What do you guys think of this new reticle for competition? I like that it has only 1 mil negative vertical hold, and easy to find 1/2 mill holds and dots for half mil in the Christmas tree. Feels very open to me
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes I love this reticle ❤️
- Thread starter Camoman1
- Start date
Meh, it looks fine. I will say this though, there's a difference between how a reticle looks in the diagram against a white background and how it looks in the real world against shadows, trees, and shit.
Not a fan. I dont see any upside to only 1 mil hold under. Granted its rarely needed, maybe just a few times a year. But thats a few times a year where you have to do something to compensate for the reticle.
.5 holds are redundant.
"Open" reticles aren't a good thing. I just shot the Finale in New Mexico. Lots of stages with multiple targets from each position on a 90 second par time. That means no time to dial. So you end up holding over, plus holding for a stiff wind, and suddenly that "open" reticle has you holding out in space somewhere trying to correlate windage and elevation to the target. Which slows you down and sacrifices accuracy.
An unobtrusive, detailed reticle is your friend.
.5 holds are redundant.
"Open" reticles aren't a good thing. I just shot the Finale in New Mexico. Lots of stages with multiple targets from each position on a 90 second par time. That means no time to dial. So you end up holding over, plus holding for a stiff wind, and suddenly that "open" reticle has you holding out in space somewhere trying to correlate windage and elevation to the target. Which slows you down and sacrifices accuracy.
An unobtrusive, detailed reticle is your friend.
The upside is there’s no bullshit up there so you can use half your unobstructed view to spot in
I dont know anyone who spots through their scope.
Nor do I believe having reticle in the upper half of the optic obstructs your view.
Not sure where your coming from here...
You don't know anyone that spots their impacts through their own scope? That's what he's talking about. I've heard both Frank and the MDS guys talk about driving the reticle down after the shot to be able to spot the splash, and less clutter up top means less distance to drive down and less distraction when you do.
i shoot weekly with my neighbor who was a sniper in Irag. He spots exclusively thru his scope
I don't like the 1 mil hold under. Use more than that at times and no issues spotting through the scope either. Never used a scope with open upper quadrants and have no problems spotting. The rest looks usable enough.
Every shot I shoot I spot through my scope. And I’ve never needed to hold under much more than a mil so I’d prefer that area be relatively clean
-Upside of 1 mil neg is opening up to view trace. Very common trend for newer reticles. I view trace and splash on every shot. I almost never use negative hold.
Why sacrifice visibility on every shot for rare times that you want to use a negative hold?
-I said it “feels open” they did a good job at putting what they need in an unobtrusive way.
What part makes this “open” that would not work for holds? It has a full Christmas tree.
I get you like the reticle but it has some downsides too for some uses. Like all reticles they are personal preference. So like away but don’t expect everyone else to feel the same way.
Absolutely, there is a few things I’d change on it too, it’s not perfect. I was referencing your comment that “negative holds are not rare”.
Where do you experience so many negative holds?
In matches. Not everyone uses them. Some try and dial everything but time and movement make that tough at times and holds are what you need to be able to use.
It is a new small company. I've reached out to them and I plan to meet them at SHOT and take a look at their scope. The reticle is pretty reasonable design. There are a couple of things I would do differently, but it is workable.
ILya
ILya
I used a negative hold at the PRS Finale in New Mexico this past weekend. The second target on stage 6 that had to be shot from 3 different positions was closer than target one, and target three was further than both. 90 second stages, horrible low rock firing positions, 60% of the field timing out, so dialing was out of the question. I've used hold unders half a dozen times in matches this year.
And I disagree with your premise that an open upper portion of your optic is better for spotting your own hits and misses. I can spot misses without needing to drop my scope crosshair below the target. The reticle I use has a clean upper reticle that doesn't go to the top of the scope, similar to this one, but I dont use that open space, I dont need that open space. No one does. I've had better success trying to control my recoil and maintain my hold on the target. Sometimes you can measure and move off the splash.
Reticles are a very personal preference. If you are going to ask what we think, be prepared for answers you dont agree with, and dont bother arguing otherwise. You aren't going to convince experienced shooters who know what they like and why that your way is better. Just my two bits..
