Rifle Scopes MK12/SPR Optic
- Thread starter rmbstyle
- Start date
To me it’s a little on the heavy side but about as light as your gonna get especially for the features it has. If you can afford it, buy it!
I run a Leupold Vari-x 3 3-10x40 M3 on one and a NXS 2.5-10x32 on my other. I love the M3 for almost everything but for the mk12 I prefer the NXS compact. Either of these will be way less money, but if you're trying to shoot tiny groups you may want the extra mags.
Avoid the Mark 6 like the plague; they are extremely prone to failure. Seen several fail myself, and heard of many more. Scope pricing is unfortunately a poor indicator of quality. For the money you'd be better off with a classic Nightforce 2.5-10.
I second this.
Any thoughts on the the U.S. Optics B-10 1.8-10x42mm as another option? Seems like a good deal for around $1500
The MK6 is very light and compact for its capabilities, I don't have any significant time behind them so I can't comment on durability. I have a Bushnell Elite Tactical 3-12 BTR on one of my SPR's and I like it a lot. If I didn't already have that scope I'd probably be looking seriously at the Bushnell LRTSi in 3-12
I guess if your going to a gun range and shooting off of a bench the Bushnells, the USO, or the Mark 6 might work. If you are like me and you pack your rifles around for miles at a time go for a Nightforce 2.5-10x32. You can find them on EBay.
You need a better pack ^
As others indicated, I wouldn’t touch a MK6 with a 10’ pole. Beyond reliability and tracking problems I cannot stand the turrets on them.
I’d look for a NF 4-16 ATACR F1 for a few bucks more. It’s a much better optic and very comparable feature wise.
I’d look for a NF 4-16 ATACR F1 for a few bucks more. It’s a much better optic and very comparable feature wise.
Definitely if you can afford it. By far the best compact 2-4x to 12-16x scope out there hands down.
I would do a classic NF F1 or a uso BT10 which is what I was planning on doing myself for a similar rifle but found a premier on here yesterday and went for it
The NF 2.5-10x24 is a really great scope for a MK12. I had one for a year and loved it, but it always left me wanting more magnification. I upgraded to a MK6 3-18 with the new M5C2 turrets and couldn’t be happier. There were all sorts of tracking issues with the M5B2 but I have never heard of “all these failures.”
I am waiting to see what SHOT brings from Nightforce in the 1-8 category. If it is underwhelming then I will go with a 2.5-10 or 4-16 NF for my KAC LPR.
Consider the Nightforce NXS F1 4-16 as well if you want a little more mag in a small compact setup. The B10 does look like a great scope though and has some awesome features for the price point.
I've got a 2.5-10x24 Nightforce Compact on my mk12, its a nice handy lightweight scope. I also have the 4-16x42 ATACR, which I would recommend if you're looking for a little more magnification at the expense of 13oz of weight.
-Kirby
-Kirby
not sure what these guys are talking about "failures". the orig "B" turrets had some issues that were resolved by leupold. they have done away with these turrets now (except some of the closeouts, which might be what you are looking at for that price). The "C" turrets have never had a tracking issue. The one I have runs great. the glass is good and the scope is awesome on an AR platform, so would be great for your build. the NF is nice too, but it is a heavier scope. as to the post that this is a "heavy" scope, well, not sure what you are comparing it to, a red dot? ok, its heavier than that. but at 23.6 oz, its actually lighter than a vortex razor 1-6 (25.2 oz) which is on just about every 3 gun rifle out there.
Leupold Mk6 with the C2 turrets is good to go. Avoid the B2 turrets. If weight is a concern then the Leupold is pretty much the only game in town. I’ve run one for two years now, not “off a bench” either, and it has been great.
Do you want/require illumination?
Do you want FFP? (not worth it IMHO on low/mid power variable)
There are excellent options available, but the NF 2.5-10 is incredibly hard to beat.
If you have the cash, the March 3-24 would be the cats ass.
If you're poor like me, the Sightron 3.5-10 is an attractive option, they have three variations.
https://sightronusa.com/index.php/product/siiiss3510x44lrirmoa/
Do you want FFP? (not worth it IMHO on low/mid power variable)
There are excellent options available, but the NF 2.5-10 is incredibly hard to beat.
If you have the cash, the March 3-24 would be the cats ass.
If you're poor like me, the Sightron 3.5-10 is an attractive option, they have three variations.
https://sightronusa.com/index.php/product/siiiss3510x44lrirmoa/
Those rifles were intended to be issued with 2.5-8x Leupold MR/T scopes. Each branch of service used their own version of the optic, but they're all the same short of knobs and either mildot or TMR.
