Rifle Scopes Is Horus stands for "horrible"?

[CCCP2k]

Hi all

Never mind the thread subject. It's just a little trick to get some attention
I was looking at Hxx reticles and really liked the idea.

One concern though. The "horrible" word with regard to the reticles came from a respected competitive shooter and instructor.
His argument was - "too busy". He is an old school shooter who is always suspicious about new stuff.

Do you think "too busy" is a problem for H59? Have you ever failed to spot a target because of that or think it may happen?

 

[ORD]

Horus DOES IN FACT STAND FOR HORRIBLE when referring to the company itself and any of its scopes, warranty and warranty service (or utter lack thereof), etc., but not necessarily their reticles in and of themselves.

The Horus reticles are NOT for everyone and they certainly can be a bit distracting depending on the particular model, the optic its in, the situation in which you are using the reticle, etc., etc. I'm not a fan having used a variety of their reticles over the years, including in higher-end optics fitted with them, but again...to each their own. Only you will be able to determine whether or not the reticles are for you or not.

The long and the short of the story with Horus though is that if you want to try one of their reticles, skip any and all of the offerings from Horus direct and get said reticle in a quality optic from a reputable manufacturer.

 

[Altnews]

Good idea but yes, I find Horus reticles too "busy." Too much time counting down and over that could just be put on the turrets, and when I miss and shoot a follow-up shot I don't have any problem holding off to correct.

It is nice to have fine, clear divisions on the crosshairs and a few reference marks down and to the side to help align a hold-off, but the human eye is remarkably good at straight lines and measurements and I've rarely had difficulty holding over X and off Y based on the crosshair markings themselves.

 

[CCCP2k]

Horus DOES IN FACT STAND FOR HORRIBLE when referring to the company itself and any of its scopes, warranty and warranty service (or utter lack thereof), etc., but not necessarily their reticles in and of themselves.

The Horus reticles are NOT for everyone and they certainly can be a bit distracting depending on the particular model, the optic its in, the situation in which you are using the reticle, etc., etc. I'm not a fan having used a variety of their reticles over the years, including in higher-end optics fitted with them, but again...to each their own. Only you will be able to determine whether or not the reticles are for you or not.

The long and the short of the story with Horus though is that if you want to try one of their reticles, skip any and all of the offerings from Horus direct and get said reticle in a quality optic from a reputable manufacturer.

Of cause it does not. HORRIBLE is a forum marketing trick
But what was said is said. I realize it's not for everybody. I am interested in dynamic shooting and H59 looks like to fit the bill. I am just wondering how much inconvenience it gives while tracking/spotting the target? Would you rather have clean line and use target dimensions to establish proper hold for wind or speed or have the precision of the hash marks on the reticle?

 

[CCCP2k]

Good idea but yes, I find Horus reticles too "busy." Too much time counting down and over that could just be put on the turrets, and when I miss and shoot a follow-up shot I don't have any problem holding off to correct.

It is nice to have fine, clear divisions on the crosshairs and a few reference marks down and to the side to help align a hold-off, but the human eye is remarkably good at straight lines and measurements and I've rarely had difficulty holding over X and off Y based on the crosshair markings themselves.

This is very interesting observation. I will try to do it some time. The idea of X/Y hold on marks only scared me to deaths.

 

[RobertB]

I fnd them too busy for my needs. I shot a OBR this last week with a HDMR on it. I have the G2 on my DMR and it is just right for a holdover type scope for me. That being said, I have alwys liked the NP-R1 in the NXS's but for the FFP scope the G2 is my ticket. The Horus is deffinently a very capable reticle but I want to see more than just a grid. YMMV.

Good luck

 

[CCCP2k]

I fnd them too busy for my needs. I shot a OBR this last week with a HDMR on it. I have the G2 on my DMR and it is just right for a holdover type scope for me. That being said, I have alwys liked the NP-R1 in the NXS's but for the FFP scope the G2 is my ticket. The Horus is deffinently a very capable reticle but I want to see more than just a grid. YMMV.

Good luck

I looked at G2 as well. It's very interesting one. Kinda less precise and busy Horus. Thumbs up for it. What do you think about S&B H2CMR? It has 2 mil marks on it. Must be great for holding for wind and dialing for elevation (unless you can produce X/Y hold)

 

[Black-X]

I'm going to go against the current grain in this thread and say that I love them. I especially like them when running with my partner because we both see the same thing and corrections are easy, plus in a gasser you don't break your cheek weld to spin turrets and you are always on the glass. I had someone at a recent match get on the Horus H-27 in a US Optics LR-17, who has never used a Horus, call an intentional miss at 300yds where I held 1.4 mils low and .5 mils right. He called it 1.5 low and .5 right, first shot.

