AR Sponsor
Posted: 5/16/2026 2:52:32 PM EDT
|
Saw AIM had these and couldn’t pass it up. The first AR15/tactical LPVO ever made. I bought one today just as a historical piece. Going to have to put in a lot of work getting the spray paint off but it will be worth it. Anyone else get in on these? |
|
Originally Posted By ScoutH57: Neat, didn’t know they had a batch of those. I’ve never actually seen one in person to my recollection If you were a real man you’d just add more spray paint  I used to be a big spray paint guy but now I’m kind of burned out on it. Seems like everyone and their brother at the range has a $400 Bear Creek done up in the exact same three colors of Krylon these days. |
|
Originally Posted By RedSev13: AA it seems. Use Energizer Lithium. They do not leak. If you use something cheap and it leaks you will never find a replacement battery case! I have two CQ/T one of each reticle. Both have LaRue CQ/T QD mounts. Those are difficult to find now also!! |
So... I find comfort in the fact that if Trump has to work so hard to go to Heaven, then there is a shit load of Democrats that have no f-cking chance to go anywhere but HELL. Sometimes it is entirely appropriate to kill a fly with a sledge-hammer.
|
Originally Posted By DasRonin: Use Energizer Lithium. They do not leak. If you use something cheap and it leaks you will never find a replacement battery case! I have two CQ/T one of each reticle. Both have LaRue CQ/T QD mounts. Those are difficult to find now also!! That is an excellent point on the battery. You also answered my question on the mount. Dang. I am going to mull this over today and decide what to do. |
|
Originally Posted By DasRonin: Use Energizer Lithium. They do not leak. If you use something cheap and it leaks you will never find a replacement battery case! I have two CQ/T one of each reticle. Both have LaRue CQ/T QD mounts. Those are difficult to find now also!! I bought a replacement battery tube direct form Leupold 7/1/2025. Still available. Paid $45 plus tax & shipping And a Larue mount nib I bought when Quantico tactical was closing the Woodbridge location  Been on the hunt for a CMR2 reticle. . . so sell me yours I have a circle dot with the base mount getting ready to move to a AUG |
|
Originally Posted By HighpowerRifleBrony: Satisfy the Hoplopfheil hipster itch. Originally Posted By HighpowerRifleBrony: Originally Posted By fxntime: What does this do better then a say, Trigicon TA31 or similar? Variable 1x to 3x Longer eye relief Focusing eyepiece  A GWOT-era Classic: The Leupold Mark 4 CQ/T YouTube |
|
Originally Posted By fxntime: What does this do better then a say, Trigicon TA31 or similar? A TA31 with an RMR is vastly superior. At the time the CQT was developed at request of Delta Force, there was nothing even remotely like it. ACOG’s with MRDS weren’t a thing. Red dot magnifiers weren’t a thing. LPVO’s were barely a thing and definitely not for AR use. It’s still not a bad optic even today. The best option? Definitely not, but still somewhat viable and the father of all AR15 oriented LPVO’s. It’s a significant piece of optical history. It’s not going to get you killed in the streets if you use it, but it’s been 25 years since it was developed. It’s not something you buy to replace or compete with an ACOG or a Razor. For me, my dream AR back in the early 2000’s was a LMT MRP with a CQT on it. I’m going to build that rifle out and enjoy shooting it in all of my hipster outdated glory, because I already have a ton of AR’s for go to use and old stuff is cool. |
|
Originally Posted By Vague: Kinda cool but also kinda spendy. Also,why are LEOs spray painting their optics FDE? Seems weird. I assume this was mil surplus that was sent to LEO on post-9/11 equipment domestic contracts and then turned into a retail bulk buyer as LEO surplus/wholesale. |
|
Originally Posted By Caeser2001: Nothing. GWOT nostalgia. That’s it. Just because it’s outdated doesn’t mean it’s ineffective. It may not get a “hell yeah borther” from a 22 year old, but it will certainly still function. People also bash ACOG’s as being relics and try to say they’ll get you killed in the streets. I think people on the internet just like to exaggerate problems to self validate their own equipment choices. I’d have quit shooting out of boredom years ago if I was limited to only one rifle and the latest and greatest only mindset. I’ve used my guns as a hobby 99.9% of the time and as a tool about .1% of the time, if that. It’s okay to collect and have fun with guns. |
Joined:
Dec 2025
Posts:
242
