Change my mind: Vertical stadia is not necessary in a reticle

[Fat Dark Earth]

I’m going to attempt to talk about PRS/competition style shooting, but I believe this carries over into other disciplines.
I’ve had this idea now for a while and I know I’m not the only one to have it. Why do we really need vertical stadia ( above the horizontal) in a reticle that is any taller than say one mil?

Why would it be such a bad thing to make it easier to see shot trace or increase visibility of your target field. Do we actually use those vertical marks past a certain point? I don’t...never have.
Do reticle designers feel like they are short changing us if they don’t throw that in there? A smart ass question for sure but hopefully somebody can enlighten me two why A large majority of us actually need that to be a part of a reticle.
Bring on your degrading and I’m smarter than you answers.
Thanks,
Mystified and patiently waiting

 

[TheGerman]

Maybe. Sometimes.

 

[AIAW]

Just so I am clear... Are you talking about completely removing the ability to "hold-under", or just limit it to 1 MIL entirely?

 

[Jefe's Dope]

I agree. 1 or 2 MIL is enough and you'd have almost the entire upper ½ for viewing.

 

[TheGerman]

Simple question:

When the miss is at 1.8 MILS high and you only have a 1MIL stadia, what correction would you call?

 

[AIAW]

Simple question:

When the miss is at 1.8 MILS high and you only have a 1MIL stadia, what correction would you call?

"You see that rock, two of those - high"

 

[TheGerman]

"You see that rock, two of those - high"

He's next to that bush....by that tree over there!

 

[DisplacedTexan]

I'm going to disagree with the whole premise of taking parts of my reticle away ...

 

[TheGerman]

I'm going to disagree with the whole premise of taking parts of my reticle away ...

If you like your reticle, you can keep your reticle!

 

[Rthur]

If it is well designed and reasonably thin shot/trace viewing isn't hindered.

R

 

[ForgeValley]

I've never found the minimal stadia above the primary horizontal to impair my view of trace or splash at all. Seems like a solution looking for a problem.

 

[Kickin45]

I agree with removing the vertical above the horizontal stadia for hunting and tactical situations.
For PRS, I’d think you’d want them for quick adjusted follow up shots.
But I would really like a reticle like the Vudu MR3 minus the vertical above center.

 

[Lowlight]

BZO,

Holding under, to maximize a target, or to stay in the sweet spot or center of the FOV, you can often dial in a middle ground or higher priority target and then hold under as well as over.

With 400 yards dialed on the scope, even a plain old Mil-Dot reticle is capable of holding from 100 to 700 yards without going outside of the mil dots.

I have used it in a competition where I would dial on a middle ground number, hold under the few shots below and over the rest. I find it faster and easier with an extra level of precision because I can determine which target could be of the highest priority. Another example we use a smaller 400 yard target for this drill and run students from 200 yards to 1000 yards with just the reticle. Dialing on for the smallest target gives you a better point of aim, then you can hold in both planes for the others which are bigger.

Time and Opportunity, as well as Target Size, will dictate how well holding might work, so I want to be flexibility in my application.

it's about being a well-rounded marksman vs being strictly a gamer and in thinking in terms of a game.

Scopes have distortion, the closer to the edges you get, the bigger the chance of a distortion error you will find. Even in scopes like the Horus, the military guys were seeing misses at 800m targets holding and then dialing the same value they were able to hit the same target. Why would that happen, distortion in the glass curving the picture. So staying close to the sweet spot in the center is the best practice.

You want flexibility in your system cause you never know.

 

[theLBC]

can't speak for everyone, but for me that works and why i use an H59 reticle

 

[spife7980]

When I was a kid I had a little tasco on my daisy powerline and I took it apart and clipped out the verticle wire. It was the best custom reticle a kid could find. I wanted it to be like the old weaver scope I hunted with that only had a vertical post in the scope.

I dont think removing it is the end of the world, Ive never actually used it that I can remember. Im sure someone can come up with a reason (and they have^^^) but it also just looks pleasant with half the sight picture unobstructed.

 

[308pirate]

Simple question:

When the miss is at 1.8 MILS high and you only have a 1MIL stadia, what correction would you call?

A little. Maybe.

 

[LawnMM]

Leave my reticle alone, please

 

[theLBC]

Simple question:

When the miss is at 1.8 MILS high and you only have a 1MIL stadia, what correction would you call?

down 1.8 MILS

if i don't think i'm close and need the tree for corrections, i suppose i can holdover instead of dialing.

