Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/16/2004 11:20:15 AM EST
So you've dropped the coin on a good SPR upper ($1000-$2000). Now it comes time for the optics. Here are my choices, I invite yours.

1. Leupold Mark 4 3-9x36mm MR/T M3 Illuminated Reticle
.

.

2. TA31F Chervon ACOG
.

.
3. Nightforce 2.5 x 10 x 24
.



Regards,
Gary
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 11:51:14 AM EST
loopy is the correct scope for an spr
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 12:09:26 PM EST
The Nightforce is my first choice, then the M3 MRT.

-Cap'n
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 12:26:14 PM EST

Originally Posted By Capn_Crunch:
The Nightforce is my first choice, then the M3 MRT.

-Cap'n



I agree with the Cap'n. I have both and the NXS 2.5-10X is a significantly better scope. I may end up selling the MR/T and get another NXS for my MRP.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 12:31:36 PM EST
A potential problem with the NXS is that there is no zero-stop on the elevation knob, and no reference for which revolution it's at, for those of us who want to dial elevation.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 12:32:47 PM EST
If you don't mind, which reticle did you get in the NXS and how do you like it?
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 1:39:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By Zak-Smith:
A potential problem with the NXS is that there is no zero-stop on the elevation knob, and no reference for which revolution it's at, for those of us who want to dial elevation.




Originally Posted By Zak-Smith:
If you don't mind, which reticle did you get in the NXS and how do you like it?



Zak, I'm aware of the lack of a zero-stop/reference and their potential issues.

I have the CR-MilDot reticle and I really like it. I have found it much crisper/quicker at all settings compare to the MR/T. Other than the "zero-stop/lack of a reference", the only other change I would want is the first setting when you turn on the illuminated reticle, that it be the lowest setting versus the highest. But, this is very easy to work with, just a personal preference. The next NXS I looking forward to trying is the 1-4X with the FC-2 reticle when its availble.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:41:31 PM EST
I'm thinking either NP1 or NPR2 for a 2.5-10 on my AR10. The NPR2 with 20 MOA of graduations should remove the need to dial elevation for the most part.

-z
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 2:48:41 AM EST
I believe my choice would be the NPR2 as well....
.
.
.

.
.
Regards,
Gary
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 3:37:39 AM EST
I prefer the MR/T for my SPR.Small, light weight, precise and short eye relief.What else could one want for a Special Purpose Rifle?BTW what's the eye relief on the Nightforce 2.5 x 10 x 24?
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 3:42:47 AM EST

Originally Posted By wes1:
I prefer the MR/T for my SPR.Small, light weight, precise and short eye relief.What else could one want for a Special Purpose Rifle?BTW what's the eye relief on the Nightforce 2.5 x 10 x 24?



The eye relief is 3.7" compared to the 3" of the MR/T.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 4:03:21 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 4:04:52 AM EST by wes1]
Do you mount the NF 2.5-10 to the flat top or do you need to mount it further foward to accommodate the longer eye relief?
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 4:13:27 AM EST

Originally Posted By wes1:
Do you mount the NF 2.5-10 to the flat top or do you need to mount it further foward to accommodate the longer eye relief?



Wes1,

I use a LaRue Tactical mount with it. It is mounted slightly forward on the receiver compared to the MR/T location.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:32:34 AM EST
With regard to eye relief.. On an AR15, eye relief of 1.5 - 2.0 would be much preferrable to anything 3" or over.

-z
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:54:44 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 7:55:05 AM EST by wes1]
That's the beauty of the MR/T ,short eye relief, which = standard rings.(No cantilever rings required)That's a bonus in my book.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:56:32 AM EST
The MRT does not have "short" eye relief. Yes, it's shorter than conventional scopes (in the 3.5 - 4.5") range, but compared to what would be optimal for the AR15 platform, it's not even close. Even at TA11 ACOG at 2.4" has to be mounted significantly forward on the flat-top.

-z
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 8:16:58 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 9:59:07 AM EST
nightforce

Remman
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:19:00 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:10:00 AM EST
Wes,

You know, I just got a TA31 and compared it for BAC with my TA11's. It was easier to keep the TA31 in the "non-magnified / OEG" mode than it is with the TA11's. I'll try both in 3Gun and see which works better. My guess right now is still the TA11 w.r.t situational awareness, but who knows. I've been surprised before.