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Just because it’s outdated doesn’t mean it’s ineffective. It may not get a “hell yeah borther” from a 22 year old, but it will certainly still function. People also bash ACOG’s as being relics and try to say they’ll get you killed in the streets. I think people on the internet just like to exaggerate problems to self validate their own equipment choices. I’d have quit shooting out of boredom years ago if I was limited to only one rifle and the latest and greatest only mindset. I’ve used my guns as a hobby 99.9% of the time and as a tool about .1% of the time, if that. It’s okay to collect and have fun with guns. Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Originally Posted By Caeser2001: Nothing. GWOT nostalgia. That’s it. Just because it’s outdated doesn’t mean it’s ineffective. It may not get a “hell yeah borther” from a 22 year old, but it will certainly still function. People also bash ACOG’s as being relics and try to say they’ll get you killed in the streets. I think people on the internet just like to exaggerate problems to self validate their own equipment choices. I’d have quit shooting out of boredom years ago if I was limited to only one rifle and the latest and greatest only mindset. I’ve used my guns as a hobby 99.9% of the time and as a tool about .1% of the time, if that. It’s okay to collect and have fun with guns. I still have a Colt 4x on an A1 carry handle and a Colt ''armored rubber'' scope on my carry handle A2. Both still work fine. |
Liberals are a curious mix of communism and fascism, they want to destroy you but want to use your own money to do it.
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
|
I bought one when they were new and bleeding edge. It was pretty bad-ass for it's day. I still have it. I "moved up" to a US Optics SN-4 later on, but sold it and moved back to the CQ/T. I'm sinister-handed and the giant turret on the right side interfered with my vision. I ultimately bought a later generation Elcan Spectre DR 1-4. I got a great deal on it because that's when folks were dumping them for reported zeroing issues, and LVPOs were finally a thing. I've never had a problem with it and like it a lot. The modern LVPOs do have much better glass than any of those. |
"Cogito, ergo armatum sum."
|
Originally Posted By the-answer-is-42: I assume this was mil surplus that was sent to LEO on post-9/11 equipment domestic contracts and then turned into a retail bulk buyer as LEO surplus/wholesale. That could actually be possible. Despite Delta Force and Leupold having a falling out resulting in the S&B Short Dot’s creation, there’s quite a bit of proof these still made it to the sand box with some SOF groups. According to Bartocci (3rd party from a blog) the military models got extra waterproofing and lens coatings. Might be hard to tell without having two versions side by side though. ETA: I just emailed Chris to see if there are any obvious tells for the military models. Mine gets delivered today so that’d be extra cool if they were DOD/SOF hand me downs. Probably not, but still worth checking. |
|
Just got mine in. Mine is painted but that’s okay. My first impressions. Glass quality is good. It’s no Razor but still better than anything out of China by a long shot. I imagine people were pretty blown away by it back at the time. ETA: I couldn’t instigate chromatic aberration at all. I’m actually surprised at the clarity for how small the objective is. It really only shows in low light, but still better dispersion than a lot of popular stuff. ETA2: I got out a bunch of different optics and at 3X, I give the CQT the edge in clarity. I’m assuming it’s due to being a true magnified 1X, but at 3X I would say it bests my TA50 ACOG, Leupold Mk3, and PA SP. Also the Arken EP8 but it’s kinda half Chinese. I don’t have any other non Chinese LPVO’s anymore so the rest are obviously worse. 1X is 1X. Whether looking 50 yards away or across my office, I’d say it’s pretty damn good even by today’s standards. In a world where pretty much everything is a demagnified higher magnification, this one is extremely cool being it’s a true magnified 1X. ETA: Now that I’ve played with it a little more, what impresses me most is the lack of barreling. Even when you swing the muzzle around in circles the view stays flat. The eye box is actually impressive for a 14mm objective. If you can put your big boy panties on and deal with a little objective shadowing at 3X, you can be pretty far out of peak exit pupil. At 1X I think you’d really have to be doing some wild stuff to lose your sight picture. Mine is amber so illumination sucks in daylight. It’s more of an illuminated brown. The reticle is very easy to find though. ETA: It does show up on darker back drops enough to enhance contrast. If