Remington 700 Rifle Forums banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey guys,
I got one of these scopes about 2 months ago and I just letting you know for the money (around $700US with mil dot) they are a top buy, a little bit more here in Australia. I only wanted a 40mm lense but wanted more than 10x power on the 3.5-10x40 mark 4 so this was the only option in the Leupold. It does'nt have tactical turrents but I don't really need them, besides take off the turrent caps and they do exactly the same thing. Yeah I know the tactical turrents look much better but apart from military shooters how many people need to adjust their scope in a real hurry, not me anyway.

Got mine zero'd for 200m which is good out to 300m for hunting, on the range I just adjust it as I need to for a zero at a certain range. I use different grain projectiles with different points of impact so have to adjust the windage and elevation when I'm shooting different ammo and it always zero's where it should as you would expect from a Leupold. It's a leupold so the quality is excellent, turrents have nice adjustments, glass is nice and clear and the lifetime warranty.

So just because it does'nt have the cool factor with tactical turrents don't overlook this one, as I said I think they are a great buy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
Those are nice scopes that's for sure. I have the same one but with a 50mm objective lens. I must admit, I wanted the tactical turrets... :D But overall I think they are good scopes for the money!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
I have used a Mark 4 8.5-20 and then used a Bushnell Elite 4200 6-24x50 Tactical and the bushnell's glass was just as good as the Mark 4's. If given the choice, I would go with the Bushnell I think. Cheaper for the same quality glass. Thats my opinion at any rate. Has anyone else noticed the same thing??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
The biggest difference between the 2 scopes is eye relief, there tends to be more with the Leupold.

The 4200 series are are a very good bang for your buck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Keeping in mind that I am dealing with standard scopes, not 'tactical'... I have a Bushnell 4200 (actually Bausch & Lomb) and a Leupy Vari-X III (the model before the current one that Leupold is discontinuing) and I find that the Leupy has more consistant eye relief and is generally clearer. Both in the ~ 3-10x power range.

And this is not a knock on the scope, just the idiot who bought it, it is a nasty silver color, that I thought was cool when I bought it (matched the stainless M70 that I put it on). Now, not so much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
I noticed that when I used the Mark 4 8.5-20 and the 4200 6-24x that the eye releif on the Bushnell was better then the Leupold. Maybe Im just wierd but I much prefer the Bushnell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I'm thinking of getting the 4200 6-24x50 for my next rifle. Seen some photo's of one and look like a quality piece of kit. Only thing bad I've heard is lack of elevation adjustment, around 50MOA compared with my Mark4 which has 100MOA. Quick, or anyone else, any more info you can give me on your experience with a Bushnell 4200 6-24x50 would be greatly appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
I didnt really get to play withe the Bushnell as much as I hoped to but it did strike me as a well priced but good quality piece of kit. I was kind of disapoint with the Mark 4 though I have to admit, I thought it would be better then it was but I need to spend some more time with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
andrew21 said:
Only thing bad I've heard is lack of elevation adjustment, around 50MOA
I just saw a program on the History Channel (Extreme Marksmen) and they had a couple of snipers on there and in passing they mentioned something to the fact that, "it takes approximately 37 MOA to get out to a 1000 yards...". This makes me think that 50 MOA adjustment isn't quite so bad? I suppose if the recticle is centered though, that you may only get 25 MOA either way of center. That could be an issue if that's the case.

I wonder if the 50 MOA adjustment means 50 MOA in either direction on the 4200?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I'm not sure but I think your right, you only have 25 MOA in each direction when centered that's why the need for the 20 MOA base to get the range with one of these scopes. Then there is the issue that to get a 100 yard zero the elevation is almost bottomed out. I don't know if that matters that much but I think that would bother me. I guess that's why you pay a little more sometimes for other scopes. I know your 4.5-14x50 mark4 has 100 MOA which means you could get out to 1000 yards even with a 0 MOA base.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
andrew21 said:
Then there is the issue that to get a 100 yard zero the elevation is almost bottomed out.
I'm not sure about that because I remember reading in the manual.. the reticles come "centered" in the scope... meaning there are 50 MOA in either direction of adjustment. I know when I bore sighted my.. I only had to dial in a few MOA to get it on paper, and then a couple of clicks here or there to get it zeroed at a hundred.

So I think I my recticle might be in more of a 45 - 55 position. Does that makes sense what I'm tyring to say? :D

But I don't think it's bottomed out. Even with the 20 MOA base, I didn't have to make 20 MOA worth of adjustments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
I have to know, why zero at a 100yds, why not 200yds or even 300yds?? I'll be zeroing mine in for 300. It something that has been bugging me for a while now. Wht everyone zeros at 100yds?? is it just what is easiest??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Yeah I know what your saying. I was just looking at a review on the 4200 on SC and it was saying the 4200 gets close to bottoming out at 100 yards with a 20 MOA base. Your mark 4 is about centered and you have still got around 50 MOA to play with for elevation, maybe the Mark 4 is designed to sit on a 20 MOA base that's why you did'nt have to adjust it too much and the 4200 might be designed to go on a 0 MOA base. I can't remember how much I had to adjust mine. I no expert I'm fairly new to all these tactical scopes, MOA bases, adjustable turrents and stuff. My shooting experience up until a year ago was just hunting with a standard scope, zeroed a certain distance and that was it. If the target was further away or there was wind you just aim off. I've still got heaps to learn target and distance shooting.
I zero my rifles for 200m which for hunting I find is pretty good. From zero to about 250m I just have to aim dead on to get a kill, after that it starts to drop. I think the 100 yard zero is just easy that's why everyone does that.
I think the Mark 4 with the BDC has to be zeroed at 100yds so you can use the turrents correctly and maybe other military scopes with BDC's are the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
Mmm, ok then that a good view point andrew. Cheers mate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Last weekend I decided to have a play with the elevation adjustment to see how much up/down I had with a 100m zero. I adjusted down until there was no more movement in the turrent and there was around 60MOA (242 individual clicks) down from my 100m zero. Went back up 242 clicks to my zero then adjusted up until there was no more movement. There was around 64MOA (258 individual clicks) up from my 100m zero. Total of 124 MOA, leupold say that the 4.5-14x40 has 100MOA so mine seems to have a little more. Can anyone correct me if my calculations are incorrect.
By the way after all those adjustments when I put it back on my zero it shot exactly where it was meant to shoot
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top