AR Sponsor
Are good 1-4x LPVOs just dead n gone? (Page 2 of 2)
|
Originally Posted By cttb: All the truly lightweight offerings (12 ounces or less) had or have 20mm objectives, even in the 30mm tube models (most recent iteration being Mark 3HD 1.5-4x). In Leupold's scopes, just going from 1" to 30mm tube added 2.5-3oz (Mark AR to VXR Patrol). Going to 24mm objective lens and true 1x takes Leupold to well over 1lb (Mark 4HD). You can't have a sub 14 ounce 1-4x LPVO with true 1x and the big field of view that comes with a bigger objective lens. The bigger tubes, lenses and reducers are what makes nearly all of those scopes weigh a pound or more. If you want less than 14 oz, you're giving up FOV and 1x. There's no way around it. In other words, people keep saying "I would love one of those old Leupolds if they had this or that added to them." Not having this or that is what made them so light and compact in the first place. Once you add this and that to them, they're not light and compact anymore. Leupold quit selling them because most people like this and that more than they like light and compact, at least for now. I'm sure in a few years light and compact will be the most important thing in a scope, and we'll have to buy all new scopes again. Great post and solid points. So it’s not just the increase in mag that has caused the bloat. True 1x is very important, and you’re right. Almost every true 1x LPVO has the bloat. |
Live from the 'Horse Capital of the World'
Joined:
Dec 2007
Posts:
9543
EE: 100% (188)
FL, USA
| I picked up a Zeiss Conquest V4 1-4x24 Aluminum Rifle Scope, ZS-RS-CV4-1-4X24 from Midway some time back for $428 to the door. It serves my needs just fine and is very clear. |
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
|
Gentlemen - stop fighting against the obvious 1-4x answer. Attached File |
Isaiah 1:18 - "Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD: "though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow"
|
Originally Posted By cttb: All the truly lightweight offerings (12 ounces or less) had or have 20mm objectives, even in the 30mm tube models (most recent iteration being Mark 3HD 1.5-4x). In Leupold's scopes, just going from 1" to 30mm tube added 2.5-3oz (Mark AR to VXR Patrol). Going to 24mm objective lens and true 1x takes Leupold to well over 1lb (Mark 4HD). You can't have a sub 14 ounce 1-4x LPVO with true 1x and the big field of view that comes with a bigger objective lens. The bigger tubes, lenses and reducers are what makes nearly all of those scopes weigh a pound or more. If you want less than 14 oz, you're giving up FOV and 1x. There's no way around it. In other words, people keep saying "I would love one of those old Leupolds if they had this or that added to them." Not having this or that is what made them so light and compact in the first place. Once you add this and that to them, they're not light and compact anymore. Leupold quit selling them because most people like this and that more than they like light and compact, at least for now. I'm sure in a few years light and compact will be the most important thing in a scope, and we'll have to buy all new scopes again. Originally Posted By cttb: Originally Posted By goer001: Originally Posted By cttb: What would a 30mm tube do for it? All the truly lightweight offerings (12 ounces or less) had or have 20mm objectives, even in the 30mm tube models (most recent iteration being Mark 3HD 1.5-4x). In Leupold's scopes, just going from 1" to 30mm tube added 2.5-3oz (Mark AR to VXR Patrol). Going to 24mm objective lens and true 1x takes Leupold to well over 1lb (Mark 4HD). You can't have a sub 14 ounce 1-4x LPVO with true 1x and the big field of view that comes with a bigger objective lens. The bigger tubes, lenses and reducers are what makes nearly all of those scopes weigh a pound or more. If you want less than 14 oz, you're giving up FOV and 1x. There's no way around it. In other words, people keep saying "I would love one of those old Leupolds if they had this or that added to them." Not having this or that is what made them so light and compact in the first place. Once you add this and that to them, they're not light and compact anymore. Leupold quit selling them because most people like this and that more than they like light and compact, at least for now. I'm sure in a few years light and compact will be the most important thing in a scope, and we'll have to buy all new scopes again. This is accurate. As a generality, Leupold garners their lightweight reputation by cutting things, and you’re right, if they added in the things people wish they’d add, they wouldn’t be lightweight anymore. Specifically, lots of 1” tubes, small objectives even on 30mm tubes, and perhaps most notably, a lot of 1.25 or 1.5 low ends as opposed to 1X. |
|
Originally Posted By glklvr: Lol, when you can find them. When Leupold discontinued them, online retailers were blowing them out for $250. Originally Posted By glklvr: Originally Posted By cttb: Originally Posted By thunderopossom: Leupold mark ar 1x4 is my most favorite scope of all time. Think they come in around 9 ounces. Buy every one I come across They sell for more used today than they cost new. Lol, when you can find them. When Leupold discontinued them, online retailers were blowing them out for $250. Paid $180 for a spray painted one in an ADM mount 10ish years ago. Got a 3x9 mark ar the other day for $200 |
|
