CZ455 scope: Leupold Mark AR 3-9 TMR vs. 4-12 Mil-Dot

[rjacobs]

I cant decide between these two scopes. I have looked at a TON of stuff and the Leupold Mark AR series comes in with what I am looking for(mil reticles with mil turrets) with good glass and good price.

BUT I cant decide between these two:
3-9 TMR has better reticle IMO than simple mil-dot BUT it doesnt have adjustable parallax and from what I gather that is important especially since the fixed parallax is set at 100 yards(from what I can gather) which is a bit far for a 22lr.

4-12 has the simple mil-dot reticle BUT has adjustable parallax down to 25 yards and slightly more magnification.


I cant see my self shooting this gun beyond about 100 yards because, well, its a 22lr and im just using it for training for the center fire stuff.

 

[RTH1800]

IMO,
The true Mil-Dot is not at all usable for a .22 RF. Far too imprecise. I find it so for all my shooting. Adjustable parallax is also needed. Might consider other scopes.

BTW, you will push that RF far beyond 100 yards once you get some good glass and rounds down the tube.

 

[djdilliodon]

I'd go for the 4-12 simply because I prefer more magnification especially when killing paper and the parallex goes down to 25 yards.

 

[rjacobs]

To be honest I dont like the mil-dot. Would rather mil hash marks like the TMR reticle.

I run Vortex Viper PST's with the MRAD reticle on my 308's and I have a Leupold VXR Patrol 1.25-4x(mil/mil with similar reticle to TMR) on one of my AR's. Both are similar with the mil-hash marks. Thats why I am attempting to stay with the mil system since this thing is going to simply be a trainer so I want to keep things similar so my brain keeps up with mil's which I am fairly new to.

I checked out the Millett that a lot of guys recommend. Garbage. Same with the Burris and BSA scopes lots of guys recommend.

I liked a Nikon scope, but its was mil reticle with MOA knobs, uh no thanks. The guy at the Nikon booth didnt understand why this was an issue.

Im trying to stay under or around $400 and I thought that these Leupolds would fit the bill.

If they would make the 4-12 with the TMR reticle that would be perfect.

 

[garandman]

Mil-dot is for military applications, and minute- of- man hits. Get the TMR.

I got 2 TMR's. There will be more in my future.

 

[rjacobs]

Mil-dot is for military applications, and minute- of- man hits. Get the TMR.

I got 2 TMR's. There will be more in my future.

Im not overall concerned with the lower magnification vs. the 4-12, but I AM concerned about the lack of parallax adjustment since most shooting will be done under 100 yards.

Are you running one of the 3-9 TMR's on a 22lr? If so whats your thoughts on not having parallax adjustment?

 

[djdilliodon]

Im not overall concerned with the lower magnification vs. the 4-12, but I AM concerned about the lack of parallax adjustment since most shooting will be done under 100 yards.

Are you running one of the 3-9 TMR's on a 22lr? If so whats your thoughts on not having parallax adjustment?

You can always have the parallax set to whatever you want. Leupold will do this if you send it in.

 

[garandman]

Im not overall concerned with the lower magnification vs. the 4-12, but I AM concerned about the lack of parallax adjustment since most shooting will be done under 100 yards.

Are you running one of the 3-9 TMR's on a 22lr? If so whats your thoughts on not having parallax adjustment?

I'm running them on 6.5 CM and 338NM. I'd want 25yard capability on a 22rf.

My point was more about mil-dots obscuring too much target area.

 

[RicosRevenge]

Adjustable parallax is a 100% MUST HAVE for rimfire and I would say that I would want it to dial down closer than 25.

Matching knobs/reticles is not a total necessity - especially for your uses. Just keep the DOPE for both if you are doing hold-offs and the reticule will act just like it would on a centerfire. Generally, from a 50 yard zero with sub-sonic ammo your hold will be 2 mils at 100 or just dial up 6 1/2" (the actual will probably vary a bit with your particular set-up and ammo). Mil/MOA conversion has never slowed me down much as I generally use hold offs with my .308 out to 700 on steel anyway. If you have time to spin the turrets you have time to look at your DOPE if it is properly accessible.

