DNT is gonna let us do a reticle

Tictacticaltimmy · Saturday at 12:38 PM

The SFP ranging box is a really cool concept, but I don't think it is relevant to this thread. My understanding is DNT is looking to simply change the etched reticle on an existing scope of theirs, not spec out a completely new optic.

@BigJimFish have you reached out to PA with this idea? It seems right up their alley, could easily apply this idea to their 18/72" acss ranging feature.

In general it seems to me the reticle designs should try to maximize the usefulness for the ways 90% of potential buyers will be using the optic 95% of the time. because trying to make the optic usable for every niche application demands compromises which makes it less usable in those 90-95% applications.

Examples of such compromises would be, in my opinion, windage marks that extend past 5 mils instead of having nice thick bars up to that point. Or having vertical stadia more than 2mil above the center... Or perhaps having vertical stadia anywhere above the center.

I actually think making these sorts of compromises are a mistake nearly all optic companies make particularly in the long range target shooting market. A reticle design that did away with them could be really strong for the way most of us use these optics.... And let the people shooting niche applications buy something else.

blksno · Saturday at 12:47 PM

carbonbased said:
Obviously this site has a white steel target/comp focus, I get it. But I think it’s helpful to think outside of just that discipline. The reticle I’d like is for small varmint shooting.

I get all that and value that info, but I don't know if the relevant info revolves around the people on the site shooting steel and target/comps.
I think it's just a factor that, for me personally, I don't see this as the ideal optic for hunting anyway, so I'm not really looking to design a reticle for a purpose the majority won't use it for.

It's like trying to make sure you put child seat hooks in the back seat of your mustang. Ok cool, it works for that, but you're talking about 10% that might buy it for colony varmints vs the 75% that are going to buy it for some type of competition shooting.

carbonbased · Saturday at 1:25 PM

blksno said:
I get all that and value that info, but I don't know if the relevant info revolves around the people on the site shooting steel and target/comps.
I think it's just a factor that, for me personally, I don't see this as the ideal optic for hunting anyway, so I'm not really looking to design a reticle for a purpose the majority won't use it for.

It's like trying to make sure you put child seat hooks in the back seat of your mustang. Ok cool, it works for that, but you're talking about 10% that might buy it for colony varmints vs the 75% that are going to buy it for some type of competition shooting.

The interesting thing about a reduced (edit: height) tree idea is it slides in between a simple cross and a full tree.

Since the simple cross is coming back into fashion for some top shooters, the reduced (edit: height) tree middle ground is something no one is doing. Like, hold until a certain point and then dial for more extreme distance shots. Open bottom and top for trace/splashes.

I dunno man, not going to fall on my sword here, but I think it’s worth thinking about.

carbonbased · Saturday at 1:27 PM

Just updated as you emoji’ed.

stanley_white · Saturday at 1:29 PM

carbonbased said:
The interesting thing about a reduced tree idea is it slides in between a simple cross and a full tree.

Since the simple cross is coming back into fashion for some top shooters, the reduced tree middle ground is something no one is doing. Like, hold until a certain point and then dial for more extreme distance shots. Open bottom and top for trace/splashes.

I dunno man, not going to fall on my sword here, but I think it’s worth thinking about.

Is this a reduced tree?

-Stan

carbonbased · Saturday at 1:55 PM

stanley_white said:
Is this a reduced tree?

-Stan

View attachment 8623990

Whoops, reduced HEIGHT tree, not width. Less mils down. At least two mils left/right.

If one desires a more open reticle at 1mil down, that’s ok if you do that sneaky thing @koshkin ‘s March reticle FML-TR1 does. The stuff at 1.5mil and 2mil down is easy to align by eye UP to the empty.5mil/1mil “imaginary” horizontals. Look to the left side that I didn’t modify and you’ll see.

He also made the tree a little narrower by his use of numbers in the ends instead of dots.

For example, by not using a big dot for 2mils right and then hanging the number to the right of the dot, he saved that much visual space by using a narrow number instead.

This way you get both things…more open and also pretty easy to align in open space.

blksno · Saturday at 2:41 PM

I just went back and looked at the weight of the various dots/lines on various reticles that utilize a higher mag range, as well as some form of tree reticle.
This is a break down of how heavy the data is OFF the main stadia. The dots, or dashes or whatever that makes up the "tree" portion of the design ideas.
The focus for me being the weight of the floating center dot, and then the weight of the rest of the tree or grid or secondary hold off data below the main stadia.

