Looking for Opinions on the Current State of Leupold, Specifically the New Mark4HD

[stomridertx]

Leupold recently unveiled a line of Mark4HD optics that really caught my attention. I'm really interested in the 1-4.5 LPVO and the 2.5-10 variants to replace some AR optics. I haven't bought any Leupold optics since running the old discontinued VX-R Patrol many years ago. I'm extremely tempted to do some selling to get into these optics, but I would like to hear some unbiased opinion. I've seen rumblings over the years of Leupold having tracking problems, but I'm unsure if those rumors are warranted. I've looked through a 5HD scope and was impressed with the glass. I know their warranty and customer service has a great reputation. Tell me about Leupold in 2024.

[okie john]

I have heard those rumors going back about 15 years. Unfortunately, they come from people I trust so I've shied away from Leupold. For me, the biggest cost of shooting is time since I only have a certain amount of it for my entire life. I hate wasting it only to learn that an expensive optic won't do what it was designed to do. The cost of ammunition is also a factor. I don't shoot rifles in competition any more but I do hunt, and the chance of blowing an expensive trip or wounding an animal is also a huge consideration.

Today I own three Leupolds, all fixed 4s. The youngest is ~20 years old. One is on my 22, one on my Tikka Compact, and one on my son’s 30-06. The last one I bought new (2017) was a VX-R 3-9x40 with a Ballistic Firedot reticle (PN 111236). I had it on several rifles but I never dialed with it. The reticle worked well for holding over, which fit with the kind of shooting I was doing at the time.

When I worked in the gun business 30 years ago, optic makers were pretty much Leupold and "Other." Now we have many excellent challengers. The first differentiator seems to be whether the glass is made in Europe, Japan, the Philippines, or China. The second is where the scope is assembled.

In the Leupold's price range, I like Nightforce. I have two of their 3-10x42 SHVs. Every time I look at one, I think, "Leupold should be making this." Right now, I'm in the market for a 1-something with an illuminated reticle, which will likely end up being an NXS 1-8. I also use an NSX 8-32x56 that I took off of an F-class rifle of my father's for load testing. In my experience, Nightforce scopes just do what they're supposed to do.

Even in the glory days, I felt there was a fair amount of voodoo required to zero a Leupold. I can zero a Nightforce in 2-3 shots and go on about my business confident that it won't shift and that I can dial as needed and everything will work as advertised.

To steel-man that argument, I offer this: https://precisionrifleblog.com/2024/06/10/best-long-range-scope-reticle-what-the-pros-use/#google_vignette The first few paragraphs go into the use cases for theses scopes, which definitely vary from mine. Similar here: https://precisionrifleblog.com/2018/12/21/best-scope/ except that it's several years older and the results are completely different.

This shift could reflect a lot of different things. For one thing, F-class and PRS are apples and oranges. For another, even Nightforce's biggest fans have to admit that Leupold's reticle game is far superior. It could reflect evolutions within specific brands over those years that affect how they design and build scopes. Or it could reflect excellent marketing initiatives on the part of several brands to put essentially hand-picked scopes into the hands of sponsored shooters, who then win big and drive sales.

Schmidt & Bender is a bellwether--any survey where they don't show up well indicates that the survey considers things other than sheer quality, usually a feature set that's optimized for a specific use case.

Any brand that shows up in both surveys is likely solid. Find the model and feature set that meets your needs, then go from there.


Okie John

[zcap]

I own the Leupold Mark 4HD 2.5-10x42 SFP (https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-2-5-10x42-m5c3-sfp-illum-tmr-riflescope) with illumination (model 183737). I have also owned similar scopes in the Nightforce NXS 2.5-10 and Trijicon Credo 2-10. The glass on the Mark 4HD is definitely better than the NXS and I would say comparable to the Credo on low magnification but better on high magnification. With the Mark 4HD you also get a zero lock elevation turret, although it "only" has 15 MILs of usable elevation given how the locking mechanism works. Tracking is excellent, at least on my sample within 1% error. I don't know of a better lightweight 2.5-10 optic on the market right now than the Mark 4HD. However, I personally dislike Leupold's thick stadia FFP TMR reticles though as I find them to lack strong visual distinction between the half-mil and mil marks, especially at lower magnifications. The SFP TMR reticle, however, has quite fine and crisp 0.05 MIL lines (at 10x) and being SFP with full length stadia allows for fast deadholds at 2.5x and precise usage at 10x.

