F T/R Competition NF Reticle for F Class
- Thread starter cjmill87
- Start date
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
Scope reticles are such an issue of personal preferences, that it is not easy to just say one is better than another.
I also went from a Weaver T-36 to a NF 12-42 and love the clean, uncluttered look of the NP2-DD reticle.
The tick marks, dots, slashes and whatever on the crosshairs are not necessary in F Class since the target rings are of known dimensions and are typically used for holdoff adjustments instead of marks on the reticle.
Paul
Scope reticles are such an issue of personal preferences, that it is not easy to just say one is better than another.
I also went from a Weaver T-36 to a NF 12-42 and love the clean, uncluttered look of the NP2-DD reticle.
The tick marks, dots, slashes and whatever on the crosshairs are not necessary in F Class since the target rings are of known dimensions and are typically used for holdoff adjustments instead of marks on the reticle.
Paul
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
I have scopes with the NP-2DD (12-42x56) and NP-R1 (8-32x56) reticles on F-Class rifles. As PJP mentioned above, I also like the "uncluttered" appearance and aiming dot of the NP-2DD. But the NP-R1 is also a good reticle. The main difference between IMO, is your ability to estimate adjustments/holds with the reticle. Obviously, the NP-R1 hashmarks are more useful for that purpose. The gap between the lines and the aiming dot of the NP-2DD subtends ~1.1 MOA @ 42X (2.0 MOA @ 22X), so it <span style="font-style: italic">can</span> be use to get a gross estimate for adjustments/holds, but isn't as nearly precise for my eyes. For F-Class, as long as you know the scoring ring spacings, you don't really need the reticle for that purpose anyhow, so I give a slight edge to the NP-2DD for F-Class shooting. YMMV.
I have scopes with the NP-2DD (12-42x56) and NP-R1 (8-32x56) reticles on F-Class rifles. As PJP mentioned above, I also like the "uncluttered" appearance and aiming dot of the NP-2DD. But the NP-R1 is also a good reticle. The main difference between IMO, is your ability to estimate adjustments/holds with the reticle. Obviously, the NP-R1 hashmarks are more useful for that purpose. The gap between the lines and the aiming dot of the NP-2DD subtends ~1.1 MOA @ 42X (2.0 MOA @ 22X), so it <span style="font-style: italic">can</span> be use to get a gross estimate for adjustments/holds, but isn't as nearly precise for my eyes. For F-Class, as long as you know the scoring ring spacings, you don't really need the reticle for that purpose anyhow, so I give a slight edge to the NP-2DD for F-Class shooting. YMMV.
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
As mentioned, the NP-2DD and NP-R1 are great choices. If you want a little less cluttered hash mark type reticle, also take a look at the NP-R2. It is a very popular reticle in the higher magnification NF scopes.
As mentioned, the NP-2DD and NP-R1 are great choices. If you want a little less cluttered hash mark type reticle, also take a look at the NP-R2. It is a very popular reticle in the higher magnification NF scopes.
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
Both my 32BR and my 42NXS are NP-2DD. I like it a lot. I was planning to go to a Sightron from the 32 but couldn't get past the idea of changing reticles.
Both my 32BR and my 42NXS are NP-2DD. I like it a lot. I was planning to go to a Sightron from the 32 but couldn't get past the idea of changing reticles.
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
I used the 8-32x NF with an NP-R1. If it's strictly to be used for F-Class shooting, it might not be the best, but for me I liked it because it was more multipurpose than the other reticles since the gun I shoot for F-Class isn't a fully dedicated F-Class rifle like others use at the matches.
I used the 8-32x NF with an NP-R1. If it's strictly to be used for F-Class shooting, it might not be the best, but for me I liked it because it was more multipurpose than the other reticles since the gun I shoot for F-Class isn't a fully dedicated F-Class rifle like others use at the matches.
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
Count me in on the NP-2DD camp. I've got two of them. The design of the reticle seems to help quickly guide my eyes to the center dot and yet nothing in the reticle seems to "get in the way". Like others above, I also hold off on the landmarks on the target, so hash marks and what not are not useful to me.
Count me in on the NP-2DD camp. I've got two of them. The design of the reticle seems to help quickly guide my eyes to the center dot and yet nothing in the reticle seems to "get in the way". Like others above, I also hold off on the landmarks on the target, so hash marks and what not are not useful to me.
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
I like the 2DD reticle, but have trouble seeing it when the view gets bad... like a dark over cast day, or when there are lots of pasters on the target face. I sometimes completely 'lose' the center dot.
The R1/R2 reticle is easier (for me) to keep in view, and the continuous lines of the reticle can help when the mirage gets bad and all you can do is quarter the fuzzy-looking target center - quartering with crosshairs seems to work better for me than centering the little black dot on the big black blob.
YMMV,
Monte
I like the 2DD reticle, but have trouble seeing it when the view gets bad... like a dark over cast day, or when there are lots of pasters on the target face. I sometimes completely 'lose' the center dot.
The R1/R2 reticle is easier (for me) to keep in view, and the continuous lines of the reticle can help when the mirage gets bad and all you can do is quarter the fuzzy-looking target center - quartering with crosshairs seems to work better for me than centering the little black dot on the big black blob.
YMMV,
Monte
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: memilanuk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I like the 2DD reticle, but have trouble seeing it when the view gets bad... like a dark over cast day, or when there are lots of pasters on the target face. I sometimes completely 'lose' the center dot.
Monte </div></div>
Try that illumination switch that we never use.
I was sitting around chatting at Raton asking if anyone had ever used it, everyone said no, except Danny Biggs, he said at Buttner once in a late match it was getting hard to see in the last match and he switched it on.
I'm guessing pasters are a problem at 600 or less. I've never noticed them much at 1000.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: memilanuk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I like the 2DD reticle, but have trouble seeing it when the view gets bad... like a dark over cast day, or when there are lots of pasters on the target face. I sometimes completely 'lose' the center dot.
Monte </div></div>
Try that illumination switch that we never use.
I was sitting around chatting at Raton asking if anyone had ever used it, everyone said no, except Danny Biggs, he said at Buttner once in a late match it was getting hard to see in the last match and he switched it on.
I'm guessing pasters are a problem at 600 or less. I've never noticed them much at 1000.
Re: NF Reticle for F Class
NF illumination is pretty anemic unless it is getting really dark out, at least to my eyes. My NF BR scope has the more easily adjustable illumination knob, and it still doesn't go bright enough to be usable short of dusk conditions.
I don't see the individual pasters so much as they give the target face a mottled appearance that makes it difficult to separate the dot from the uneven background. Usually by that point the scoring rings are not in the best condition either, so holding off using just the rings isn't as effective as usual.
Don't get me wrong - I really, really like the 2DD reticle. I just really don't like it when I have a crystal view of the target - and can't see the bloody center of the reticle. The only one I have that problem with is the 2DD.
YMMV,
Monte
NF illumination is pretty anemic unless it is getting really dark out, at least to my eyes. My NF BR scope has the more easily adjustable illumination knob, and it still doesn't go bright enough to be usable short of dusk conditions.
I don't see the individual pasters so much as they give the target face a mottled appearance that makes it difficult to separate the dot from the uneven background. Usually by that point the scoring rings are not in the best condition either, so holding off using just the rings isn't as effective as usual.
Don't get me wrong - I really, really like the 2DD reticle. I just really don't like it when I have a crystal view of the target - and can't see the bloody center of the reticle. The only one I have that problem with is the 2DD.
YMMV,
Monte
Similar threads