 

[Long Range 338]

I like to use the portion above the horizontal stadia for milling and spotting for other shooters. I've got a mix of reticles and have grown accustomed to using that part of the reticle as Xmas type reticles and others obscure the target when trying to spot trace or splash. Not really a scientific reason but a personal preference thing.

 

[kriller134]

BZO,

Holding under, to maximize a target, or to stay in the sweet spot or center of the FOV, you can often dial in a middle ground or higher priority target and then hold under as well as over.

With 400 yards dialed on the scope, even a plain old Mil-Dot reticle is capable of holding from 100 to 700 yards without going outside of the mil dots.

I have used it in a competition where I would dial on a middle ground number, hold under the few shots below and over the rest. I find it faster and easier with an extra level of precision because I can determine which target could be of the highest priority. Another example we use a smaller 400 yard target for this drill and run students from 200 yards to 1000 yards with just the reticle. Dialing on for the smallest target gives you a better point of aim, then you can hold in both planes for the others which are bigger.

Time and Opportunity, as well as Target Size, will dictate how well holding might work, so I want to be flexibility in my application.

it's about being a well-rounded marksman vs being strictly a gamer and in thinking in terms of a game.

Scopes have distortion, the closer to the edges you get, the bigger the chance of a distortion error you will find. Even in scopes like the Horus, the military guys were seeing misses at 800m targets holding and then dialing the same value they were able to hit the same target. Why would that happen, distortion in the glass curving the picture. So staying close to the sweet spot in the center is the best practice.

You want flexibility in your system cause you never know.

I’ve heard of people counting the total number of clicks for elevation and windage then adjusting it back to the middle then zero the rifle to stay as close to center of the glass as possible. Is this something that should be practiced or is that bullshit?

 

[Fat Dark Earth]

Just so I am clear... Are you talking about completely removing the ability to "hold-under", or just limit it to 1 MIL entirely?

1 mil only.

 

[Fat Dark Earth]

I like to use the portion above the horizontal stadia for milling and spotting for other shooters. I've got a mix of reticles and have grown accustomed to using that part of the reticle as Xmas type reticles and others obscure the target when trying to spot trace or splash. Not really a scientific reason but a personal preference thing.

At least it’s not a jack ass answer. Thanks

 

[Fat Dark Earth]

I've never found the minimal stadia above the primary horizontal to impair my view of trace or splash at all. Seems like a solution looking for a problem.

Glad it has worked out for ya. Seriously I am. I’d love to be able to say that.

 

[PinesAndProjectiles]

I’ve heard of people counting the total number of clicks for elevation and windage then adjusting it back to the middle then zero the rifle to stay as close to center of the glass as possible. Is this something that should be practiced or is that bullshit?

It doesn't matter how many clicks you count, the scope is going to zero in the same position regardless. So somebody is blowing smoke up your ass.

 

[hlee]

Although, if you had rings with external adjustments, you could zero your optic without touching the turrets (or get it close) and be as close to the optical center as possible, as suggested above. Leupold has rings that allow for windage correction on the base...

 

[WirgmanUSMC]

Turn your rifle 90deg and shoot it. If you’re unable to dial below zero stop 1-1.5 Mils you’ll be glad you have vertical stadia. Common? No. Happens? Yup.

 

[atomic41]

I've used the hold down method on stages where there are multiple targets at different distances. Dialing for the middle or far target then holding down for the closer ones is preferred sometimes.

I do like your idea but I think it would limit you for that rare time when you could use it. You made me think of something else that would be cool but probably not possible. If a scope had the ability to turn on/off a reticle then you could have options like turn on the upper line only when needed. Or turn on your Christmas tree only when needed. That would be cool!

 

[Guthwine]

The Swaro STR has a reticle that can be deactivated, since it is only visible when illuminated. But it only works for the reticle as a whole and is not a a cheap option.

 

[FUNCTIONAL]

Standard Mildot gen2 with a 308 and targets spread throughout a 700yrds gap. Situations like that are why I need my full reticle.

 

[whatsupdoc]

Eventually someone will develop an optic with the ability to download a reticle from your phone and you will be able to design your own
and switch reticles on the fly.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Simple economics.

Some people want or need the stadia to keep going. Much less feel they are hindered by it.

