Leupold Mk 4 3.5-10x for target and hunting?

B

Bird Blaster

Regular
Rating - 100%
202   0   0
Location
Northern Ontario
I have a question about what scope may work the best for me. If I am repeating something that has been answered 100x before, please point me in the right direction. I know how annoying it is to see the same topics posted on all the time.

I recently purchased a Rem 700 XCR Long Range Tactical in 300WM thanks to another CGN member!! I need to match a scope to it that suites my purposes. I would like to use the gun for hunting and target shooting. I am going to be new to long"er" range shooting, but not to hunting.. Hunting will likely be for black bear and deer, and hopefully elk and caribou in the future. My moose hunting is short range and I have another Browning X-bolt 30.06 w/ a low-power scope. Regarding target shooting, it will be a newer hobby to me. Realistically I probably won't be reaching for those 1000yrd shots ANYTIME soon.

I have been reading lots about scopes for long range shooting, and a lot of them can be very expensive like S&B, NF etc...I think those are probably more scope than I need. I was looking at something like a Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x. Is there another scope which might suite my needs better? I am comfortabel spending around $1500, but not really a heck of a lot more.

The other question I have is regarding M1/M5 turrets. Since "milling" things will be new to me, is it easy to learn Mil dot/MOA (M1) or a Mil/Mil system (M5)??

Again please point me in the right direction if I am just repeating previous questions.

thanks
 
I had that exact scope (Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm) on my ATRS-built 300 WM. I promptly found that it wasn't as much magnification as I wanted so I replaced it with a 5.5-22x NXS and have never regretted the decision. For a little bit more you get more reticles to choose from, 20 MOA per revolution turret, illuminated reticle standard and double the magnification.

Going MIL/MIL or MOA/MOA is the best way to go. Personally, I range with a rangefinder and can't wrap my brain around estimating target size in metric. Wish I could but I can't. There is lots of talk that ranging isn't why you should go MIL/MIL with your scope but frankly I can't imagine any other use for either MIL or MOA reticles unless you're planning to use them to range targets. My Mark 4 has the TMR reticle (which is a great reticle) and MOA dials so not ideal for ranging. My NXS has the NP-R1 reticle and MOA turrets (my NXS 3.5-15x had a mildot reticle and MOA turret - the two don't play cricket).

For hunting you likely won't be startign out at obscene ranges. When Rick from ATRS went to RSA in 2007 we talked scopes and I told him to take a 3.5-10x which he did. He ended up happy that he did and I think that you'll be satisfied with the scope as well for hunting. But the reality is that you are going to want to punch paper or ring gongs out at 700 and 800 yards (and much further once you get into the swing of things) an dfor that game the 5.5-22x NXS is a much better option. You won't regret the few extra bucks spent to buy the NXS. You might even find a used one for a few hundred less than retail and then you'll be really happy that you listened to me (except you won't be able to smallenfreuden).
 
Thank you very much for the thoughts/comments.

I have been reading a lot more about the different scopes. I think FFP is the way to go (obviously!) and that pushes the Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x40mm M5 up to around $1700 where I am. A NF with FFP would be amazing, but I can only seem to find them for around 3k. I will keep looking into this, but I am definitely starting to narrow things down some.
 
Bird Blaster said:
Thank you very much for the thoughts/comments.

I have been reading a lot more about the different scopes. I think FFP is the way to go (obviously!) and that pushes the Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x40mm M5 up to around $1700 where I am. A NF with FFP would be amazing, but I can only seem to find them for around 3k. I will keep looking into this, but I am definitely starting to narrow things down some.
Click to expand...

I've not drunk the FFP Kool-Aid. I don't think that the majority of people ever use FFP for any of the advertised reasons. Another downside to FFP is that the reticle is tiny at low power and extremely large at high power. It's annoying as hell and I don't like it. If you're a Magpul fanboy then you'll have to get FFP and a Horus reticle but really I don't see any reason to spend the extra money on it.

Kombayotch will be along shortly to enlighten us both as to the virtues of FFP and MIL/MIL. He knows all this stuff and can explain it. I don't get it and I don't worry about it.
 
I just received my Vortex 2.5-10x32 mm, mil/mil, FFP, and so far I am quite happy with it. I am a bit of a less is more kind of guy, so I like the smaller scopes as opposed to the higher power, massive bell scopes like the NF NXS series. I'm not a super long range shooter, however just looking at longer ranges I don't think I would feel terribly handicapped using a 10x at 800+ m (the furthest I have shot so far is milk jugs at 400m). FFP is nice as I can read the reticle at the higher powers very nicely, however as mentioned above, good luck reading any of the numbers at the low end. If you are looking to stay around $1000, I would highly recommend Vortex.

Edit: I'm not saying my scope is a better scope than NF, etc., or that it is better at long range. Just that I really like it and it works well.
 
I shot a very nice 6" group at 850m using a fixed 10x scope. Could I have improved it with a better aim point and more magnification? Probably. I wouldn't want to use 10x to shoot a coyote at 800 yards or thereabouts, but it would still be doable. But 20x or 22x or 25x would be better.
 
Scope magnification has more to do with seeing the target than hitting it. Still, having to ask someone whether and where you hit a long range plate takes a lot of the fun out of it.

My little 3.5-10 Mark 4 with Mildot reticle will give a decent aiming reference on targets as small as 1/2 MOA, while remaining slim and trim enough to feel at home on a sporter. My long range hunting rifles that are still trying to be general purpose usually end up with something topping out at 14-15 power, while the heavy ones that border on useless for anything but prone or bench shooting wear scopes from 20-25 power.
 
The nice thing about a hunting scope kept at 10x or less magnification is they usually do not have a parallax adjustment to worry about. In the heat of the hunt having to make an optic adjustment is something I don't want to worry about. I use a 2.5-10x for game hunting and higher magnifications for target(24x) or varmint(14x) hunting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom