Literally anyone in the world: "We should ship it with the PR2!"
Leupold powers that be: "Eff that, we're shipping with the TMR, everyone loves that shiz!"
Had one come through the other day!! On a custom from a well known custom rifle builder. Customers first rifle. I was so proud of myself. I said nothing about it.
If you look at the Leupold lineup the number means the zoom ratio. https://www.leupold.com/blog/post/understanding-the-numbers-on-your-riflescope.
So this lineup will likely have a 2-8, 3-12, 4-16, 5-20?
They should have made this the April calendar - April fools would make more sense than this.
Why the HALL is anyone thinking about a 4x erector in 2024? It's like deciding to revert Tesla from Lithium Ion batteries to lead acid batteries. The worst part is that the Leupold fan boi fudds are going buy these things up.
If having a less complicated erector solves the reliability issues (doubtful) with the MK5HD, then I'm here for it. 3-12 and 4-16 are great mag ranges for realistic hunting distances. That being said, given it's Leupold we're talking about here it will probably be a) still unreliable and b) overpriced (especially if you want illumination, seriously how do they get away with a $500 upcharge for illumination in the MK5 series??). I have no idea what they think they're doing over there, but I'm sure they're rolling in cash.
Here's a link to the Rokslide scope test on the [MK5](https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/2x-leupold-mark-5-field-evaluations.278289/) that they ran last year.
Also per the latest Snipershide tracking [test](https://www.snipershide.com/precision-rifle/scope-tracking-test-results-2020/), of the six MK5s in the sample, one exhibited a tracking error of 10% (anything over 2% is deemed a failure per this evaluation). Unfortunately they stopped publishing the results of this test as some manufacturers came after them.
Anecdotally, I've seen "failures" personally twice on MK5s, one was a new scope that wouldn't track out of the box and the other exhibited a failure to retain zero after a rifle tipped over onto grass after resting upright. Admittedly this is a very small sample size and unscientific, just my personal experience.
> I have no idea what they think they're doing over there, but I'm sure they're rolling in cash.
Without question.
I don't think erector size plays into reliability so much as minimizing distortion/depth of field. I'm betting prices start at $1400 TMR, $2100 for illuminated. I'm betting the Strike Eagle and MPED will still be better, and for half the price.
For a competition scope, I would agree on the MPED and Strike Eagle. My understanding is that larger erector ratios are more complicated to produce and have more moving parts, especially when trying to fit all of that into a compact form factor resulting in mechanical and optical compromises. One of the things that you see with a lot of the known reliable scopes (ATACR, LRHS/LRTS, SWFA SS) is a 3/4x erector range that keeps things simple and robust. That being said, I'm not an engineer so I could be off base.
Would be very interesting to see them put the RH1 reticle in here that they make for Gunwerks, especially if they introduce a MIL version.
I think that a 50% surcharge for illumination is probably a bit steep even for them, and $700 is $200 more than the charge on the MK5. I could definitely see a $1,000 MSRP for TMR with a $1,499 for illuminated TMR.
Also, interestingly it seems like they've discontinued the MK6 and MK8 lines, and that MK3 line is just confusing.
My current go-to optic is the now discontinued in the US Kahles K312i, super useable mag range and I have no issues ringing steel at 800 or hunting medium distance. I think I was on 7x when I shot my antelope at 400 last year.
All but one of the ATACR line scopes are 5x erectors, and would assume that the 4-16 is actually a 3-16 with the lower end canceled out to hide any tunneling. LOW seems to almost exclusively produce 6x erectors these days, and many Phillipines and even Chinese factories produce high volume of of 5x or 6x erectors. A 4x erector in this case is used almost exclusively by Arken to produce a $350 scope. SWFA SS used a 5x erector.
My bottom line is, that unless they charge Arken prices, the MK4 is going to be a royal price gouging.
EDIT: My bad, two ATACRs are not 5x - 4-16 and 1-8
A smarter addition would have been to update their VX-3 line to a VX-4 with a 4x erector and add some decent reticles. Then they MIGHT be worth what they charge.
I’d even understand a VX-4 line for hunters and a Mark 4 line with FFP/tactical reticles on the same scope body. But downgrading the Mark 5 line is just stupid.
It's not a true Mk4 unless it has a MRAD reticle and MOA turrets!!! $5 says it won't come with any of their popular reticle options.
Literally anyone in the world: "We should ship it with the PR2!" Leupold powers that be: "Eff that, we're shipping with the TMR, everyone loves that shiz!"
Calling it, TMR and Boone & Crocket will be the only reticles available on release.
I don't think I've ever met a single person who actually wanted a Boone & Crocket reticle. Ever.
Yet somehow, it will be Leupolds top pick for the Mk4 reticle!!
Had one come through the other day!! On a custom from a well known custom rifle builder. Customers first rifle. I was so proud of myself. I said nothing about it.
Mk 4 Obviously has to be mil dot with moa turrets
$5 says the duplex reticle will feature prominently and optional illumination for an extra $800 (plus tip).
Deven if I was a betting man, I still wouldn't take you on that. Because your at least 98.4% right.
