what reticle do yall prefer for purely a hunting scope? im thinking about getting a conquest and can choose between a z plex, #4 and rapid z reticle. i dont want the rapid z in a sfp scope that will be used only for hunting. ive heard a lot of ppl say they prefer the #4, but imo, it covers up a lot of the sight picture. what do yall like?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes reticle choice for hunting
- Thread starter jackh
- Start date
Re: reticle choice for hunting
I like #4 s in general but bought and subsequently returned a conquest with one as it was as you said TOO thick
I like #4 s in general but bought and subsequently returned a conquest with one as it was as you said TOO thick
Re: reticle choice for hunting
I use the rapid z most of the time, but primarily shoot with the center crosshair. I think it is thin enough and I have the back up of the rapid z if ever needed. I also have the #20 and I think it is plenty thin enough to shoot at distance with.
I use the rapid z most of the time, but primarily shoot with the center crosshair. I think it is thin enough and I have the back up of the rapid z if ever needed. I also have the #20 and I think it is plenty thin enough to shoot at distance with.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
I'm with PGS. It's hard to beat a Mil reticle for hunting because the targets are usually big enough, and the ranges short enough, to make full use of what the mil dot system was designed to do.
I'm with PGS. It's hard to beat a Mil reticle for hunting because the targets are usually big enough, and the ranges short enough, to make full use of what the mil dot system was designed to do.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm with PGS. It's hard to beat a Mil reticle for hunting because the targets are usually big enough, and the ranges short enough, to make full use of what the mil dot system was designed to do. </div></div>
+2
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm with PGS. It's hard to beat a Mil reticle for hunting because the targets are usually big enough, and the ranges short enough, to make full use of what the mil dot system was designed to do. </div></div>
+2
Re: reticle choice for hunting
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jig Stick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Leupold TMR.....which is basically mildots
</div></div>Except without the dots.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jig Stick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Leupold TMR.....which is basically mildots
</div></div>Except without the dots.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PGS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a look at a GenII. </div></div>I would have been satisfied with a Gen I Antelope.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PGS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a look at a GenII. </div></div>I would have been satisfied with a Gen I Antelope.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
I should add to my previous post that since this is a hunting scope with max shooting to 600 yards, you don't need zero stop or high speed turrets saving quite a bit of money. Also, if you consider the NF, the NPR-2 is probably the best choice..I speak from experience..
I should add to my previous post that since this is a hunting scope with max shooting to 600 yards, you don't need zero stop or high speed turrets saving quite a bit of money. Also, if you consider the NF, the NPR-2 is probably the best choice..I speak from experience..
Re: reticle choice for hunting
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PGS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a look at a GenII. </div></div>I would have been satisfied with a Gen I Antelope.
</div></div>
this one is a Gen 2.5, he lacks mass and curl !
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PGS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a look at a GenII. </div></div>I would have been satisfied with a Gen I Antelope.
this one is a Gen 2.5, he lacks mass and curl !
Re: reticle choice for hunting
Depending on what I'm hunting, I have no reservations about using a mildot or Z-plex. For varmint hunting, like a nice, fine reticle. For big game, a mildot is fine, and can aide in ranging or used for hold-overs.
Depending on what I'm hunting, I have no reservations about using a mildot or Z-plex. For varmint hunting, like a nice, fine reticle. For big game, a mildot is fine, and can aide in ranging or used for hold-overs.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
To PGS and Graham, do you guys actually range game with your mildot scopes? I would love to do this for deer but was under the impression that there was a lot of variances in size which would make for a lot of error. How far are you comfortable shooting an animal ranging with mildots, and where did you get the numbers you use for sizes? Right now when I practice ranging I use 46cm for the height of a deer chest to back but I don't know how much that measurement typically varies. Thanks.
To PGS and Graham, do you guys actually range game with your mildot scopes? I would love to do this for deer but was under the impression that there was a lot of variances in size which would make for a lot of error. How far are you comfortable shooting an animal ranging with mildots, and where did you get the numbers you use for sizes? Right now when I practice ranging I use 46cm for the height of a deer chest to back but I don't know how much that measurement typically varies. Thanks.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Canis Latrans</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To PGS and Graham, do you guys actually range game with your mildot scopes? I would love to do this for deer but was under the impression that there was a lot of variances in size which would make for a lot of error. How far are you comfortable shooting an animal ranging with mildots, and where did you get the numbers you use for sizes? Right now when I practice ranging I use 46cm for the height of a deer chest to back but I don't know how much that measurement typically varies. Thanks. </div></div>
It's nice to have the ability to mil range if you need to while hunting. I haven't had to yet. I've got a pretty good range finder.
