Testing out the Mk12 Mod1 and M14 at the Abbotsford Fish and Game Club

So, I finally got around to getting my Mk12 Mod 1 clone build out to see how it shoots.  I knew the Colt HBAR that it was built around shot well when I had the barrel encased in Primary Weapons Systems (PWS) parts.  I'd only shot it once and I recall getting a decent group but I didn't measure it and wish I had.  The Mk12 Mod 1 clone had a Leupold 3.5-10x40mm FFP with Leupold's fine TMR reticle and I was shooting 75gr Hornady Steel Match, and I also tried out a few rounds of 77gr Federal Gold Medal Match SMKs.

I also dragged my M14 EBR out to see if I could get it to shoot reliably.  The last time I had this rifle out was in December of 2016 and it wasn't functioning properly.  Shells weren't ejecting properly and I had my buddy Roy take a look at it.  The shells were getting caught on the nut of the keeper screw of the scope rings.  I've since switched out the rings and scope and made sure the nut was on the opposite side this time (opposite of ejection port side).  The M14 was equipped with a Leupold VX-R Patrol 3-9x40mm SFP with Leupold's TMR reticle (a lot fatter than the fine version on the Mark 4) and I was shooting 155gr Hornady Steel Match.

I went with a few buddies to the Abbotsford Fish and Game Club this past weekend.  I think most of us have grown tired of the Port Coquitlam District Hunting and Fishing Club (PCDHFC) as it's gotten pretty crowded, and at times, a bit fuddy.

The Abby range had no wait time, plenty of lanes, and it was self governed.  It was a nice clean range and I would definitely like to go back.

It's a shame that it maxes out at 100m, but for zeroing rifles and shooting groups, it was good enough.  

There were plenty of benches to shoot off of, but there was also amble space to lay down right beside your bench to shoot prone

The first thing I shot was my M14.  I really wanted to see if it was just the scope ring issue that was causing previous malfunctions.  I know that my buddy Roy had diagnosed that as the issue, but I wanted to make sure.  I had a couple of cheap 7.62 rounds left in the magazine and decided to send a few for a rough zero, but a few of them actually failed to eject properly. 

Crap....so, I got out the 155gr Hornady Steel Match and my worries disappeared.  After I got a rough rough zero on a rock at about 75m, I decide to zero the rifle at the 100m target.  I shot a 5 round group that looked fairly respectable and went to my rifle sized targets.  

I probably should have measured this one, but it looks like it's about 2"?

Anyway, the best group I could manage with the Leupold VX-R was 1.7" at 100m.  Maybe I could have done better with more magnification and a finer reticle, maybe not.  I've read a lot of frustrating first hand accounts of people trying to squeeze accuracy out of these things.  Rack grade M14s came with no accuracy guarantees, and from what I've read match grade M14s can come with a guarantee to produce 2" groups at 100 yards.  There are accounts where some people have poured large amounts of money into these things (not even Norinco) in their "Ultimate Builds" to which produced 1" to 1 1/4" groups.  Some custom builds have been known to produce 1" or less, but I don't think I'm going to chase that unicorn.  I talked to Roy about it and he assured me the groups my rifle was producing was good for an M14.  

My Mk12 Mod 1 clone build performed as well as I expected.  I managed a .875" group at 100m, but I honestly think this rifle could do better with more magnification.  At 100m, it was hard for me to see the target, even with the fine TMR reticle.  That being said, it is supposed to be a clone build, and wouldn't be right with one of Leupold's higher power Mark 4s.  Actually, the Mod 1 was more commonly seen with Leupold's 2.5-8x36mm Mark 4, not this one, but I think I'll just settle for close enough.

Overall, I'm happy with these two rifles.  I think it was a successful day for me in that I managed to get both rifles zeroed.  The bonus was that both of them produced groups I was satisfied with considering the ammo and glass.  The Mk12 Mod 1 will always be a range toy considering the AR's restricted status, but maybe I can take the M14 out to plink with at further distances.

Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm LR/T M3-FF TMR 60035 for the Mk12 Clone and comparison to VX-R Patrol

There were two things glaringly wrong with my interpretation of the Mk12.  First, the barrel is completely wrong.  It should be an 18” Douglas barrel, but I’ve decided to keep the 20” Colt HBAR because it’s an excellent barrel and produces decent groups. 

The second is the glass.  I’ve mentioned this before, that I can’t in good conscience pay $1,900 for obsolete glass in the form of a second focal plane Leupold Mark 4 with a mildot reticle and MOA adjustments.  I’ve been using a Leupold VX-R Patrol 3-9x40mm for a while, which has a mil TMR reticle with .1 mil adjustments, but is in the second focal plane.  The reason I got it was because it was less than half the price of a Mark 4, and though it’s SFP, it’s mil/mil, it has a similar profile to the Mark 4, and has a 30mm main tube.  And since it had mil adjustments, I could dial instead of using TMR reticle at a one magnification.

