Says the non-rimfire guy. I'd like to be able to use the same scope on my rimfire and centerfire guns.
I shoot rimfire why not dial into the center ?
I get holds, but 400 yards is a mile when scaled so 25 Mils give or take the zero, you might need elevation but if you are holding past 3.5 Mils of wind plus 8 to 10 Mils of elevation I would recommend reevaluating your tactics for repeated success
I get holds, but 400 yards is a mile when scaled so 25 Mils give or take the zero, you might need elevation but if you are holding past 3.5 Mils of wind plus 8 to 10 Mils of elevation I would recommend reevaluating your tactics for repeated success
I shoot long range .22LR and at 300 yards with CCI SV (subs) I have to run 11+ MILs drop from a 100 yard zero. I typically have to account for less than 1 MIL windage either left or right. At most on windy days 1.5-2 MILs. You don't need a huge windage adjustment, and usually I don't even dial wind, I just use the tree reticle.
You can use ±5 mils for most shooting, including prs-22 type events. Some of the more popular models in ELR use ± 5 mils, and thsu don't have ±10 mils (fully-marked) on the windage either.
The place ±10 mils maybe works /needed most is partner-spotting through your rifle, in long-range and heavy weather. But that's kind of a niche application context.
ETA - Mil-C @ 1,000 yds
ETA
The place ±10 mils maybe works /needed most is partner-spotting through your rifle, in long-range and heavy weather. But that's kind of a niche application context.
ETA - Mil-C @ 1,000 yds
ETA
Last edited:
Even out there I’ve never needed 5 mils either. On the wide open hay fields 3.5 or so is usually plenty.
Freaking athlon came out with something that is pretty appealing to me for something like this
ETA: after looking at it for a bit, if it had staggered 0.2 MIL hash like the MIL C it would be perfect. I love the larger dots at the 1 MIL values for wind and smaller 0.2 mil spaced dots
ETA: after looking at it for a bit, if it had staggered 0.2 MIL hash like the MIL C it would be perfect. I love the larger dots at the 1 MIL values for wind and smaller 0.2 mil spaced dots
Last edited:
That’s a good design. I much prefer windage dots to solid lines and hash marks for the tree.
Thinking out loud, a reticle for the OEM crew
So, after looking that the Riton, Arken, et al, recently I really dislike some of the reticles they use. I get asked by the OEMs all the time about a SH reticle and normally the thinking is, nah, I don’t want my stuff in low cost scopes, but then after mulling over it for a few days I was...
www.snipershide.com
-Stan
If I could get that reticle with the 1mil tree removed and a 2mil segmented circle around the center I think that would be PERFECT for a 3-18. Would be fast enough for rapid offhand shooting at 3x and you would still have .2mil hashes all the way to the center and a center dot. A bit busy around the center but still plenty of space to spot misses/impacts.
Could also remove the vertical stadia above 2mils and replace that area with ranging bars.
It would be really cool if someone built a reticle emulator. Have a few stock images of representative “targets” at defined yardages. Overlay a prospective reticle. Run through typical mag ranges. Is the reticle ACTUALLY easily visible at 2x? Does it obscure too much of the target at max mag? How much of the image do those thick stadia lines really obscure?
Lots of reticles look good on a white background. What do they look like at max mag, overlayed on an elk at 400y? What about a wt deer an min mag at 50y?
Lots of reticles look good on a white background. What do they look like at max mag, overlayed on an elk at 400y? What about a wt deer an min mag at 50y?
This is why I said Athlon gets it in my previous post. They have a couple reticles that would be good as a crossover. Just reduce the horizontal mil marks and lengthen the solid bars and it’s there.
The line thickness on the 2.5-15 is 0.06.
That is the one that I have been considering getting for my ar. Currently on pause as I see what comes out from this thread.
Their Gen 2 has a similar reticle. The reticle goes to the top of the scope instead of stopping at 8mil. Looks like a standard duplex on 2.5x. It’s a thick reticle at .06 mil.
Cut the top stadia to 4 MIL and add .5 MIL hashes opposite one side of the .2 MIL hashes.
Agreed, that’s exactly what I was thinking. .2 hashes on top, .5 on bottom.
Ok art guys give me a picture to catch me up
Laura gave me the SHOT Show HIV this week after I dodged it at the show.
I need to get caught up with pictures
Laura gave me the SHOT Show HIV this week after I dodged it at the show.
I need to get caught up with pictures
I still have the AI file for the one I did on pg 3...Ok art guys give me a picture to catch me up
Laura gave me the SHOT Show HIV this week after I dodged it at the show.
I need to get caught up with pictures
What changes would you like
did a revised version of mine...reduced size of the + to only .02 instead of .4 and bumped up the weight at 2mil on the horizontal to .06 and again at 5 mil down to .06 weight. Should make it easier to see at reduced power.Ok art guys give me a picture to catch me up
Laura gave me the SHOT Show HIV this week after I dodged it at the show.
I need to get caught up with pictures
Less busy overall, heavier the further away from the POA you get, still refined in tight.
