Oh lord I thought you were serious with that. I was trying to be nice and considerate to others wishes lol. I honestly think on a crossover type reticle as long as the crosshairs are .05 mil or thicker then a normal tree style reticle will do the trick in low magnification ranges. I’m willing to consider the circle but honestly I don’t care for it.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Hold on there pardner lol
The tree is invaluable for shooting rodents, like ground squirrels (small or large, like pdogs). They don’t sit there like steel does, and can unpredictably appear at varying ranges. They also run, of course.
1000% agree. I didn't mean that it's ONLY for newer shooters. Just that a newer shooter can benifit a lot...maybe more than a seasoned shooter
I think a big issue is a lot of people who only shoot white painted steel targets on nice open ranges don’t get so much the practical aspect of what they’re asking for. Not dissing them at all, but that’s not how everyone shoots.
If I were honest, and EBR-7C with thicker crosshairs would be what I would want for a crossover scope. Fully illuminated. I want that reticle to look like a duplex at low power, and I want all the information at high power. I want a small floating dot to help establish a good zero at 100 yards and to shoot tiny groups at 100 yards because I like doing that. That’s it.
I just have a hard time believing people that suggest this "Tree" reticle has too much information or its distracting or it covers up too much. GTFOOHWTBHI feel the same way about people who want tree reticles
I mean if you’re always gonna dial elevation then yeah I would agree with you. But if not then the practical application is invaluable.I feel the same way about people who want tree reticles
"trees are great!"I just have a hard time believing people that suggest this "Tree" reticle has too much information or its distracting or it covers up too much. GTFOOHWTBH
*posts picture of shooting a paper target at 100 yards*
Right on. Preach brother preach!
I love this reticle, the vortex EBR-2C. While .2 holds might be helpful, what’s great about this thing is the .5mil holds really open the view up.
I mainly shoot .204 so 500yds is basically absolute max range.
If I had my druthers, I’d make this:
I’ve debated (in my head) the merits of the Mil-XT‘s .2 hash’s, 3mil wind holds, and 1/2mil dots. But visibility is key for my shooting, as the little guys are the same color as the ground.
I own a NX8 4-32 w/Mil-XT and have only used it sparingly thus far on the pdog fields. Jury is still out.
Practical when?
I do not engage in combat, nor predators, nor varmints. Those three cases, sure. Are the vast majority of shooters doing this?
ETA: these are just examples of a target rich environment. Even here the tree only adds value if you have someone calling dope for you while on the gun...
Last edited:
Again. That’s great for “you” but I have done all three of those at some point and still hunt predators and varmints. That to me is as practical as it gets.
I’d like a .06 mil center dot. Too small of a dot gets lost in the bad environmental and mechanical variables.
The top shooters have shot so much that wind holds have become more intuitive than much of the rest of the shooters.
Back when I was at the top of my game by practicing twice a week I began to know where to aim in one respect and in the other respect I still used the .2's because that's what I was familiar with the most, as well as I liked the most. If I had doubt I knew exactly where the .1's were which I still think is neat.
I knew a guy that would often win the Sporting rifle match at Raton and he used a .5 mil hash reticle. I'm sure it was the same for him in that he had practiced enough he knew where to aim in a wind condition intuitive to his own reticle.
Training and knowing....
Same with me. One gets used to it.I just have a hard time believing people that suggest this "Tree" reticle has too much information or its distracting or it covers up too much. GTFOOHWTBH
I agree about being able to more quickly read a reticle that is broken down into quarters vs two-tenths. Probably from using a tape measure daily when framing houses for years. But it’s weird to me to pair a quarter-based reticle with one-tenth mil turret adjustments. It would be fine if the clicks were 0.125 mils but that’s even weirder. Anyway, the reason I am moving from the MR4 to the TR2ID reticle is because it has the additional half-mil hashes. I hope to not find myself counting .2 hashes anymore.
I also still prefer a tree based reticle over a simplistic hashed crosshair reticle for dynamic shooting, as long as the tree isn’t crowded with several different shapes and so many numbers as to be a distraction. I also prefer a more open center with windage holds starting .2 mils from center.
Is it possible to have a “donut of death” in a reticle that is only visible when illuminated? It would nice to not be distracted by it when not needed.
I also still prefer a tree based reticle over a simplistic hashed crosshair reticle for dynamic shooting, as long as the tree isn’t crowded with several different shapes and so many numbers as to be a distraction. I also prefer a more open center with windage holds starting .2 mils from center.
Is it possible to have a “donut of death” in a reticle that is only visible when illuminated? It would nice to not be distracted by it when not needed.