-z
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 12:40:10 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 8:25:31 PM EST
I HAVE HAD THEM ALL. MY CHOICE WOULD BE THE NIGHTFORCE 2.5-10X24 NXS BY A CONSIDERABLE MARGIN OVER ANY OF THEM.


I'm building a SPR and interested in coyote hunting. What your thoughts are on the low light (morining/evening/spotlight) performance of the NIGHTFORCE 2.5-10X24?
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 9:48:22 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/18/2004 12:40:26 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/18/2004 6:49:23 PM EST
Ideally I'd get the Nightforce 2.5-10x24 but it's the budget that's stopping me. For my purposes and billfold, the Leupy 1.5-5x20mm illuminated (prbably circle dot but maybe duplex) is going to be the ticket. It's not as good as the Nightforce but it will have to do for me.

If it weren't for EBS (empty billfold syndrome - the reason I still don't have my illuminated Leupy) I'd have Wes at MSTN build me a duplicate of his SuperSam (posted elsewhere) but barrel chopped to 18" and the 2.5-10x24 Nightforce.
Link Posted: 9/19/2004 2:00:52 AM EST

Originally Posted By adh:
Ideally I'd get the Nightforce 2.5-10x24 but it's the budget that's stopping me. For my purposes and billfold, the Leupy 1.5-5x20mm illuminated (prbably circle dot but maybe duplex) is going to be the ticket. It's not as good as the Nightforce but it will have to do for me.
If it weren't for EBS (empty billfold syndrome - the reason I still don't have my illuminated Leupy) I'd have Wes at MSTN build me a duplicate of his SuperSam (posted elsewhere) but barrel chopped to 18" and the 2.5-10x24 Nightforce.



Interesting, I have had a similar discussion with Wes about a Super-Sam with a 20" max BBL length. I would be looking for an alternative chambering (6.8SPC or maybe even 6.5 Grendel). I would also look at the NXS for this one.
Link Posted: 9/19/2004 4:35:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/19/2004 4:44:41 AM EST
Damn, Wes...Very nice.
Link Posted: 9/19/2004 7:56:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By Zak-Smith:
... It was easier to keep the TA31 in the "non-magnified / OEG" mode than it is with the TA11's. ...-z



Does "non-magnified/OEG" mode refers to the brief period in which the donut in the strong eye is superimposed over the target image from the non-strong eye?

any clarification appreciated.

ps - I have a TA11 donut and love it. BAC really works.

Link Posted: 9/19/2004 10:45:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By pcurtis:

Originally Posted By adh:
Ideally I'd get the Nightforce 2.5-10x24 but it's the budget that's stopping me. For my purposes and billfold, the Leupy 1.5-5x20mm illuminated (prbably circle dot but maybe duplex) is going to be the ticket. It's not as good as the Nightforce but it will have to do for me.
If it weren't for EBS (empty billfold syndrome - the reason I still don't have my illuminated Leupy) I'd have Wes at MSTN build me a duplicate of his SuperSam (posted elsewhere) but barrel chopped to 18" and the 2.5-10x24 Nightforce.



Interesting, I have had a similar discussion with Wes about a Super-Sam with a 20" max BBL length. I would be looking for an alternative chambering (6.8SPC or maybe even 6.5 Grendel). I would also look at the NXS for this one.



pcurtis, I see you do not suffer from EBS then.....
Link Posted: 9/19/2004 11:33:15 AM EST

Originally Posted By xyzzy45:

Originally Posted By Zak-Smith:
... It was easier to keep the TA31 in the "non-magnified / OEG" mode than it is with the TA11's. ...-z



Does "non-magnified/OEG" mode refers to the brief period in which the donut in the strong eye is superimposed over the target image from the non-strong eye?
any clarification appreciated.



Well, yes. I am referring to stretching that "brief period" into as long as you want to use it as a 1X red dot, superimposed over the target. In sunlight, cover up the front lens - it runs just like a 1X red dot.

