FEEDBACK-OPINIONS PICYURES WANTED LEUPOLD VARI X III TAC LR M1/M3 ILLUM NON ILLUM

AR Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - FEEDBACK-OPINIONS PICYURES WANTED LEUPOLD VARI X III TAC LR M1/M3 ILLUM NON ILLUM

Posted: 9/26/2003 10:54:19 PM EDT

LOOKING FOR OPINIONS-FEEDBACK AND PICTURES, FROM THOSE WITH ANY LEUPOLD (ESPECIALLY VARI X III TACTICAL SCOPES LR M1/M3 WITH AND WITHOUT ILLUMINATED RETICLES). FOR USE ON COLT FLAT TOP, .223, H-BAR 20", 1 IN 9 TWIST, W/FULL FLOATED FORE END, 100-600 YRDS. THANKS IN ADVANCE TO ALL. YOUR OPINIONS ARE APPRECIATED.

Posted: 9/27/2003 12:10:37 AM EDT

[#1]

I have both the M1 and M3 and have done a quite a bit of shooting with the two. If you are consantly shooting at different ranges, the M3 is much quicker to adjust due to 1 MOA elevation turret vs the 1/4 MOA turret on the M1. If you are shooting at more fixed distances the M1 is very good.
The big problem I have seen with people shooting the M1 is they sometimes loose track of how many revolutions they clicked when they are going from close in shots to long shots. With the M3, it's just a single revolution.

Posted: 9/27/2003 12:37:27 AM EDT

[#2]

One thing to add about the M3, your elevation cam in calibrated for a 55grn bullet at a known distance (Bullet Drop Compensation). I've used this several times on targets out to 450 yards and it's dead on, no guessing involved.

[img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=568[/img]

Posted: 9/27/2003 6:04:44 AM EDT

[#3]

The 7.62x51mm NATO Mk 11 Mod 0 Sniper Rifle Systems we deliver to the Navy SEALs & select Army units all are required to have the Leupold 3.5-10x Vari-X III Long Range Tactical M3 w/mildot reticle.
We have qualified over 500 of these on their host Mk 11's in the last 3 years. That means with each scope mounted, 40 rounds of accuracy firing and then 200 rounds of reliability, all with the scope mounted.
As you know, the M3 comes with additional elevation knobs, one calibrated for 5.56.
Through all this "field quality control", they have performend very, very well.
They are a great scope, almost as good as their Mk 4, but the Mk 4 is not a variable.

Posted: 9/27/2003 8:03:12 AM EDT

[#4]

Coldblue,
is that calibration done for meters or yards? One guy in other forum told that there is two variants of this scope.

I´m very satisfied to my M3 LR and calibration works just fine from 100- 300 meters with 55 gr bullet.

MN

Posted: 9/27/2003 11:52:16 AM EDT

[#5]

On the top is printed: .223 REM/5.56mm
On the side is printed: X 100 YD.
Then there are master range markings above their MOA clicks (1, 2,3,4,5).
The 100 YD mark is at 0 MOA, the 500 YD mark is at 11 MOA.
The MOA continue around to 60 (actually 59 because you can't pass 0 a second time).

Posted: 9/27/2003 12:09:26 PM EDT

[#6]

I have both the MkIV M3 and M3LR (premier reticle's 2nd gen mildot.)

I dont see the need for the 1/4MOA clicks - but that is just me.

The scope "cam's" are best off being sanded painted and scribed to your shooting, in your gun with your ammo.
I had to re-scribe a M118LR cam for it did not jibe past 500m with my rifle/ammo combo.

A friend of mine who ran SOTIC stuff at 1SFG recommends that approach and required it from his students - he hounded the point to me when I was down shooting in Lewis, and I have subsequently adopted it as gospel - for it works.

Posted: 9/27/2003 12:38:02 PM EDT

[#7]

EXCELLENT THREAD SO FAR. GREAT FEEDBACK. OUTSTANDING INFORMATION FROM QUALIFIED PERSONS WITH FIELD EXPERIENCE. NO FEEDBACK AS OF YET FROM THOSE WITH ILLUM RETICLE.

Posted: 9/27/2003 1:25:23 PM EDT

[#8]

I have both and illuminated and a non illuminated. For daylight shooting, the illumination is worthless. For precision daylight shooting, the "floating" crosshairs on the illuminated do not seem to be as precise as the standard duplex in in the non-illuminated. But that could be just me.

In twilight or darkness, the illumination is a big help.

Both are great scopes, but if I bought another it would most likely be non illuminated, as how many do you need? Plus the standard is cheaper. I got the illuminated late last year when they were discontinuing one version and bringing out another. Leupold retrofitted the current electronics and off center adjustment knob at no charge.