I built a "recce" rifle which a 16" navy improved version, they were allowed more leeway in stocks and hardware but it's basically the same rifle with a different barrel. Some use the same scope. Others use the NF 2.5-10, which is nice, but honestly for what a 5.56 can do the MR/T is pretty nice for the price. Your idea of the B10 is exactly what I'm doing with my 20" Grendel. But my 16" sports the MR/T because I happened to have one I got for a good deal from a member on here. It's a fine scope for that rifle and for that price. A NF 2.5-10 would be nice too, nicer in fact, but I do like USO and the B10 is a fine looking scope. I have a 1-8x, 3.2-17x and 5-25x. They're all excellent optics, first class. They're also tanks. The B10 is smaller but it's still hefty. The mil/mil version with the GAP reticle is one of the lower cost versions and I have that reticle in the LR17 and ER25 and it's a great, simple reticle to use. The 1-8x has a blue tree, not my favorite color but worth it for this fine optic, and I really don't use the tree, but those 1-8x optics work like illuminated reflex sights at very low power, and like FFP scopes at ~3x or so and above. Discontinued, but an amazing AR optic if you can find one.
I'm not a big fan of lots of mag on a 5.56 so I think you'd be better off with the 2.5-10, 1.8-10, 2.5-8x or even a 6x ACOG or 1.5/6x Elcan. Or a VCOG. There are lots of good choices, all better than the Mk6 IMO.
If you want that kind of mag, I'd consider the 4-16 ATACR. FFP and you can get it illuminated and with practically any reticle. Look for sales, and fancy reticles cost more and aren't necessary IMO for a 5.56 AR but I consider illumination these days to be standard on a high end scope.
That Mk6 is for non-illuminated I bet. For some reason Leupold charges a helluva premium for reticles and illumination on their Mk6 and Mk8 scopes. Nevertheless, people are saying stay away from Mk6. Also, look at the sticky on the optics forum for a tracking test a member did. VERY informative! And he evaluated for more than tracking. You would do well to look at that before making a decision, even if some of the scopes tested aren't the same model you'd buy. Good luck. And as long as you get a quality scope and it has what you feel you need, you'll likely be satisfied. Remember people tend to get more mag than they need, so try to keep that down if you can, but that's totally up to you too. And read that sticky.
Just my $.02.
I built a "recce" rifle which a 16" navy improved version, they were allowed more leeway in stocks and hardware but it's basically the same rifle with a different barrel. Some use the same scope. Others use the NF 2.5-10, which is nice, but honestly for what a 5.56 can do the MR/T is pretty nice for the price. Your idea of the B10 is exactly what I'm doing with my 20" Grendel. But my 16" sports the MR/T because I happened to have one I got for a good deal from a member on here. It's a fine scope for that rifle and for that price. A NF 2.5-10 would be nice too, nicer in fact, but I do like USO and the B10 is a fine looking scope. I have a 1-8x, 3.2-17x and 5-25x. They're all excellent optics, first class. They're also tanks. The B10 is smaller but it's still hefty. The mil/mil version with the GAP reticle is one of the lower cost versions and I have that reticle in the LR17 and ER25 and it's a great, simple reticle to use. The 1-8x has a blue tree, not my favorite color but worth it for this fine optic, and I really don't use the tree, but those 1-8x optics work like illuminated reflex sights at very low power, and like FFP scopes at ~3x or so and above. Discontinued, but an amazing AR optic if you can find one.
I'm not a big fan of lots of mag on a 5.56 so I think you'd be better off with the 2.5-10, 1.8-10, 2.5-8x or even a 6x ACOG or 1.5/6x Elcan. Or a VCOG. There are lots of good choices, all better than the Mk6 IMO.
If you want that kind of mag, I'd consider the 4-16 ATACR. FFP and you can get it illuminated and with practically any reticle. Look for sales, and fancy reticles cost more and aren't necessary IMO for a 5.56 AR but I consider illumination these days to be standard on a high end scope.
That Mk6 is for non-illuminated I bet. For some reason Leupold charges a helluva premium for reticles and illumination on their Mk6 and Mk8 scopes. Nevertheless, people are saying stay away from Mk6. Also, look at the sticky on the optics forum for a tracking test a member did. VERY informative! And he evaluated for more than tracking. You would do well to look at that before making a decision, even if some of the scopes tested aren't the same model you'd buy. Good luck. And as long as you get a quality scope and it has what you feel you need, you'll likely be satisfied. Remember people tend to get more mag than they need, so try to keep that down if you can, but that's totally up to you too. And read that sticky.
Just my $.02.
To me the Trijicon Accupower 3-9x40mm fills this role better than just about anything else that’s out there. Light, affordable, pretty much all the right features for an SPR.