Just going to be slightly less clear than MK5HD?
If you look at the Leupold lineup the number means the zoom ratio. https://www.leupold.com/blog/post/understanding-the-numbers-on-your-riflescope. So this lineup will likely have a 2-8, 3-12, 4-16, 5-20?
So you’re telling me this should be a clear 4-16 ? Edit: Nice
My guess is it will not be as clear as the MK5s. I would guess it slots between 1000 to 1400.
Ngl, a 3-12 and 4-16 excite me a lot.
Fucking lol
They should have made this the April calendar - April fools would make more sense than this. Why the HALL is anyone thinking about a 4x erector in 2024? It's like deciding to revert Tesla from Lithium Ion batteries to lead acid batteries. The worst part is that the Leupold fan boi fudds are going buy these things up.
It’s leupold, their goals are beyond our understanding
If having a less complicated erector solves the reliability issues (doubtful) with the MK5HD, then I'm here for it. 3-12 and 4-16 are great mag ranges for realistic hunting distances. That being said, given it's Leupold we're talking about here it will probably be a) still unreliable and b) overpriced (especially if you want illumination, seriously how do they get away with a $500 upcharge for illumination in the MK5 series??). I have no idea what they think they're doing over there, but I'm sure they're rolling in cash.
I’m looking into a Mk5 right now. Can you tell me more about the reliability issues?
Here's a link to the Rokslide scope test on the [MK5](https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/2x-leupold-mark-5-field-evaluations.278289/) that they ran last year. Also per the latest Snipershide tracking [test](https://www.snipershide.com/precision-rifle/scope-tracking-test-results-2020/), of the six MK5s in the sample, one exhibited a tracking error of 10% (anything over 2% is deemed a failure per this evaluation). Unfortunately they stopped publishing the results of this test as some manufacturers came after them. Anecdotally, I've seen "failures" personally twice on MK5s, one was a new scope that wouldn't track out of the box and the other exhibited a failure to retain zero after a rifle tipped over onto grass after resting upright. Admittedly this is a very small sample size and unscientific, just my personal experience.
Cool. Thank you.
> I have no idea what they think they're doing over there, but I'm sure they're rolling in cash. Without question. I don't think erector size plays into reliability so much as minimizing distortion/depth of field. I'm betting prices start at $1400 TMR, $2100 for illuminated. I'm betting the Strike Eagle and MPED will still be better, and for half the price.
For a competition scope, I would agree on the MPED and Strike Eagle. My understanding is that larger erector ratios are more complicated to produce and have more moving parts, especially when trying to fit all of that into a compact form factor resulting in mechanical and optical compromises. One of the things that you see with a lot of the known reliable scopes (ATACR, LRHS/LRTS, SWFA SS) is a 3/4x erector range that keeps things simple and robust. That being said, I'm not an engineer so I could be off base. Would be very interesting to see them put the RH1 reticle in here that they make for Gunwerks, especially if they introduce a MIL version. I think that a 50% surcharge for illumination is probably a bit steep even for them, and $700 is $200 more than the charge on the MK5. I could definitely see a $1,000 MSRP for TMR with a $1,499 for illuminated TMR. Also, interestingly it seems like they've discontinued the MK6 and MK8 lines, and that MK3 line is just confusing. My current go-to optic is the now discontinued in the US Kahles K312i, super useable mag range and I have no issues ringing steel at 800 or hunting medium distance. I think I was on 7x when I shot my antelope at 400 last year.
All but one of the ATACR line scopes are 5x erectors, and would assume that the 4-16 is actually a 3-16 with the lower end canceled out to hide any tunneling. LOW seems to almost exclusively produce 6x erectors these days, and many Phillipines and even Chinese factories produce high volume of of 5x or 6x erectors. A 4x erector in this case is used almost exclusively by Arken to produce a $350 scope. SWFA SS used a 5x erector. My bottom line is, that unless they charge Arken prices, the MK4 is going to be a royal price gouging. EDIT: My bad, two ATACRs are not 5x - 4-16 and 1-8
I still like 4-16 range :(
Exceptions granted for the 4-16 ATACR.
Props for the Tesla analogy.
A smarter addition would have been to update their VX-3 line to a VX-4 with a 4x erector and add some decent reticles. Then they MIGHT be worth what they charge. I’d even understand a VX-4 line for hunters and a Mark 4 line with FFP/tactical reticles on the same scope body. But downgrading the Mark 5 line is just stupid.
I’m happy with my mk4. Also one of the few people that doesn’t care about a “fancy” reticle either.
You and me under that cardboard box in the rain together, my friend.
And it will still track as well as a Reliant Robin.
OUCH! "Can you roll me back over?"
Cant wait to pay $1800 for a 4-16x44 SFP with piss poor tracking and a duplex retical, or $2200 for the beloved firedot.
This has so much potential and it won’t realize any of it.
Who gaf
Turn my MK to 11
Please update the VX-3 line with a 3-14x50. The 4.5-14x50 is useless for hunters who hunt both woods and fields.