	MainStadia	Center Dot	1 mil indication dots	secondary dots
DNT TOR	.04	.05	.08	.05
Mil XT	.033	.05	.10	.05
GR2ID	.04 (assumed)	.05	.08	.06 - .04
EBR-7D	.03	.03	.09	.06
Gen3 XR Fine	.025	.05	.10 (+ shape)	.05
MPCT3x	.034	.036	.2 (O shape)	.036
my basic v4	.03	.03	.2 (+ shape)	.03

From what I can see, the .information is all fairly consistent overall. Mine borrowing bits and pieces from many.

I may tweak a v5 so the + shapes aren't as pronounced, not as "long". Mine are 2x longer than the Gen3XRfine, but not as heavy. I think that's a good thing, but I'm open to the change.

As you can see by the main stadia...I think this slight bit of girth helps to make the remaining tree "vanish" when you're not looking for it. I don't really see .3 or .4 or somewhere in the middle as a deal breaker, considering we're rarely holding on the line itself...however, mine does have openings at the mil marks.

blksno · Monday at 11:07 AM

Did a "reduced" tree for some of the folks that were asking. Tweaked the 1 mil + to be more like the 1 mil + that Tangent Theta uses. Left the larger + once you get beyond the 5 mil holds. Modified the heavy bar at 10 and 20 mil marks to taper in toward the middle. Tried a pointed arrow style like the MPCT3, didn't like it. I'm not partial to either, but I do like this one better than the arrow type.

This wouldn't really be my choice, but people were asking for a more reduced, simple tree.

I was shooting this weekend, made a 1st round impact at 1063 with 77 OTMs out of my 18" SPR. Had to dial 10.2 mil, hold an additional 5 of elevation and I would have held 5.5 Mil of wind, but the Arken 5-25 didn't have enough wind holds for it....so I had to dial. (not my preference) but it worked. It's for this reason, I'd prefer to have at least 4 or 5 mil of wind holds at or below 5 mil of elevation.
That's just me.

Same basic layout as my other versions...
Reduced the height above to a much more simple 1 mil and 1/2 mil dot (this would be my pref) ...the first mil up, and 4 mil down are the same as Tangent Theta. The + being the same, the dots being slightly more fine, the center hold being slightly more fine.

Horizontal still .03 mil out to 2 and down to 5. Same weight as an EBR-7D Beyond that, goes to .05 mil out to 10 and down to 10 which is slightly heavier than the other competitors.

carbonbased · Monday at 12:14 PM

blksno said:
Did a "reduced" tree for some of the folks that were asking. Tweaked the 1 mil + to be more like the 1 mil + that Tangent Theta uses. Left the larger + once you get beyond the 5 mil holds. Modified the heavy bar at 10 and 20 mil marks to taper in toward the middle. Tried a pointed arrow style like the MPCT3, didn't like it. I'm not partial to either, but I do like this one better than the arrow type.

This wouldn't really be my choice, but people were asking for a more reduced, simple tree.

I was shooting this weekend, made a 1st round impact at 1063 with 77 OTMs out of my 18" SPR. Had to dial 10.2 mil, hold an additional 5 of elevation and I would have held 5.5 Mil of wind, but the Arken 5-25 didn't have enough wind holds for it....so I had to dial. (not my preference) but it worked. It's for this reason, I'd prefer to have at least 4 or 5 mil of wind holds at or below 5 mil of elevation.
That's just me.

Same basic layout as my other versions...
Reduced the height above to a much more simple 1 mil and 1/2 mil dot (this would be my pref) ...the first mil up, and 4 mil down are the same as Tangent Theta. The + being the same, the dots being slightly more fine, the center hold being slightly more fine.

Horizontal still .03 mil out to 2 and down to 5. Same weight as an EBR-7D Beyond that, goes to .05 mil out to 10 and down to 10 which is slightly heavier than the other competitors.
View attachment 8625524

In case you’re talking about my reduced tree fetish, look at this post of mine.

I’m talking about reduced height, not width.