Illuminated on SPR wannabe w/ ARMS #35 QD base and low rings:
[img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=9365[/img]

Non-illuminated in Leupold Mk IV rings directly on flat top and FF RAS on KAC SR15 Match:
[img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=15212[/img]

Posted: 10/3/2003 10:24:05 PM EDT

[#9]

THANKS TO ALL THOSE THAT RESPONDED. WISH I COULD FIND A TS30A2. FOR NOW IF ANYONE KNOWS WHERE TO GET THE BEST DEAL ON A LR M3 WITH GEN 2 RETICLE, EITHER ILLUM OR NON ILLUM, PLEASE ADVISE. BEEN LOOKING HARD AND HAVEN'T FOUND THE RIGHT DEAL YET.

Posted: 10/4/2003 1:58:37 AM EDT

[#10]

[img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=14087[/img]

Illuminated M3. Haven't shot it with illumination enough to form an opinion.

I got lucky, got it off of the EE boards...

Posted: 10/4/2003 5:12:51 AM EDT

[#11]

[url]http://www.premierreticles.com/[/url].........(540)868-2044 Ask for Rob and tell em mike sent ya...........Oh yeah CAPS LOCK!...........UNDERDOG

Posted: 10/4/2003 7:57:28 PM EDT

[#12]

MIKE, WILL CALL PREMIER MONDAY MORN. MUCH THANKS FOR THE ASSIST. SORRY BOUT CAPS LOCK. I'M A POOR TYPIST WITH A BAD WHEEL. DON'T MEAN TO YELL.

Posted: 10/9/2003 10:20:30 AM EDT

[#13]

I'll 2nd the recommendation for Premiere.

I bought a #51182G from them this spring.
(3.5-10 x 40 M3 LR Tactical)

Easily the best glass I've ever owned.

The Gen 2 Mildot reticle is awesome.

The groundhogs around here hate it!

Posted: 10/9/2003 10:43:06 AM EDT

[#14]

Danhits -

Few points -

1. Gen 2 is very handy if you intend to mil with your rifle scope.

2. Gen 2 can NOT be put in an illum reticle

3. Only premiere sells gen 2. A gen2 M3 is about $800.00.

4. Cams - cams are great if and only if you shoot one load, from one gun, at one temp, at one elevation, with one humidity index - know your dope, don't rely on the cam.

5. Chem sticks can be improvised to create illum for your reticle.

M3 is a put a round on the target quickly scope that requires the shooter to be able to shoot using holdovers - 1 MOA adj means 6" vertical at 600.

I like M3, I like Gen2.

Good luck

Posted: 10/9/2003 7:18:44 PM EDT

[#15]

I have a Leupold MK4 M3 and a Leupold VariX-III 4.5x14X40mm, both with the Gen 2 reticle. I originally had the variable scope on my Remington PSS but the "click-ology" finally got the better of me, so I moved that scope to my Bushmaster and bought the M3 for the .308.

I couldn't be happier with the scopes and am ecstatic about the ease and accuracy afforded by the Gen 2 reticle.

Regarding illuminated reticles, it's been my opinion they're more trouble than they're worth. I like simple and a lighted reticle ain't simple.

Posted: 10/10/2003 6:33:09 AM EDT

[#16]

In defense of the M1 knobs I have no problem with the revolutions- there are hash marks to indicate where you are in turns. The M3 is faster but the M1 has better graduation 1/4 MOA. The M3 will pretty much keep you in the kill area at long ranges but not to the degree of the M1. As far as illum goes get the Mildot or the German #4. (You may have to call Luepy to see if they can put it in the tactical.) THe duplex has annoying large crosshairs.

J

Posted: 10/10/2003 7:13:49 AM EDT

[#17]

Jason,
The only time the M1 knobs are useful on a tactical gun are on a .338LM or .50BMG - for at those rnages the 1MOA click M3 can send you out of the KZ.

In close the M1 is overly complicated and the shooter can easily be 1 rev out and not know it - low light, fatigue etc.
K.I.S.S. --> M3

Posted: 10/10/2003 3:44:37 PM EDT

[#18]

I checked w/Premiere and Leupy about installing M3 knobs on an M1 scope.

Premiere says that while it is mechanically possible, Leupold is dragging their feet on giving permission and making parts available.

I spoke with Leupold, and they referred me to: [url]www.KentonIndustries.com[/url].

These folks make custom laser-engraved turret knobs. The knobs are calibrated to the load data that you provide, and they are marked with come-ups for whatever ranges you specify.
That's as close as you can get to having M3 BDC 'cams' on an M1 scope.

I think that I'm going to order a set and put a Premiere 4.5-14 x 50 M1 LR Tactical Gen 2 MilDot on my SEBR AR-10.

Does anyone have any experience with [url]www.KentonIndustries.com[/url]?

Posted: 10/10/2003 8:03:49 PM EDT

[#19]

Thread is looking good. Thanks.

Posted: 10/11/2003 10:06:07 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Regarding illuminated reticles, it's been my opinion they're more trouble than they're worth. I like simple and a lighted reticle ain't simple.