I prefer the Steiner P4xi 1-4x P3TR (https://www.steiner-optics.com/products/p4xi-1-4x24) over the Mark 4HD 1-4.5x BDC (https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-1-4-5x24-sfp-illum-firedot-bdc-riflescope). The P3TR reticle has 5 MIL hash marks (or 20 MIL at 1x) at 3, 9 and 12 o'clock which provide more range estimation features in addition to width estimation provided by the BDC stadia. The Mark 4HD BDC reticle doesn't provide any great range estimation features. The build quality on the Mark 4HD seems better than the P4xi, though not enough to warrant the price difference ($600 vs $850 if you know where to look).

[HeavyDuty]

I just picked up a Mk4HD 6-24 from CS Tactical, no rounds through (under) it yet but I’m impressed with the clarity and mechanical build. Not very useful, I know.

[stomridertx]

I just picked up a Mk4HD 6-24 from CS Tactical, no rounds through (under) it yet but I’m impressed with the clarity and mechanical build. Not very useful, I know.

It's useful, I know that you've been shooting a long time so your initial hands-on impression is going to say a lot.

[stomridertx]

I own the Leupold Mark 4HD 2.5-10x42 SFP (https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-2-5-10x42-m5c3-sfp-illum-tmr-riflescope) with illumination (model 183737). I have also owned similar scopes in the Nightforce NXS 2.5-10 and Trijicon Credo 2-10. The glass on the Mark 4HD is definitely better than the NXS and I would say comparable to the Credo on low magnification but better on high magnification. With the Mark 4HD you also get a zero lock elevation turret, although it "only" has 15 MILs of usable elevation given how the locking mechanism works. Tracking is excellent, at least on my sample within 1% error. I don't know of a better lightweight 2.5-10 optic on the market right now than the Mark 4HD. However, I personally dislike Leupold's thick stadia FFP TMR reticles though as I find them to lack strong visual distinction between the half-mil and mil marks, especially at lower magnifications. The SFP TMR reticle, however, has quite fine and crisp 0.05 MIL lines (at 10x) and being SFP with full length stadia allows for fast deadholds at 2.5x and precise usage at 10x.

I prefer the Steiner P4xi 1-4x P3TR (https://www.steiner-optics.com/products/p4xi-1-4x24) over the Mark 4HD 1-4.5x BDC (https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-1-4-5x24-sfp-illum-firedot-bdc-riflescope). The P3TR reticle has 5 MIL hash marks (or 20 MIL at 1x) at 3, 9 and 12 o'clock which provide more range estimation features in addition to width estimation provided by the BDC stadia. The Mark 4HD BDC reticle doesn't provide any great range estimation features. The build quality on the Mark 4HD seems better than the P4xi, though not enough to warrant the price difference ($600 vs $850 if you know where to look).

I have a P4Xi on my wife's AR, it is a badass scope. I actually prefer a straight mil reticle over BDC or any ranging stuff as I have that figured out pretty well. I'm actually thinking of getting the Mark 4HD 1-4.5 to replace my Razor 1-6, for weight savings and the motion sensor. I can come out ahead in price too without a perceived downgrade.
I'm looking exactly at the 2.5-10x42 to replace my Burris XTRIIIi 3.3-18x50. I'm starting to feel that the 16" AR it's on is over-scoped and it seems the 10x eyebox is really good on the Leupold. Your writeup on your experience helps quite a bit.