No point in spending cash to have reticles built when its not really a major concern and people aren’t out there not buying optics because the stadia goes all the way up.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Also, I can promise you the minute a ton of reticles stop taking the stadia up, you’ll see an increase in stages like:

Must dial in 500yd dope. Using hold under/over, engage targets from 100-1k. No dialing allowed after time begins.

So, you’ll either have to hold in space or cheat and not dial the 500 as described.

 

[clcustom1911]

I’m going to attempt to talk about PRS/competition style shooting, but I believe this carries over into other disciplines.
I’ve had this idea now for a while and I know I’m not the only one to have it. Why do we really need vertical stadia ( above the horizontal) in a reticle that is any taller than say one mil?

Why would it be such a bad thing to make it easier to see shot trace or increase visibility of your target field. Do we actually use those vertical marks past a certain point? I don’t...never have.
Do reticle designers feel like they are short changing us if they don’t throw that in there? A smart ass question for sure but hopefully somebody can enlighten me two why A large majority of us actually need that to be a part of a reticle.
Bring on your degrading and I’m smarter than you answers.
Thanks,
Mystified and patiently waiting

You mean like this?

 

[samb300]

Regarding seeing splash - for most people/rifles, recoil moves the muzzle and the reticle UP, so you end up looking for your splash 1-2 mils BELOW the horizontal stadia. Having a tall vertical portion of the reticle doesn't matter for seeing splash unless your dope is off and you really do need to make a gross correction from hitting way high.

That being said, like mentioned above, having the reticle there to make hold-unders can be very useful. Personally, I was considering the Minox ZP5 MR4, but didn't end up trying it because they only have 2 mils of vertical reticle. It's basically the perfect reticle (to me) other than that. I find that on no-dial stages, or stages with very tight par times, I tend to dial for a 'middle' target and hold under for the close ones and hold over for the far ones like Frank mentioned.

The other way I use it is for near/far stages. Like 5 positions, each position you have to shoot a 300yd and a 600yd target, in 90sec. Personally, I prefer to shoot the far target dialed for center, and hold under for the close one, since I know I'll time out if I try to dial each one. Plus the close target is usually large enough and has minimal wind so a gross hold under works fine. In that case, I would dial 3.6 mils for 600, and hold under 2.6 mils for the 300 yd target.

 

[lte82]

Regarding seeing splash - for most people/rifles, recoil moves the muzzle and the reticle UP, so you end up looking for your splash 1-2 mils BELOW the horizontal stadia. Having a tall vertical portion of the reticle doesn't matter for seeing splash unless your dope is off and you really do need to make a gross correction from hitting way high.

That being said, like mentioned above, having the reticle there to make hold-unders can be very useful. Personally, I was considering the Minox ZP5 MR4, but didn't end up trying it because they only have 2 mils of vertical reticle. It's basically the perfect reticle (to me) other than that. I find that on no-dial stages, or stages with very tight par times, I tend to dial for a 'middle' target and hold under for the close ones and hold over for the far ones like Frank mentioned.

The other way I use it is for near/far stages. Like 5 positions, each position you have to shoot a 300yd and a 600yd target, in 90sec. Personally, I prefer to shoot the far target dialed for center, and hold under for the close one, since I know I'll time out if I try to dial each one. Plus the close target is usually large enough and has minimal wind so a gross hold under works fine. In that case, I would dial 3.6 mils for 600, and hold under 2.6 mils for the 300 yd target.

Dialing 1.0 for 300 and holding over 2.6 for 600 means you have horizontal stadia lines / exact wind holds for both targets. Dialing for 600 and holding under for 300 means you only have exact wind holds for 600. I see this as a wash at best, or a disadvantage in high winds. This would be exaggerated even more at say a 800/500 yard set of targets. It’s almost always more accurate to dial the short target and hold over the rest if using a tree.

 

[samb300]

Dialing 1.0 for 300 and holding over 2.6 for 600 means you have horizontal stadia lines / exact wind holds for both targets. Dialing for 600 and holding under for 300 means you only have exact wind holds for 600. I see this as a wash at best, or a disadvantage in high winds. This would be exaggerated even more at say a 800/500 yard set of targets. It’s almost always more accurate to dial the short target and hold over the rest if using a tree.

I disagree, but it's personal preference. And it does depend somewhat on the wind conditions and caliber. In my example I'm not assuming a 2" target at 300 with 20 mph winds. Or a 200 yd / 900 yd stage.

