Hey guys, I just started shooting local prs matches this year and have been learning a ton and having a blast. My current optic is an older Steiner 4x16x50 military. Its built like a tank, tracks well, and has really nice glass. However, I find the G2 mil dot reticle to be kind of annoying. It seems really thick at higher magnification and obscures a lot of the target at longer distances. I've had the opportunity to look through some of the open center tree style reticle such as the razor's ebrc2 and really like them. I was able to check out the leupold mk5 at bass pro the other day and really liked it, however it had the tmr reticle which I didn't care for. I'm looking to get some feedback from someone running the CCH reticle and if they like having the open centers on all the hash marks, if they feel this is advantageous, and how they like it in general compared to the others such as the ebrc2, skmr3, devl, etc. Thanks in advance.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Looking for feedback on Leupold CCH reticle
- Thread starter jsel10
- Start date
I've got a Mk5 5-25 with the CCH reticle. Before going to that reticle, I have thousands of rounds through rifles with H59s. I thought the CCH would be kind of a "pared down" Horus without some of the useless stuff (IMO) like the mover holds and the steps, etc. The more I use the CCH, the more I like it it. It's taking a bit of getting used to because it's definitely a finer reticle. Also, going from 0.2mil hashes to 0.25 and the open centers also makes it seem "more open" if that makes sense? The only downside I've found so far was that against dark backgrounds, the reticle didn't stand out as much as the thicker H59 but I've since gotten used to it. At the end of the day, I think you can kind of get used to any reticle, provided that it's the type that works for how you think (ie xmas tree, grid, etc). I like mine enough that I've got a second one coming.
Ditto on pretty much everything stated above. I like the Horus grid reticles a lot and I actually prefer the cleaner appearance of the CCH for practical use. I haven't had an opportunity to use the mover holds, but it's a nice feature I'm glad that it's there. Because of the reduced hash marks and openness at the .25 intervals, it appears less cluttered than a Horus grid and I didn't find the .25 hash marks difficult to adjust to. Bottom line is I'd likely choose the CCH over paying premium for a Horus. What would make it even better is if Leupold would offer an illuminated CCH that only lit up at maybe .5 mil increments.
It’s .25 hashes killed it for me.
I haven’t met anyone who think in hundredths for holds. Stick with .1, .2, .5, and whole mils in a reticle.
I haven’t met anyone who think in hundredths for holds. Stick with .1, .2, .5, and whole mils in a reticle.
i should have mine tuesday and will most likely be shooting a match with it saturday. i've had to bracket targets with every scope i've ever owned so the .25 shouldn't be an issue
I recently picked up a Mk 5. I've used Horus reticles for years so I'm comfortable with them, ended up going with the Tremor3, but only after a serious look at the CCH. I'd like to hear more feedback on it as well!
shot it this weekend in a night match after only having it mounted for a couple hours. made a few mistakes and it took longer for me to shoot the stages then it normally would because i had trouble finding the correct spot for my holds but if the reticle had been illuminated i wouldn't have had any issues. all in all i really like it and the little bit of time i spent behind it in daylight hours i had zero issues with it
Similar threads