To be clone correct youd need need the 2.5-10 Nightforce but the 4-16 would be a great optic as well and give you more mag. Guess it depends on how far you want to shoot out to.
NF 2.5-10 - no doubt. this optic is bombproof.
NF 2.5-10x24
Nightforce rings
Wilcox or Insight ring cap (theyre both impossible to find, but I managed to get them) with a Doctor RDS on it
Nightforce rings
Wilcox or Insight ring cap (theyre both impossible to find, but I managed to get them) with a Doctor RDS on it
What do you all think about the nighforce shv 4.5-14? Would you go MOA or MIL?
Burris XTR II 2-10
Steiner T5Xi 3-15
Nightforce 2.5-10
Steiner T5Xi 3-15
Nightforce 2.5-10
Gotta figure out how to quote here on this new tool..
"
I've got a 2.5-10x24 Nightforce Compact on my mk12, its a nice handy lightweight scope. I also have the 4-16x42 ATACR, which I would recommend if you're looking for a little more magnification at the expense of 13oz of weight.
-Kirby"
Well, a few comments. Sort of like bait, as I build clones, and I love scopes.
First, I disagree with the assessment of the L-Mark 6. I have two, and they serve me well. I have the mid-range 3-15x and the short range 1-6x (off the top of my head those are the magnifications, could be off a little. I have too many scopes.
The mid-range has a Hourus reticle, and I had the turret knobs changed to the lower locking type, B5 or C6, whatever. It works fantastic. built like a freight train. A little heavy for a mid-range I agree. The low-power is great as well, and heavy.
I also travel a bunch for work, so I will use a hotel analogy. Leupold is like Marriott. If you stay at a Marriott you will know what I mean. You never find a bad Marriott. You also seldom find a 5-Star. With Marriott, like Leupold, you know what to expect. It is a solid 3-Star scope. I have never had a bad one. I am sure someone has, but the only really great Leupold I ever held was a Mark 8, maybe a 1-8x. What is that, the CBRS or some such initials? Amazing scope. Best 1-8x I have ever looked through... until last week at SHOT, when I picked up the NF ATACR 1-8x.
Next, Kirby's comment above: the 2.5-10 is a correct scope for a Mod 1 build. Great scope. I want one. They are expensive when you find them. Kirby, your mention of 4-16x doesn't fit. Love the scope, one of my favorites. It is just not for this rifle.
Which brings me to point #3: If you are building a clone, and you used the word, and called it a Mk12, build a Mk12. There are only three truly correct optics for a Mk12. The first Kirby mentioned was a late change on the Mod 1 and Mod H. Mod 0 started with the same optic as the M110, which was the Leupold 3.5-10x40, except the Mk12 was a black scope. Crane very quickly moved to the TS30A2, which is the Leupold model 112633, 2.5-8x36 mm.
Finally, after harassing your shit, if you need any help or parts, let me know. If you need the optic, got that too. Maybe I can call one a demo after I use it for the day.
"
I've got a 2.5-10x24 Nightforce Compact on my mk12, its a nice handy lightweight scope. I also have the 4-16x42 ATACR, which I would recommend if you're looking for a little more magnification at the expense of 13oz of weight.
-Kirby"
Well, a few comments. Sort of like bait, as I build clones, and I love scopes.
First, I disagree with the assessment of the L-Mark 6. I have two, and they serve me well. I have the mid-range 3-15x and the short range 1-6x (off the top of my head those are the magnifications, could be off a little. I have too many scopes.
The mid-range has a Hourus reticle, and I had the turret knobs changed to the lower locking type, B5 or C6, whatever. It works fantastic. built like a freight train. A little heavy for a mid-range I agree. The low-power is great as well, and heavy.I also travel a bunch for work, so I will use a hotel analogy. Leupold is like Marriott. If you stay at a Marriott you will know what I mean. You never find a bad Marriott. You also seldom find a 5-Star. With Marriott, like Leupold, you know what to expect. It is a solid 3-Star scope. I have never had a bad one. I am sure someone has, but the only really great Leupold I ever held was a Mark 8, maybe a 1-8x. What is that, the CBRS or some such initials? Amazing scope. Best 1-8x I have ever looked through... until last week at SHOT, when I picked up the NF ATACR 1-8x.
Next, Kirby's comment above: the 2.5-10 is a correct scope for a Mod 1 build. Great scope. I want one. They are expensive when you find them. Kirby, your mention of 4-16x doesn't fit. Love the scope, one of my favorites. It is just not for this rifle.