A 10mph wind at 300 yds is maybe 0.4 mils, which you can easily hold without a horizontal stadia. That same wind at 600 yards will be around 1.0 mils, which is harder to do in the tree if you're between elevation marks. No tree reticle has 0.5 mill horizontal stadia, so you'd be "floating in space" between 2 and 3 mils of elevation.

In the end, I always find it easier and more precise (for myself) to dial the far target in order to be aiming as close to the center of the reticle as possible. Unless the far target is huge, I prefer to have the precision of staying on the zero vertical stadia.

 

[Navy Chief]

I disagree, but it's personal preference. And it does depend somewhat on the wind conditions and caliber. In my example I'm not assuming a 2" target at 300 with 20 mph winds. Or a 200 yd / 900 yd stage.

A 10mph wind at 300 yds is maybe 0.4 mils, which you can easily hold without a horizontal stadia. That same wind at 600 yards will be around 1.0 mils, which is harder to do in the tree if you're between elevation marks. No tree reticle has 0.5 mill horizontal stadia, so you'd be "floating in space" between 2 and 3 mils of elevation.

View attachment 7182637

In the end, I always find it easier and more precise (for myself) to dial the far target in order to be aiming as close to the center of the reticle as possible. Unless the far target is huge, I prefer to have the precision of staying on the zero vertical stadia.

The nightforce mil-xr has has 0.5 mill horizontal stadia.... I am really liking this reticle and strongly considering it for my next scope purchase.....

 

[hlee]

"What was your wind call?"
"Left edge."
"Cool."
"IMPACT!"

Why do we need a horizontal stadia? Or a christmas tree reticle? How about just a tiny cross-hair? That won't obstruct the view. Or, maybe a dot in a circle. Or a "German Post," though that will obstruct more than a dot. Ooooooo, no reticle at all. That won't obstruct anything. Mind, blown...

 

[Dolomite_Supafly]

Simple question:

When the miss is at 1.8 MILS high and you only have a 1MIL stadia, what correction would you call?

If, like most, you have a zero stop that actually stops at zero you cant dial down either.

 

[Birddog6424]

Shot this stage at the PRS Finale this morning. 5 shots from prone on a 500 mover, move up to barricade for one shot each on small static steel at 200'ish, 300'ish, and 400'ish. Back to prone for 5 more shots on the 500 yard mover.

I held under 1.4mils for the first plate, 1 mil for the second, .4 for the third.

Whether I would ever need to do such a thing outside of competition, I highly doubt it.

 

[Clearlight]

I find subtensions above the centre horizontal line very useful. As LL mentioned above,
engaging targets on the clock across a significant distance is the reason, allowing
the shooter to stay on a higher zoom and in the centre of the image. In days gone by,
I’ve seen the need to engage 3 or 4 targets across a 400-500 meter area, starting at 800
distance, then move as quickly as possible.

I’ve designed a few reticles with wind subtensions above the main horizontal for this
exact reason. Shot spotting for ELR/ULR over difficult (or sometimes any) terrain is
another reason. Being able to put the centre of the reticle on the plate and use subtensions
above and below centre is very helpful for making corrections and collecting data, and
relating that to a chrono number, spotter wind call etc. We don’t always have a spotter
or multiple spotters around to assist with this task, so self spotting is sometimes critical.

We are going to see more reticles in the future with this feature, note the S&B Grid 2 reticle
for an example. Even in PRS, on the no dial stages, I know some guys will dial elevation
for the far target and hold under the closer ones so they can use the main horizontal for
wind on the far one.

In answer to the OP, I’d prefer at least 2 Mil above, preferably 4 Mil, with some wind subtensions
providing they are not obstructively large. We always had vertical info with old Mil dot style reticles,
there’s room for innovation in this area with the addition of wind subtensions.

 

[Deleted member 10043]

I use it to level the scope. Man up, shoulder the rifle and look down the scope. Bottom of vertical stadia should not be distorted left or right.

 

[Fat Dark Earth]

well, my mind is changed. Thanks to those who drop some useful knowledge that I didn’t think about. Much appreciated.

 

[Alpine 338]

Also, I can promise you the minute a ton of reticles stop taking the stadia up, you’ll see an increase in stages like:

Must dial in 500yd dope. Using hold under/over, engage targets from 100-1k. No dialing allowed after time begins.

So, you’ll either have to hold in space or cheat and not dial the 500 as described.

Match Directors that come up with that nonsense should be the target in that stage.