If you are interested in the Horus, try not to look through it one time and say that it's too busy. That's exactly what I thought when I first tried it but now I have a hard time using a conventional reticle and spinning dials. After a few range trips you stop paying attention to the reticle so closely and there's a point where things *click* in your head. Now if you are a bench shooter where follow up shots and multiple targets aren't important, then maybe the Horus isn't needed.

 

[Chris@InterstateGuns]

Not to be insensitive, but if you can't hold in space something is wrong. If "H" reticles are your fancy then work it. I'm just glad to live in the age of "designer reticles". So many great choices.

 

[CCCP2k]

Good idea but yes, I find Horus reticles too "busy." Too much time counting down and over that could just be put on the turrets, and when I miss and shoot a follow-up shot I don't have any problem holding off to correct.

It is nice to have fine, clear divisions on the crosshairs and a few reference marks down and to the side to help align a hold-off, but the human eye is remarkably good at straight lines and measurements and I've rarely had difficulty holding over X and off Y based on the crosshair markings themselves.

I tried to do X/Y hold on S&B P4L fein reticle and it does not look as scary as it sounds. Now I really wonder what kind of grouping and POI precision it can produce.

 

[CCCP2k]

I'm going to go against the current grain in this thread and say that I love them...

Not against, you are going with it. Looks like everybody agrees that it's personal. It's an option to consider. I hear from many people that after a while you forget about "too busy" aspect and "start seeing a new world of possibilities". Mathematically it makes total sense but there are other things beyond the math. I'd like to hear them as well. Telling the truth, I decided a long time ago that I must try it. The only question is when. Right now the question is where to put 4K. H59 or extra ammo?

 

[CCCP2k]

Not to be insensitive, but if you can't hold in space something is wrong.

Ops, this is something I have to look after. Thank you very much
Definitely H will not solve the problem. As "busy" as many think it is, it also has gaps

 

[Black-X]

Not to be insensitive, but if you can't hold in space something is wrong. If "H" reticles are your fancy then work it. I'm just glad to live in the age of "designer reticles". So many great choices.

Nothing wrong. I like the Horus and found benefits in it over a conventional reticle which gives me a visual confirmation of hold versus an approximate.

 

[Papa Zero Three]

Not to be insensitive, but if you can't hold in space something is wrong. If "H" reticles are your fancy then work it. I'm just glad to live in the age of "designer reticles". So many great choices.

Nothing wrong. I like the Horus and found benefits in it over a conventional reticle which gives me a visual confirmation of hold versus an approximate.

I find it funny that if you read threads on spotting scopes, you will hear all day the benefits of having a reticle in ones spotting scope and I think it's really in arguable these days. You just don't hear people arguing about reticles in spotting scopes vs none and that none is better. Yet there are all kinds of threads, like this one, where people complain about a certain reticle being "too busy" for thier liking in a scope. Does anyone see how illogical this is?

Granted, you can hold "in space", we've all probably done it with some repeatable sucess. It boils down to guessing where that point "in space" is be it in your scope or in a spotting scope with no reticle in it. Both a shooter and or a spotter are guessing as to where that point is "in space" and guessing how many Mils/MOA of correction are neeed. To be good, and by good I mean consistent, one needs to have a calibrated Mk-1 eyeball and that comes from putting lots of rounds down range and even then, it's still just guessing as to what the correction is. I can remember times that my spotter using a spotting scope with no reticle would give me a correction and it would differ from mine based on seeing the trace/impact and having a standard reticle in my scope. Having a scale of any type is a benefit over nothing aka the Mk-1 eyeball.

Conversly, having a reticle system that serves as a quantifiable scale be it in a scope or a spotting scope, serves as visually confirmation of what the correction is and when you have 2 people working together, this reduces the human Mk-1 eyeball error(reduces not removes it entirely). So what if you don't have 2 people working together and you have to spot for yourself? Would you prefer to have a scale system of some sort or use the SWAG method and guess where "in space" that point is?

Ultimately, I think it boils down to what peoples preferences and or comfort levels are when it comes to using certain reticles be it any of the typical crosshair reticles out there or a Horus reticle. A reticle is a tool, like a hammer, wrench, and there are different kinds and makes out there, use the one that best works for you and your application.

 

[Lowlight]

It's not illogical at all... it how the human mind works. We like clear intersections and are drawn to them. Our minds don't multi-task as well when given the grid, we don't focus.

Using the spotter with the H32 is night and day from using a scope. I have taken the picture here to demonstrate.