Phone pictures of a reticle are not 1:1 with what an eyeball actually sees.
I find that trees suck to look through. MILXT is a tastefully small profile tree, and I still hated it after trying for a week. Switched to MILC
I digress though. Its clear that everyone on snipershide wants a tree. I would prefer that at least 2 mils below center be open
I agree with that, and I also believe that a computer generated overlay of a design over a picture also does not actually represent what the eyeball actually sees either. It's just an idea.
Alas, at 20x, I don't think any of the options I posted are difficult to "see through" and ignore...but again, maybe that's just because those are the only kind of reticles I shoot with.
I think they are all better than the H59 which is the tree I initially fell in love with.
When you say "open" do you mean just pure cross hair? No hash, no dot? I think that would be a tough sell.
I already have a .05 mil thick reticle and nope it's not gonna work at 3x because it doesn't work at 5x. This is not with daylight bright illume.
Yeah if it was daylight bright illume one is just about assuredly going to see the reticle on low magnification if at .06-.07 mil thick. Just barely..... and if no or low illume it's gonna be iffy against a patchy dimly lit background. That's a problem if one needs to "see" the reticle. However it's a step in the right direction compared to .05 mil thick in a 3-18 for sure.
The circle is the other compromise to make a 3-18 work. People want aiming precision at 18x but want to see the reticle on 3x. I accept that compromise of the circle. Like what most people found out is they ended up liking the DMR reticle in the Helos G2 2-12. You start using it, find out the concept works, and next thing you know it's a go-to. Edit, they'll also find out they would end up using lower magnification more than they used to.
I had a old IOR 6-24 FFP with a .1 mil thick reticle and if you want to talk about horrible, that was it...... I didn't buy it for hunting so rarely on 6x and before I started using it I didn't realized how thick a .1 mil stadia is. I still did okay with it until it broke mid match. They sent me a new one and I sold it ASAP.
Last edited:
@carbonbased @blksno
Both your reticles have .2 mil markings that alternate sides of the horizontal stadia, that doesn't make sense to me. I prefer all .2 on one side and then a .5 mark on the other.
Both your reticles have .2 mil markings that alternate sides of the horizontal stadia, that doesn't make sense to me. I prefer all .2 on one side and then a .5 mark on the other.
It would bring world peace and would do the trick here.
one thing to be sure of, NO MATTER what reticle gets chosen, there will be a bunch of people coming out of the woodwork..... "oh, so close, but I wish it had X Y or Z" Never going to be able to please everyone.
but what do I know, I'm just a peckerwood who lives in the hills with too many guns.
but what do I know, I'm just a peckerwood who lives in the hills with too many guns.
I have a leupold with a TMR firedot at 0.12 mil thickness and I hate that reticle. Looks like a kid drew it with a sharpie. I’ve been looking at the Helos 2-12 to replace it but I’ve been up in the air about it because I don’t want that huge center dot. I did just order an Ares 2.5-15 with the .06 reticle for another rifle and I’m hopeful. On an EBR-7C with .03 reticle at 5x I can still use it even without illumination albeit a bit slower so I’m hopeful that the .06 will be at least equal to that for me.
As long as you can hit those cans of beef stew at a mile it should be fine
I can accept that, but it's a step toward "less is more".
Did you mean on the vert? Up/down. If so, you'll see the MilXT does as well. If you meant Horiz (side to side) you'll see they all do this to some degree. Mine and the Element Theos being the only ones that have .2 mil hash on one side, and .5 mil has on the other.
maybe I'm not clear on your explanation.
DNT TOR — Ziess ZR-MRi — NightForce Mil-XT — Element Theos APR-2d — (DNT MIL-SH idea)
sorry I was referring to your reticle in your optic in post#257.I can accept that, but it's a step toward "less is more".
Did you mean on the vert? Up/down. If so, you'll see the MilXT does as well. If you meant Horiz (side to side) you'll see they all do this to some degree. Mine and the Element Theos being the only ones that have .2 mil hash on one side, and .5 mil has on the other.
maybe I'm not clear on your explanation.
DNT TOR — Ziess ZR-MRi — NightForce Mil-XT — Element Theos APR-2d — (DNT MIL-SH idea)
The main stadia of reticle in picture #5 is correct. I'm personally against the mixture of dots, lines and + in the tree. I'd go for just dots
Picture in Post 257 is the DNT TOR reticle.
But if you prefer just dots...it would seem the existing TOR reticle would be right up your ally. No??
Gentlemen,
Remember this is talking about reticles for 3 different zoom ranges.