I do agree that the hash marks will help you opposed to the true "mil-dot." I ran a SS 16X on my .22 and it was OK, but the hash is definitely an improvement.

 

[russ10x]

I use MILDOTs all around. Why? You answered your own question. If you are plinking, or group shooting, finer stadias. If you are training, then use the retical that is exactly the same as your centerfire. I've used MILDOT s since the early 80 s. I am very comfortable and with the right ammo, I have to disagree with one poster, I find them very accurate.

 

[rjacobs]

Well a lot of this has me re-thinking since I dont know if I like the mil-dot reticle anyway.

Im kind of thinking now on spending a little more and getting into maybe a Vortex Viper HS-T 4-16x44 for in the 550 range.

 

[garandman]

I'm just saying the TMR does everything the mildot does, And more. And better.

 

[russ10x]

I disagree.

No doubt TMR's with the half mil hash mark make it far more useful but people who aren't in the military and shoot targets smaller than E types can benefit from a mildot vs no subtention at all.

I actually am beginning to wonder if I'd like a gen 2 mildot more than a TMR (haven't had a chance to use a scope with one yet).

The TMR marks half and full mils with .2 on the ends for aiding in ranging targets.

The gen2 has half mil, .9mil (ball edge), full mil (ball center), 1.1mil (ball edge) 1.5mil, 1.9mil (ball edge), 2mils and on and on and on.

It provides more hold points on the lines and really doesn't lose anything to the TMR when making any real substantial wind holds while holding over and off the target. (what's the width of the full mil tic mark? .5 at best?).

Just sayin'.

DF most of the shooting community, more than likely who would not be reading this forum, would have no clue as to how to use any ranging reticle, never mind a MIL DOT. That's ok...that is why we are on the Hide, a forum to learn. So, I'm with you on this. But we all Ned to remember that the Greats (Gunny Hathcock, Chuck Mullhewanny, did it all with target cross hairs, as the Redfield scope only came with those.

 

[russ10x]

I don't want this thread to diverge off topic too much and say this as respectfully to russ10x and garandman as I can since we all know you can type shit here and the perception of your attitude whether mellow, angry, happy can get skewed so don't think I'm ranting or upset here.

I agree that most of the general shooting community doesn't know how to use mil/moa, mil/mil, or moa/moa scopes...but we here aren't the "general shooting community" on the Hide and therefore my comment has no real bearing on "them".



And "we" who have been doing this shit (me 12yrs) want others to progress without making the same mistakes we did and move forward. And hopefully to some extent move everyone forward.

And I can see your point of bringing up Carlos and Chuck....as they were making due with a lot less. But then I respond, why look back that far? Why not use Chris Kyle or better yet the masses of individuals who shoot PRS and other tactical matches as examples?

The technology is here now commonly and there is no need to low ball yourself out of the gate because others got away with alot less.

And to those individuals I cited (obviously not Chris Kyle) many have never served. Or if they have...not in a "sniper role". And targets at those type of matches can be smaller than a E type. I'd be willing to bet there are more civilians now that use milling type reticles and advanced milling type reticles (Horus) than military shooters.

So saying mildot, TMR, Xmas tree pattern, Horus, MOA based reticle...whatever milling type reticle you have is not just for the military on man-size targets. They are for expedient shooting and thats it. Fill in your needs from there.

Agreed

 

[rjacobs]

I believe I am going to go with a Vortex Viper HS-T after doing some more research and finding a killer deal on one that makes it a no brainer to spend just a little more and get something that will do everything I want and have the same reticle I am used to in my Vortex Viper PST's.

 

[garandman]

The simple reality that CANNOT be argued is that any mil-dot obscures more target area than the Leupold TMR. Obscured target area results in less precision.

 

[Big_Rig_416]

i have the TMR and its an awesome scope especially for the money. That being said, i dont think it would work all that well on a .22 because of the paralax.

 

[hahco]

one other thing to note is that the 4-12x leupold is a surprisingly compact unit. it actually has less mounting adjustment range than the 3-9x. I like the size of it, enough so that I've got two of them. but they might not work like you think on your setup unless you're using a rail