Like this:

Based on DNT’s existing design, but use is “hold for closer stuff, dial for longer”
For a higher mag scope, like 7-35/5-25
More open for trace and splash spotting
But still has handy quick wind holds
made horizontal stadia mil design consistent
Used the alignment ideas in my prev post (like used in ILya’s March reticle, as well as others)
Done fast on my iPhone
I’d probably add the FML-TR1 single 1mil wind dots above the horizontal main stadia, but can’t with my iPhone

blksno · Monday at 12:24 PM

carbonbased said:
In case you’re talking about my reduced tree fetish, look at this post of mine.

I’m talking about reduced height, not width.

Like this:
View attachment 8625610

Based on DNT’s existing design, but use is “hold for closer stuff, dial for longer”

For a higher mag scope, like 7-35/5-25

More open for trace and splash spotting

But still has handy quick wind holds

made horizontal stadia mil design consistent

Used the alignment ideas in my prev post (like used in ILya’s March reticle, as well as others)

Done fast on my iPhone

I’d probably add the FML-TR1 single 1mil dots above the horizontal main stadia, but can’t with my iPhone

If that's what you're thinking...I think what you have there is probably a solid option already.
I can see how that would be useful, on my 6 Creed, that looks like a 620 yd target with a 25mph full value wind could still be accomplished with pure holds.
I kinda like that. The only minor down side would be using it on a rimfire...which I currently do. I'd still prefer at least 4 or 5 mil down for holds.

carbonbased · Monday at 12:27 PM

blksno said:
If that's what you're thinking...I think what you have there is probably a solid option already.
I can see how that would be useful, on my 6 Creed, that looks like a 620 yd target with a 25mph full value wind could still be accomplished with pure holds.
I kinda like that. The only minor down side would be using it on a rimfire...which I currently do. I'd still prefer at least 4 or 5 mil down for holds.

Screw the rimfire guys! Lol

But seriously. I’m def not asking you to work something up, didn’t mean to come across that way. I could do that myself with photoshoot/illustrator if, for example, DNT wanted a bit o’ reticle consulting lol. More formal, that is.

blksno · Monday at 12:51 PM

carbonbased said:
Screw the rimfire guys! Lol

But seriously. I’m def not asking you to work something up, didn’t mean to come across that way. I could do that myself with photoshoot/illustrator if, for example, DNT wanted a bit o’ reticle consulting lol. More formal, that is.

I don't hate this.

carbonbased · Monday at 1:04 PM

blksno said:
I don't hate this.
View attachment 8625642

I generally like it.

(except the crosses! Gaaahhh! Personal pref)

blksno · Monday at 1:55 PM

carbonbased said:
I generally like it.

(except the crosses! Gaaahhh! Personal pref)

My pref for sure, it's something from the TT Gen3XR Fine that I'd like to see.

Rob01 · Monday at 6:10 PM

I wouldn’t buy a scope with a reticle with less than 3-4 mils above the crosshairs. It’s needed for hold unders which I use a lot of especially in rimfire matches. I have no problems seeing trace or impacts with them. Just me though.

koshkin · Monday at 6:53 PM

Rob01 said:
I wouldn’t buy a scope with a reticle with less than 3-4 mils above the crosshairs. It’s needed for hold unders which I use a lot of especially in rimfire matches. I have no problems seeing trace or impacts with them. Just me though.

I am with you on that one. I have putzed around with different amounts of hold under and about 3mrad seems to be a good compromise. Interestingly, that is usually about where (if I controlled the recoil well enough) I will pick up trace. My basic rule of thumb is that if I am shooting 308 at a 1000 yards, the highest point in the trajectory is about 5-6mrad above the line of sight. The bullet is about 3mrad above the line of sight at 800 yards, so the top of the reticle almost points to it.

ILya

blksno · Monday at 7:34 PM

Rob01 said:
I wouldn’t buy a scope with a reticle with less than 3-4 mils above the crosshairs. It’s needed for hold unders which I use a lot of especially in rimfire matches. I have no problems seeing trace or impacts with them. Just me though.

Can you explain that one for us morons lol. I dont think ive ever had to hold UNDER more than a couple tenths in a rimfire match. Maybe ours are too easy?

Rob01 · Monday at 7:49 PM

blksno said:
Can you explain that one for us morons lol. I dont think ive ever had to hold UNDER more than a couple tenths in a rimfire match. Maybe ours are too easy?