Originally Posted By Ronnoc: Trijicon TR24G is great, love mine and is my SHFT and EOTWAWKI optic on a 11.5 SD. Fast, sharp glass, lighter weight. 14oz. Very good weight compared to a dot magnifier. The fundamental problem is you only get one 'drop' with the triangle at about 350ish . This has been beat to death why they can't do better. But there is one thing that kinda killed the market share of this scope and many like it. The prevalence of NV drove a passive dot on everything and so it no longer makes the weight tradeoff vs a dot magnifier for a modern fighting carbine. |
|
Originally Posted By cttb: All the truly lightweight offerings (12 ounces or less) had or have 20mm objectives, even in the 30mm tube models (most recent iteration being Mark 3HD 1.5-4x). In Leupold's scopes, just going from 1" to 30mm tube added 2.5-3oz (Mark AR to VXR Patrol). Going to 24mm objective lens and true 1x takes Leupold to well over 1lb (Mark 4HD). You can't have a sub 14 ounce 1-4x LPVO with true 1x and the big field of view that comes with a bigger objective lens. The bigger tubes, lenses and reducers are what makes nearly all of those scopes weigh a pound or more. If you want less than 14 oz, you're giving up FOV and 1x. There's no way around it. In other words, people keep saying "I would love one of those old Leupolds if they had this or that added to them." Not having this or that is what made them so light and compact in the first place. Once you add this and that to them, they're not light and compact anymore. Leupold quit selling them because most people like this and that more than they like light and compact, at least for now. I'm sure in a few years light and compact will be the most important thing in a scope, and we'll have to buy all new scopes again. In many optics they actually do use a 24mm objective, but they have a 2mm castle nut that serves the purpose of durability enhancement, and cleaning up the edges since they’re flat view true 1.5X instead of demagnified 2-3X like everything else. Their lens geometry causes edge distortion, but they set the focal plane to match the blinder/castle nut and it’s pretty genius how well it works. They have one of the flattest low magnification views with absolutely no edge distortion. |
Joined:
Mar 2026
Posts:
854
EE: 100% (1)
OH, USA
|
Yeah, I was looking at all these extra small 1-10x and 1-8x they’ve been coming out with… I really wish they would make a small quality 1-4x that’s about the size of those new 3-9x Vudu. It’s like 1-4’s got completely forgotten about the past decade. You can get a good one, but they’re pretty much the same size/weight as a mid-tier 1-6x. |
|
Originally Posted By PistoleroJesse: 14oz. Very good weight compared to a dot magnifier. The fundamental problem is you only get one 'drop' with the triangle at about 350ish . This has been beat to death why they can't do better. But there is one thing that kinda killed the market share of this scope and many like it. The prevalence of NV drove a passive dot on everything and so it no longer makes the weight tradeoff vs a dot magnifier for a modern fighting carbine. No idea why BigT killed the red reticle! |
Joined:
Mar 2026
Posts:
855
EE: 100% (1)
OH, USA
|
Originally Posted By Fooboy: Gentlemen - stop fighting against the obvious 1-4x answer. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/113559/IMG_9547_jpeg-3813965.JPG No diopter The tritium glares like a MFer under nods. Fixes mag (ACOG) Kinda sucks compared to a 1-4x with a thermal clip on. I’ve had a few ACOGs (TA44 TA11 and TA33) and if I ever went back to a prism for a serious use AR it would be an SLx 2x. The SLx is just plain nicer to get behind. |
|
Originally Posted By Brahmzy: 23.1oz for that thing. |
What it boils down to is that they fear an effective resistance to their power: So, Left in power=Guns bad, mmmmkay...?, Right in power=Guns good!-thskirk
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: People chase numbers. The market wants a 1-bajillion that’s 6” long and 10oz. This is partly because the average gun buyer doesn’t shoot their guns much. If they did? They’d realize the shortcomings of chasing said numbers, and that often an optic can be quantitatively impressive and qualitatively trash. Look at our discussions here regarding the NX8 vs NX6. I’ve said before that the NX8 is the ‘worst good’ LPVO, and I stand by that. Of course it’s not trash, it’s a 2k optic, but I’ll say it’s the only premium optic I’ve ever picked up and immediately knew I wouldn’t be keeping it. Meanwhile the NX6 I have a fondness for, and consider it to be a tremendous leap forward for NF LPVOs. Yet on paper the NX6 is worse than the NX8 in every way. Bigger, heavier, less magnification, plus you’d figure the lower cost would denote lower quality (just a function of less glass, but you know, assumptions and all). I think 1-6 is the sweet spot, and offers very little compromise over a 1-4 for considerably more magnification. 1-8 is stretching it but the juice can be worth the squeeze depending on specifics, same for 1-10 too etc. I have to think any new design that comes out today will be a 1-6 at a minimum , but there are some examples of legacy scopes that still hold their own. I have some nice glass, but I have a soft spot for the P4xi and will likely always have at least one. They were a lot cooler when they were 400 brand new, but they’re still exceptional scopes and it’s a shame they get overlooked I agree 1-6 is the sweet spot. I spent a lot of time looking through my 3-18 at some steel out to 800 and even 1000 at different magnifications. 6x is a LOT better than 4x. But the returns drop off quickly. even 10x doesnt feel than much better than 6x. Also on all my FFP about 6x is where you can start really seeing MIL markings clearly. Its not as much how good or bad the reticle is. Its just than below 6x the MIL lines are pretty close to each other. But I would kill for a good 1-4 with a good reticle that was 14oz. |
