Rifle Scopes Nightforce Mil-R ... Good Reticle for Beginner?

[Napeequa55]

Need some advice on reticle selection.

I'm a hunter and hobby shooter (elk, mule deer, blacktails, black bears in PNW). I'm interested in dipping my toes into longer-range shooting. I just moved close to a range with a 600-yard rifle range.

I want to get some higher-end glass, currently only own Leupy VX3 scopes, have owned Vortex and Nikon in the past. I've really only used duplex and BDC reticles, never used my reticle for ranging targets but I'd like to have this capability for hunting and scoped carbine courses. Also have never dialed in adjustments, just held over with the BDC (I shoot 556, 6.8 SPC and 308). I definitely want a partially illuminated reticle for low light shooting and black bear hunting where black reticles get lost.

I've looked around at a few brands and many reticles seem to complex/crowded and others too simple. I want something that will not be too much for a beginner but have the features that will help me grow.

I like the Nightforce Mil-R reticle because of the simple windage and elevation divisions and the ranging feature which doesn't require too much movement off center to use on targets of known size.

Does this seem like a reasonable reticle for my needs?

The scope I end up with will probably spend time on an AR and a 308 bolt gun.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

I have a Mil-R reticle in one of my scopes. I’ve got mixed feelings about it. For hunting and mixed use I think it’s great. The illumination is great on mine being in just the center and I enjoyed the inverted T when I first got it (SHV F1). But sometimes I find myself thinking too much when breaking down the sub tensions. There’s a lot going on with the reticle hashes and different sizing, but to be fair, I never spent enough time with it to be fast at it. If you take the time to really learn it, it should be good for you. But there are reticles that are easier to read I think. I don’t think I’d get another one now that they have the mil-c and mil-xt.

Also I’ve gotten over the ranging feature and would be happier without it in view all the time.

 

[_Windrider_]

Mil c better

 

[silentsquirter]

I would go with the Mil C reticle as well. The Mil C reticle has a floating dot crosshair, which really helps me with precision. At longer ranges, the reticle thickness of the Mil-R is somewhat of an impediment.

 

[patriot07]

If the mil-r is significantly discounted, then I'd go with it. If it's the same price as mil-c, I'd go with that. Both are good reticles, but mil-c is better

 

[Napeequa55]

I would go with the Mil C reticle as well. The Mil C reticle has a floating dot crosshair, which really helps me with precision. At longer ranges, the reticle thickness of the Mil-R is somewhat of an impediment.

Thanks I see what you mean with the floating dot. That does seem preferable vs. the Mil-R for precision when you don't want the target obscured by the crosshair.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

Thanks I see what you mean with the floating dot. That does seem preferable vs. the Mil-R for precision when you don't want the target obscured by the crosshair.

I haven't found the Mil-R center cross to be in any way a detriment, and in fact, it is the reason why it excels as a hunting reticle because you can actually see it on low power, as opposed to a tiny dot. Unless your game is to shoot 1" dots at extended ranges, the cross hair is fine. But it is not graduated with any other marks, so you have to break it down into quarters, halves, ect.

Just my .02

 

[Billl223]

I've had a SHV F1 for a couple of years. I dial elevation and hold wind and like the Mil-R reticle. Its plenty of scope for 600 yards. I never use the illumination.

 

[Thorbeast]

I haven't found the Mil-R center cross to be in any way a detriment, and in fact, it is the reason why it excels as a hunting reticle because you can actually see it on low power, as opposed to a tiny dot. Unless your game is to shoot 1" dots at extended ranges, the cross hair is fine. But it is not graduated with any other marks, so you have to break it down into quarters, halves, ect.

Just my .02

Agreed, I have two scopes with a MIL-R (MIL-C and MIL-XT were not available at the time) and my only complaint is the lack of windage references inside the first mil of windage (references only at .5 mil, .6 mil). I've never had a problem with the reticle obscuring the target. If I were buying a scope today, I would spend the extra money and get the MIL-C or MIL-XT. Shortly after buying the scope, the cost difference will be forgotten, but not reticle.

