36' @ 100 yds.
Third the eye relief is very short at 2.8"

On the plus side, the turrets are excellent, the weight @ 22.5 oz is outstanding, it's adjustment range is excellent @37 Mils and it does have side PA. Cost is in the $750. range.

The Trijcon Credo 2-10x36mm is it's prime competitor.

It has a reticle suitable for LR shooting, weight of 23 oz., field of view of 50'@100 yds, eye relief of 3.4 to 3.9", 27 Mils of elevation, and a cost of around $1000.

The Credo lacks PA adjustment, and it's turrets aren't as good as the GLx though they are serviceable.

We can argue about how much side PA means on a scope that is not meant for shooting small groups, but in reality neither the PA nor the Credo would be my choice for shooting sub MOA on paper targets.

Shooting fast and accurately on a two way range is more their forte and both have strengths and weaknesses in that arena.

Other choices like the Vortex Viper PST Gen 2 are worth a look, but at nearly 27 oz it is too much for too little.

Athlon Helos BTR Gen2 2-12x42mm has all good features except weight and being made in China. But it is the cheapest of the MPVO's.

There are really not any more MVPO's to consider, as everything else is either SPF, or bigger, heavier, and/or more expensive.

All this is IMHO and YMMV.

[Todd.K]

I understand most people think that an SPR/DMR is some high speed sniper gear. The reality is they mostly get given to line grunts with minimal training.

You can want or need an urban semiauto light sniper rifle, but in actual use a fiber optic bright illumination with BDC and wind tree is actually more useful.

[MarshallDodge]

I understand most people think that an SPR/DMR is some high speed sniper gear. The reality is they mostly get given to line grunts with minimal training.

You can want or need an urban semiauto light sniper rifle, but in actual use a fiber optic bright illumination with BDC and wind tree is actually more useful.

BDC might work for the average Joe on large targets, but I get really frustrated with a BDC reticle. It's pretty rare that you can get one to line up with your load, especially when you get out past 300 yards.

In an urban environment, 300 is a looong way but I'm not in an urban environment and my gun isn't just sitting in the safe waiting for the day a zombie starts walking up my driveway. I shoot at distances from 25-1000 yards pretty regularly with a DMR or SPR.

I need a reticle that corresponds with the MOA or Mil data that my ballistics app gives me, as well as the feedback that I get from a spotter. 1 MOA or 0.5 MIL increments in a reticle is so much nicer to work with than the coarse BDC stadia lines.

[gaijin]

^Definitely agree.
Although Strelok can give you info on what bullet/velocity keys with BDC reticle sub-tensions on a lot of scopes; it has to be proven in the field.
It’s a fools errand to trust data without verifying.
I have a few BDC scopes, but none are useable much last 300 yds.

[Todd.K]

I’m telling you how they get used in the real world, and you are telling me how you like to use one on the range.

Neither is right or wrong, I’m just saying is that that the scope should be picked for the actual use.

There is nothing wrong with a SFP scope on a general purpose SPR for the majority of practical users.

There is nothing wrong with a big, higher magnification, FFP scope for more long range specialized SPR.

[MegademiC]

^Definitely agree.
Although Strelok can give you info on what bullet/velocity keys with BDC reticle sub-tensions on a lot of scopes; it has to be proven in the field.
It’s a fools errand to trust data without verifying.
I have a few BDC scopes, but none are useable much last 300 yds.

Yeah, you always need to true up the data. "Published b.c." will get you close, but IME, you have to refine it if you want to make 1st rd hits at distance consistently..