Hi folks,

I've dug around in the archives and only found a couple of posts that mentioned this scope. I wondered if I might hear from folks who've owned these or who've fired guns with one mounted.

So, what's your informed opinion of these Leupold Mk 4 CQ/T 1-3x14mm scopes? Would it be worth $600 (I have an extra paycheck coming and CDNN has them on sale)? If they are better or worse than a comparably priced ACOG, how so?

I understand the CQ/Ts have a short (c 7hr) battery life, but that the reticle is still visible when the battery dies. 14mm seems a little narrow, and I hear the eye relief is short.

Thank you for your time!
cheers, erich

I owned one for a while.  My main complaint is that the thing is way too bulky and kind of heavy.  A good idea, but it just didn't work well for me.  Watch-Six

I think the fact that CCDN has them on "clearence" should speak volumes.

A guy I shoot IPSC with put one on his Wilson AR. I fooled with it, didn't bother to shoot with it. It was way too big and bulky, the edges of the optics were noticeably distorted and for what it did, I think it costs too much. I am very happy with my Aimpoint Comp M, CCDN doesn't have these on clearence.

Bill

I definitely recommend try before you buy; some people like the scope, some don't. Here were my perceptions:

The 14mm objective has been described as "looking through a soda straw". I thought that was a pretty apt description.

In CQB role, it loses compared to an Aimpoint because of eye relief and parallax issues. At longer ranges, I liked the ACOG with BAC better because the reticle was finer and you didn't need to mess with any settings to zoom in.

An illuminated reticle is a big help in using the scope quickly. I actually liked the design of the reticle but the color was a poor choice for me. The amber/orange color blended in with brown/tan terrain quite nicely and gave me a disappearing reticle on occasion.

The unilluminated reticle is about on par with any other thick post crosshair in a scope.

I disagree with the "looking through a soda straw" statements.  At 1x with the 14mm objective lens you have a 14mm exit pupil.  (14mm divided by one power equals 14mm).  Your eye can only use 5 to 7mm in darkness let alone in good light.  At 1x the 14mm exit pupil makes your eye alignment very non critical.  At 3x you get 14/3=4.67mm exit pupil.  Compare that to a 40mm objective 10x scope with a 4.0mm exit pupil.  Soda straw?  No.  Bulky?  Yes.  Watch-Six

I agree with watchsix
the objective being 14mm is not noticable when you consider what you eyes are capable of. Like he said. compare this scope apples to apples. A US Optics scope has a 22mm objective but has a smaller exit pupil as all scopes do.
I was on a recent training mission in Indiana and when an Artillary simulator went off (accidentily and unexpectedly in my ear), it also through a piece of gravel into the front object lense of my buddies Aimpoint and broke the crap out of it, after he finished crying and my sobs for his greif subsided, we wondered allowed if that would have happened to my Leupold if I was in his position? Just a thought. Now Im not saying it should be chosen for this reason, and Im not knocking Aimpoints because I love them and my TAO1 as well, its very nice however to have a Leupold, like was said above . some like some dont. I personally dont mind the bulk, But Im not a Carbine fan ( no Offense) I just prefer rifles, so the bulk is not as noticable for me. BTW I was getting more like 24-30 hours on lowest settng for illum. I would however has prefered red illum in ret.
To each their own
IMHO
cp

I very much appreciate all the information. CDNN's clearance is what got me interested - seemed like a heck of a price (which, many times, CDNN has - on good stuff), but I hadn't heard from folks who'd actually SHOT with the things.

I think I'll try to actually lay hands on one before calling over to Abilene. Thanks so much for all the replies!

At 1x with the 14mm objective lens you have a 14mm exit pupil. (14mm divided by one power equals 14mm). Your eye can only use 5 to 7mm in darkness let alone in good light. At 1x the 14mm exit pupil makes your eye alignment very non critical. At 3x you get 14/3=4.67mm exit pupil.

I was comparing the scope side by side with a TA31, TA11, Eotech 551 and Reflex. I've had a chance to evaluate the Aimpoint as well; but not side by side with the CQT.

4.67mm may seem great when examining a single scope but when you are comparing it to a TA11 with 10mm exit pupil at 3.5x, a TA31 with 8mm exit pupil at 4x, or two CQB sights that have unlimited eye-relief and are parallax-free, the soda straw analogy seems pretty apt.

Also, as you noted, since your eye can only use so much exit pupil, the only place the CQT shows an advantage (1x), the advantage wasn't noticeable to me (probably because all three scopes were showing my eye the max it could use). The only thing noticeable was that the CQT got worse as magnification increased and the others (already magnified) stayed the same.

I'll be the first to say that I didn't get to play with the CQT half as much as I'd need to make a truly informed opinion. None of the sights were mine and I was limited to about an hour with all of them; but the CQT would have been my 4th choice out of the 5 sights.

Depending on what you're using the scope for, the issue may be eye placement.  Let's say the eye can use 5mm of light, and the exit pupil of the scope is exactly 5mm.  While this means that the eye can use all the light the scope has, it also means that a slight shift of the eye takes it out of the proper alignment.  That may be fine for slow, precise shooting, but rather suboptimal for defensive purposes.  That's the real advantage of the red dot scopes and scopes with a large exit pupil - speed - because you can use it so quickly without having to get your eye just right.