I picked up a couple of your PLx-C Novas and wondering what barrel length and ammo (both 308 and 5.56) the BDC drops on the reticle will work OK with. There's no chart for this in the manual like you have your other reticles. Thanks!
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Hey Primary Arms CEO Marsh.......
- Thread starter Fret
- Start date
That is the Nova Mil. Just standard Mil drops. The chart in the manual is to help but yes app is the best way to plot out mils for your specific load and barrel length
We do not own the IP for the BDC ACSS version and are prohibited from publishing the exact measurements. What I mean is the exact measurements is what is given to the factory to manufacture and is usually to 4 decimal points. Let me get a rounded off version that will work for your purposes. I will get that for customer service as well. Sorry for this hassle
Last edited:
I bet I could make you one with Gravity Ballistics, and it would be close to on-point
Because you used GB it would be open source and not owned by anyone
My next goal this year to put it on ammo
I had mock-ups made for different boxes of ammo, but it will translate to drop in a number of ways
Because you used GB it would be open source and not owned by anyone
My next goal this year to put it on ammo
I had mock-ups made for different boxes of ammo, but it will translate to drop in a number of ways
I have my dope for the actual drops for my load in the rifle it's on. I was just trying to see where the drop in the BDC on the reticle lines up. Maybe tweak the zero distance slightly to get it all to line up without having to get out and shoot a bunch before I have some rough data.
Based on the chart in the manual there seems to be some variance in the data printed with x round at y velocity. Running the numbers in my AB app or others it varies by about .3 mils which isn't too bad for general information.
I would have thought since it was labeled as ACSS that the info would be owned by PA. It's a cheap optic and I guess I shouldn't have expected specific data. In hindsight I should have just got the Mil based reticle and it would have been easier. Lesson learned. It's the first budget LVPO I have purchased and probably the last.
Based on the chart in the manual there seems to be some variance in the data printed with x round at y velocity. Running the numbers in my AB app or others it varies by about .3 mils which isn't too bad for general information.
I would have thought since it was labeled as ACSS that the info would be owned by PA. It's a cheap optic and I guess I shouldn't have expected specific data. In hindsight I should have just got the Mil based reticle and it would have been easier. Lesson learned. It's the first budget LVPO I have purchased and probably the last.
The ACSS reticles seem to all be designed by Dimitri Mikroulis, not in-house by PA. He’s prevented release of reticle drop data in the past too (meters version of the Raptor reticle, for one).
If PA wants, we can fix that... it's not proprietary.
Sure reticles can have an designer, but ballistics is ballistics.
The data is not a secret
Sure reticles can have an designer, but ballistics is ballistics.
The data is not a secret
We have the exclusive rights to all ACSS reticles but do not own the IP. Chart will be finished shortly
We freely give measurements to the app guys. I will fix this. The design file is not the drops info.
Last edited:
The sooner you get rid of the ACSS abortion, the sooner you will sell a WHOLE lot more optics. From Prisms to traditional scopes.
ILya Koshkin noticed that this is a different reticle than the one on the PLx-C Nova.
Let me clarify. There are two Nova reticles. Mill and BDC. Only the Mil is in the PLx-C. As we get closer to SHOT I will have updates on new intros.
The chevron is fine..it's a proven system. The reticle subtensions need to be mils instead of retarded ass .223 or 308 or 300blk BDV because there are too many different cartridges out there with all kinds of ballistics...just make the fucking things in mils so people can generate their own drop cards. I would buy ton of the prisms if the reticle wasn't so useless.
And put simple tree reticles with .2 tens hashes and a small aiming dot in the scopes. Don't need all that bullshit and won't have to pay licensing fees.
PA would be a great option for cheap hunting and plinking scopes and prisms if this was the case. Yea it's chicom oem but so is everything else. As long as they have a good warranty then it's no different than vortex.
And put simple tree reticles with .2 tens hashes and a small aiming dot in the scopes. Don't need all that bullshit and won't have to pay licensing fees.
PA would be a great option for cheap hunting and plinking scopes and prisms if this was the case. Yea it's chicom oem but so is everything else. As long as they have a good warranty then it's no different than vortex.
It’s proven to be a poor option. The idea to use it with the Bindon aiming concept is bad because BAC induces massive lateral parallax error.
Beyond BAC, its infinitely small aiming point is infinitely vague, and then the rest of it easily occludes short range elevation and windage holds. Full length crosshairs are far more effective for quick sight picture acquisition than chevrons.
Proof of it being a poor concept is that everyone is professionally moving away from them. The DoD has completely switched away from chevrons and there are no new military optics have them.
I am not big on chevrons in precision optics. I think it is a mistake to put it there. I do not mind the chevron on low power optics. It is not my favourite option, but it does not get in the way either.
As far ACSS reticles go, they clearly work very well for PA's customers. Over the years, I have learned that the most dedicated fanboys in the riflescope world are the Nightforce zombies and ACSS groupies. When I say anything less than complimentary about either one of these, I start getting all sort of hate mail.
While I find them a little annoying and quite amusing, if I were running a riflescope company, I would make sure I keep them happy. ACSS reticles in their current form clearly do well for PA commercially.
ILya
As far ACSS reticles go, they clearly work very well for PA's customers. Over the years, I have learned that the most dedicated fanboys in the riflescope world are the Nightforce zombies and ACSS groupies. When I say anything less than complimentary about either one of these, I start getting all sort of hate mail.
While I find them a little annoying and quite amusing, if I were running a riflescope company, I would make sure I keep them happy. ACSS reticles in their current form clearly do well for PA commercially.
ILya
Last edited:
Similar threads
