Leupold Mark 4 1-3x14mm Close Quarter/Tactical Riflescope

[Agent Akin]

http://www.leupold.com/tactical/products/scopes/mark-4-cqt-riflescopes/mark-4-1-3x14mm-cqt/

What do folks think of this scope? I'm trying to decide what kind of optics I'll put on my M4gery... now that Addax is shipping the ZK piston uppers, soon my old pre-ban Bushmaster will be a whole new weapon, and I'll need some nice optics to top off the package!

I was basically trying to decide between some species of ACOG, or an Eotech with a magnifying tube... but it seems that the Leupold might be the best of both worlds. Sure, it only goes up to 3x, whereas the ACOG is 4x... but that doesn't seem to be enough of a difference to matter, to me. And, when it's dialed down to 1x, you can use it for CQB with both eyes open... I was playing with one at Addax the other day and I was quite impressed...

So, I'm just wondering what the brain trust thinks...

Thanks!

[MrPlink]

any input here? Im seeing these for around 700 which seems like a good deal.

[Agent Akin]

any input here? Im seeing these for around 700 which seems like a good deal.

Who has them for that much? Cheapest I found was like $800...

[Hoop]

It's okay if you want to pay 800+ for a circle-dot reticule. I would get a 1-4 scope instead, PST Super Sniper etc.

[uscbigdawg]

It's okay at best.

The reticle does not give a lot of information for hold overs/unders and it does not illuminate in daylight (well). It's really high above the bore, so CQ offset is annoying. Glass is generally fair, but below Leupold standards IMHO.

For the price, as stated above, there are much better and more versatile options:

- Vortex Viper PST
- Meopta 1-4x K-Dot reticle
- Trijicon TR21 and TR24 w/ red triangle
- Burris Tac30
- Super Sniper
- Weaver and Simmons low power variables

I either have or have used the first 4 and got them all at CS Tactical. California company, Calguns supporter and a straight up honest and helpful guy to work with.

Rich

[okdo]

leupold CQT

Mine is for sale and very nice!!! okdo

[brando]

Yes, it's okay at best. This was Leupold's lame attempt to meet the USASOC requirements for a 1-4x optic/RDS. S&B delivered the Short Dot and the rest is history.

[Agent Akin]

Yes, it's okay at best. This was Leupold's lame attempt to meet the USASOC requirements for a 1-4x optic/RDS. S&B delivered the Short Dot and the rest is history.

Well, I don't care how nice it is, if it really costs 2.5k like Google's results page says it does, it's a wee bit out of my price range... heh...

[brando]

Hey, I'm just giving you a little background on the optic; not telling you to get something else.

[HK Dave]

Everything I've ever heard about this optics points to it being a joke.

If you have $800 to spend and want a variable CQB optic... take a look at SWFA SS 1-4x with the donut reticle.

[tacticalcity]

Personally I like it, but it is not my favorite.

Some of the arguments against it are actually funny. One guy argues that is not "cluttered" with information in one breath (suggesting he wants a dedicated long range reticle) then complains about the entire class of optic by knocking height over bore issues in CQB. Make up your mind. Either you are bench rester or a runner and gunner or you want something in the middle. This optic falls in the middle. And as with all optics that try and fall in the middle it gives up a little something on both ends of the spectrum. All of his alternative suggestions have the exact same issues along with others such as getting lost in their long(er) tubes during CQB.

Are there other optics that lean more one way or the other and appeal more to people who lean one way or the other? Sure. But that doesn't mean this optic sucks. It just means they found something that better fits their tastes. This optic is a quality. Lots and lots of operators swear by them. Is it my personal favorite? No.

[Dave Sauer]

I used one for a while. It was OK. I like more magnification, at least 4...6 is even better. For the price there are better options.

[pc_load_letter]

From what I've heard from the socom guys, the Leupold 1-3 was their attempt to meet a ussocom need for variable 1-4. Needless to say, they lost to Elcan.

[brando]

From what I've heard from the socom guys, the Leupold 1-3 was their attempt to meet a ussocom need for variable 1-4. Needless to say, they lost to Elcan.

Actually, no. To be a stickler for details, it was a JSOC requirement that lead to the Short Dot in 2004. Leupold took too long to provide a scope and when they did they said it was "done and didn't need revisions", much to the disagreement of the solicitation committee. By this point S&B had taken their Flash Dot and made several modifications based on direct feedback to meet the requirement. So what happened? Guys kicked in doors in Iraq increasingly with Short Dots and Leupold put their scope on the mil/LEO market.

The Elcan 1-4 and 1.5-6x didn't come around until much later and was only issued as part of the SOPMOD block 2 program, not a special requirement like the former.

[Agent Akin]

There are a lot of names of different scopes being tossed around here that I'm not familiar with at all... is anyone aware of an idiot's guide or something that might explain things, and maybe have pictures and links? I'm looking for something that's good for close up work, but can also be used to reach out a bit if the situation ever calls for it. Since I'm willing to drop a decent chunk of change on something that I'll never actually use for "real", I definitely want something good...

The only other solution I was even aware of was the Eotech MPO II and MPO II... but I'm not in love with the notion of swinging the tube off to the side, it just seems like it'd be odd and maybe make things look off kilter or something...