My reticle is fine enough to view shot and follow up if necessary.
It's all personal preference.
Once you've come to grips with a load that suits, and regularly use the scope at various ranges,and situations, it all tends to just fall into place.
Time on task.
It's all personal preference.
Once you've come to grips with a load that suits, and regularly use the scope at various ranges,and situations, it all tends to just fall into place.
Time on task.
Worth noting, something like 3 or 4 of the past 5 or 6 PRS points winners didn’t use a reticle with a tree.
H2cmr and JTAC reticles have been used for those wins. With JTAC being a good example of the reticle that comes out of a design from the guys currently at the top.
The ever increasing trend is to dial everything possible, including wind. And only hold when absolutely necessary. Even then, the holds aren’t usually so far off the vertical that you are in complete open space enough that you can’t easily bracket.
Obviously it’s personal preference, but if you only find yourself holding a few times a year, it’s not necessarily a bad thing if you decide you’d rather have open space.
H2cmr and JTAC reticles have been used for those wins. With JTAC being a good example of the reticle that comes out of a design from the guys currently at the top.
The ever increasing trend is to dial everything possible, including wind. And only hold when absolutely necessary. Even then, the holds aren’t usually so far off the vertical that you are in complete open space enough that you can’t easily bracket.
Obviously it’s personal preference, but if you only find yourself holding a few times a year, it’s not necessarily a bad thing if you decide you’d rather have open space.
In the past 5 years of competition, I can count on one hand the number of times I either held over or under. And 3 of those times I held under.
I prefer a thin, unobtrusive reticle for spotting.
I thought he meant people were using their rifle scopes as spotters. Which I certainly never see in PRS circles. You're not allowed on the gun.
As far as spotting shots through the optic, sure, we all do that. But nobody needs the reticle to stop 1 mil above the crosshair to do that.
I've never in all my years of shooting heard anyone say they need that or want that. Nor have I needed it or wanted it myself. I even have it in my scope right now and don't use it in that matter. I spot my shots just fine. Along with everyone else.
Seems a lot like the MR4 but with 1 mil rather than 2. I'm not much of a comp shooter but I really like the way this reticle hits me. The only thing I don't like is trying to explain wind holds to new shooters (especially under 1 mil) because of the .2 mil nub outside the floating center dot.
I do like the .5 mil quick reference.
Honestly I see more of a military/ field shooting reticle when I look at this but I don't really care what other people look through to hit their targets.
I do like the .5 mil quick reference.
Honestly I see more of a military/ field shooting reticle when I look at this but I don't really care what other people look through to hit their targets.
Pretty much boils it down. We all have opinions on what we like and what works for us.
agree with rob01 that negative holds are not rare. we all use our equipment differently. i would say its rare for me to shoot a match and not use a negative hold.
Okay thanks for the info
Maybe I wasn’t clear, open top is for viewing trace, not dropping reticle to view splash
Arguing? This a forum and we are discussing why or why not we prefer things. I’m here to hear advice from top shooters like you, but like you said, it’s all personal preference so don’t take conversations personally and feel it’s arguments.
I agree. I try my best not to hold over, but i always hold wind. If it wasn’t for stupid “no dial stages” I’d probably go for a reticle with no tree. But those stages seem too keep coming up, so I like a tree
Holds are a skill set that should be practiced as it’s helpful at times and good for fast follow ups. Having used reticles for years with no tree, including the H2CMR, and doing holds both wind and elevation together out to past 1000 yards from 100 yard zero in some matches I can say holding into space with no reference points is harder and slower than having the reference points.
Keen to hear your thoughts after shot show. I wonder if it's just another LOW scope with a bigger mag range or if it's something completely different.
Their website reckons it took them 2 years to design the reticle so I'm inclined to think most of the "information" on their website is marketing speak and hyperbole.
Interesting that the waterproof rating they advertise on the scope is worse than my smart phone.
Since my current scopes were not offered without the tree reticle, I have reluctantly been forced into them. As time goes on, I am thinking that they may well be very useful while hunting. At times things are changing fast enough and the low light makes seeing the turrets difficult, so it may well be a skillset that can be a real asset in the field.