 

[Crews]

I’ve had both; agreed the Mil-C is better. BUT... if there was a deal on a Mil-R scope I’d use one again in half a heartbeat.

Only complaint was not having defined .5mil hash mark for wind. It can de done with MilR no problem, but there’s something In my brain that likes a hash mark better. Everyone’s brain is different though.

 

[phlegm]

Your use case sounds reasonable to me. For general shooting, I really like the Mil-R. I have it in a 2.5-10x and SHV F1.

For more specialized purposes like PRS and ELR, I use the Mil-C and Mil-XT.

 

[themightytimmah]

I much prefer the Mil-C for target work, but the Mil-R is great (and maybe even preferable) for hunting. At low power and shorter ranges, you can put the “box” on the vitals and squeeze the trigger. Very instinctive vs hunting for that little center dot.

The Mil-R always got me in trouble when I was trying to hit a 2 MOA or smaller target out at a distance -guessing your wind call plus guessing where on the reticle that 1/3 mil sits (for example) added a lot of uncertainty and ultimately frustration to the shot. I really hated it on my precision .22.

All of my Mil-R scopes are gone now, for better or for worse. The levy to upgrade to a Mil-C was around 5-10% per scope, there was a fire sale on Mil-Cs when the Mil-XT came out.

 

[charnicus]

One of my most favorite scopes, the NXS 2.5-10x42 with the Mil-R is about perfection. I’ve also had the Mil-R in an SHV 4-14. The thickness or thinness is right on in my opinion. Mil-C is excellent as well and comes with the benefit of the floating dot. I don’t think you’ll feel disadvantaged by running it for a first scope or long term. My first scope was a Mil-R and I still shoot with one. If your eyes like it go with it and go from there.

 

[SRPowah]

I ran the Mil-R on all 3 of my rifles in a 4-16 ATACR, 4-14 SHV, and a 2.5-10x24. I loved the reticle, and having the same reticle in all of my optics was awesome. I am not a competition shooter, so everything is simply long range steel or hunting. Simple enough reticle but very effective.

I ran the Mil-C when it first came out, and sold it within a couple weeks. I was spoiled by the SKMR for floating dots, but went back to traditional reticles. Now years later, I am going back to the Mil-C on my main long range rifle but keeping the Mil-R on my AR. I would of kept the SHV Mil-R if i hadn't sold the rifle it belonged to. It fits that general use/hunting role too well.

 

[Steel head]

For hunting use the mil R should be excellent.
I’d prefer the mil c or XT but I mostly shoot steel.

 

[jarredsc]

Have only had a bit of time behind it and it is quite nice in my eyes the center cross hair is fine and very usable

 

[Griswald]

On the Mil-R and on the MOAR reticles on the SHV 4-14x50, is the illuminated part only the + in the very middle or as you zoom to higher powers does the illuminated portion get to be more than just the center +?

 

[ofelas]

In English?

 

[Lost_Phil]

On the Mil-R and on the MOAR reticles on the SHV 4-14x50, is the illuminated part only the + in the very middle or as you zoom to higher powers does the illuminated portion get to be more than just the center +?

It only illuminates the center cross.

I have the SHV 4-14 F1 with the Mil R and like it. The Mil C and XT are better, but only come on the more expensive Night Force optics. I do wish they would add to the other SHV scopes, it is a grate hunting and a good target recital.

 

[Rocketmandb]

I would go with the Mil C reticle as well. The Mil C reticle has a floating dot crosshair, which really helps me with precision. At longer ranges, the reticle thickness of the Mil-R is somewhat of an impediment.

Agree - I have a tough time shooting with a reticle that doesn't have a floating dot.

 

[gr8fuldoug]

We just put the Nightforce NXS 5.5-22x56mm - ZeroStop - .1 Mil-Radian - Illuminated - Mil-R on sale, reduced from $2,090.00 to only $1,699.99