[littlejerry]

I own the Leupold Mark 4HD 2.5-10x42 SFP (https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-2-5-10x42-m5c3-sfp-illum-tmr-riflescope) with illumination (model 183737). I have also owned similar scopes in the Nightforce NXS 2.5-10 and Trijicon Credo 2-10. The glass on the Mark 4HD is definitely better than the NXS and I would say comparable to the Credo on low magnification but better on high magnification. With the Mark 4HD you also get a zero lock elevation turret, although it "only" has 15 MILs of usable elevation given how the locking mechanism works. Tracking is excellent, at least on my sample within 1% error. I don't know of a better lightweight 2.5-10 optic on the market right now than the Mark 4HD. However, I personally dislike Leupold's thick stadia FFP TMR reticles though as I find them to lack strong visual distinction between the half-mil and mil marks, especially at lower magnifications. The SFP TMR reticle, however, has quite fine and crisp 0.05 MIL lines (at 10x) and being SFP with full length stadia allows for fast deadholds at 2.5x and precise usage at 10x.

I prefer the Steiner P4xi 1-4x P3TR (https://www.steiner-optics.com/products/p4xi-1-4x24) over the Mark 4HD 1-4.5x BDC (https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-1-4-5x24-sfp-illum-firedot-bdc-riflescope). The P3TR reticle has 5 MIL hash marks (or 20 MIL at 1x) at 3, 9 and 12 o'clock which provide more range estimation features in addition to width estimation provided by the BDC stadia. The Mark 4HD BDC reticle doesn't provide any great range estimation features. The build quality on the Mark 4HD seems better than the P4xi, though not enough to warrant the price difference ($600 vs $850 if you know where to look).

Thanks for the write up. I'm a current owner of an NXS 2.5-10x32 and I've been looking at the Mark to go on another rifle, but I'm tempted by the FFP version. The SFP reticle does look nice and fine. The illuminated FFP TMR looks quite chunky. The non-illumunated FFP is a little better...

I'm excited to see this scope exist.

[HeavyDuty]

It's useful, I know that you've been shooting a long time so your initial hands-on impression is going to say a lot.

Thank you, but undeserved - I’m mostly unskilled when it comes to optics. Luckily we have great SMEs here that are generous in sharing their knowledge.

My impression of the optical quality comes from being a lifelong photographer.

[stomridertx]

I read through the Sniper's Hide thread. Once the migraine subsides I'll probably have a couple of really nice scopes for sale.

[zcap]

I have a P4Xi on my wife's AR, it is a badass scope. I actually prefer a straight mil reticle over BDC or any ranging stuff as I have that figured out pretty well. I'm actually thinking of getting the Mark 4HD 1-4.5 to replace my Razor 1-6, for weight savings and the motion sensor. I can come out ahead in price too without a perceived downgrade.
I'm looking exactly at the 2.5-10x42 to replace my Burris XTRIIIi 3.3-18x50. I'm starting to feel that the 16" AR it's on is over-scoped and it seems the 10x eyebox is really good on the Leupold. Your writeup on your experience helps quite a bit.

I like my MILs too but the TMR reticle in the Mark 4HD 1-4.5 is quite difficult to use. This image shows the TMR reticle vs Vortex's VMR-2 reticle vs Steiner P3TR reticle, scaled so that 5 MILs is roughly equal in each reticle, against a white background. I own or have owned scopes with all three reticles, and against most backgrounds the stadia are more difficult to discern than the reticle diagrams in the specs would lead you to believe. In my experience, Vortex's VMR-2 is the easiest to actually MIL something with, followed by the P3TR using the 5 MIL mark and estimating a percentage of 5 MILs, and finally I can struggle to try to count the MIL marks on TMR at 4.5x.


123107

[stomridertx]

I like my MILs too but the TMR reticle in the Mark 4HD 1-4.5 is quite difficult to use. This image shows the TMR reticle vs Vortex's VMR-2 reticle vs Steiner P3TR reticle, scaled so that 5 MILs is roughly equal in each reticle, against a white background. I own or have owned scopes with all three reticles, and against most backgrounds the stadia are more difficult to discern than the reticle diagrams in the specs would lead you to believe. In my experience, Vortex's VMR-2 is the easiest to actually MIL something with, followed by the P3TR using the 5 MIL mark and estimating a percentage of 5 MILs, and finally I can struggle to try to count the MIL marks on TMR at 4.5x.