Inside of 1000 yards I usually hold for everything and like tree reticles as long as they aren’t too busy.
for quick aiming it's not good.
for quick aiming you want to have simple cross not floating dots.
numbers down at the main cross, not at the edge of tree, and have all numbers down, not just even; only even numbers you can have at horizontal line.
line thickness at least 0.05mil for faster aiming, maybe 0.075MIL.
cross up maybe 5 MIL, tree down at least 15 MIL, left and right maybe 10 MIL, after that VERY thick bar for better aiming at lowest power.
for horizontal tree 'lines' maybe just dots and not lines.
0.5 MIL value of section can be enough for quick aiming; if you aim between that you have 0.25 MIL.
Would prefer 3 or 4 Mil above (for holding under). I hold elevation 90% of the time. Why? Because I my eyes are 51yrs old. I need 1X "readers" to see my turrets. However, the reticle is always 100% razor sharp. ((I know, I know, they make turrets magnifiers, etc. But, that is one more thing hanging on the rifle and 1 more thing to get knocked around)). About the only I dial is for tiny tiny targets or when I have a shit ton of time.
I like the ,05 center dot. Actually, I would be fine with a, say .072 size dot.
I like the ,05 center dot. Actually, I would be fine with a, say .072 size dot.
I agree with Rob01. I use the tree all the time for competition. Since 2019 when I began, I see a lot more stages with multiple distances and multiple positions. Dialing the nearest target, and holding the nth ones is the only way I can do it without timing out. A lot of the newer "clean" reticles like PR2, JVCR, SKMR3/4, etc. bother me because assuming any wind over 12mph, and I'm going to start wanting more windage in my holdunders. Out west, the norm is 12 MPH+ 50% of the time. I've shot a few matches with 20 MPH and or even 35 MPH+ winds.
I spot misses in my tree using a Tremor3. The argument that "busy" reticles obstruct view for misses/impacts, is BS to me.
I spot misses in my tree using a Tremor3. The argument that "busy" reticles obstruct view for misses/impacts, is BS to me.
On a related topic, how hard would it be to build a bubble level into a reticle? I should not need to explain my reasoning for this.
Hey everyone, I was just told about this thread here. My name is Van and I'm with Apex Optics. Feel free to ask me any questions you have about the reticle (or your honest feedback, which I think I've seen so far 
), or about the optic itself.
As previously mentioned, we're a pretty new company, and are looking forward to getting our scopes on some rifles for the upcoming season.
I'll be here on the 'Hide to answer any questions at all, and as Ilya mentioned we're going to be at SHOT Show this year, and will have our optic on some rifles at a few of our partner booths in Vegas!
Thanks!
Van
), or about the optic itself.As previously mentioned, we're a pretty new company, and are looking forward to getting our scopes on some rifles for the upcoming season.
I'll be here on the 'Hide to answer any questions at all, and as Ilya mentioned we're going to be at SHOT Show this year, and will have our optic on some rifles at a few of our partner booths in Vegas!
Thanks!
Van
Don’t change everytime one person doesn’t like your reticle it looks good.Hey everyone, I was just told about this thread here. My name is Van and I'm with Apex Optics. Feel free to ask me any questions you have about the reticle (or your honest feedback, which I think I've seen so far
As previously mentioned, we're a pretty new company, and are looking forward to getting our scopes on some rifles for the upcoming season.
I'll be here on the 'Hide to answer any questions at all, and as Ilya mentioned we're going to be at SHOT Show this year, and will have our optic on some rifles at a few of our partner booths in Vegas!
Thanks!
Van
Yeah, we appreciate that for sure. We spent a long time deliberating over every single aspect of this reticle, and went through several different versions.
Honestly, we have people switching to our scope from Nightforce, Kahles, Vortex and Minox, and not because we're paying them to. The big reasons are the features, the glass quality, and most frequently we hear because they love the reticle.
I'm sure we will learn from this as well, and there's always room to improve!
Honestly, we have people switching to our scope from Nightforce, Kahles, Vortex and Minox, and not because we're paying them to. The big reasons are the features, the glass quality, and most frequently we hear because they love the reticle.
I'm sure we will learn from this as well, and there's always room to improve!
Similar threads