View Quote

[>:/] I just don't understand this type of comment. With the IR, you have an option. If it fails, you simply don't have that option, but the base unit still functions as if it didn't have one. Like a light on your rifle, if it fails, all you have is the rifle, same as if you didn't have the light at all (excepting weight and bulk, just mean with or without light). I would rather have the option unless it prevented me from using the item without it.

Posted: 10/11/2003 10:33:19 PM EDT

[#21]

The only complain I have with my M3LR is the cam I have was from an old model and it won't go below your zero-ed elevation, it has a notch to prevent you from doing so. It gives me problem on hot days or higher altitudes when I have to drop it below zero. I believe the later models have the problem fixed. Just be aware when you buy it used.

[img]http://home.graffiti.net/3par/DSCN0005.JPG[/img]

Posted: 10/11/2003 11:46:08 PM EDT

[#22]

HYCHENG... OLD MODEL LEUPOLD WITH A NOTCHED CAM. YOU SHOULD TREAT YOURSELF TO A BRAND NEW LEUPY WITH A NEW CAM. I WILL TAKE THAT OLD ONE OFF YOUR HANDS FOR A FAIR PRICE IF YOU WANT.

Posted: 10/15/2003 5:59:11 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Regarding illuminated reticles, it's been my opinion they're more trouble than they're worth. I like simple and a lighted reticle ain't simple.

View Quote

[>:/] I just understand this type of comment. With the IR, you have an option. If it fails, you simply don't have that option, but the base unit still functions as if it didn't have one. Like a light on your rifle, if it fails, all you have is the rifle, same as if you didn't have the light at all (excepting weight and bulk, just mean with or without light). I would rather have the option unless it prevented me from using the item without it.

View Quote

I see what you're saying, but that's not entirely accurate: a lighted reticle can physically break; leaving you with something rattling around in your tube that has to be ignored or fixed.

If this in fact not the case and a lighted reticle is no different from a standard type, I will gladly reverse my stance on IR's.

Posted: 10/15/2003 10:17:01 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Regarding illuminated reticles, it's been my opinion they're more trouble than they're worth. I like simple and a lighted reticle ain't simple.

View Quote

[>:/] I just understand this type of comment. With the IR, you have an option. If it fails, you simply don't have that option, but the base unit still functions as if it didn't have one. Like a light on your rifle, if it fails, all you have is the rifle, same as if you didn't have the light at all (excepting weight and bulk, just mean with or without light). I would rather have the option unless it prevented me from using the item without it.

View Quote

I see what you're saying, but that's not entirely accurate: a lighted reticle can physically break; leaving you with something rattling around in your tube that has to be ignored or fixed.

If this in fact not the case and a lighted reticle is no different from a standard type, I will gladly reverse my stance on IR's.

View Quote

El_Roto, I certainly agree with you there. Myself, I have never had a reticle break, much less a lit one but it certainly does happen, and the only cases I know personally just said the illumination failed when lit reticles were involved. Unfortunately, I simply am ignorant to the ways of reticle and scope manufacture. This warrants a letter to Leupold to ask them what the skinny is, I'll see if I can do it. Unlike the flashlight failing, reticle failure could be disasterous, and if a lit reticle is any more susceptible to failure, then agreed, that would not be something acceptable to a serious operator. Will post results of inquiry if any. Going to write it RIGHT NOW! [:D]

Posted: 10/16/2003 12:42:25 PM EDT

[#25]

Well, here is a surprise to me. I did write the letter to Leupold asking them about the durability issue when comparing illuminated reticles to non-illuminated, and here is what they said:

"Michael,
The illuminated reticles are all made of glass. In fact, they're more durable than the wire reticles used in othe models.

Garth

Leupold Customer Service
Product Specialist Group"

I had forgotten that the IR's are usually etched glass. Change your mind El_Roto? I know mine has been - wild!

Posted: 10/16/2003 12:50:29 PM EDT

[#26]

My previous AR10.....

[img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=5489[/img]

My current AR10....

[img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=17466[/img]
[size=1]Though it no longer wears the RAS, it will be wearing a {T} FF handguard in a couple weeks.....[/size=1]

Posted: 10/16/2003 12:58:34 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Well, here is a surprise to me. I did write the letter to Leupold asking them about the durability issue when comparing illuminated reticles to non-illuminated, and here is what they said:

"Michael,
The illuminated reticles are all made of glass. In fact, they're more durable than the wire reticles used in othe models.

Garth

Leupold Customer Service
Product Specialist Group"

View Quote

If that's the case, then I wonder why Premiere Reticles can't put their Gen 2 Mil-Dot reticle in an IR scope. Anyone know? Hmmmmmmmm . . .

Posted: 10/16/2003 1:06:27 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

If that's the case, then I wonder why Premiere Reticles can't put their Gen 2 Mil-Dot reticle in an IR scope. Anyone know? Hmmmmmmmm . . .

View Quote

That's because the IR reticle is in secondary focal point not primary. Premiere wants to put their reticles in primary to make it tracking the magnification.