Extremely helpful, thank you.

[ccmdfd]

For another, even Nightforce's biggest fans have to admit that Leupold's reticle game is far superior.

Man, I'm glad to hear it's not just me.

I'd love to combine the ruggedness and dependability of the NF, with the reticle of the Leupold, and the eye relief of Trijicon (or perhaps Swaro).

[WDR]

Man, I'm glad to hear it's not just me.

I'd love to combine the ruggedness and dependability of the NF, with the reticle of the Leupold, and the eye relief of Trijicon (or perhaps Swaro).

NF seem to be a lot heavier than other brands. That doesn't matter to some folks, but it matters to me, when I'm carrying a rifle at high elevations for miles. Trade offs everywhere.

I've been looking at a VX5HD 3-15X to go on the Savage .223 I bought,and weight compared to other similar scopes can be significant. I have not decided to pull the trigger yet. I will admit, some of the stories of VX5's not tracking and losing zero makes me hesitate a little. I'm just not sure there is a comparable scope available with similar weight, power range, and optical quality, from a brand I'd trust... that also isn't made in China. I've sorta looked at Trijicons offerings, but I can't find a place local that carries them in stock to go peer through one before buying.

[ccmdfd]

NF seem to be a lot heavier than other brands. That doesn't matter to some folks, but it matters to me, when I'm carrying a rifle at high elevations for miles. Trade offs everywhere.

I've been looking at a VX5HD 3-15X to go on the Savage .223 I bought,and weight compared to other similar scopes can be significant. I have not decided to pull the trigger yet. I will admit, some of the stories of VX5's not tracking and losing zero makes me hesitate a little. I'm just not sure there is a comparable scope available with similar weight, power range, and optical quality, from a brand I'd trust... that also isn't made in China. I've sorta looked at Trijicons offerings, but I can't find a place local that carries them in stock to go peer through one before buying.


Yeah, I just put a 4-20 VX5 on a 300WSM. So far only 15 shots. Got my fingers crossed. It was on sale/showroom demo.

I do like the dial design on the Leupolds. Locking with press button and good clicks. I wish more companies would do something like that.

[Unobtanium]

Man, I'm glad to hear it's not just me.

I'd love to combine the ruggedness and dependability of the NF, with the reticle of the Leupold, and the eye relief of Trijicon (or perhaps Swaro).
When Leupold makes a decent LPVO let me know. They have yet to put a reticle in one that compares to the fcdmx, even once you get past Leupold quality issues.

[stomridertx]

Doing further reticle comparison talked me off the ledge. I think I "want" to like Leupold, but the only upside is weight. I'm going to be keeping what I have until some company finally figures out the MPVO we all want.

[okie john]

NF seem to be a lot heavier than other brands.

Yes and no. I find that if you insist on illuminated reticles and reliable dialing, most hunting scopes worth owning come in around 20-22 ounces, with LPVOs 4-5 ounces less.

Instead, I look to save weight in other places. I'm OK with two-piece bases and Warne Mountain Tech rings for hunting rifles. A 12-12.5" LOP also cuts weight and shifts weight forward, which improves balance more than you'd think. That alone can make a rifle feel lighter when you carry it all day.

For instance, my stainless Model 70 Classic 30-06 in a Bansner stock had a 13" LOP. With a Nightforce 3-10x42 SHV, a 20 MOA rail, and SWFA low rings, it weighed 8 pounds, 13.28 ounces. With the LOP shortened, Warne Mountain Tech Rings, steel Burris Tactical bases, and the same scope, it now weighs 8 pounds 8 ounces. I may swap that scope for a NF NXS 1-8, which only weighs 17 ounces, and will bring this rifle down to 8 pounds 3 ounces.

To be honest, I'm not sure that I want a 30-06 much lighter than that.


Okie John

[Tokarev]

I have the 183316 model. That's the TMR fire dot reticle with the locking elevation turret.

