Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Leupold Comparison
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="John Burns" data-source="post: 307729" data-attributes="member: 2164"><p>Hogghead,</p><p></p><p>The dual bias spring system is the same but there is a difference in the way the turrets attach to the tube. The MK IV turrets are quite a bit larger so there might be a loss of internal adjustment.</p><p></p><p>The VX-3s we use for our GreyBull optic have a little over 105 MOA so there might also be some confusion on the Leupold website.</p><p></p><p>LRHWAL,</p><p></p><p>Our scopes have a dust cap to cover the turrets. This cap is not a part of the waterproofing so using the optic without it does not compromise the integrity. I prefer to leave mine off so I always try and check it before shooting. I have had only one instance of the turret moving while in a scabbard and I heard it click as the rifle was being removed.</p><p></p><p>The more common screw up for me is to forget to return the scope to 200 yd zero. If I then replace the dust cover I end up carrying a rifle zeroed for some other range but I think I am back on 200yds. Nothing is perfect but for me the better option is to leave the elevation dust cap off and do my best to keep an eye on it during movement. </p><p></p><p>I have the same opinion of the large Nightforce or MK IV tactical turrets. I have used "tactical turrets" quite a bit before going back to the smaller target turrets. Tactical style turrets look cool and work great from a bench or static position but for me the turrets took too much of a beating in the field. Under hard use the large turrets get hammered and this abuse is transmitted to the optic.</p><p></p><p>I can always tell an optic with tactical style turrets that has been used hard because the anodizing on the knurling is gone. The smaller target turrets stay looking new for a much longer time making me believe the optic is taking less of a beating when the going gets tough.</p><p></p><p>Having used both styles in below 0 weather I don't think the larger turret has any advantage when wearing gloves so we get back to the same issue of bigger without offering any performance gain. I like the lightest most compact optic that will still perform at the same or higher level than the competition.</p><p></p><p>There is no difference in tracking between a VX-3s with 40 or 50mm objectives. The big advantages for the 50 mm are:</p><p></p><p>• With the larger exit pupil the optic is faster and much easier to use. The 4.5-14x50mm has an exit pupil of 3.6 mm @14x and the same optic with the 40mm has an exit pupil of 2.86 mm. It is easier to see thru a 3.6mm hole than a 2.9mm hole and you can acquire targets quicker and spot your hits better thru the larger exit pupil.</p><p></p><p>• All things being equal a larger objective will give better resolution</p><p></p><p>• Slight advantage in low light but I think this is a little overblown compared to the above mentioned ease of use issues.</p><p></p><p>Due to the quantifiable reasons above I like the 50mm better and is an example for me of accepting a larger optic for the real gains the larger objective offers.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="John Burns, post: 307729, member: 2164"] Hogghead, The dual bias spring system is the same but there is a difference in the way the turrets attach to the tube. The MK IV turrets are quite a bit larger so there might be a loss of internal adjustment. The VX-3s we use for our GreyBull optic have a little over 105 MOA so there might also be some confusion on the Leupold website. LRHWAL, Our scopes have a dust cap to cover the turrets. This cap is not a part of the waterproofing so using the optic without it does not compromise the integrity. I prefer to leave mine off so I always try and check it before shooting. I have had only one instance of the turret moving while in a scabbard and I heard it click as the rifle was being removed. The more common screw up for me is to forget to return the scope to 200 yd zero. If I then replace the dust cover I end up carrying a rifle zeroed for some other range but I think I am back on 200yds. Nothing is perfect but for me the better option is to leave the elevation dust cap off and do my best to keep an eye on it during movement. I have the same opinion of the large Nightforce or MK IV tactical turrets. I have used “tactical turrets” quite a bit before going back to the smaller target turrets. Tactical style turrets look cool and work great from a bench or static position but for me the turrets took too much of a beating in the field. Under hard use the large turrets get hammered and this abuse is transmitted to the optic. I can always tell an optic with tactical style turrets that has been used hard because the anodizing on the knurling is gone. The smaller target turrets stay looking new for a much longer time making me believe the optic is taking less of a beating when the going gets tough. Having used both styles in below 0 weather I don’t think the larger turret has any advantage when wearing gloves so we get back to the same issue of bigger without offering any performance gain. I like the lightest most compact optic that will still perform at the same or higher level than the competition. There is no difference in tracking between a VX-3s with 40 or 50mm objectives. The big advantages for the 50 mm are: • With the larger exit pupil the optic is faster and much easier to use. The 4.5-14x50mm has an exit pupil of 3.6 mm @14x and the same optic with the 40mm has an exit pupil of 2.86 mm. It is easier to see thru a 3.6mm hole than a 2.9mm hole and you can acquire targets quicker and spot your hits better thru the larger exit pupil. • All things being equal a larger objective will give better resolution • Slight advantage in low light but I think this is a little overblown compared to the above mentioned ease of use issues. Due to the quantifiable reasons above I like the 50mm better and is an example for me of accepting a larger optic for the real gains the larger objective offers. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Leupold Comparison
Top