GORE-TEX Professional

Leupold Introduces The Throw Lever for Mark 6 Riflescopes


Leupold is now offering their own throw lever for Mark 6 riflescopes. The Mark 6 Throw Lever clamps over the magnification adjustment ring on the Leupold Mark 6 family of riflescopes, providing a point of traction, allowing for magnification adjustments even with gloves on.



Tags: ,

16 Responses to “Leupold Introduces The Throw Lever for Mark 6 Riflescopes”

  1. Greg says:

    Someone needs to tell Alamo Four Star’s website guy that it’s not 2012 anymore. Either that or they’re waaaay late getting their 2012 catalog out.

  2. Correction to release, this item is “not” available from Alamo Four Star, it is only available from Leupold

  3. Joe says:

    Law Suit from Dick Swan over the use of the term “throw lever” in 3, 2,1……..

  4. Geoff says:

    If that simple clamp is $190, how much do they charge for their scope rings? $600???
    Try this instead:
    Snug it down, not too tight, bend the excess up and put a piece of heatshrink tubing on it.

    • SSD says:

      Yep, that’s what I want on my $2k+ glass. I bet it is awesome on your BSA optic you got at the gun show.

      • Geoff says:

        Actually I have a Nikon P-223 4-12X that cost $250 on my AR, and yes, I would use a hose clamp rather than a $190 ring clamp if I needed to adjust the magnification with gloves on. OR, take off the darn glove! Oh, and I checked on Leupold scope mounts, they run as high as $550 for the Mark 8 IMS, so my guess at $600 wasn’t that far off. Maybe some of you people have tons of money to spend on stuff like that, but I can’t, so I won’t.

        • SSD says:

          The rule of thumb is that your glass costs more than your gun.

          • Geoff says:

            I read somewhere half as much as the rifle. The Leupold equivalent scope to what I have costs $500 at Bass Pro and does not have the BDC reticle. I am happy with mine and shoot 5 shot <1MOA groups at 100 yards. I'm retired so do not have a boat load of money for what some people can afford, so I make do with what works for me and what I can afford.

            • Occasional Poster says:

              So let me get this straight. You’ve got a $250 scope on a $500 rifle that you’ve added a hose clamp unto. You don’t own a Leopold scope at all but you feel the need to tell everyone about your Dodge when they are talking about Cadillacs?

            • Angry Misha says:

              While I must admit that $190 is a bit steep for a piece of CNC’d billet that’s been anodized, laser etched and threaded, it is what it is. First off, you need to consider how much it c osts to design, develop and produce this which drives the cost.

              Inasmuch, and judging by your “shade tree mechanic” material solution, the concept is beyond your scope of expertiese. Therefore, I am going to use short sentences comprised of small words.

              Real socpes, used by REAL shooters, while durable, are precison instuments. Because of this, WE do not favor installing something that is not purpose built and could damge it, like a “hose clamp”. You see, the reason why those scope rings etc. are expensive is because they are “precision” so as not to crush the scope tube. Sure, you can slap on a hose clamp like you said, but what are you out.. $250? You use your rifle/scope combo for plinking and reliving your “glory days” handing out MRE’s and signing requisition forms. These are made primarily for those who “do the do”. True, necessity is the mother of invention, and this is apparent if you look at LAV’s Modelo Raid M4 which used hose clamps to secure the scuba light. However, we have advanced.

              So, instead of poo pooing a companies product because you cannot afford it or the optic it was made for, just shut up and go play with your hooptie M-Forgery until it’s time to go tell stories at your local dive bar to anyone who will listen about your adventures in the “303rd Logistical Studies Group”

              Now, I know what you’re thinking: “Who the heck is this Angry Misha guy calling me out?” Trust me, by the content of your commnets, you DON’T wanna get in a johnson measuring contest and I’m not going to entertain it as I am not going to lower myself anymore than this comment.

              Don’t go away mad, just go away.

            • Angry Misha says:

              Trust me, I am kicking myself for this because I said I wouldn’t acquiesce any further conversation on the subject, but pray tell, considering that an issue M4 holds about 3 MOA with M855, please enlighten us about your budget M4 that is capable of shooting sub MOA groups at 100 yards.

              You know, the more I read your post the more that I am convinced that you were some sort of leg staff puke in the Army or Marines who thought that just because you occasionally went to the “field” and wore camo that you were the deciding authority on what people actually needed.

              Inasmuch, it is creatures like you that make me wish I would’ve gone to AFSOC or NAVSOC, strike that, I lost myself for a moment with that NAVSOC comment. Its people like you who make me wish I would have gone to AFSOC and wouldn’t have had to justify every miniscule expense for operational equipment to some staff puke who thought they knew better.

  5. daggert says:

    I have a mk 6 1-6 and seem to remember a warning not to use a throw lever on this scope as it induced too much torque

  6. Bill says:

    I have a scar 17 with the mark 6 1-6x, a S&B 5-25x on a custom GA Precision ect ect… Some of the best equipment on the planet and there’s no way in hell they are gonna get $170 from me for this little throw lever. It’s frankly disgusting that they would even consider trying to charge that much.