you’re looking at something brown for instance, it’s going to be amber. If you’re looking at something amber it’s going to look brown. The turrets are the best I’ve ever seen on a Leupold. They do require a flathead but the caps work perfectly for it. This is a 0-300 optic (like 99% of AR’s are actually used for) so it’s 50 yard zero and forget it anyway. The mount sucks. Everything falls on the screws to stay in place. I’m not sure why they would have done it this way but I guess most mounts left a lot to be desired back then. ETA: There are recoil lugs but they’re pretty lame. I have to say again how bad this mount really is. As to condition, it’s painted and has some knicks and scrapes. A battery had leaked in the cylinder at some point but it cleaned out and everything functions. I’ll be stripping the paint and giving it a cosmetic restoration. Leupold offered to do a functional check up on it but not sure I’ll need it. ETA: They must have done 20 layers of spray paint and I’m not joking. It’s been on it and baked in long enough that acetone, paint thinner, and lacquer thinner won’t touch it. Just my first impressions, but I’d buy one of these new if they still made them and could get daylight brightness in it and make a better mount. It’s compact and lightweight but still probably more durable than a traditional ring mount. I don’t think it’s just nostalgia. I actually like this little thing. Not sure why it looks bent in one photo but it’s not. Probably my camera setting but don’t have time to do anything crazy. Attached File Attached File On the Keltec because space gun vibes. Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: On the Keltec because space gun vibes. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/61399/Photoroom_20260520_135541_jpeg-3765448.JPG |
|
I heard back from Chris Bartocci. He basically said it’s a big heavy POS that came about from Steve Holland fooling Leupold into developing it without authorization. It’s multiple inches shorter than any other LPVO and lighter than just about anything else with a mount by a bit so I disagree with him there, but the rest is pretty interesting. Sounds like Leupold bailed once they caught on that there was no adoption and this was all just a “hey wouldn’t it be cool if….” thing from people in Delta Force that weren’t authorized to commission or sign off on anything. I still think it’s an awesome piece of history and I’m glad I got my hands on one. If I could find a Larue mount that didn’t cost as much as the optic itself that would be awesome. I’ll update during my restoration process at some point. ETA: Restoration fail. The paint is too thick and old for paint thinner, acetone, or lacquer thinner to touch. It will take me years at this point and can’t use Citristrip (and especially other strippers) as it’s risky on older rubber seals. |
|
The easy part is done. Other side is mostly clean. Let there be no doubt this is the worst possible optic to try and strip spray paint from. Attached File I’m definitely going to have to paint it back to black. Sucks, but it’ll work. Going to go enjoy my acetone inhalation and absorption buzz now. |
|
Back in black. Still have to figure out what to use to touch up the diopter and objective wear as I wasn’t feeling ballsy enough to paint them. Can’t fix how beat up the caps are either. Might see if Carolina Laser can reproduce a new inventory plate for it. Its delaminating in a couple spots but that might be getting too carried away. Just going to Citristrip the mount as it’s not beat up at all. End of the day the rattle can looks pretty good. Rustoleum ultra matte. Hopefully it doesn’t shrink up like every other time I’ve used it. This thing was pretty dinged up under the paint too. The pssh pssh fixes that though. Also found a throw lever in stock for it that will hopefully be here this week. One thing I do have a gripe against on this thing is the locking diopter. If it’s set to 0 the objective housing gets pretty tight when changing magnification. Attached File In any event, I’m going to put this thing on my BCM and see how it goes. I think these got hated not because they’re bad, but because the market wasn’t ready for LPVO’s when it was released. It was far from perfect, but it truly was the archetype. |
|