Last edited:
I could fuck with that...did a revised version of mine...reduced size of the + to only .02 instead of .4 and bumped up the weight at 2mil on the horizontal to .06 and again at 5 mil down to .06 weight. Should make it easier to see at reduced power.
Less busy overall, heavier the further away from the POA you get, still refined in tight.
View attachment 8606658
I would still prefer the floating + in the center over the dot for astigmatism reasons, but it is what it is. I like the rest of the reticle.
Is this already in a scope?did a revised version of mine...reduced size of the + to only .02 instead of .4 and bumped up the weight at 2mil on the horizontal to .06 and again at 5 mil down to .06 weight. Should make it easier to see at reduced power.
Less busy overall, heavier the further away from the POA you get, still refined in tight.
View attachment 8607745
Overlaid on a pronghorn at roughly 440 yds.
If my math is close, if you see roughly 5 mil on each side of the cross hair at 35x. Youd see roughly 10 mil at 18x (17.5 mil) and you'd see roughly down to 22.5 at the bottom at 7x (roughly) so this is about how the view would be on a 440 yd critter.
Tough to really get a feel for it with hypotheticals but it is what it is.
Now, according to the Leupold chart...at 35x your FOV is going to let you see about 8 mil to each side but I suppose all that depends on what kind of FOV you want. Obviously if you have it zoomed in a little bit more 7x so that it's more usable...it gets a little heavy at 35x. But that's the point of going with .03 mil lines and dots when you get all the way zoomed in to 35x...so it's not TOO heavy.
If my math is close, if you see roughly 5 mil on each side of the cross hair at 35x. Youd see roughly 10 mil at 18x (17.5 mil) and you'd see roughly down to 22.5 at the bottom at 7x (roughly) so this is about how the view would be on a 440 yd critter.
Tough to really get a feel for it with hypotheticals but it is what it is.
Now, according to the Leupold chart...at 35x your FOV is going to let you see about 8 mil to each side but I suppose all that depends on what kind of FOV you want. Obviously if you have it zoomed in a little bit more 7x so that it's more usable...it gets a little heavy at 35x. But that's the point of going with .03 mil lines and dots when you get all the way zoomed in to 35x...so it's not TOO heavy.
That looks pretty good. Curious how it looks on a mixed contrast, shadowy background?
Personally I would like to see the tree end at 10 mils and just the thick line below there. Its a lot of clutter and I can't imagine not dialing if I need over 10mils of drop. At the magnification I would be using to shoot that far, the tree would be at the bottom of the reticle or not visible at all anyway.
Similarly I would like to see the windage bars brought in quite a bit, never going to need over 5 mils of windage.... Maybe 6 in some absolutely crazy conditions. And IMO the center dot and .5mil dots should be double the size so they are visible at lower mags.
I really like the thicker horizontal stadia tapering down at 2 mils.
Personally I would like to see the tree end at 10 mils and just the thick line below there. Its a lot of clutter and I can't imagine not dialing if I need over 10mils of drop. At the magnification I would be using to shoot that far, the tree would be at the bottom of the reticle or not visible at all anyway.
Similarly I would like to see the windage bars brought in quite a bit, never going to need over 5 mils of windage.... Maybe 6 in some absolutely crazy conditions. And IMO the center dot and .5mil dots should be double the size so they are visible at lower mags.
I really like the thicker horizontal stadia tapering down at 2 mils.
Gave it one more minor tweak, very minor, probably wouldnt even notice if you're not lookign for it.
Since you cant see anything outside 5 mil when you're zoomed in, there's no reason for the dots to be smaller than .05, and since you cant see anything outside 10 when you're zoomed in to 18x, theres no reason to have dots outside to be smaller either.
So I bumped up the size so they are easier to see the further out you zoom.
Since you cant see anything outside 5 mil when you're zoomed in, there's no reason for the dots to be smaller than .05, and since you cant see anything outside 10 when you're zoomed in to 18x, theres no reason to have dots outside to be smaller either.
So I bumped up the size so they are easier to see the further out you zoom.
For me...one of the major reasons I like 20 mil of hold is for rimfire. There's plenty of times beyond 300 yds where I have had to run a NO DIAL stage and a 300 yd hold is 12-13 mil.
That looks insanely busy. It’s so easy to get lost in grid reticles. Shooting prone and stable it would probably bs ok. Shooting PRS or dmr matches, no thanks.
I think it's well established, can't make 100% of the people happy 100% of the time.
I have never had issues with a grid personally, All of my PRS rifles have some form of a grid or grid like reticle.
I could see doing a strait cross hair like a JTAC, considering the TOR is pretty similar to a MilXT already but to be honest...I did this one, the way I WOULD WANT IT. I prefer the tree style, works for me. Doing a JTAC style for an 18x or 25x optic isn't a bad idea though.
These are some of the tree reticles of the more popular optics. All fo them have pros in their own right.
Attachments
Personally I would be interested in a 5-25, so that is where my mind is.
Of those reticles the MPCT3X is by far my favorite:
- I love having different shapes (not just different sized dots or dashes) to differentiate full mil marks from .2 marks. That is one thing I like about your reticle on the tree.