Spotter 45 with H32 vs H37



As you can see the H32 is in the lower 1/3 of the spotter leaving the center open and the FOV wide... you can place the reticle directly under the target to read the mils, you don't have to "cover" the target.


Here you have the H37, look at it, there is no well defined intersection for our eye to focus on, it's distracting. That is physiology of the human mind stuff... we have a point of diminishing returns.




People can trust their own first impressions, as they usually more right than wrong, especially when we are talking visually. It is not like you can learn the scopes personality and if you have to be sold on it, chances are it is not worth looking into to start.

One day, someone will bring in a new, cold shooter with no opinion either way and show them how to do it both ways and see what the judgement is, because honest people will tell you, it's a great short cut to training, it works well to teach a person about mils, but experience shows those who have used it, or better, used both, tend to walk away from the Horus after a while. It's a lowest common denominator tool as that was the original intention. Minute of Elephant accuracy for someone too busy to be bothered to practice. "Here D, do this, hold line 2, pull the trigger"... wow you're good.

 

[Papa Zero Three]

It's not illogical at all... it how the human mind works. We like clear intersections and are drawn to them. Our minds don't multi-task as well when given the grid, we don't focus.

Using the spotter with the H32 is night and day from using a scope. I have taken the picture here to demonstrate.

Spotter 45 with H32 vs H37

View attachment 10978

As you can see the H32 is in the lower 1/3 of the spotter leaving the center ope and the FOV wide... you can place the reticle directly under the target to read the mils, you don't have to "cover" the target.


Here you have the H37, look at it, there is defined intersection for our eye to focus on, it's distracting. That is physiology of the human mind stuff... we have a point of diminishing returns.

View attachment 10981


People can trust their own first impressions, as they usually more right than wrong, especially when we are talking visually. It is not like you can learn the scopes personality and if you have to sold on it, chances are it is not worth looking into to start.

One day, someone will bring in a new, cold shooter with no option and show them how to do it both ways and see what the judgement is, because honest people will tell you, it's a great short cut to training, it works well to teach a person about mils, but experience shows those who have used it, or better, used both, tend to walk away from the Horus after a while. It's a lowest common denominator tool as that was the original intention. Minute of Elephant accuracy for someone too busy to be bothered to practice. "Here D, do this, hold line 2, pull the trigger"... wow you're good.

You have made your point and voiced your perspective, I don't disagree with your observations/points on it. But do you or do you not agree that like any of the different types of reticles out there, the Horus reticle is a tool and the tool the shooter chooses to use, and that works for him is his choice, there is no right or wrong as long as he is putting lead on tgt where he intended?

 

[Lowlight]

Absolutely,

it is a tool, and if it works for them, there is no disputing it. Unless they are being sold a lie, like you can't do it with any other reticle. It's mils, they all work the same and the goal should be to stay in the middle of the reticle as much as possible. That is the sweet spot of any optic, free from distortions like the edges. It's where our focus is...

If the shooter chooses the option naturally, no issue at all, but having it forced on them, or having them being told tall tales as if, is not a natural progression. Sales & Market should not dictate, especially on the military side of things. Especially when there are other, proven, more realistic tools out there.

We have been holding off since the first time someone slapped a scope on a rifle. That is not in dispute at all, visualizing where to hold is a simple concept. However cluttering the sight picture, distracting the shooters focus all go against sound principles of how the human mind thinks. While we have the luxury of fighting in places like Afghanistan where we have angles, dirt and other complimenting conditions, the minute it goes to the jungles of South America or the Philippines people will find that reticle is close to useless...

It's a tool, not the end all be all, one stop do it all as so many claim.

 

[CCCP2k]

Oh man, it's horrible. Just got it on PMII 3-20x50. But the man was right. I can imagine what kind of tricks one can pull with it...
As for spotting capability, in my opinion, it is compromised. But... You get a lot in return. It's not the answer for all questions but for sure a thing to look at.

PM me if you need pics. I will do them the best I can

 

[CCCP2k]

Correction. Spotting is fairly OK @ 12x

I am not a pro (disclaimer)

 

[CCCP2k]

Absolutely,

it is a tool, and if it works for them, there is no disputing it.

.... the minute it goes to the jungles of South America or the Philippines people will find that reticle is close to useless...

It's a tool, not the end all be all, one stop do it all as so many claim.

I would rather say extremely hard to use.

 

[orkan]

Given the background of horus as a company, they have nothing I need. I've used two of their optics in the past, both were junk. I wouldn't recommend them to friend or enemy.