Essentially. If you go search old threads it’s kind of funny. -It’s too big: It’s shorter than any other LPVO even still. -It’s too heavy: With mount and battery it’s about the same as most naked LPVO’s, even 1-4’s. -It’s not as bright as an Aimpoint: Welcome to 99% of LPVO’s the past two decades. -It’s not true 1X: Yeah, if you’re looking at your computer screen two feet in front of you. -The reticle sucks: Kinda, but it’s made to shoot out to 300. It’s not just a simple circle dot as believed. I have yet to meet anyone in real life that needs low mag 800 yard BDC for a 5.56 carbine anyway. -The 14mm objective sucks: Bullshit. It collects light better than my TA50 ACOG and is very forgiving in exit pupil due to the short length and being a magnified 1X instead of magnified/demagnified 3X like everything else. That’s another big call out. This thing has an actual 14mm exit pupil on 1X. That’s bigger than any other LPVO so people are full of shit on the light gathering and the error sensitivity. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Back in black. Still have to figure out what to use to touch up the diopter and objective wear as I wasn’t feeling ballsy enough to paint them. Can’t fix how beat up the caps are either. Might see if Carolina Laser can reproduce a new inventory plate for it. Its delaminating in a couple spots but that might be getting too carried away. Just going to Citristrip the mount as it’s not beat up at all. End of the day the rattle can looks pretty good. Rustoleum ultra matte. Hopefully it doesn’t shrink up like every other time I’ve used it. This thing was pretty dinged up under the paint too. The pssh pssh fixes that though. Also found a throw lever in stock for it that will hopefully be here this week. One thing I do have a gripe against on this thing is the locking diopter. If it’s set to 0 the objective housing gets pretty tight when changing magnification. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/61399/Photoroom_20260525_193630_jpeg-3768303.JPG In any event, I’m going to put this thing on my BCM and see how it goes. I think these got hated not because they’re bad, but because the market wasn’t ready for LPVO’s when it was released. It was far from perfect, but it truly was the archetype. I owned one when they were still cool. I don't think they were hated; they just couldn't compete with the Weaver 1-3 (equal glass, 1/2 the weight) and/or the multitude of 1-4 scopes that were released not long after these were available. Nostalgia is fine, but I wouldn't oversell its attributes. For the time it was badass. |
"History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives."-Abba Eban
"I like it both ways, but still mainly mouth it" -gonzo_beyondo
"I like it both ways, but still mainly mouth it" -gonzo_beyondo
|
Originally Posted By rob78: I owned one when they were still cool. I don't think they were hated; they just couldn't compete with the Weaver 1-3 (equal glass, 1/2 the weight) and/or the multitude of 1-4 scopes that were released not long after these were available. Nostalgia is fine, but I wouldn't oversell its attributes. For the time it was badass. They were definitely hated. At least here. The V3 was a hidden gem but was pretty bare bones and known for having durability issues. It’s been 20 years but 20 something year old me wasn’t blown away by the glass quality back then and I was using some pretty awful stuff. Cantilever mounts back then were pushing over a half pound on the light side too, so they were fairly close. I’m not insinuating it is better than a good modern optic. I am saying the criticisms of it have aged worse than the optic. |
|
All painted up. Still waiting on the throw lever and might just hunt down some caps for it. I hate what caps do to flat view optics though. Still might try some touch up for the diopter and objective. Quads on quads dogs. Attached File Ended up having to paint the mount as the Citristrip discolored the anodizing on it. Attached File |
|
Well, my luck with SwitchView products continues as usual. While they say it fits the Leupold CQT it’s not even close. I barely tightened it and there was a massive gap so it wasn’t going to stay. I decided to try and tighten it just a little bit just to see and immediately sheered the few threads that actually caught. This is the third Switchview out of three I’ve had fail, but this is the first one that was a sizing issue and not from use. These guys must make their hardware out of lead as every single one I’ve had has sheered or bent the screw and came loose after a few range trips. Attached File I think that concludes my ambitions with the CQT. Outdated, but still not entirely obsolete. An awesome piece of history to have in my collection. |
| I'm generally a Leupold fan, but I'm really not a fan of the CQ/T. It's built like a tank and weighs about the same. I had one for a couple years but it's long since been sent down the road. There's a dozen 1-4x LVPOs out there that do everything the CQ/T does and more. |
RIP TSgt Jason Norton and SSgt Brian McElroy. KIA 22 Jan 06, near Taji, Iraq.