Which brings me to point #3: If you are building a clone, and you used the word, and called it a Mk12, build a Mk12. There are only three truly correct optics for a Mk12. The first Kirby mentioned was a late change on the Mod 1 and Mod H. Mod 0 started with the same optic as the M110, which was the Leupold 3.5-10x40, except the Mk12 was a black scope. Crane very quickly moved to the TS30A2, which is the Leupold model 112633, 2.5-8x36 mm.
Finally, after harassing your shit, if you need any help or parts, let me know. If you need the optic, got that too. Maybe I can call one a demo after I use it for the day.
This is the correct choice.
Gotta figure out how to quote here on this new tool..
"
I've got a 2.5-10x24 Nightforce Compact on my mk12, its a nice handy lightweight scope. I also have the 4-16x42 ATACR, which I would recommend if you're looking for a little more magnification at the expense of 13oz of weight.
-Kirby"
Well, a few comments. Sort of like bait, as I build clones, and I love scopes.
First, I disagree with the assessment of the L-Mark 6. I have two, and they serve me well. I have the mid-range 3-15x and the short range 1-6x (off the top of my head those are the magnifications, could be off a little. I have too many scopes.
I also travel a bunch for work, so I will use a hotel analogy. Leupold is like Marriott. If you stay at a Marriott you will know what I mean. You never find a bad Marriott. You also seldom find a 5-Star. With Marriott, like Leupold, you know what to expect. It is a solid 3-Star scope. I have never had a bad one. I am sure someone has, but the only really great Leupold I ever held was a Mark 8, maybe a 1-8x. What is that, the CBRS or some such initials? Amazing scope. Best 1-8x I have ever looked through... until last week at SHOT, when I picked up the NF ATACR 1-8x.
Next, Kirby's comment above: the 2.5-10 is a correct scope for a Mod 1 build. Great scope. I want one. They are expensive when you find them. Kirby, your mention of 4-16x doesn't fit. Love the scope, one of my favorites. It is just not for this rifle.
Which brings me to point #3: If you are building a clone, and you used the word, and called it a Mk12, build a Mk12. There are only three truly correct optics for a Mk12. The first Kirby mentioned was a late change on the Mod 1 and Mod H. Mod 0 started with the same optic as the M110, which was the Leupold 3.5-10x40, except the Mk12 was a black scope. Crane very quickly moved to the TS30A2, which is the Leupold model 112633, 2.5-8x36 mm.
Finally, after harassing your shit, if you need any help or parts, let me know. If you need the optic, got that too. Maybe I can call one a demo after I use it for the day.
I try not to get too caught up in what other people call a mk12, in many cases it’s someone building a generic 18” scoped AR. Since the OP was already suggesting a non “clone correct” optic I figured he wasn’t trying to get too anal about it. What’s wrong with a 4-16 ATACR if the OP isn’t worried about a perfect clone?
I got to spend some time pouring over these at Shot. I don't think the NX8 would be a bad fit. It's super lightweight and compact. I think it would be decent.
However the ATACR would make an excellent scope for this set up. The eyebox is a little better than NX8 and the tube is a little bigger. Obviously the glass is much nicer, but the big factor is the reticle. The FC-DM is an excellent design with a dot grid shaped kinda like a Horus. But as I mentioned elsewhere, the price tag on this optic is awfully steep.
The big question mark I would have is does a person really want to limit themselves to an 8x when there are so many great 10x to 16x optics to choose from. It all depends on your application. In my personal experience in running the XTR II in 8x on my 308 SASS and 6.5 Creedmoor AR10 I found it to be pretty effective to 500 yards. Once you start stretching it out it's still doable, it just slows you down a little. But I have used my 8x to hit my IPSC plate at 900 on several occasions. It's pretty doable.
Last edited:
I run a Leupold MK 4 MR/T 2.5–8×36 Illum with the MK12 mod 1 turret. I shoot mine out to 750 with positive hits. Hard to see the hits with only the 8x but I can hear them fine. For the money the scope is dead on with the 77 grain black hills ammo.
It has been my experience that guys who had the choice or got to use both preferred the NF scopes with the larger objectives. I was told on more than one occasion that it is much brighter.
Now about the USO...you can't go wrong. It's a great scope and is durable as a metal ball bearing. I like how fine the reticle is in my NF but I prefer the features of my USO.
You cannot go wrong either way.
I agree with that.
I could make out the impacts on a clean white plate at 700 yards, but 900 yards was pretty tough. Even with 175gr 308. I think running a 5.56 inside 600 yards there wouldn't be much issue with an 8x. I've shot my 3 Gun rifle to 720 yards on a handful occasions and regularly run it out to 500 yards in practice and matches.
They fixed the turrets.