 

[CCCP2k]

Given the background of horus as a company, they have nothing I need. I've used two of their optics in the past, both were junk. I wouldn't recommend them to friend or enemy.

Given their aggressive advertising company, I agree. Sounds fishy right away. But the idea of H reticles makes so much mathematical sense so you can not discard it outright. The only problem you have to calculate fast. But I think this skill can be obtained with modest amount of effort. Some may find .2 mil windage marks very handy. So the dots. I can see how the reticle could help in WWII style assault. One can shoot both deep and wide across whole front. I think this was the main idea behind it. Comes with a price (not money) on it. But hell, what does not?

 

[LongArm]

I have a Bushnell HDMR H59. I have also had a Bushnell DMR with the G2 "gap" that I did not like as much as the H59. I really like the H59. No dialing,hold over and shoot. I am no pro but it works great for me.

 

[mkollman74]

I have two H59 scopes. I have a couple of buddies who give me crap about 'em all the time. I don't really care though - I am the one shootin' the system. I never thought I'd like a Horus reticle, but I find that I really do now. Certainly not the only way to get it done, but it's working for me. I'd like to get an MSR and give it a whirl...

 

[Stearman]

" It's not illogical at all... it how the human mind works. We like clear intersections and are drawn to them. Our minds don't multi-task as well when given the grid, we don't focus"

I am sorry, but I find this to be inaccurate IMHO..
The attached photo is a "Heads Up Display" on an aircraft, in a very dynamic situation. The HUD is a piece of glass with a hologram of pertinent data that is placed in front of your face, much like a reticle.
There are at least 20 different things being monitored as it propels itself towards the "Planned Impact Point" at 141 Knots, thats 162MPH for those who do not convert quickly.
We can shift our focus from individual pieces of HUD info to Runway (That's the white lights) and back very quickly and still multi tasking to achieve desired results. But I was not very good the first couple of times,
point is, we can do anything that we have taken the time to thoroughly learn, and learn to exploit. BTW he is only 110' off the ground...

 

[Chiller]

" It's not illogical at all... it how the human mind works. We like clear intersections and are drawn to them. Our minds don't multi-task as well when given the grid, we don't focus"

I am sorry, but I find this to be inaccurate IMHO.. View attachment 12475
The attached photo is a "Heads Up Display" on an aircraft, in a very dynamic situation. The HUD is a piece of glass with a hologram of pertinent data that is placed in front of your face, much like a reticle.
There are at least 20 different things being monitored as it propels itself towards the "Planned Impact Point" at 141 Knots, thats 162MPH for those who do not convert quickly.
We can shift our focus from individual pieces of HUD info to Runway (That's the white lights) and back very quickly and still multi tasking to achieve desired results. But I was not very good the first couple of times,
point is, we can do anything that we have taken the time to thoroughly learn, and learn to exploit. BTW he is only 110' off the ground...

The statement of information overload it fairly well proven out. We have a limited ability to process information rapidly. If the system works for you, great. It is not the end all be all solution though.

 

[phreakmode]

" It's not illogical at all... it how the human mind works. We like clear intersections and are drawn to them. Our minds don't multi-task as well when given the grid, we don't focus"

I am sorry, but I find this to be inaccurate IMHO.. View attachment 12475
The attached photo is a "Heads Up Display" on an aircraft, in a very dynamic situation. The HUD is a piece of glass with a hologram of pertinent data that is placed in front of your face, much like a reticle.
There are at least 20 different things being monitored as it propels itself towards the "Planned Impact Point" at 141 Knots, thats 162MPH for those who do not convert quickly.
We can shift our focus from individual pieces of HUD info to Runway (That's the white lights) and back very quickly and still multi tasking to achieve desired results. But I was not very good the first couple of times,
point is, we can do anything that we have taken the time to thoroughly learn, and learn to exploit. BTW he is only 110' off the ground...

There exists a distinct difference. The resolution through an optic is limited, if the reticle stadia lines obscure the object or event you are observing is does not matter how good you are at divided attention activities like flying an aircraft equipped with moderately modern technology.

 

[Ring]

i like the G2dmr, but still think this is "just about perfect" with what u need and not "to much"..

 

[steve123]

i like the G2dmr, but still think this is "just about perfect" with what u need and not "to much"..

If only the designers of that reticle were actually shooters and realized that we mostly hold for wind. I hate trying to aim through a number when holding off for wind. Those numbers should be located at the end of their line not at the .5 mil mark!

Oh and BTW this is another reason why I prefer Horus reticles.

 

[orkan]

If only the designers of that reticle were actually shooters and realized that we mostly hold for wind. I hate trying to aim through a number when holding off for wind. Those numbers should be located at the end of their line not at the .5 mil mark!

