Thoughts on the Maven RS4 vs NF NX8, or Mark 5?

[tdhanses]

Maybe i’ve settled but my NX8 2.5-20 is easy to get behind and seems very clear even at the max 20. Really to me it’s the perfect scope for hunting but i get not everything is for everyone and we all have things that just stand out and bug us.

 

[Mike D Texas]

I have no experience with Maven. Every NF scope I’ve ever been behind had ok glass at best. The MK5 has been solid for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Bravo 4]

These are the experiences that are keeping me from getting a Mk5 3.8-18. I like everything that scope has to offer over the NX8 but the reliability is keeping me from buying one. I just can't understand why Leupold can't make these more bombproof? I'll take absolute reliability over everything else and I really wish I could say that about Leupold.

I concur, that is why I’ve kept my NXS as it is the only scope I’ve had that I fully trust. I’m more of a mil/mil FFP guy and it is moa/moa SFP. I have had more scopes fail than most guys could imagine, mostly Leupold (have used a lot of them personally and professionally). When we get the MK5s issued to us then I can really get a bearing on how durable they are. I will have several dozen and they will get used more in a 6 month period than most will see in a lifetime. That’s when I’ll potentially know where my money will go. I may be retired by then but still have access to the info, it’ll just be more second hand.

 

[Dreeko]

I concur, that is why I’ve kept my NXS as it is the only scope I’ve had that I fully trust. I’m more of a mil/mil FFP guy and it is moa/moa SFP. I have had more scopes fail than most guys could imagine, mostly Leupold (have used a lot of them personally and professionally). When we get the MK5s issued to us then I can really get a bearing on how durable they are. I will have several dozen and they will get used more in a 6 month period than most will see in a lifetime. That’s when I’ll potentially know where my money will go. I may be retired by then but still have access to the info, it’ll just be more second hand.

I look forward to hearing back from you once you have seen how the MK5s perform in a work setting. My Mk5 5-25 has proven to be reliable but my uses for it are far from the abuse a duty optic will see.

 

[Lawnboi]

I want the little mk5 to be all the scope I want, but I keep hearing enough bad that I can’t bring myself to buy one.

 

[Flyjunky]

I concur, that is why I’ve kept my NXS as it is the only scope I’ve had that I fully trust. I’m more of a mil/mil FFP guy and it is moa/moa SFP. I have had more scopes fail than most guys could imagine, mostly Leupold (have used a lot of them personally and professionally). When we get the MK5s issued to us then I can really get a bearing on how durable they are. I will have several dozen and they will get used more in a 6 month period than most will see in a lifetime. That’s when I’ll potentially know where my money will go. I may be retired by then but still have access to the info, it’ll just be more second hand.

Any idea on when you'll receive them and start putting them to use? I ask because I have roughly 35 weeks before my rifle build will be finished and I'll be trying to decide on a new scope by then. I hope you'll come back to this thread or, better yet, start a new thread about the MK5 and it's durability.

 

[Formidilosus]

I concur, that is why I’ve kept my NXS as it is the only scope I’ve had that I fully trust. I’m more of a mil/mil FFP guy and it is moa/moa SFP. I have had more scopes fail than most guys could imagine, mostly Leupold (have used a lot of them personally and professionally). When we get the MK5s issued to us then I can really get a bearing on how durable they are. I will have several dozen and they will get used more in a 6 month period than most will see in a lifetime. That’s when I’ll potentially know where my money will go. I may be retired by then but still have access to the info, it’ll just be more second hand.

I’ve seen several dozen used professionally. They are the best scopes Leupold has ever built, but still all had issues with relatively little use.

The most reliable sniper optic to this day is still the NXS F1 Milspec.

 

[Flyjunky]

Has anyone noticed a correlation between cartridge and failure? I'm wondering if most failures are when using heavier recoiling rifles?

 

[HighUintas]

I’ve seen several dozen used professionally. They are the best scopes Leupold has ever built, but still all had issues with relatively little use.

The most reliable sniper optic to this day is still the NXS F1 Milspec.

Is the F1 milspec a sub model of the nxs line, or are all scopes from the nxs line the most reliable?