Not morons just because you haven’t done it. Dialing a mid range target and then holding under and over makes you be able to hold more and stay more towards the center of the reticle. Also allows for more hold over if using a higher power that limits reticle in the FOV. I do it with centerfire matches too but much more useful in rimfire with its larger amount of elevation needed. It’s also a lot faster than dialing all the ranges especially if multiple repetitions through the same group of targets or going out and then back in.

blksno · Monday at 9:08 PM

Rob01 said:
Not morons just because you haven’t done it. Dialing a mid range target and then holding under and over makes you be able to hold more and stay more towards the center of the reticle. Also allows for more hold over if using a higher power that limits reticle in the FOV. I do it with centerfire matches too but much more useful in rimfire with its larger amount of elevation needed. It’s also a lot faster than dialing all the ranges especially if multiple repetitions through the same group of targets or going out and then back in.

That's interesting...I literally hold over for 75% of my rimfire matches and it's never crossed my mind to dial toward the middle and hold UNDER lol.
Never even crossed my mind

carbonbased · Monday at 10:22 PM

Rob01 said:
I wouldn’t buy a scope with a reticle with less than 3-4 mils above the crosshairs. It’s needed for hold unders which I use a lot of especially in rimfire matches. I have no problems seeing trace or impacts with them. Just me though.

koshkin said:
I am with you on that one.

Eh, you guys have enough scope/reticle options with holds above the crosshairs. The world’s your oyster!

Please let us dweebs have one, just one reticle in a higher mag scope without much (or any) crap up there! Lol

Always liked this Vortex G4i SFP reticle in their LHT 3-15, but yeah, SFP and the holds are weird fractions.

koshkin · Monday at 10:52 PM

carbonbased said:
Eh, you guys have enough scope/reticle options with holds above the crosshairs. The world’s your oyster!

Please let us dweebs have one, just one reticle in a higher mag scope without much (or any) crap up there! Lol

Always liked this Vortex G4i SFP reticle in their LHT 3-15, but yeah, SFP and the holds are weird fractions.

View attachment 8626116
View attachment 8626117

Thank you for your kind words on the G4 reticle.

I fully agree with you when it comes to hunting reticles. It is a little different for the long range/competition ones. I do like nicely open top half, but a little bit of information up there has not been in the way too much in my experience.

ILya

carbonbased · 2025-02-25T00:39:18-0500

koshkin said:
Thank you for your kind words on the G4 reticle.

I fully agree with you when it comes to hunting reticles. It is a little different for the long range/competition ones. I do like nicely open top half, but a little bit of information up there has not been in the way too much in my experience.

ILya

Such a pleasant reticle to look at (I own the scope too).

Bravo6niner · 2025-02-25T00:42:31-0500

Late to the party here but honest question. Forget about the reticle how does this scope stack up to ZCO, NF, etc as far as reliability, repeatability, glass, etc ?? Or like comp use where you might bang against a prop or something like that.

Thanks

Emerson0311 · 2025-02-25T08:08:49-0500

blksno said:
That's interesting...I literally hold over for 75% of my rimfire matches and it's never crossed my mind to dial toward the middle and hold UNDER lol.
Never even crossed my mind

I can dial for 162, hold under for 106, over for 185 and 210, and hit 3 positions without touching the scope. MD’s set it up that way. Dialing everything does seem to work for the super dudes perennially on the podium, but most of us aren’t there yet. I don’t like to hold up more than about 5 mils for ease of counting and seeing through the Center oh the scope, so the holding under allows a larger range spread without dialing on the clock.

Rob01 · 2025-02-25T08:29:43-0500

carbonbased said:
Eh, you guys have enough scope/reticle options with holds above the crosshairs. The world’s your oyster!

Please let us dweebs have one, just one reticle in a higher mag scope without much (or any) crap up there! Lol

Always liked this Vortex G4i SFP reticle in their LHT 3-15, but yeah, SFP and the holds are weird fractions.

View attachment 8626116
View attachment 8626117

If they want to design a good hunting reticle then that’s fine. That’s a market share too. There are plenty of choices out there for good match usable reticle as you mentioned. Just throwing my two cents in that I wouldn’t buy one.

carbonbased · 2025-02-25T10:37:02-0500

Rob01 said:
If they want to design a good hunting reticle then that’s fine. That’s a market share too. There are plenty of choices out there for good match usable reticle as you mentioned. Just throwing my two cents in that I wouldn’t buy one.

Yeah I’m just giving you guys some crap. A little joshing.