But as the folks on AR15.com have been quick to point out, it is not even close to being clone correct.  The turrets and markings appear quite different from a Mark 4, but for the uninformed like myself, it was good enough.  I was happy with my VX-R Patrol, but it had always been gnawing at the back of my head that it wasn’t clone correct and I should get another Mark 4 so I decided to start looking.  I figured ok, if I find one for cheap, as cheap as my Patrol, I could justify it in the name of clone correctness, but that was not to be.  Lever Arms had a Mark 4 2.5-8x36mm illuminated TMR with M3 turrets, but they wanted $1,900.  Apparently Leupold ceased production of the Mark 4 for civilian sales so I’ve heard that they will be even harder to find in the future.

But luck was with me and I stumbled on a deal for a Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm.  It had the TMR reticle, M3 turrets with MOA adjustments, but interestingly enough, the reticle was in the first focal plane.  I didn’t even know the Mark 4 had an FFP option, though when I started searching for these, it seemed a bit rare.  The price was decent and the scope was brand new so I grabbed it and hoped it wasn’t a misprint.  I wasn’t worried about the adjustments because I could always send it back to Leupold to replace the turrets to be in mil adjustments.  

Anyway, this isn’t my first Mark 4, I had one years ago for another rifle, but ended up replacing it with the Bushnell Elite Tactical DMR 3.5-21x50 first focal plane scope with the TReMoR2 reticle.  The scope came packaged like my first Mark 4, reinforced with foam, instructions, an Allen key, a Leupold sticker and flip caps that appear to look the same as Butler Creek, except are marked Leupold. 

The adjustments are in 1 moa increments, but I’ll look into getting the turrets converted to mils.  I contacted Korth Group and they quoted $124 per turret and I think I’ll probably do that one day.  I noticed the turret was also marked 308 win 168gr.  Around the turret itself, there are secondary markings indicating where to dial for 100 yrds, 200 yrds and so forth.  After seeing this, I was almost tempted to through this onto my 700p. 

I’ve edited out the serial number, but I also noticed the scope wasn’t stamped made in the USA either.  I guess I can always verify with Leupold the authenticity of this scope, but I’m pretty sure it’s real. 

Marked in black lettering are the words Front Focal 

A side by side comparison with the VX-R Patrol on the left and the Mark 4 on the right.  The Mark 4 is slightly longer. 

Although both scopes share similar overall profiles, the turrets is what really gives it away, and to the clone builder, this was easy to spot.

I found it interesting that the magnification was printed on the adjustment knob on the Mark 4, where it was opposite on the Patrol

After mounting the scope in the ARMS 22 rings, there was still something off and I couldn't quite place it.  I know there was no illumination dial as this model did not come with illumination, but apparently that's acceptable according to the folks on ARF.  I couldn't quite place what was wrong until I looked at the rifle from the side.  Then it hit me, the scope was longer than what I was used to looking at.  Then I realized that almost all of the pics of the Mk12 Mod 1 that I had showed the 2.5-8x36mm on the Mod 1, where it was mostly the Mod 0 that used the 3.5-10x40mm.  I have a bad feeling that I will be scanning the interwebz for a cheap 2.5-8x36mm sometime in the future....

Apologies for the crappy pics of the glass itself.  I haven't had the chance to get the scope outside for some clear shots.  Anyway, the FFP Mark 4 at 3.5x mag from about 10m

The SFP VX-R Patrol from the same distance.

The FFP Mark 4 at 3.5x mag, the fire hydrant is about 100m away.  Note that because it is FFP, the reticle is tiny at 3.5x mag.

The SFP VX-R Patrol at 3x mag.  

The FFP Mark 4 at 10x mag.  

The SFP VX-R Patrol at 9x Mag.  I'm sure most people reading this will already know the difference between FFP and SFP, but  ou can clearly see that with the SFP scope, the reticle does not change size no matter the magnification.  The reticle is also a lot finer on the FFP scope, but this might have something to do with the the cost of the Mark 4 versus the VX-R Patrol.

Anyway, it's still not perfect, but at least it sort of looks right compared to when I had the VX-R Patrol on there.  I still haven't even shot this rifle in it's current configuration.  I've only shot the barrel when it was in the PWS form, so I'll have to get out one of these days and test her out.  As far as appearance of the rifle is concerned, it's definitely getting there.  Lets see if my OCD will allow me to keep this Mark 4, lol!

Specifications

Item Condition New

Scope Weight: 19.5 oz.

Scope Length: 13.5"

Magnification Range: 3.5-10x

Scope Objective Diameter: 40 mm

Scope Tube Size / Mount: 30 mm

Scope Turret Adjustment: 1/2 MOA - windage / 1 MOA - elevation

Reticle Position: First

Field of View: 29.9' - 11' @ 100 yds.