Pros are that the scope itself is bright and clear and it is fairly lightweight. For the money Leupold did a great job here. The power ring turns cleanly and easily. Exterior finish is perfect, etc. The eye box is quite good.

In hindsight I'd have probably been happier with 183315 wirh the capped turret and the simpler BDC reticle. The TMR dots are quite small and too closely spaced which makes them hard to use. The fire dot is bright on max but I think the Steiner is brighter at its top setting. In fact I'd say the P3TR reticle is probably better overall than either reticle Leupold is offering here.







Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Here's a recent review.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/tfb-review-leupold-mark-4hd-1-4-5x25-m5c3-sfp-scope-torture-test-44815669

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

These are the better scopes, in my opinion.

https://www.leupold.com/shop/riflescopes/series/patrol-6hd-rifle-scopes

With that said, I have no experience with the "patrol" branded versions. My experience is with the VX6HD with the CMR2 reticle. It is my understanding that Leupold branded these as "patrol" to make them more marketable to law enforcement.

Caveat here is again the turrets and reticle. The CMR2 is generally pretty useful but isn't what we'd call daylight bright. But at least the outer circle is generally thick and heavy enough to be seen against various backgrounds so the scope works okay with the illumination off. But why include exposed (but locking) turrets when the reticle has some bullet drop info?

The other version of the Patrol is a basic cross hair with capped turrets. I believe this scope is what LAPD wanted for their LVPO program.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Poconnor]

I just tried to buy a leupold 2.5x20 and a leupold 1-4x for hunting. I was very disappointed to discover that they have been discontinued.
No more leupold custom shop, no more leupold heavy duplex reticles.
Am I the only person that think the new leupolds look ugly with the squared adjustment caps?
For hunting I just wanted a simple reliable lightweight leupold with the duplex reticle.

[okie john]

For hunting I just wanted a simple reliable lightweight leupold with the duplex reticle.

From your lips to God’s ears. And an illuminated fixed 4x while you’re at it.


Okie John

[Poconnor]

Okie; that is a great idea but I fear an illuminated reticle would triple the price and double the weight. How about a 4x Trijicon ACOG fiber optic\ battery powered duplex reticle built for hunting? Increased eye relief and mounting options. I do not think that is going to happen.

[Chris17404]

Hi, all. Reviving this somewhat older thread since it discusses the Leupold Mark 4HD 1-4.5x24 optic...

The BDC reticle version of this optic is shown in the below image. This BDC appears to be very similar to the one that appeared in the old VX6 1-6x Multigun optic. My question is... given the specified MIL measurements in the BDC, I am wondering what caliber and distances is Leupold suggesting here? I realize a BDC is typically setup for a specific caliber and load. but BDCs usually always specify a distance for each horizontal hash mark. That's the point of a BDC. Does anyone have experience with this BDC and could suggest some guidance?

Additionally... I was wondering if you would consider the FireDot on this reticle to be equally as bright as a Vortex Razor or PST red dot reticle. I know what the PST looks like and I'd like to replicate that but in a light weight optic. I'd consider the Razor, but it's just too heavy for my rifle. Also, if anyone has thoughts on this Leupold, like 1x performance, I'd welcome that as well. Thanks.


https://marvel-b1-cdn.bc0a.com/f00000000247462/www.leupold.com/media/binaryanvil/reticle/Illum._FireDot_BDC_Web_1.png

[Jimichanga]

Hi, all. Reviving this somewhat older thread since it discusses the Leupold Mark 4HD 1-4.5x24 optic...

The BDC reticle version of this optic is shown in the below image. This BDC appears to be very similar to the one that appeared in the old VX6 1-6x Multigun optic. My question is... given the specified MIL measurements in the BDC, I am wondering what caliber and distances is Leupold suggesting here? I realize a BDC is typically setup for a specific caliber and load. but BDCs usually always specify a distance for each horizontal hash mark. That's the point of a BDC. Does anyone have experience with this BDC and could suggest some guidance?