-z
Link Posted: 9/19/2004 12:18:02 PM EST

Originally Posted By adh:

Originally Posted By pcurtis:

Originally Posted By adh:
Ideally I'd get the Nightforce 2.5-10x24 but it's the budget that's stopping me. For my purposes and billfold, the Leupy 1.5-5x20mm illuminated (prbably circle dot but maybe duplex) is going to be the ticket. It's not as good as the Nightforce but it will have to do for me.
If it weren't for EBS (empty billfold syndrome - the reason I still don't have my illuminated Leupy) I'd have Wes at MSTN build me a duplicate of his SuperSam (posted elsewhere) but barrel chopped to 18" and the 2.5-10x24 Nightforce.



Interesting, I have had a similar discussion with Wes about a Super-Sam with a 20" max BBL length. I would be looking for an alternative chambering (6.8SPC or maybe even 6.5 Grendel). I would also look at the NXS for this one.



pcurtis, I see you do not suffer from EBS then.....



adh,

Its not that I don't also suffer "EBS" at times, although I have have asked Wes several times if MSTN sold stock! I've had almost all of my AR's prior to '94 (now just old AR's, thankfully). The only unplanned upper was the 5.56MM Twin for my wife (side benefit, it gave me an nearly identical platform to work with until all the logistics [ammo, brass, & mags] for my 16.5" 6.8SPC upper fell into place). Shoot me an email (also where are you in the TX?), we maybe able to work a deal on my Ill. MR/T M1, if you are interested. But, the NXS is still the better scope. (Thread maintained)
Link Posted: 9/19/2004 5:32:47 PM EST
Pcurtis,

I'm in the san Antonio metro area (out toward Boerne). No question that the NXS is the better optic, and thanks for the offer on the MRT, but I'll be staying with the 1.5-5x20mm illuminated vari X III. The illuminated MRT starts pushing a lot closer to the NXS cost and I believe I'd just have to try to jump farther and get the NXS.

Take it easy.

ADH
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 3:02:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By MSTN: ... MY CHOICE WOULD BE THE NIGHTFORCE 2.5-10X24 NXS BY A CONSIDERABLE MARGIN ...ESPECIALLY WHEN MOUNTED IN THE SEVEN OUNCE LARUE TACTICAL SPR SCOPE MOUNT. ...WES


Would this mount work with the bigger Nightforce scopes (e.g. 3.5x15x56)?
Is it sufficiently forward to still allow nose on charging handle head position?
do you carry these mounts and at what price?

thanks!
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 10:49:00 AM EST
Recently I purchased a SPR upper w/o Scope. Because I wanted to build the SPR as close as possible to it's correct configuration I did a little research and found this regarding optics.

SnipersHide

Leupold's MRT Scope

by Mike Miller

If you have ever been unfortunate enough to carry a weapon in harms way you learn a few things fast. The farther away you can engage/hit the enemy the better chance you have of survival. A Sniper Rifle is great for long range but is not the best choice for closer in combat. A M4 Carbine is great at shorter ranges, under 400 yards, but not the best choice for the 600 to 700 yard ranges.

With that said it is hard to get an advantage without getting bogged down with optics and or multiple rifles. The US Military understands this and has developed a rifle that is neither a Sniper Rifle nor an Assault Rifle. They call this the Special Purpose Rifle. It is based on the M16 Family of weapons and has an 18” bbl. The BBL length was picked because this was the shortest length that would stabilize the longer 77 grain 5.56mm bullets at long ranges, 600-700 yards, ranges. I wont go into detail but the SPR is a fine weapon and has recorded many 700 yard hits during the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Currently I consider the SPR to be the best weapon system going for ranges from 50-700 meters.

Now to hit something you must see it. In combat seldom does the enemy give you much to shoot at so the lower power 1-4 power scopes used before on M16s lacked the power to resolve something as small as a human head at 600 plus yards. These scopes, such as Leupold’s fine CQT where designed for Close Quarters Battle, not long range work. The human head being typical of the size of a target you actually see when the rounds are flinging about. The military tried the sniper scopes available but ran into two problems:

1. The sniper scopes where too big/long and interfered with other items (NVD’s etc) to be placed on top of the SPR.

2. The shorter M16 stocks forced the sniper rifle scopes to be mounted far forward so the proper eye relief could be had, that allowed the shooter to quickly take a shot.

