Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 50 of 50

Thread: Pick my next rifle

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Lexington, SC
    Posts
    20,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FLS View Post
    The Gen 2 is a decent scope, but read a lot of stuff about their durability. I’ve had two and no issues. I didn’t keep either long enough to give them a good test.
    I’ve shot Bushnell DMR Series since they came out. I’m currently shooting a Bushnell DMR3 and shot the DMR Pro before that. Ive NEVER had a failure and I don’t baby my rifles. They track true, and every tracking test I’ve seen confirms that. The glass is HD from LOW, and is right there with the the rest of the high end Jap glass. Better than everything in the NF line except the ATACR. There is nothing in the Leupold line I’d choose over one. They’re the in house scope at GA precision. George Gardner developed the reticles. It’s the best scope in its class by a wide margin IMO. You’ll have to spend a lot more to see minor improvements. Is a ZCO, March or S&B better? Yes. Worth 2-3 times the price? Hell no. I wish they would bring the 3-12 back. It was the perfect optic for an AR.
    Attachment 76142
    I'll check 'em out. I don't need THAT much high end magnification (was looking for something with a 12-15 maybe top end). Going on a build with a White Oak SPR barrel (18").

    I wish Leupold made a Mk 5 in the 2-10 range with about 40mm of objective, a TMR reticle, and a Fire Dot...
    Last edited by Swamp Rat; 07-15-2022 at 10:43 AM.
    "Only accurate rifles are interesting " - Col. Townsend Whelen

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Horry County
    Posts
    3,812

    Default

    If i didnt have the DMRs I would have a 4-16 ATACR or a 3-18 MK 5. If i could find a used Bushnell 3-12 LRTS I would snap it up.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,323

    Default

    I've been happy with the Mk 5
    20221002_191607.jpg

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Lexington, SC
    Posts
    20,837

    Default

    Did you get it to tighten up?
    "Only accurate rifles are interesting " - Col. Townsend Whelen

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,323

    Default

    Not as of yet, but I still have other ammo to try. Its fine for deer hunting, but I won't be happy til the rounds are touching.

  6. #46
    CWPINST's Avatar
    CWPINST is offline 168 grains of assistance from a distance
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Aiken
    Posts
    5,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rp View Post
    Our local gun smuggler we both know talked with Leupold at great length about the objective size. They talked him out of a 50. Seems glass quality plays a bigger part on the light. And the lower mount helps too.
    I agree with the glass quality and coatings importance priority in the realm of light transmission (not gathering) but one thing to remember when discussing low light performance with a manufacturer is that few if any states allow you to harvest a deer up to 59 minutes after sunset……where every little bit of performance helps.
    If it ain\'t accurate at long distance, then the fact that it is flat shooting is meaningless.

  7. #47
    CWPINST's Avatar
    CWPINST is offline 168 grains of assistance from a distance
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Aiken
    Posts
    5,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Five Oh View Post
    Not as of yet, but I still have other ammo to try. Its fine for deer hunting, but I won't be happy til the rounds are touching.
    Curious…..what is your caliber and load?
    If it ain\'t accurate at long distance, then the fact that it is flat shooting is meaningless.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,323

    Default

    308 168 amax primarily. I really want it to love that load be ause I've got cases and cases of it. Also shooting 165 gmx and 168 GMM.

  9. #49
    CWPINST's Avatar
    CWPINST is offline 168 grains of assistance from a distance
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Aiken
    Posts
    5,237

    Default

    The FGGM 168 is pretty much the gold standard for factory .308 target ammo. It is almost magical in that it shoots so well in so many rifles. That said, there is no guarantee that it will do what you want. Kenny Jarrett once told me that when he builds a rifle, he can’t guarantee that it will shoot well with a specific bullet that a customer wants. You have to feed it what it likes.

    Without going back, I don’t remember the details of your rifle. No offense but you have to be realistic about the capabilities of a particular rifle especially with factory ammo. A hunting rifle that consistently shoots in the 3’s is a rare bird. I have a custom .260 that is close to that at 100 yards but I haven’t found a load that it will hold that at 300 yards…..not yet anyway. It is more like .6 MOA at 300. Which in reality is more than enough for accurate deer hunting.

    EDIT: OK I see now. It is the Begara. Thought you were talking about another one you had. My bad! You may have to go custom for the accuracy you are looking for BUT put a couple hundred rounds through it and work up some hand loads. You might be pleasantly surprised. Clean about every 20 rounds and see if that makes a difference. I have a .308 that shoots quite well but if it goes more than 20 rounds without cleaning, groups get real ugly real fast. Kinda unusual actually.
    Last edited by CWPINST; 10-19-2022 at 08:29 PM.
    If it ain\'t accurate at long distance, then the fact that it is flat shooting is meaningless.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Pelzer
    Posts
    309

    Default

    Good choice on the Leupold Mark V. I have a few of them. They are FFP and much lighter than the Nightforce ATACR. Get a nice scope level for it and that may change your accuracy. Good looking set up. Enjoy!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •