Top 10 Scopes for Mk12 Rifles in 2023

[longshot2000]

Hey guys and gals.

We just finished our review and curation of the best and most popular scopes to run on a Mk12 SPR rifle in 2023, and want to share with anyone interested.

The Mk12 SPR was originally issued with a Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm LR/T M3 scope. This optic was chosen for its combination of magnification range, clarity, and durability. The Mark 4's magnification range of 3.5-10x was ideal for the intended use of the Mk12 SPR, allowing for precise target engagement at the rifle's effective range. The scope featured a Mil-Dot reticle, a popular choice for military use due to its versatility and the ability to estimate range using the dots in the reticle.

However, around 2004, the U.S. Navy began to transition to the Tactical Milling Reticle (TMR). The TMR reticle offers several advantages over the traditional Mil-Dot. The TMR uses various sized and spaced hash marks on the horizontal and vertical stadia for more precise range estimation and windage adjustments. This reticle design allows for more precise shooting at longer ranges and in crosswinds.

Read our blog here

Top 10 Scopes for the Mk12 SPR in 2023​

When building your own Mk12 clone, the choice of scope is crucial. Here, we present our top 10 picks for Mk12 scopes, ranked from #1 to #10. These scopes are chosen based on their similarity to the original Mk12 scopes, their performance, and their value for money. We've also included some budget-friendly options for cost-conscious builders.

 

[rothgyr]

If there's no FDN 10X/FX10, we riot.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

If there's no FDN 10X/FX10, we riot.

2005 called and wants their bad ideas back.

This list is terrible by the way. As someone who used to build MK12's for guys going down range and has owned every clone correct variant most of you know about; There are WAY better optics today.

The best clone correct scope was the F1 NXS 3-15 and S&B 3-12. Followed by the NF 2.5-10X24 SFP for weight/speed. The 3-9 and 2.5-8 Mk4 were light and had decent glass, but were mechanically lacking and the turrets sucked ass, not to mention they were SFP with non matching reticles/turrets. Almost made the BDC turrets a nessesity, until you get to afganistan and are shooting at 9K DA and none of your shit lines up.

Just a few that smoke everything listed:

ZCO 4-20
Kahles 3-18
Bushnell LRHS 3-12/4.5-18
Minox ZP5 3-15
Vortex AMG
NF 4-16 F1 ATACR
S&B 4-16 PM2
Burris 3-18 XTR3
Vortex 1-10 Razor
Eotech 1-10 LPVO
ATACR 1-8
S&B Dual CC 1-8 shortdot
TT 3-15M
Any of the March Shorties.

The MK5 is not a terrible choice, but the TMR is a dogshit reticle.

 

[longshot2000]

Everyone has their preference. You will see we included the Leupold TMR 2.5-8x36, but when coming up with a list of Top 10, we looked for a combination of historically correct, some that look the part, what is commercially available, and then some budget options, for guys who are looking to shoot a Mk12 but are not ready to spend $2k on glass.

 

[Tictacticaltimmy]

Seems nutty to me you would have the PA SlX orion, a hunting scope, and the Stroke Beagle 3-18, but not the PA GlX 2.5-10 Griffin Mil.

Missing the Athlon Helos 2-12 also seems like a pretty obvious oversight.

 

[PappyM3]

The NXS 2.5-10x42 is definitely high on the list for me. And I say this as an FFP fan. That NF has a great eyebox, is light weight, durable, and you get an adjustable parallax. I just wish they would release an update with better glass.

Well, budget available I suppose I might go with the March Fx 1.5-15 DFP. But I haven’t seen one of those so I can’t say.

2005 called and wants their bad ideas back.

This list is terrible by the way. As someone who used to build MK12's for guys going down range and has owned every clone correct variant most of you know about; There are WAY better optics today.

The best clone correct scope was the F1 NXS 3-15 and S&B 3-12. Followed by the NF 2.5-10X24 SFP for weight/speed. The 3-9 and 2.5-8 Mk4 were light and had decent glass, but were mechanically lacking and the turrets sucked ass, not to mention they were SFP with non matching reticles/turrets. Almost made the BDC turrets a nessesity, until you get to afganistan and are shooting at 9K DA and none of your shit lines up.