-appreciate all the extra numbers at the center and 3mil marks on the tree. I find I can get lost quickly deciding if the line I'm looking at is 6.4 or 7.4 mils when "6" and "7" is 5 mils away from the center.
-the dots connecting each mil mark on the tree seem like it would make it very easy to find out exactly where your hold is in the empty space throughout the tree. Without that it is hard to know your exact elevation hold when you are a couple mils from the center on a typical tree reticle.
Honestly if ZCO would just license that reticle to a cheaper OEM I would happily put money down.
Of those reticles the MPCT3X is by far my favorite:
- I love having different shapes (not just different sized dots or dashes) to differentiate full mil marks from .2 marks. That is one thing I like about your reticle on the tree.
-appreciate all the extra numbers at the center and 3mil marks on the tree. I find I can get lost quickly deciding if the line I'm looking at is 6.4 or 7.4 mils when "6" and "7" is 5 mils away from the center.
-the dots connecting each mil mark on the tree seem like it would make it very easy to find out exactly where your hold is in the empty space throughout the tree. Without that it is hard to know your exact elevation hold when you are a couple mils from the center on a typical tree reticle.
Honestly if ZCO would just license that reticle to a cheaper OEM I would happily put money down.
Last edited:
I was never really a fan of the old H-2 and H-37 with the offset being +4 mil high of center, but would it be terrible if it was 1 or 2 mil high of center?
Almost wouldn't notice unless you were holding way over. (just spit balling here)
Would a 1 or 2 mil offset ranging "L" be desire-able at all? does anyone actually use those?
This is offset 2 mil above center, could be a decent compromize between dead nuts and the H-37 which is too high IMO
Almost wouldn't notice unless you were holding way over. (just spit balling here)
Would a 1 or 2 mil offset ranging "L" be desire-able at all? does anyone actually use those?
This is offset 2 mil above center, could be a decent compromize between dead nuts and the H-37 which is too high IMO
The problems start on high tonal-separation background and are compounded when looking at something non-obvious. This is the very good MIL-C against long-range alpine terrain in broad daylight. Even within the same image, there's better and worse performance depending on what you are looking at. (Note theres two entire reticle's here for demonstration purposes).
I understand completely, but I don't believe a digital representation equates 1:1 to how an actual reticle performs in the field.
Alas, that's the whole point and advantage of having an illuminated reticle that's daylight bright.
An example would be a Leupold PR2 that's one of the most popular used in a Mk5HD for PRS work. Most are NOT illuminated.
The lines in this reticle are .03...same as the one I designed. The difference is that mine get heavier as you move away from the center point.
These Chinese scopes are definitely not going to have daylight bright illumination, likely not even daylight noticeable
Put together a hypothetical (lite) version for a 3-18x DMR style.
Even less cluttered, slightly heavier at .05 in close to the aiming point and .07 as you get out past 2 mil of wind and below 5mil elevation.
I guess I'll have to double check the two DNT I have already to see how bright they actually are. I don't remember them being unusable.
Even less cluttered, slightly heavier at .05 in close to the aiming point and .07 as you get out past 2 mil of wind and below 5mil elevation.
I guess I'll have to double check the two DNT I have already to see how bright they actually are. I don't remember them being unusable.
^^^^
Absolutely this. Simplified THLR for the 3-18 crossover. The reticle should be 100% functional for shots from 20 yards to 800 in good and poor light. Post bold enough to clearly see at 3x in low light, spaced close enough to bracket vitals. Many of today’s reticle have 10 mils of windage marks on each side of the vertical wire. Considering a 99 mph full value wind only takes 7.5 mils of wind hold with the 147 gr ELD launched at 2700fps, why are putting the post 20 fn mils apart, where they are of absolutely no value for bracketing vitals in low light up close? Bring those post in to no more than 5 mils from center. The bottom post should point at 1.4ish mils below center. That puts the POI dead on at close range (20 yards) if using the bottom post as your aiming point. Don’t want a tree reticle for hunting. Think dial elevation and hold windage. Thicker reticle than for match shooting. The center portion should be visible enough by 6x to use your wind holds. Illumination is fine, but design the reticle so that it can be used if the illumination fails.
John
I like the stadia thickness on the 3-18. Personally I prefer the dashes between all the "+" marks. And one more mil of windage in the tree starting at 2mils would be appreciated.
For my comment on daylight visibility, I am in AZ and it is typically BRIGHT when I am shooting, very different terrain from your overlay pics, the ground itself is reflective. I haven't owned a scope that lights up more than the center that has useful illumination in those conditions.
For my comment on daylight visibility, I am in AZ and it is typically BRIGHT when I am shooting, very different terrain from your overlay pics, the ground itself is reflective. I haven't owned a scope that lights up more than the center that has useful illumination in those conditions.
OK...Here's Pr2 non-illuminated vs Mil-C....to me this shows Mil-C is stronger than it looks when tested against itself. But maybe other people find teh pr2 easier to use based on their eyes.
Similar threads
