Episode 93 reticle talk

[Alaskashooter]

Just listened to episode 93, went back and listened again about the reticles. 100% agree with the floating dot. If I’m hearing this right the suggestion is not putting reticle left and right of center until after the two mil mark and at first it made sense, your probably not going to have that much wind. What would the solution be for a moving target? Scenario that happened a couple years ago. Coyote runs across a frozen lake, I know my ranges on the lake so I knew he was in the 325-350 area. no time and opertunity to dial, no problem hold elevation, hold windage to shoot where he’s going to be. Maybe I’m completely off base here but this situation seems like the type where having that windage go all the way across would be a big necessity.

 

[_Windrider_]

Just listened to episode 93, went back and listened again about the reticles. 100% agree with the floating dot. If I’m hearing this right the suggestion is not putting reticle left and right of center until after the two mil mark and at first it made sense, your probably not going to have that much wind. What would the solution be for a moving target? Scenario that happened a couple years ago. Coyote runs across a frozen lake, I know my ranges on the lake so I knew he was in the 325-350 area. no time and opertunity to dial, no problem hold elevation, hold windage to shoot where he’s going to be. Maybe I’m completely off base here but this situation seems like the type where having that windage go all the way across would be a big necessity.

A situation like this I dial e steady state wind hold and the changes. That way you aren’t ever too far off center. Pick a distance to dial, say 300. Then you just have to adjust for closer or further.

 

[Alaskashooter]

A situation like this I dial e steady state wind hold and the changes. That way you aren’t ever too far off center. Pick a distance to dial, say 300. Then you just have to adjust for closer or further.

You dialing for a moving target? That’s what I’m getting at here, the left and right of the reticle in both “Xmas tree” types and standard cross type is utalized in this type of application. Not just for wind. Also in the situation I was in, time was not on my side so dialing elevation or windage was not an option.

 

[_Windrider_]

You dialing for a moving target? That’s what I’m getting at here, the left and right of the reticle in both “Xmas tree” types and standard cross type is utalized in this type of application. Not just for wind. Also in the situation I was in, time was not on my side so dialing elevation or windage was not an option.

No not for a mover. Guess I missed the jist of your post. ??

 

[trob_205]

whats your windage correction on a running dog @ 300-350?

 

[MarinePMI]

Just on average speed alone (15-20mph at a full run), that's a 7-10 mil lead (.5 mil per mph velocity rule of thumb). Never done it (though did take a whitetail on the run once), but the wind speed will also add/subtract to that estimate. Movers are an interesting thing, and have a lot of "depends" caveats (hold CoM or leading edge?, ambush versus track/swing?, strong enough winds for negative leads, etc.).

JMTCW...

 

[Mike4837]

The theory behind the floating dot makes a lot of sense to me. I have the H59 which has the floating dot and compared the the Nightforce Mil-R reticle I really prefer the floating dot. The solid cross hair of the Mil-R obscures small aiming points and I find it harder to be that little bit extra precise when I aim. That's actually my only complaint about the Mil-R reticle. I don't mind the clutter of the H59 and I find it handy for competitions which require holdovers. I really like franks idea of starting the subtensions a mil or mil and a half below the center, but my only concern from a competitive standpoint would be dialing and using holdovers. For instance, the last match I shot I dialed to the first target and then held the difference all the way out. The second target was only .6 mils below center using that method. I wonder if .6 mils is small enough of a difference that you could get an accurate guess and make hits consistently? What's everyone's experience with that?

From a duty perspective, a reticle with a floating dot and graduated crosshair would be pretty slick. Something like the Schmidt LRR-Mil makes a lot of sense in that application for sure.

 

[Sapper524]

Somewhere between a Gen2 XR and a SIG DEV-L would be perfect

 

[Alaskashooter]

The theory behind the floating dot makes a lot of sense to me. I have the H59 which has the floating dot and compared the the Nightforce Mil-R reticle I really prefer the floating dot. The solid cross hair of the Mil-R obscures small aiming points and I find it harder to be that little bit extra precise when I aim. That's actually my only complaint about the Mil-R reticle. I don't mind the clutter of the H59 and I find it handy for competitions which require holdovers. I really like franks idea of starting the subtensions a mil or mil and a half below the center, but my only concern from a competitive standpoint would be dialing and using holdovers. For instance, the last match I shot I dialed to the first target and then held the difference all the way out. The second target was only .6 mils below center using that method. I wonder if .6 mils is small enough of a difference that you could get an accurate guess and make hits consistently? What's everyone's experience with that?

From a duty perspective, a reticle with a floating dot and graduated crosshair would be pretty slick. Something like the Schmidt LRR-Mil makes a lot of sense in that application for sure.

I’m also running an h59 reticle and I’ve liked it since day one. That being said I like to experiment and while I dislike the mil-r reticle from NF, the mil-c is quite pleasant.

 

[Mormegil87]

I went to the Mil-C from the H59 and have really appreciated the simplicity. I'm not a fan of anything with 0.5 Mil subtensions so having the 0.2 Mil subtensions in the Mil-C was a huge bonus.

 

[Lowlight]

A 2 MPH walk in a mover is a 1 Mil hold at a minimum, distance with a mover is pretty consistent from 100 to 500 yards give or take a 100 yards,

A finer subtension than 2. is too fine and clutters the area around the center crosshair

 

[the other Matt]

@lowllight

To the point you made about keeping your target in the middle 1/3 of the scope to avoid any distortion on "lower-end" scopes....

This may be a silly question but, how would this work with magnification? For example, if I have a FFP scope dialed to max magnification it seems like the whole site picture would be the middle third of lens.

In general this concept makes sense to me, I am just not sure about how to apply it with FFP and magnification.

Thanks in advance!

 

[MarinePMI]

For example, if I have a FFP scope dialed to max magnification it seems like the whole site picture would be the middle third of lens.

I won't speak for Frank, but if you are doing extreme hold overs on a reticle at lower power, you'll be out of the center 1/3....

 

[the other Matt]

I won't speak for Frank, but if you are doing extreme hold overs on a reticle at lower power, you'll be out of the center 1/3....

I kinda figured it would not apply at high magnification, but I am no expert on optic technology and its shortcomings...
thanks

 

[Lowlight]

the center 1/3 is the center third regardless of magnification

Now magnification can create more distortion, but with most holdover reticles you have to power down to see more of the reticle.

An example was at SHOT Show a few years ago, during range day there was a 1 Mile target and the scope was basically zeroed on target to hold. It was on 12x to read the 18 mils needed to hit the target was at the very bottom of the sight picture. You had nothing below be the scope tube, and being on the edge puts you in the worst possible position.

It's a head position compromise too, lower the power to say 12x, then sight in a target in the middle, after, shift to the hold at the bottom. You'll see a measurable change in your head position.

 

[short_mag]

Great conversation. I hope that the manufacturers are listening. Seems like the designers of the reticles have never ‘used’ their reticles.