Just a few that smoke everything listed:

…

The MK5 is not a terrible choice, but the TMR is a dogshit reticle.

Do you have a hyperbole fetish? I don’t think I’ve seen one of your posts without it.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

The NXS 2.5-10x42 is definitely high on the list for me. And I say this as an FFP fan. That NF has a great eyebox, is light weight, durable, and you get an adjustable parallax. I just wish they would release an update with better glass.

Well, budget available I suppose I might go with the March Fx 1.5-15 DFP. But I haven’t seen one of those so I can’t say.


Do you have a hyperbole fetish? I don’t think I’ve seen one of your posts without it.

Not when you can get a S&B 4-16x42 or a NF 4-16x42 in almost the same form factor, WAY better glass, FFP, ect. If you want adjustable parallax, get a real scope with modern features instead of one that is pretty much obsolete.

Tell me where I am wrong and then we can talk hyperbole.

 

[PappyM3]

Not when you can get a S&B 4-16x42 or a NF 4-16x42 in almost the same form factor, WAY better glass, FFP, ect. If you want adjustable parallax, get a real scope with modern features instead of one that is pretty much obsolete.

Tell me where I am wrong and then we can talk hyperbole.

And if I don’t want a 4x low end? Or would prefer to not have an additional 10-11 ounces of weight?

Edit: It’s all a trade space and your absolutes aren’t relevant to everyone.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

And if I don’t want a 4x low end? Or would prefer to not have an additional 10-11 ounces of weight?

Edit: It’s all a trade space and your absolutes aren’t relevant to everyone.

Add a RMR or run a 1-10 LPVO

 

[PappyM3]

Add a RMR or run a 1-10 LPVO

What if I want the clarity and field of view, but slightly magnified < 4x for scanning, so an added RMR isn’t an standalone answer?

And what if I said 1-10 LPVOs at 10x generally suck? In my opinion. Though, I will admit the 10x may work well in the field out to 600m. Which would be suitable for that weapon system. But I’d still like to be able to adjust the focus out at range.

All in all: trade spaces. An S&B 4-16 or Razor 1-10 might be better for you. But it isn’t necessarily better for others.

 

[Jfservices]

There’s a guy in Dallas right now with a 2.5-8 tmr for $1k. Looks pretty clean. DO NOT do business on the TGT site any other way than face to face btw. They’ll pack your fudge.

Main :. Used Guns.

 

[A.Redd]

2005 called and wants their bad ideas back.

This list is terrible by the way. As someone who used to build MK12's for guys going down range and has owned every clone correct variant most of you know about; There are WAY better optics today.

The best clone correct scope was the F1 NXS 3-15 and S&B 3-12. Followed by the NF 2.5-10X24 SFP for weight/speed. The 3-9 and 2.5-8 Mk4 were light and had decent glass, but were mechanically lacking and the turrets sucked ass, not to mention they were SFP with non matching reticles/turrets. Almost made the BDC turrets a nessesity, until you get to afganistan and are shooting at 9K DA and none of your shit lines up.

Just a few that smoke everything listed:

ZCO 4-20
Kahles 3-18
Bushnell LRHS 3-12/4.5-18
Minox ZP5 3-15
Vortex AMG
NF 4-16 F1 ATACR
S&B 4-16 PM2
Burris 3-18 XTR3
Vortex 1-10 Razor
Eotech 1-10 LPVO
ATACR 1-8
S&B Dual CC 1-8 shortdot
TT 3-15M
Any of the March Shorties.

The MK5 is not a terrible choice, but the TMR is a dogshit reticle.

So the 3-12 Schmidt is bested by the Burris, kahles, Eotech, vortex, minox, & bushnell? I think the schmidt is pretty good

I’ll add, the Schmidt has a practical reticle throughout the power range. I think this is a built for purpose scope, and does its purpose well.