 

[wind gypsy]

I just can't understand why Leupold can't make these more bombproof?

Just a wild guess but weight and price point = more sales. Especially when the average customer isn't going to shoot enough to notice any reliability issues.

 

[Formidilosus]

Is the F1 milspec a sub model of the nxs line, or are all scopes from the nxs line the most reliable?

It was a subset. Not available anymore because consumers valued glass and features over dependability. In general though, the NXS scopes have fewer issues than any.

 

[Flyjunky]

Just a wild guess but weight and price point = more sales. Especially when the average customer isn't going to shoot enough to notice any reliability issues.

I can understand that for much of the scope line but the MK5 isn't a cheap or light scope. In both price and weight, the MK5 and NX8 are very similar.

 

[Formidilosus]

Has anyone noticed a correlation between cartridge and failure? I'm wondering if most failures are when using heavier recoiling rifles?

Yes. Recoil, impacts (especially side), vibration (vehicle), and dialing kills them.

 

[Formidilosus]

I can understand that for much of the scope line but the MK5 isn't a cheap or light scope. In both price and weight, the MK5 and NX8 are very similar.

The NX8 has way less issues than the MK5’s (or about any other make/model) in the several dozen of each I’ve seen used heavily, however the higher powered NX8’s are the most problem prone NF’s I’ve seen.

 

[Bravo 4]

I can’t even begin to estimate when we will receive them in mass, the Army approved them over a year ago (we were part of testing) and by their estimates should have had them by now. However they do not get in a hurry and the past year point five has been ridiculous (folks are just looking for a reason not to go to work ) on getting anything from anybody. We have had a small amount of these scopes for the past 3 years and I’ve ran them on everything from a 5.56 gasser to a somewhat lightish weight .375 of the Cheytac flavor. No issues from any of those scopes, but the 2 that were bought with individuals’ own money failed. And there is no difference in the civilian and mil version other than reticle, maybe they got into a bad batch.
The mil spec NXS were a beefed up version of the commercially available models only sold (not even advertised) to the general public until right at the end when a certain retailer got some of the last batch and sold them for a decent price. I wish I could have gotten in on that!

 

[Bravo 4]

Recoil is always going to be a factor. I have destroyed several somewhat expensive scopes on a braked .338 build that I used for several years for hunting. One scope that we have little issues with are the 4.5-14 MK4s on our Barrett M107s. Pretty much 30 yo technology and features, but we have little issues with them.

 

[wind gypsy]

I can understand that for much of the scope line but the MK5 isn't a cheap or light scope. In both price and weight, the MK5 and NX8 are very similar.

I'd argue that the Mk5 is quite light for a 35mm tubed scope in the "tactical" realm. I cant think of a 34mm tubed scope in that class that is as light as the mk5.

Cheap, yeah maybe not. The 5-25 can be had for $2k. Compared to the standards like ATACR, Khales, etc, they are $1k less expensive. I've never fiddled with one but I was of the impression they were supposed to be pretty close to this level optically. So what is it they supposedly give up to ATACR and Khales if they are truly reliable and have competitive glass? They are lighter and less expensive. That is what I was getting at.

Edit: in regards to the NX8, i think its fair to say from this thread and many others the NX8 is price point compromise based on consumer desires. 8x zoom, lower weight, low price (compared to the spec "upgrades" from NXS) = compromised performance.

 

[Totoro]

I had an -32x NX8 on my 300PRC for a few range sessions and for me just could not get comfortable with eye relief/eye box. At max power finicky parallax like others reported.

Put my trusty NXS -22x and happily ever after!

Yeah it's SFP/glass is so-so/portly but I shoot behind it for days.

Not to say the NX8 isn't a quality optic but just not for my eyes.

 

[Littleguy]

Following
I have have 2 MK5s which I really like and have always hoped to get my hands on a NF. Very interested to hear what others have to say about their experiences with both.

 

[Solby]

I would handle the NX8 and Mark 5. In my hands the Mark 5 seemed superior and I liked the reticle better. Durability has been fine on a 5-25 through many range sessions and two mountain hunting seasons. I will add a 3.6-18 to my collection at some point.