Additionally... I was wondering if you would consider the FireDot on this reticle to be equally as bright as a Vortex Razor or PST red dot reticle. I know what the PST looks like and I'd like to replicate that but in a light weight optic. I'd consider the Razor, but it's just too heavy for my rifle. Also, if anyone has thoughts on this Leupold, like 1x performance, I'd welcome that as well. Thanks.


https://marvel-b1-cdn.bc0a.com/f00000000247462/www.leupold.com/media/binaryanvil/reticle/Illum._FireDot_BDC_Web_1.png

I'm not a huge fan of the BDC myself. Why don't you chronograph your load and see what it is moving at. You can use JBM ballistics https://jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmtraj-5.1.cgi website. Just find the bullet you are using in the drop down library and enter the particulars for your rifle. Set it to output in mils and you can compare the subtensions in the BDC to your proposed load.

[okie john]

I’d look at something like https://www.trijicon.com/products/details/cr424-c-2900011 instead. It has the same power range and a similar feature set but with reliable internals and a usable reticle, plus it’s about an ounce lighter.


My question is... given the specified MIL measurements in the BDC, I am wondering what caliber and distances is Leupold suggesting here? I realize a BDC is typically setup for a specific caliber and load. but BDCs usually always specify a distance for each horizontal hash mark. That's the point of a BDC. Does anyone have experience with this BDC and could suggest some guidance?

Claims that a reticle matches a specific load with the precision required to use it as described come from the marketing department, not the engineering department. It can work in the military where everyone uses the same rifle and load but there’s too much variation in the real world for it to hold up. First off, that load may not shoot well in your rifle. Second, it may not be the right load for the task at hand. Third, the marketers will almost certainly use unrealistic velocities and BCs for the load they choose. I went through all of this several years ago with a Leupold 3-9 with a ballistic Firedot reticle. It worked up to a point but ultimately, I got rid of it and went with Nightforce.

I chronographed my load in my rifle, calculated drops on https://www.federalpremium.com/ballistics-calculator, verified them in the field, then jotted them down where I could see them. Then I could either hold over or dial as the situation dictated.

This is what that looks like in real life.

132342

A few hours after this was taken, I used this rifle to kill a smallish black bear at 353 yards with one shot.

It's crude but effective.


Okie John

[Borderland]

I have a bunch of VX-2 and VX-3 rifle scopes but nothing in their new lineup. I just buy Leupold when I need a scope. Steiner when I need binoculars. It works for me.

They have an offshore produced product but I've never purchased one. All of the gold ring scopes are made in OR. That's what I read.

Probably not much help.

[Bergeron]

I'm considering commissioning a NRL lightweight hunting rifle, and I see the 6-24x and 5-25x Leupolds on some successful shooter's rifles. The comments I've heard make it seem like there is little difference in optical quality between those two exact models. I'd like to look through both to compare.

Speaking of lightweight rifles from earlier upthread, I got to shoot a friend's 8lb 30-06 yesterday. I got two impacts with two shots at 200 and 400 yards, and then I was happy to hand him back the rifle. Punchy.

[Clusterfrack]

I do a similar thing. The holdovers are in even increments of 0.5mil so I don't have to dial. I jot down the optimal point blank zero offset and max range.

132425


I chronographed my load in my rifle, calculated drops on https://www.federalpremium.com/ballistics-calculator, verified them in the field, then jotted them down where I could see them. Then I could either hold over or dial as the situation dictated.

This is what that looks like in real life.

132342

A few hours after this was taken, I used this rifle to kill a smallish black bear at 353 yards with one shot.

It's crude but effective.


Okie John

[okie john]

I do a similar thing. The holdovers are in even increments of 0.5mil so I don't have to dial. I jot down the optimal point blank zero offset and max range.

Yep.

Most game is taken within 175 yards, so if you zero a modern cartridge at 200, then you can reach to ~250 pretty easily. That's a LOT of reach. You'll rarely need to hold over or dial unless you go out specifically looking to make long shots.

Before I shot that bear, my 25-year average on game was about 30 yards, with only two or three animals beyond 100.


Okie John