|
Originally Posted By viator: I have a really old, probably over 20 years old, Leupold VX II 1-4 20mm 1” tube - Matte Duplex scope mounted in an LT104-1 - LaRue SPR M4 1.5 1” cantilevered mount. Tons of rounds have gone down the tube on that AR15 A3 with a 20" barrel. Old school. Simple. I'll keep it. It is also FRTed, so the extra weight of the 20" barrel smooths out the firing I also have a Leupold 1.5-5x20 30mm VX-III illuminated German #4 dot in a cantilevered scope mount - LT104-30 - LaRue SPR M4 1.5”. I'll keep this. I can shoot open eyes at 1.5x and it doesn't bother me. I have a couple each of more modern LPVOs in illuminated 1-6, 1-8, and 1-10 versions. I really like these. I like my old light and simple 1-4 and I don't plan on replacing it. It is a nice rifle/scope combination to hand somebody new to demonstrate to them how it was back in the day. The Leupold 1.5-5 is a step up from that. But, I love the technology available on the newer, generally much heavier, versions. I have purchased 5 LPVOs 1-6 and above this year. I'm going to purchase either two more LPVOs 1-8 or above or two MPVOs. I am learning towards two MPVOs because they are 18" SPRish builds. I gota agree with you about "both eyes open" with the 1.5x. I have a 2-10x44 VX5HD firedot. I use it for hunting not clearing rooms. So I dont run drills or any thing. But with the fire dot you can 100% shoot both eyes open at 2X no problem. Sometimes I actually think that scope would work better than a LPVO for most people. 2-10, 44mm objective is SUPER bright, HUGE eye box, Firedot is day time bright, shake awake, locking but exposed dials and I think it is under 17oz which is less than most LPVO. |
|
Originally Posted By dana: I gota agree with you about "both eyes open" with the 1.5x. I have a 2-10x44 VX5HD firedot. I use it for hunting not clearing rooms. So I dont run drills or any thing. But with the fire dot you can 100% shoot both eyes open at 2X no problem. Sometimes I actually think that scope would work better than a LPVO for most people. 2-10, 44mm objective is SUPER bright, HUGE eye box, Firedot is day time bright, shake awake, locking but exposed dials and I think it is under 17oz which is less than most LPVO. Sometimes you want to be able to shoot without dialing or even if you're dialing, being able to quantify how far off your last shot was instead of Kentucky windage is helpful |
|
Originally Posted By Daggertt: It would be awesome except in total Leupold fashion, it probably only comes with a duplex reticle or something. Sometimes you want to be able to shoot without dialing or even if you're dialing, being able to quantify how far off your last shot was instead of Kentucky windage is helpful They’ve done pretty good in reticles recently. The Firedot BDC/MIL in the Mk3HD is pretty solid. Attached File I had their MOA ring Firedot and it’s still probably my favorite LPVO I’ve ever used. I think it was 12 ounces. Was still pretty easy to pick up when my battery died at one point. Attached File What I really wish they would do is a BDC/MIL ring Firedot in an updated 1-4 CQT that used ACOG mounts, a 24/20mm objective, a top MRDS plate, no rails, and with a throw lever. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: They've done pretty good in reticles recently. The Firedot BDC/MIL in the Mk3HD is pretty solid. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/61399/IMG_6159_png-3815814.JPG I had their MOA ring Firedot and it's still probably my favorite LPVO I've ever used. I think it was 12 ounces. Was still pretty easy to pick up when my battery died at one point. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/61399/IMG_6160_png-3815815.JPG What I really wish they would do is a BDC/MIL ring Firedot in an updated 1-4 CQT that used ACOG mounts, a 24/20mm objective, a top MRDS plate, no rails, and with a throw lever.  This is all you get. Simple duplex 
|
Joined:
Jan 2024
Posts:
114
EE: 100% (15)
OR, USA
|
My favorite 1-4 is the capped Vortex PST. I have one on my 16" 5.56 and one on my Tippman 22 lr. The reticle is great for under 200 yards and the illumination does not trigger my astigmatism. Weight is ~ 15.5 oz and the glass clear and stable through all ranges. There is one up for sale on ebay that looks brand new for under $300. I always avoided the Vortex PST 1-6 due to weight. I now own two that sit on my hunting uppers mounted on Aero light weight mounts. Excellent stable scopes. The last one I purchased for $200 in like new condition. The Vortex unconditional warranty can not be beat. Frugal Fudd |
|
Originally Posted By Daggertt: None of which are available in the 2-10x vx5 This is all you get. Simple duplex https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-ummq3sqapp/product_images/uploaded_images/firedot-duplex-detailed-sheet.png I also missed that the Mk3HD is now discontinued. |
Are good 1-4x LPVOs just dead n gone? (Page 2 of 2)
AR Sponsor