Just imagine…internal company scope reticle meetings must be super painful for the designers haha ow

blksno · 2025-02-25T10:38:41-0500

Emerson0311 said:
I can dial for 162, hold under for 106, over for 185 and 210, and hit 3 positions without touching the scope. MD’s set it up that way. Dialing everything does seem to work for the super dudes perennially on the podium, but most of us aren’t there yet. I don’t like to hold up more than about 5 mils for ease of counting and seeing through the Center oh the scope, so the holding under allows a larger range spread without dialing on the clock.

Literally never crossed my mind. I've been doing it the "regular" way my whole life. I know the first time I try it...I'm gonna fumble bad, but I'll for sure give it a try. ESPECIALLY on stages where you have to go back and forth. I'm sure others do it simialr, where we will fire a troop line... 80, 110, 137, 158, 206, 206, 158, 137, 110, 80. In that scenario...i think my way would be less confusing. for me anyway.
I don't know if it's actually quicker or easier your way or mine, more than one way to skin a cat

Looks like "roughly" it would be something like this...(but I still wouldn't "NEED" 4 mils over the top)

	dope	my holds	your holds
106 yds	2 mil	0	-2
162 yds	4.6 mil	2.6	0
185 yds	5.9 mil	3.9	1.3
210 yds	7.3 mil	5.3	2.7

koshkin · 2025-02-25T11:01:48-0500

carbonbased said:
Yeah I’m just giving you guys some crap. A little joshing.

Just imagine…internal company scope reticle meetings must be super painful for the designers haha ow

You have no idea....

Emerson0311 · 2025-02-25T11:56:19-0500

blksno said:
Literally never crossed my mind. I've been doing it the "regular" way my whole life. I know the first time I try it...I'm gonna fumble bad, but I'll for sure give it a try. ESPECIALLY on stages where you have to go back and forth. I'm sure others do it simialr, where we will fire a troop line... 80, 110, 137, 158, 206, 206, 158, 137, 110, 80. In that scenario...i think my way would be less confusing. for me anyway.
I don't know if it's actually quicker or easier your way or mine, more than one way to skin a cat

Looks like "roughly" it would be something like this...(but I still wouldn't "NEED" 4 mils over the top)

dope my holds your holds
106 yds 2 mil 0 -2
162 yds 4.6 mil 2.6 0
185 yds 5.9 mil 3.9 1.3
210 yds 7.3 mil 5.3 2.7

Yup. I write my wrist coach notes in a way that makes the over/under obvious, as long as I actually slow down and deliberately check each time before getting in the glass.

carbonbased · 2025-02-25T12:11:06-0500

Emerson0311 said:
Yup. I write my wrist coach notes in a way that makes the over/under obvious, as long as I actually slow down and deliberately check each time before getting in the glass.

I hear @koshkin uses a wrist coach for rhetoric when he’s in contentious client reticle meetings…NFL head coach style…

Rob01 · 2025-02-25T12:54:44-0500

Emerson0311 said:
Yup. I write my wrist coach notes in a way that makes the over/under obvious, as long as I actually slow down and deliberately check each time before getting in the glass.

I do it by putting an up arrow next to the number for hold overs and a down arrow for hold unders. Tells me where I want to be.

blksno · 2025-02-25T16:35:12-0500

did a v6 with some compromise for the guys that want info up top but also for the guys that don't want it "distracting"
tweaked the bottom, reduced the data, reduced the size, kept the + but made it different.

And with that...I think I'm gonna tap out. It was fun though, Like I said...Not pot committed, but the ADHD flares up and I like to do it anyway.

LeftyJason · 2025-02-25T21:28:34-0500

koshkin said:
You have no idea....

Something like this?

Kickin45 · 2025-02-26T00:43:06-0500

blksno said:
did a v6 with some compromise for the guys that want info up top but also for the guys that don't want it "distracting"
tweaked the bottom, reduced the data, reduced the size, kept the + but made it different.

And with that...I think I'm gonna tap out. It was fun though, Like I said...Not pot committed, but the ADHD flares up and I like to do it anyway.

I frakkin love this!!!!!

FuhQ · 2025-02-26T01:04:35-0500

blksno said:
did a v6 with some compromise for the guys that want info up top but also for the guys that don't want it "distracting"
tweaked the bottom, reduced the data, reduced the size, kept the + but made it different.

And with that...I think I'm gonna tap out. It was fun though, Like I said...Not pot committed, but the ADHD flares up and I like to do it anyway.