Oh and BTW this is another reason why I prefer Horus reticles.

Yeah! Those idiots at GA Precision must not be shooters either!!!!

 

[Soct]

I'm told by people who have them, that they take time to get use to. They said that at first they didn't like them because the reticle was too busy. But after using it for awhile they got use to and liked it. An exception to the first impression rule I guess.

 

[Lowlight]

I'm told by people who have them, that they take time to get use to. They said that at first they didn't like them because the reticle was too busy. But after using it for awhile they got use to and liked it. An exception to the first impression rule I guess.

No it is not an exception to the rule, but Cognitive dissonance

Cognitive dissonance theory explains human behavior by positing that people have a bias to seek consonance between their expectations and reality.

They bought a scope that cost $400 more than the if they bought the same scope with a standard reticle. So if they didn't like it, they blew $400 on top of the purchase price. Rather than second guess their decision to go in this direction, they tell themselves, "now I like" and surely worked very hard to convince themselves of it.

Balancing money spent vs the reality of the poor decision is a very common factor with people who exhibit cognitive dissonance. Now they want company in their decision so they try and convince others that their decision was a sound one.

As far as the Vortex Reticle,

It's RANGE then Wind... you need to know the vertical line you hold prior to the windage so that is why you work down the middle reticle vertically before moving horizontally. Last time I checked, Scott from Vortex has been at almost every long range shooting competition out there, more than you can say about a lot of people, especially Horus shooters. He routinely lives in the Top 10 if not the Top 5.

 

[steve123]

No it is not an exception to the rule, but Cognitive dissonance

Cognitive dissonance theory explains human behavior by positing that people have a bias to seek consonance between their expectations and reality.

They bought a scope that cost $400 more than the if they bought the same scope with a standard reticle. So if they didn't like it, they blew $400 on top of the purchase price. Rather than second guess their decision to go in this direction, they tell themselves, "now I like" and surely worked very hard to convince themselves of it.

Balancing money spent vs the reality of the poor decision is a very common factor with people who exhibit cognitive dissonance. Now they want company in their decision so they try and convince others that their decision was a sound one.

As far as the Vortex Reticle,

It's RANGE then Wind... you need to know the vertical line you hold prior to the windage so that is why you work down the middle reticle vertically before moving horizontally. Last time I checked, Scott from Vortex has been at almost every long range shooting competition out there, more than you can say about a lot of people, especially Horus shooters. He routinely lives in the Top 10 if not the Top 5.

Scott's a good guy and I certainly wouldn't want to insult him if he was the designer of that reticle, sorry man.

That being said, I sold the Razor I had because of the reason stated which is a pet peeve of mine. I don't find it any harder to glance over a little to find a line.

 

[tacguns]

I thought this was a shooting site ? but it seems to be a phycology class I don't understand why everyone always tries to push what they like on everyone else. I think you should get whatever reticle you like and damn what anyone else says. if you like the Horus reticle get it, if you like standard mil dots get it. I have S&B P4LF,Leupold H37, Leupold standard mil dots, nightforce NPR1, and just bought a brand new S&B 5-25x56 with H59. I like them all but prefer the horus. so I would pick the one you like and be done with it. as your shooting evolves so will your taste in reticles.

 

[Soct]

No it is not an exception to the rule, but Cognitive dissonance

Cognitive dissonance theory explains human behavior by positing that people have a bias to seek consonance between their expectations and reality.

They bought a scope that cost $400 more than the if they bought the same scope with a standard reticle. So if they didn't like it, they blew $400 on top of the purchase price. Rather than second guess their decision to go in this direction, they tell themselves, "now I like" and surely worked very hard to convince themselves of it.

Balancing money spent vs the reality of the poor decision is a very common factor with people who exhibit cognitive dissonance. Now they want company in their decision so they try and convince others that their decision was a sound one.

As far as the Vortex Reticle,

It's RANGE then Wind... you need to know the vertical line you hold prior to the windage so that is why you work down the middle reticle vertically before moving horizontally. Last time I checked, Scott from Vortex has been at almost every long range shooting competition out there, more than you can say about a lot of people, especially Horus shooters. He routinely lives in the Top 10 if not the Top 5.

If you are going to make insults, just do it in plain english. What you did there is not as opaque as you think.

 

[coach4christ]

Too busy for me, but my buddy loves it. It's all really just personal preference. Being that I use my comp rifles as hunting rifles, I prefer the simple NF MOAR reticle, but a lot of people don't. I would hate to try to find a deer in the h37. But then again, that's not what it was designed for.