Rifle Scopes Affordable 1-8x with FFP Horus?

[BlackFiveTanker]

I've read a lot about the Horus reticles over the years (never shot with one) and finally live in a place where I can shoot at longer distances. I am looking for a 1-8x FFP that has one. But I'm kinda running up short - looks like a few years ago there were several makes with Horus - but they've been discontinued.

Sadly, glass like the Leo Mark 8 (H-27D) is out of my price range (@ $1500) but I found this USO TS-8 which has a 'busy' RBR... and my Google-fu doesn't tell me much about them. I know it's a different 'system' from the Horus, but can it be used similarly? I've read a lot of criticism about ballistic reticles, which is why I'd prefer something with a Horus.

...

Putting together an 'all-rounder' bolt action, but don't want big glass or 10x. Want something rugged that I won't mind putting a few miles in the woods/desert, but that will also be available for shooting with friends or hunting. Also want the 1x just in case I run into a feral hog or something, and the 8 to be able to reach out an touch something. FWIW - I am a competent iron-sight rifleman (500m doesn't scare me), but this will be my first foray into personally owned glass.

I guess the wish-list for the glass is a 1-6 or 1-8x, with a FFP Horus (or similar) reticle, a SFP illuminated dot and solid construction / good quality without getting into the $4k or higher price point. Rifle likely to be a Tikka CTR in 308 or 6.5 CM.

Does something like this exist, and if not; what gets close?

 

[wade2big]

Without looking through one, I would think a Horus reticle would be unusable at 8x

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

What about a straight MIL reticle? Is that close enough for you?

 

[BlackFiveTanker]

@Wade: Why - if you don't mind my asking.

@ Hollywood: I might default to that if I can't find what I'm looking for. I'm frankly interested in what Horus has done and thought it would be fun to learn the system; 'new shiney' and all that. I've certainly read enough (and shot friend's guns) with the old tried and true - it's the allure of the 'new' that is driving this search.

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

@Wade: Why - if you don't mind my asking.

@ Hollywood: I might default to that if I can't find what I'm looking for. I'm frankly interested in what Horus has done and thought it would be fun to learn the system; 'new shiney' and all that. I've certainly read enough (and shot friend's guns) with the old tried and true - it's the allure of the 'new' that is driving this search.

Wade's thinking is probably the same as mine - as dense/cluttered/whatever you want to call it as the Horus reticles are, I would think that they're not going to work well on a LPVO. It might be readable/useable (somewhat) at 8x, but it's probably going to turn into a blurry mess at 1-4x.

Edit: That's all speculation on my part, though. I've never paid enough attention to a T3 or H59 when I have been behind optics with them to try them down in the 3-8x range and see how they looked.

 

[BlackFiveTanker]

Not being able to use the Horus features at low mag makes sense. I figure that at the lower power settings the SFP dot would work, given that the few FFP reticles I've looked through all tend to be rather thin at low power. Fairly sure the SFP dots are supposed to be sufficient for BZO ranges, much like iron sights. But for farther targets and at greater magnification (as I understand it) the reticle should be clear and the Horus features should be useable, presuming I can plot the strike of any missed shots.

But what Wade said about being unuseable at 8x has me curious - if it works at 10x, why not 8x?

You say you've used them - but I kinda get the feeling you're not a fan of Horus? If I'm correct, is it the clutter - or just that you're more comfortable with what you've trained with in the past?

 

[wade2big]

Not being able to use the Horus features at low mag makes sense. I figure that at the lower power settings the SFP dot would work, given that the few FFP reticles I've looked through all tend to be rather thin at low power. Fairly sure the SFP dots are supposed to be sufficient for BZO ranges, much like iron sights. But for farther targets and at greater magnification (as I understand it) the reticle should be clear and the Horus features should be useable, presuming I can plot the strike of any missed shots.

But what Wade said about being unuseable at 8x has me curious - if it works at 10x, why not 8x?

You say you've used them - but I kinda get the feeling you're not a fan of Horus? If I'm correct, is it the clutter - or just that you're more comfortable with what you've trained with in the past?

I’m not trying to talk you out of it by any means. I’m just participating in this thread.

I don’t like ANY holdover reticle at 8X, not just the Horus to be clear.

i looked up the USO scope you mentioned and the two reticles offered in that scope look fine. I would ‘t have a problem with either one.

Make sure to get an illuminated reticle in which ever FFP scope you choose since you said it could be for hunting duty. The small 24mm objectives will get dark quick when the sun drops low so you will have the mag turned down early and those small reticles disappear quick.

 

[BlackFiveTanker]

I’m not trying to talk you out of it by any means. I’m just participating in this thread.

I don’t like ANY holdover reticle at 8X, not just the Horus to be clear.

i looked up the USO scope you mentioned and the two reticles offered in that scope look fine. I would ‘t have a problem with either one.

Make sure to get an illuminated reticle in which ever FFP scope you choose since you said it could be for hunting duty. The small 24mm objectives will get dark quick when the sun drops low so you will have the mag turned down early and those small reticles disappear quick.

Grin - I appreciate the participation!

