mk3 35mm or Reap-ir????????
- Thread starter The Duke
- Start date
I just recently asked this same question on another forum. My question also included the MKII. Seems the response I was given is basically the software on them. I'm curious to hear what the guru's on this site say. I was told the Reap was supposed to have about a 10% better picture then the MKII, but most weren't able to realize that difference when looking between the two. I did not however get the difference or how much "better" the image was supposed to be with the MKIII.
With that info, I just bought a MKII 35mm, can't wait to get it in.
With that info, I just bought a MKII 35mm, can't wait to get it in.
If I were buying today, I’d probably buy a MK III in 35 mm. Although I really like the size/weight of the REAP-IR, I can’t warm up to the joystick. I’d want the 35mm for the wider FOV as I want to call them in within 150 yds, not try to snipe them way out there, and for detection, I use a scanner anyway. IRD/Trijicon seem to have an excellent customer service /quality record, other than IRD abandoning the MK II buyers when they introduced the MK III.
Gman757
Active member
Originally Posted By: The DukeI am building a super light weight AR10 in 308. Basically getting it a light weight as I possibly can.
Other than weight and price what is the difference between the 2 models. To my knowledge nothing just wanted to see if anybody knew something I don't.
Thanks!
I have owned both and I also prefer the ergonomics of the scope turrets. They correspond to the menu display for easy and quick adjustments in the field.
The difference between the Mark II and Mark III is the multiple reticle storage points (4) added to the Mark III as well as as a stadiametric range finder. The other feature added to the Mark III is a double lever Lurue mount instead of the single found on the Mark II.
There are no software differences between the Mark III and the REAP IR. There is a difference in the lens material.....the REAP IR has a GASIR lens and the Mark III uses a GERMANIUM lens. They market the REAP IR as having a better image but I did not see a noticeable difference in the field. The GASIR lens is cheaper according the information I have seen.
If you are looking for lighter the REAP IR is the obvious choice but I found that the added weight of the scope helped me recover more quickly from recoil for follow up shots on running hogs.
IMO.... Recoil will be an issue with a light weight 308 build and I would recommend an adjustable gas block and possibly a hydraulic buffer to help mitigate felt recoil.
Other than weight and price what is the difference between the 2 models. To my knowledge nothing just wanted to see if anybody knew something I don't.
Thanks!
I have owned both and I also prefer the ergonomics of the scope turrets. They correspond to the menu display for easy and quick adjustments in the field.
The difference between the Mark II and Mark III is the multiple reticle storage points (4) added to the Mark III as well as as a stadiametric range finder. The other feature added to the Mark III is a double lever Lurue mount instead of the single found on the Mark II.
There are no software differences between the Mark III and the REAP IR. There is a difference in the lens material.....the REAP IR has a GASIR lens and the Mark III uses a GERMANIUM lens. They market the REAP IR as having a better image but I did not see a noticeable difference in the field. The GASIR lens is cheaper according the information I have seen.
If you are looking for lighter the REAP IR is the obvious choice but I found that the added weight of the scope helped me recover more quickly from recoil for follow up shots on running hogs.
IMO.... Recoil will be an issue with a light weight 308 build and I would recommend an adjustable gas block and possibly a hydraulic buffer to help mitigate felt recoil.
Last edited:
SkyPup
New member
Originally Posted By: Gman757Originally Posted By: The DukeI am building a super light weight AR10 in 308. Basically getting it a light weight as I possibly can.
Other than weight and price what is the difference between the 2 models. To my knowledge nothing just wanted to see if anybody knew something I don't.
Thanks!
I have owned both and I also prefer the ergonomics of the scope turrets. They correspond to the menu display for easy and quick adjustments in the field.
The difference between the Mark II and Mark III is the multiple reticle storage points (4) added to the Mark III as well as as a stadiametric range finder. The other feature added to the Mark III is a double lever Lurue mount instead of the single found on the Mark II.
There are no software differences between the Mark III and the REAP IR. There is a difference in the lens material.....the REAP IR has a GASIR lens and the Mark III uses a GERMANIUM lens. They market the REAP IR as having a better image but I did not see a noticeable difference in the field. The GASIR lens is cheaper according the information I have seen.
If you are looking for lighter the REAP IR is the obvious choice but I found that the added weight of the scope helped me recover more quickly from recoil for follow up shots on running hogs.
IMO.... Recoil will be an issue with a light weight 308 build and I would recommend an adjustable gas block and possibly a hydraulic buffer to help mitigate felt recoil.
This - agree with GMan 100%
Other than weight and price what is the difference between the 2 models. To my knowledge nothing just wanted to see if anybody knew something I don't.
Thanks!
I have owned both and I also prefer the ergonomics of the scope turrets. They correspond to the menu display for easy and quick adjustments in the field.
The difference between the Mark II and Mark III is the multiple reticle storage points (4) added to the Mark III as well as as a stadiametric range finder. The other feature added to the Mark III is a double lever Lurue mount instead of the single found on the Mark II.
There are no software differences between the Mark III and the REAP IR. There is a difference in the lens material.....the REAP IR has a GASIR lens and the Mark III uses a GERMANIUM lens. They market the REAP IR as having a better image but I did not see a noticeable difference in the field. The GASIR lens is cheaper according the information I have seen.
If you are looking for lighter the REAP IR is the obvious choice but I found that the added weight of the scope helped me recover more quickly from recoil for follow up shots on running hogs.
IMO.... Recoil will be an issue with a light weight 308 build and I would recommend an adjustable gas block and possibly a hydraulic buffer to help mitigate felt recoil.
This - agree with GMan 100%