What was needed was a shorter scope with less eye relief that allowed the scope to be used with all other equipment on the SPR. Leupold won this contract, with what is now marketed as the MRT Scope. MRT stands for Medium Range Tactical . The MRT is designed to be used on the AR15/M16 flat top family of rifles. These same basic scopes have been in military use for over a year. They have stood up to some of the most abusive environments known to man. Having been to Afghanistan I can attest to how bad the conditions are. If a weapon system holds up to this type of abuse I would trust it anywhere. The Leupold scope did and after a year of extensive real world testing it is being released for public sale.

I was fortunate enough to get one of the first production scopes. The specifications are:

12” long
3-9 power
36mm objective
30mm tube
Choice M1 1/4moa per click or M3 type 1 moa BDC (Bullet Drop Compensator) elevation and 1/2moa windage Knobs (Although the attached Leupold provided MRT Photo shows a 1moa windage knob, it is in fact a 1/2moa know and adjustment)
Lit reticle or non lit reticle versions in either type of knob.
New improved “Index Matched”glass

The specifications don’t mean much until you mount the scope on a rifle and use it. Then it all makes sense. The eye relief is perfect for the AR/M16 family of rifles, but also worked well on a light bolt action hunting rifle. The scope I tested had the lit reticle and M3 knobs. Leupold really thought this out because the BDC M3 knobs actually interchange with the new MK4 M3 3.5-10 scopes and last years M3 3.5-10 LR scopes. My scope came with a BDC for the 62 grain 5.56mm round but other BDC are available. The scope does not have an adjustable objective feature but in shooting with it from 50 to 700 meters I found I did not need it. I found the 36mm objective to be a perfect compromise between too big and too small for the flat top mounting. The scope works with standard 30mm rings as long as the objective clears any system obstructions.

The “Index Matched Glass” is new this year on all MK4’s except the CQT and Spotting Scopes (They have Multi coat 4) and an improvement over the older coatings. Looking through this scope you see a sight picture as clear as any scope of this size, I have ever used. Frankly the writers opinion is this is as good of glass as you can get. I cant wait for the Sniper Rifle scopes to become available so I can test the new “Index Matched Glass” in them also.

I tested the scope for tracking and repeatability. It performed flawlessly. 40 moa dialed was 40 moa moved and it would return to zero each time without a hitch. This is no surprise as this is common to all the Leupold scopes I have tested.

I personally only used this scope for a month, but as said earlier it is being used in combat as you read this and reports I have received, support what I have learned. This is a fine scope and what I want on my SPR Rifle.

Leupold & Stevens
Military/Law Enforcement Division
14400 NW Greenbrier PKWY
Beaverton, Oregon 97006-5790
USA
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 10:54:30 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/12/2004 1:54:57 AM EST
Wes,

Would you recomend the use of the ARMS 38 Swan Slleve in conjunction with the new Larue mount and the Nightforce NXS 2.5-10 power scope? All the pictures I see of this scope and mount combination have the mount sitting directly on the flattop. The Mk 12 Mod 0 SPR I was considering has the PRI tube and ARMS Swan Sleeve. I wonder would the use of the sleeve and the Larue place the scope at an unconfortable height. The stock I've selected is the VLTOR non-clubfoot collapsable.

Regards,
Gary
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 3:26:47 AM EST
Anyone?
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 3:37:23 AM EST
The Swan sleeve raises the mounting rail surface by 1/2 inch or so. Putting the Larue mount on top of the #38 will probably put the LOS through the optic too high for a good cheek weld.

Paladin
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 4:13:12 AM EST
Paladin,

In looking at all the pics on this forum I had not seen the Larue/ARMS Swan Sleeve combination on an SPR and I figured that was the reason why. So if I go with the Swan, I need to scrap the Larue and go with an ARMS 22L or other such ring set up for my Nightforce 2.5-10.

Anyone else care to chime in?

Regards,
Gary
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 5:49:00 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/14/2004 12:33:29 AM EST
depends on what your barrel is made out of... i didn't look hard but i didn't see you list it...

what is your upper? length?

depending on that will give you the answer to your optic theres a big diff. between a ta31 and the other optics you were listing
Link Posted: 10/14/2004 5:51:15 AM EST
I went with the ACOG TA11.
It allowed long shots, and provided the versatility of BAC.

It took me a while to shake my instinct to keep it "true" to the proper SPR set up.
But it works.
Top Top