So - do you mind expanding on why you don't like holdovers at 8x - and what you do prefer?

Always looking to learn

 

[nn8734]

I know I’m not Wade but I run nothing but Horus reticles (h37, two h59’s) on my 308/magnums and occasionally at 8-10x. Have no issues with holding over at 8x at medium distances. But usually shoot at 12-16x unless conditions allow for more magnification sans excessive mirage.

That said, Horus is not for everyone so you may get some diversity in opinions, such as wade’s which are no less valid.

Edit: Also depends on what sort of shooting you like to do (I wouldn’t recommend Horus if you like shooting really small groups at distance on small targets)

If possible, try to get behind one and see what you think. Most folks get taken back by how busy it looks at first but you get used to it. My first time looking at the H37 reminded me of looking through a chain link fence, lol

Also just participating.

 

[wade2big]

Grin - I appreciate the participation!

So - do you mind expanding on why you don't like holdovers at 8x - and what you do prefer?

Always looking to learn

The smaller the highest magnification of the scope, the simpler I prefer the reticle to be.

A high magnification scope (20-25X) used towards the upper end works well with high detailed reticles (horus fits in here). The reticle is large enough in the scope to make use of all the smaller holds and subtensions easily


The 12-15X midrange powered scopes work will with holdover reticles as well but the finer details (.2 mil marks etc.) become more of a clutter as everything is drawn together. I prefer .5 hashes at this power range as .2s are tough to use (break out the tylenol)

For lower power 8-10x scopes, I prefer plain old milling reticles (mil hash or mil dot). These reticles when smaller show enough detail to be effective and aren’t a run together thin cluttered mess that some of the other reticles would be. Simple is better here.

Like @nn8734 stated, everyone’s opinions are different, but nobody will argue that the larger the reticle the easier it is to use and the smaller it is the more difficult. Everything beyond that including my preferences above are subjective.

 

[BlackFiveTanker]

Thanks for the responses, guys

Any thoughts on either of these?

• Primary Arms PLx 1-8x24mm -- from what I gather they generally produce lower end stuff, but this says it is made in Japan with quality Japanese glass. Seen some good vids on it.
• Elite Tactical SMRS 1-8.5x 24mm -- also seen good writeups.

Both have 34mm tubes. The PA reticle has the busy stuff , while the SMRS looks more traditional

I had hoped to wander over to Whittakers and look at scopes, but they don't carry PA stuff

Kinda bummed: had decided on the CTR - but their weekly ad shows an affordable Sako A7. Gonna have to go handle both (I've always wanted a SAKO... but the vig...)

 

[Tim_WNC]

There are some killer deals on Burris XTR II 8x scopes to be found. I have a couple of them with MIL reticles. 1 is used extensively in 3 Gun and DMM style matches. The other is on my AR10 deer rifle. For the price, the glass and performance have been terrific for me.

 

[BlackFiveTanker]

There are some killer deals on Burris XTR II 8x scopes to be found. I have a couple of them with MIL reticles. 1 is used extensively in 3 Gun and DMM style matches. The other is on my AR10 deer rifle. For the price, the glass and performance have been terrific for me.

Thanks - will have to check that one out. Are the FFP reticles illuminated? (The site doesn't say)

 

[Tim_WNC]

Thanks - will have to check that one out. Are the FFP reticles illuminated? (The site doesn't say)

Both of mine are, but I seem to recall a version that was not.

 

[Birddog6424]

I ran the MK8 CQBSS in 3 Gun for a while. The Horus was really overkill for that magnification level. I used some holdovers and some wind here and there, but really only needed 20 to 30% of the reticle. The rest went unused.

There are plenty of effective reticles out there without a full blown Horus for use in an LPVO.

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

You say you've used them - but I kinda get the feeling you're not a fan of Horus? If I'm correct, is it the clutter - or just that you're more comfortable with what you've trained with in the past?

A little of both. I run G3 reticles in my LR optics, and have been able to do everything I need with that, so I don't personally feel the need for .2 hash marks, wind dots, etc. I also think they're just too damn busy, but realize that's also personal preference.

I'm actually going to be putting a LPVO on an M1A in the near future, and plan to run a Bushnell SMRS 1-8.5x, as it's FFP and has a straight MIL hash reticle with a dot and big donut- no BDC silliness.

 

[BlackFiveTanker]

A little of both. I run G3 reticles in my LR optics, and have been able to do everything I need with that, so I don't personally feel the need for .2 hash marks, wind dots, etc. I also think they're just too damn busy, but realize that's also personal preference.

I'm actually going to be putting a LPVO on an M1A in the near future, and plan to run a Bushnell SMRS 1-8.5x, as it's FFP and has a straight MIL hash reticle with a dot and big donut- no BDC silliness.

I've looked at that one as well. I've a pair of Bushnell binocs that I've had and enjoyed for years.

Question: Would a holdover scope be more useful for someone who doesn't have a spotter - b/c as I understand it, holdover reticles are designed to help the shooter spot the calls for himself and make rapid, accurate adjustments. Or is it still just a matter of 'getting to know your tools, and using what you have' effectively?