LaRue Armorer, Colt 1911 Armorer, Colt M16/AR15 Armorer, Glock Armorer
LaRue Armorer, Colt 1911 Armorer, Colt M16/AR15 Armorer, Glock Armorer
|
Originally Posted By CATM: I'm generally a Leupold fan, but I'm really not a fan of the CQ/T. It's built like a tank and weighs about the same. I had one for a couple years but it's long since been sent down the road. There's a dozen 1-4x LVPOs out there that do everything the CQ/T does and more. 17.5 ounces with a mount is pretty lightweight. Even a TR24 with no electronics in a crappy fragile hyper lightweight Aero mount weighs more than that. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: 17.5 ounces with a mount is pretty lightweight. Even a TR24 with no electronics in a crappy fragile hyper lightweight Aero mount weighs more than that. Yeah, good point. I forgot to mention mine had the ARMS QD mount. So, it was probably more like 22-23 oz. It felt like my rifle that has a Trijicon Accupower 1-8x on it. |
RIP TSgt Jason Norton and SSgt Brian McElroy. KIA 22 Jan 06, near Taji, Iraq.
LaRue Armorer, Colt 1911 Armorer, Colt M16/AR15 Armorer, Glock Armorer
LaRue Armorer, Colt 1911 Armorer, Colt M16/AR15 Armorer, Glock Armorer
|
Originally Posted By CATM: Yeah, good point. I forgot to mention mine had the ARMS QD mount. So, it was probably more like 22-23 oz. It felt like my rifle that has a Trijicon Accupower 1-8x on it. That’ll do it. And honestly, compared to the ACOG’s and Aimpoints of the era, it was a boat anchor by comparison. Add to it everyone was running big low power lights, heavy barrels with FSB’s, and quads back then and things got exasperated pretty quick. |
|
I wanted one of these when they first came out. I ended up getting a deal on a Trijicon Tripower instead, which was a terrible optic. I sent the Tripower into Trijicon and got a Weaver 1-3x to use in the meantime. So I never got around to getting a CQT. By the time I had a chance to get it, another optic got my attention (Meopta 1-4x K-dot & Trijicon 1.25-4x Accupoint) so I passed on the Leupold. The Weaver 1-3x was a great little optic as well. I still have one that I stick on lightweight carbines and it's currently on a KelTec RDB. I will give Leupold credit in that it started competing companies to look at the LPVO space that the CQT helped expand. But Leupold, missed out on dominating a field of optics if they kept going with it. I would still love to get one to play with. But at $500, I can find another toy as that is all it would be. In fact, I recently got an early Aimpoint MKIII reddot thrown in with a Mini-14 in a Ramline folding stock deal. It's nice to play with an early Aimpoint that I saw in the magazines when I was a kid. I don't remember what they cost, but I know it was way out of my price range and I ended up with a Tasco Propoint in my early days. As a side note, the Trijicon Tripower was a fiber optic, tritium powered reflex sight that had a battery 'backup'. It was around at the sametime as the CQT. It was way too dim except in ideal conditions as they tried to do too many things with it. Shooting from a shaded position (like a big covered shooting area) into a bright target area made the reticle very hard to see. I actually sent mine into Trijicon as I thought it must not be functioning correctly. They sent it back with a note saying it was working 100% as designed, so I sent it down the river. The idea was great, an optic you could use with or without a battery, but it didn't do anything great. Another downside was the fiber optic cover had to be covered at night as it would glow from the tritium & battery. Under NVG it was a pretty bright light source without the cover. It was also hard to see the glow with the naked eye until it got really dark, so you were a beacon and may not have know it. |
|
Actually enjoying it a lot. I think I like the idea more than the optic though. It’s a shame that some of its best features are obscure. Drop the rails, pump the objective up to 24mm, put a throw lever on it, use an ACOG mount, and put their Firedot BDC reticle in it and I think it’d be my perfect AR optic. |
AR Sponsor