Eye Relief: 4.7" - 3.4"

Illuminated Reticle: no

Scope Finish: matte black

UPC 030317600358

MPN 60035

Some info on the clone correct scope for the Mk12 I found on AR15.com:

Have been trying to gather a little information from a contact at Leupold with regards the scopes, the marked TS-30, TS-30 A2 and subsequent models supplied to the military under contract which ther has been 11 or 12. 

Obviously the TS-30 is a vari-x scope which was a 3-9x36 mil-dot scope with a M3 turret (non-illuminated). At this time, I don't have any nsn number for this scope or know if it was even assigned one or the number that Leupold actually manufactured and sold. 

The TS-30 A2 was made and sold in the 2002, 2003 timeframe, again no nsn number or numbers sold. Nearly all pictured have a k serial number for 2002. 

These were the only scopes that were actually marked in this way and sold to the military, basically pre-mark 4 for these models. 

The TS-30 became model 57075, the Mark 4 3-9x36 MR/T M3 non-illuminated mil-dot reticle (but with significant design changes) 

The TS-30 A2 became model # 57055 the Mark 4 3-9x36 MR/T M3 illuminated mil-dot reticle (no change in design) 

Leupold primarily supplied model number 57055 in the 2003-2006 timeframe for military contracts 

In 2006, Leupold redesigned the previous years models and introduced the Mark 4 2.5-8x36 and the TMR reticle 

The following scope model was supplied by Leupold under contract in the following years 

Model # 60150 the Mark 4 2.5-8x36 M2 illuminated mil-dot 

Leupold continued to supply this scope model in contracts until approximately 2010 at which time it was redesigned/small changes were made and it became 

Model # 67920 the Mark 4 2.5-8x36 MR/T M2 illuminated mil-dot. 

Once again in 2012, the scope was redesigned/small changes made and it became 

Model #112633 the Mark 4 2.5-8x36 MR/T M2 illuminated TMR. 

Model numbers 60150, 67920 and 112633 have all at one time or another been NSN 1005-01-562-0953 which was created in 03/08. 

So I suppose at this stage if you have either model #'s 57055, 60150, 67920 or 112633 you would be clone correct. I did get a few contract numbers to look up, if I gather anything more I will put it out there.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-/118-520524/&page=792&anc=7401682#i7401682

Leupold VX-R Patrol 3-9x40mm and Mark 4 30mm high rings for the M14 EBR

I've bought and sold Leupold Mark 4 rings in the past, but this was the first time I coughed up for brand new ones and it was a bit hard to swallow, lol!  That being said though, these are damn fine scope rings and I needed them to complete a certain look I was after.  

I understand that my M14 EBR is pretty far from a proper Mk14 Mod 0 clone, but one thing that has always sort of bothered me was my choice in glass.  I can't bring myself to spend $1,900 on a second focal plane MOA scope (Leupold Mark 4), but at the same time, I can't afford to keep a Steiner T5Xi on there either.  I settled for a Bushnell Tactical 5-15x40mm, miildot reticle with 1/4 MOA adjustments.  

It's not a bad scope at all, and was one of my first half-decent scopes, but I've gotten used to scopes in first focal plane, or at the very least scopes with a mil-based reticle with mil adjustments.  

The Bushnell also has a peculiar object paralax adjustment which is something that has been sort of getting on my nerves.

I also wasn't 100% sure on the Weaver Tactical rings.  You can see the ring tops flex if you don't crank them down evenly, and I also found the rings themselves scratch and even get gouged pretty easily.  This didn't exactly instill confidence considering the M14 has been known to be rough on scopes, let alone soft aluminum rings.

Also, if you look at the ring mount keeper screws/nuts, the front one in particular, there wasn't enough clearance to tighten the nut.  The nut would actually hit the ARMS base with every turn.  Not the manufacturer's fault in this case as it just simply wasn't designed for this base in particular, but the material would scrape away with every turn and would probably end up rounded out if I did it often enough.

The scope base is an ARMS unit, and I think these are made of steel.

The Leupold rings fit like a glove to the ARMS base, and the keeper screw easily cleared the base.

Leupold called for 65in/lbs, but when I took the pic, I had it adjusted to 45in/lbs.  I did torque it down properly later on.

So, I know I said I currently prefer first focal plane scopes, and the VX-R Patrol 3-9x40mm is clearly a second focal plane scope, but I wasn't about to buy another Steiner for my M14.  This Patrol came from my Mk12 Mod 1 clone (I got new glass for my Mk12 Mod 1) and I hope the elevation adjustment has good tracking so I won't have to rely on reading the reticle for shot adjustments (either that or keep it at 9x magnification when shooting or ranging).

Anyway, far from being clone correct, but I think it's a step in the right direction and probably a far better scope than the one it replaced.  I would liked to have gotten another Steiner T5Xi 5-25x56mm for the M14, but I'm not sure if the rifle itself warrants premium glass like the Steiner.

Looking forward to taking it the rifle out one of these days and see how she groups.  I've had it for years and still haven't shot groups with it yet, lol!