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

I've looked at that one as well. I've a pair of Bushnell binocs that I've had and enjoyed for years.

Question: Would a holdover scope be more useful for someone who doesn't have a spotter - b/c as I understand it, holdover reticles are designed to help the shooter spot the calls for himself and make rapid, accurate adjustments. Or is it still just a matter of 'getting to know your tools, and using what you have' effectively?

Do you mean a BDC reticle as opposed to a MIL/MOA reticle?

If so, either would work. The issue I have is that most BDC reticles have arbitrary markings that rarely line up with any MIL or MOA values that make sense. I'd much rather know exactly what each marking represents so I can use it in whatever way I find valuable.

 

[BlackFiveTanker]

Do you mean a BDC reticle as opposed to a MIL/MOA reticle?

If so, either would work. The issue I have is that most BDC reticles have arbitrary markings that rarely line up with any MIL or MOA values that make sense. I'd much rather know exactly what each marking represents so I can use it in whatever way I find valuable.

Years ago, when I first started thinking about whether I wanted to transition from the Mark 1 Eyeball to a rifle with glass, I got interested in learning about the different types of reticles and scope systems. Read a lot about FFP/SFP scopes and what type I would actually like (and determined that FFP is what I want - despite pushback from buddies and gun-store 'experts'. ) Also looked at Mil Dot/MOA reticles, the Horus system and BDC. My take-away is that BDC has the same limitations you describe, and I quickly lost interest in BDC reticles and compensating scopes. But my interest in Horus continued - as I assessed that as someone who doesn't have a friend who would be into spotting while I shoot, that I could use Horus (or something similar), to give me the ability to rapidly adjust by spotting my own shots; sort of the way you spot the impact of a round fired from a tank and dial into the strike to get the reticle back on POI.

While I can do the same thing with windage and elevation knobs on an iron-sight gun, and I'm certain I could do the same with a simple mil-dot reticle; Horus simply remained intriguing. Again - for what you wrote: predictable marking that I could use, with whatever dope showed up from the rifle / ammo selection - rather than being tied to what the factory thought would work on a BDC.

Sadly, it looks like I'm a couple of years late from finding the scope 'that has it all' -- and now I'm looking to figure out which of the available scopes will get me closest to what I want to play with
...
...and learning from chatting with folks here who are more likely to know what they're talking about than who I currently have access to.

Fully willing to assess info and change my mind if necessary; and really enjoying the feedback!

 

[Birddog6424]

Do you mean a BDC reticle as opposed to a MIL/MOA reticle?

If so, either would work. The issue I have is that most BDC reticles have arbitrary markings that rarely line up with any MIL or MOA values that make sense. I'd much rather know exactly what each marking represents so I can use it in whatever way I find valuable.

I dont disagree with this. But I think having subtensions that "line up" isnt relevant.

I've run LPVO mil reticles, and it's not like they line up with bullet drop either. You have a .87 at 200, a 1.6 at 300, a 2.9 at 400, etc.

So whether your using a mil reticle or BDC, you still end up doing the exact same thing. I know 1 mil is 210 yards, 2 mils is 320, etc (not exact by the way. Just tossing that out)

If you are using these reticles for rapid target transition, its simpler and faster to just know what each line represents in terms of yardage drop and run with. Regardless of what type of mathematical grid the reticle represents.

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

I dont disagree with this. But I think having subtensions that "line up" isnt relevant.

My point was that on a BDC reticle, those lines could be 1.2 mil, 2.4 mil, 3.8 mil, etc.... At least with a MIL reticle, I can run my known data through AB or my Kestrel and have it spit out whatever data I want, and know where it lines up on my reticle, as I know the exact values of the reticle (Ex: 1, 2, 3, 4, etc mils). On a BDC, it's either a wild guess, or I have to go digging to find out what those arbitrary values are and get my data to line up with it.

The end result is the same, I just would rather deal with the same process I already do on my LR rifles and optics.

 

[Birddog6424]

My point was that on a BDC reticle, those lines could be 1.2 mil, 2.4 mil, 3.8 mil, etc.... At least with a MIL reticle, I can run my known data through AB or my Kestrel and have it spit out whatever data I want, and know where it lines up on my reticle, as I know the exact values of the reticle (Ex: 1, 2, 3, 4, etc mils). On a BDC, it's either a wild guess, or I have to go digging to find out what those arbitrary values are and get my data to line up with it.

The end result is the same, I just would rather deal with the same process I already do on my LR rifles and optics.

It all works out to the same thing once you go to the optic manufacturers website and find the mil or moa equivalent for every subtension. They all just become lines that equate to yardage.

But I get what your saying that it plays into just keeping it simple.

 

[wade2big]

It all works out to the same thing once you go to the optic manufacturers website and find the mil or moa equivalent for every subtension. They all just become lines that equate to yardage.

But I get what your saying that it plays into just keeping it simple.

Once off the square shooting range the less it matters if the BDC marks match even number yardages. The main thing is shooting the rifle and knowing how to use what you have.

Even numbers are just easier to remember.