Weaver Tactical or Leupold Mark 4

I've narrowed down my choices to the Leupold Mark 4 6.5-20x50 or the Weaver 4-20x50 Tactical. I was leaning toward the Leupold until I tried each scope in my local store. I know it doesn't represent exactly what to expect at the range, but it was very difficult to get a sight picture in the Leupold at maximum magnification. If I was not exactly at the right position and angle, I could not see anything. The Weaver was much more forgiving at all powers and the Leupold was much easier at the lower magnification levels.

Is this typical for these Leupold scopes, or should I try it again? The Leupold was nice otherwise and the glass seemed a little better than the Weaver.

Having the 5X erector, allowing you to go down to 4X instead of 6.5X would pretty much decide it right there for me.

Between those two, I would probably choose the Weaver... And use the extra money to buy ammo!

What about the Sightron 6-24x50 SIII as compared to the Weaver. Is the glass better, and are they as durable? I don't have local access to the Sightron scopes, but I've read good reviews on the glass, although I've read some negatives about the durability.

Those Weaver Tacticals are getting consistently good reviews.  I had the Mark 4 you reference, and it was really a great scope for me.  It was definitely picky on the top end of the magnification range, as you pointed out.

I think I would roll the dice on the Weaver.

And with Sightron scopes you are giving up FFP, I don't know if that is important to you.

Be advised, any 20X (even a $3,000 20X) is not nearly as easy to get behind as a scope with less magnification.  Small eye box is a problem all 20X rifle scopes share, some have it worse than others.

I have almost bought the Sightron several times I really like the SIII line.  I went with Trijicon Accupoint and the 5-20 Super Sniper but I also have some Mk 4 scopes from before I knew better. The down side of the Weaver is it only has about 50 moa of internal adjustment and the 5-20 Accupoint also shares that issue however the illumination makes up for that to some degree.  For true long range the Super Sniper scopes are quite good for their price.  Nightforce is also a fine choice but has rather unimpressive glass to go with its superb mechanicals.  Over that U.S. Optics is awesome and the very best is Heinsoldt.  I would have no problem selecting a SIII or an Accupoint and as the owner of an 8.5-25x50 Mk4 I would suggest a 4.5-14 would be a better choice in Leupold.

Rancid Coolaid wrote: Be advised, any 20X (even a $3,000 20X) is not nearly as easy to get behind as a scope with less magnification.  Small eye box is a problem all 20X rifle scopes share, some have it worse than others. And don't get the Leupold, better scopes can be had, for less money. The S3 is an example. What are you mounting the scope on? At what are you shooting? At what ranges will you be shooting? No need for a 20X scope on a 100 or 200 yard gun.

I'll be using this scope on a Remington 700 Milspec 5R, mostly paper punching out to 600 yards and deer hunting once or twice a year.

In the end I went with the 3-15x50 Weaver. However, I may have made the wrong decision. After receiving the scope, I compared it to my Leupold VX-III 4.5-14x40 and the clarity is not as good as the Leupold. Everything else seems nice and well built, although the SF and zoom ring are a little gritty. I hope I can return it.

Sorry to hear it, I have a new Leupold 8.5x25x50 with the varmint reticle, I know it is a lot of scope for my .223 but I like it for the squirrels and with my eyes getting worst, it is nice to see what I am looking at. I don't know enough about scopes but I do try and by American, since there isn't enough of us to go around anymore

How would the glass quality of the Vortex PST and Sightron SIII compare to the Weaver Tactical?

i have the 4.5-14 mk4 on an AR for ground hogs. i like it, but i didn't pay retail, and probably wouldn't. but it does the job, getting those little bastards out to 500 or so.