3-18
5-25
7-35
Not all comments apply or are wanted for each of zoom ranges. Might be good to specify what zoom range you want each feature for.
There also could be the potential for 3 different reticles, 1 for each zoom range.
Remember this is talking about reticles for 3 different zoom ranges.
3-18
5-25
7-35
Not all comments apply or are wanted for each of zoom ranges. Might be good to specify what zoom range you want each feature for.
There also could be the potential for 3 different reticles, 1 for each zoom range.
@koshkin designed Meopta reticle pic is attached.
I love my .1 MRAD thick illuminated TMR as I can use the hash marks on 9x.
-Stan
I would probably really like the TMR reticle if I had it in another scope and it had a floating dot. In a 3-9x sfp it just doesn’t make sense.
By open center, I mean a center dot and then open space before the windage hashes begin at 0.2 mils. This applies to all magnification ranges. I feel like starting the hashes inside of this crowds my aiming point. I also find it less distracting to keep all .2 mil hashes on one side of the windage cross bar and 0.5 mil hashes on the opposite side.
I don’t see an issue with most reticles in 5-25 and similar zoom ranges. The big miss has been in the 3-18 range, or what I think of as the best compromise for a cross over mag range. But I shoot in the southeast where we have a good mixture of woods and fields and the best hunting has always been in the woods (for me), so reticle visibility at minimum power needs to be optimized.
If I am shooting at a square range then I usually find the 3-18 mag range to be lacking in magnification but the reticle size is fine. When I am hunting and have the scope on 3 power, and it is in the middle of the day when illumination is useless, I find the reticles to be way too fine.
I have a Riton 3-18 on my 22 and while I have mixed feelings about the IQ on minimum power (it suffers from excessive spherical aberration), the T3 reticle is just about the perfect thickness and the illumination is truly daylight bright. Squirrels and tin cans beware.
I don’t see an issue with most reticles in 5-25 and similar zoom ranges. The big miss has been in the 3-18 range, or what I think of as the best compromise for a cross over mag range. But I shoot in the southeast where we have a good mixture of woods and fields and the best hunting has always been in the woods (for me), so reticle visibility at minimum power needs to be optimized.
If I am shooting at a square range then I usually find the 3-18 mag range to be lacking in magnification but the reticle size is fine. When I am hunting and have the scope on 3 power, and it is in the middle of the day when illumination is useless, I find the reticles to be way too fine.
I have a Riton 3-18 on my 22 and while I have mixed feelings about the IQ on minimum power (it suffers from excessive spherical aberration), the T3 reticle is just about the perfect thickness and the illumination is truly daylight bright. Squirrels and tin cans beware.
What's the magnification range of each scope and for each reticle?
Edit, I have the Mildot3 .5 mil hash reticle in my Meopta Optika 6 5-30x56. It's on the thicker side for a 5-30 at .05 mil. The center cross is .4 mil, the mildots are .2 mil, and the hashes are .25 mil wide, those make it easier to see vs my H59 which is all .05 mil. I chose it because I wanted to use it on lower power but not fully down to 5x, as well as I wanted a simpler reticle for a change.
Last edited:
3-18:
Meopta Optika6 3-18x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653574
FREE SHIPPING on Meopta Optika6 3-18x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653574
4.5-27:
Meopta Optika6 4.5-27x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653595
FREE SHIPPING on Meopta Optika6 4.5-27x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653595
5-30 with a slightly different reticle:
Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 ED Illuminated MRAD 34mm FFP Riflescope 653608
FREE SHIPPING on Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 ED Illuminated MRAD 34mm FFP Riflescope 653608
-Stan
I'd be fine using that reticle in a 3-18.3-18:
Meopta Optika6 3-18x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653574
FREE SHIPPING on Meopta Optika6 3-18x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653574www.eurooptic.com
4.5-27:
Meopta Optika6 4.5-27x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653595
FREE SHIPPING on Meopta Optika6 4.5-27x50 Illuminated MRAD 30mm FFP Riflescope 653595
5-30 with a slightly different reticle:
Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 ED Illuminated MRAD 34mm FFP Riflescope 653608
FREE SHIPPING on Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 ED Illuminated MRAD 34mm FFP Riflescope 653608
-Stan
As long as you leave enough space for the floating dot, do not make it too tight.
The dot is the heart of the reticle.
The dot is the heart of the reticle.
Agreed.
Those center dots with only .01 MRAD to the crosshair infuriate me — .02 minimum please.
I want a distinct center dot not an interrupted crosshair.
-Stan
Similar threads
