I think I have it narrowed down between these two scopes for my AR.  No hard use at all, just going to the range and shooting at 100 yards or less.  The price of each one is about the same and both have a lifetime warranty.

The Duplex reticle on the Leupold and Point Blank reticle on the Nikon would be fine for me.  The Leupold is about 4 ounces lighter which I like. The reticle lines (I'm told) are thicker on the Nikon which I actually would like because I can't see worth a damn any more.  Anyone know if that is a fact?  I hate getting old.

So if you have had either one or both, feel free to give me your .02 worth and advice.  It is much appreciated.

I really like my Mark AR but I have the SPR reticle. It is at least 1 moa thick. Not sure on the Nikon.

I bought the Mark AR for its lightweight and have been very impressed with it.

Can you look at both locally somewhere?

I've called around.  Nearest shop that has both is a solid hour away. Might go there though.

I have the AR MOd 1 also, but without the illuminated dot. Have it on my SIG M400, and really like it. Someday I'll get a quick detach mount for it, the supplied mount needs to be re-torqued now and again.

I love my Nikon, but I went with a Prostaff BDC 3x9x40. For the $ it's VERY clear glass and I'm happy.

You can't go wrong with either. Great customer service. I still always lean Leopold, although I have several of each brand.

I looked at the duplex reticle on the Leupold, pretty thin.  Seems no one around here has a SPR reticle in stock.  I might go with the Nikon point blank reticle.  The guys at SWFA (site sponsor) say it is a bit heavier so that might work.  The small dot in the center might help too.