View attachment 8626608 View attachment 8626609

View attachment 8626610 View attachment 8626611

View attachment 8626612 View attachment 8626613

View attachment 8626619 View attachment 8626621

I like it, but one question... What would it look like if you made it exactly like this, but on the first 4.5 MILs, you made the small center dots illuminate, too. Not the surrounding hashmarks, just the center dots. That would help alleviate the overpowering brightness, but still allow you to see the small dots, for you to position/hold in low-light, and pickup on them easier when glassing the targets.

koshkin · 2025-02-26T01:40:34-0500

LeftyJason said:
Something like this?

Eerily similar. That’s usually the stage where I walk. Life’s too short

carbonbased · 2025-02-26T02:25:13-0500

LeftyJason said:
Something like this?

Thx for the PTSD-trigger pal! Lol

blksno · 2025-02-26T10:13:15-0500

FuhQ said:
I like it, but one question... What would it look like if you made it exactly like this, but on the first 4.5 MILs, you made the small center dots illuminate, too. Not the surrounding hashmarks, just the center dots. That would help alleviate the overpowering brightness, but still allow you to see the small dots, for you to position/hold in low-light, and pickup on them easier when glassing the targets.

I actually thought about that, would be very easy. I was thinking about just doing the first 4 major mil marks. Do the 1 mil and the 1/2 mil dots...leave out the .2 dots and the +
Give you at least enough to see where the 1 mil and half mil holds would be should be enough.

FuhQ · 2025-02-26T11:21:02-0500

blksno said:
I actually thought about that, would be very easy. I was thinking about just doing the first 4 major mil marks. Do the 1 mil and the 1/2 mil dots...leave out the .2 dots and the +
Give you at least enough to see where the 1 mil and half mil holds would be should be enough.

View attachment 8627223

Yep! That’s awesome.

blksno · 2025-02-26T11:40:45-0500

1 up and 1 mil wind hold on a cow.
again, I don't think CGI accurately represents how a reticle looks in the field, but it's as close as we get.

FuhQ · 2025-02-26T11:58:23-0500

blksno said:
1 up and 1 mil wind hold on a cow.
again, I don't think CGI accurately represents how a reticle looks in the field, but it's as close as we get.

View attachment 8627305

How cluttered would it be to add in the vertical 1/2 MIL dots between the boxes, and make them illuminate, too? Just thinking ahead for ELR type shots where the targets are fairly small.

blksno · 2025-02-26T12:00:09-0500

FuhQ said:
How cluttered would it be to add in the vertical 1/2 MIL dots between the boxes, and make them illuminate, too? Just thinking ahead for ELR type shots where the targets are fairly small.

not bad , but many folks suggested keeping the top 1 or 2 mils as minimal as possible, so I left it out. (I did have them in there originally, but took them out or it starts looking too much like a GR2ID

FuhQ · 2025-02-26T13:09:32-0500

blksno said:
not bad , but many folks suggested keeping the top 1 or 2 mils as minimal as possible, so I left it out. (I did have them in there originally, but took them out or it starts looking too much like a GR2ID

You mind posting one with them in there like that? I’d like to see it.

blksno · 2025-02-26T13:17:55-0500

FuhQ said:
You mind posting one with them in there like that? I’d like to see it.

S&B GR2ID

FuhQ · 2025-02-26T14:14:45-0500

blksno said:
View attachment 8627420

S&B GR2ID
View attachment 8627454

I was actually talking about just a single 0.5 MIL dot between the dashes, to keep it less cluttered, but still giving a reference point.

Win a RIX Storm S3 Thermal Imaging Scope!

DNT is gonna let us do a reticle

Sergeant of the Hide

OG

💥💥💥💥

💥💥💥💥

If it ain’t broke, you can’t resist.

💥💥💥💥

OG

OG

💥💥💥💥

OG

💥💥💥💥

OG

💥💥💥💥

OG

Moderator

Dark Lord Of Optics

OG

Moderator

OG

💥💥💥💥

Dark Lord Of Optics

💥💥💥💥

Private

Old Salt

Moderator

💥💥💥💥

OG

Dark Lord Of Optics

Old Salt

💥💥💥💥

Moderator

OG

Thumbnail-les

Jack of all

Unreconstructed

Dark Lord Of Optics

💥💥💥💥

OG

Unreconstructed

OG

Unreconstructed

OG

Unreconstructed

OG

Unreconstructed

Similar threads