Are you a coyote guy?.....Had to ask after seeing your handle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Canis Latrans</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To PGS and Graham, do you guys actually range game with your mildot scopes? I would love to do this for deer but was under the impression that there was a lot of variances in size which would make for a lot of error. How far are you comfortable shooting an animal ranging with mildots, and where did you get the numbers you use for sizes? Right now when I practice ranging I use 46cm for the height of a deer chest to back but I don't know how much that measurement typically varies. Thanks. </div></div>
It's nice to have the ability to mil range if you need to while hunting. I haven't had to yet. I've got a pretty good range finder.
Are you a coyote guy?.....Had to ask after seeing your handle.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
I respect coyotes for their ability to adapt and to survive. I don't hunt them if that is what you're asking (but I don't look down on those who do).
I respect coyotes for their ability to adapt and to survive. I don't hunt them if that is what you're asking (but I don't look down on those who do).
Re: reticle choice for hunting
When you mentioned a #4 I was thinking you meant for low light use if you didn't have an illuminated Reticle.
I agree on the mildot use for holdovers vs a "calibrated" bdc type reticle.
The issue most tactical scopes that have a lit mildot Reticle is that they are too bright for real lowlight hunting.
When you mentioned a #4 I was thinking you meant for low light use if you didn't have an illuminated Reticle.
I agree on the mildot use for holdovers vs a "calibrated" bdc type reticle.
The issue most tactical scopes that have a lit mildot Reticle is that they are too bright for real lowlight hunting.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
You mentioned the rapid z reticles as an option? Just in case you don't know, (I didn't and I wish I had), Zeiss has a reticle calculator on their web site that you can use to find the best match for your ballistics. I didn't read the info about thier rapid z 1000 being for a .308 shooting a 168gr bullet and found out the dumbass way that it didn't work worth a darn for a .243 shooting a 95gr Berger. Might help you out in your decision making.
You mentioned the rapid z reticles as an option? Just in case you don't know, (I didn't and I wish I had), Zeiss has a reticle calculator on their web site that you can use to find the best match for your ballistics. I didn't read the info about thier rapid z 1000 being for a .308 shooting a 168gr bullet and found out the dumbass way that it didn't work worth a darn for a .243 shooting a 95gr Berger. Might help you out in your decision making.
Re: reticle choice for hunting
ya i am trying to stay away from any type of BDC reticle just because the ones i have seen are calibrated for a specific round and dont work a damn with something else you might want to use.
i have heard from more than one person that the #4 on the zeiss is just too thick too far in to be real usable. if i get a zeiss, it will probably be a conquest 3-9x50 with z plex.
maybe i should go more tactical and get a SS 3-9 with the new mil quad reticle? anyone know how the glass in the SS compares to conquests?
ya i am trying to stay away from any type of BDC reticle just because the ones i have seen are calibrated for a specific round and dont work a damn with something else you might want to use.
i have heard from more than one person that the #4 on the zeiss is just too thick too far in to be real usable. if i get a zeiss, it will probably be a conquest 3-9x50 with z plex.
maybe i should go more tactical and get a SS 3-9 with the new mil quad reticle? anyone know how the glass in the SS compares to conquests?
Re: reticle choice for hunting
I'll take a BDC reticle anyday. If it doesn't fit the intuitive hundred yd. intervals, just recalibrate for the trajectory you're using. Here's a BDC reticle set up for a 22 Long Rifle trajectory that i adapted for use with an an AR shooting the 65 JLK Low Drag at 3050 mv.--
I'll take a BDC reticle anyday. If it doesn't fit the intuitive hundred yd. intervals, just recalibrate for the trajectory you're using. Here's a BDC reticle set up for a 22 Long Rifle trajectory that i adapted for use with an an AR shooting the 65 JLK Low Drag at 3050 mv.--
Re: reticle choice for hunting
If you're hunting with the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer, all you need is cross hairs and a new barrel every time you pull the trigger!
http://www.reloadersnest.com/query_bw.asp?CaliberID=173&BulletWeight=50
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Eargesplitten_Loudenboomer
If you're hunting with the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer, all you need is cross hairs and a new barrel every time you pull the trigger!
http://www.reloadersnest.com/query_bw.asp?CaliberID=173&BulletWeight=50
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Eargesplitten_Loudenboomer
Re: reticle choice for hunting
if you had to chose between #4 and zplex for a 3-9x50 conquest for low light and night hunting inside 300 yds, which would you chose? i will be hunting pigs, coyotes/foxes and paper. i dont want the zplex to be too coarse, but im afraid of the posts coming too far in and the center of the reticle being too thin for night hunting with the #4.
i guess i should get the zplex since i wont exactly be doing precision shooting or long range varminting with this scope
if you had to chose between #4 and zplex for a 3-9x50 conquest for low light and night hunting inside 300 yds, which would you chose? i will be hunting pigs, coyotes/foxes and paper. i dont want the zplex to be too coarse, but im afraid of the posts coming too far in and the center of the reticle being too thin for night hunting with the #4.
i guess i should get the zplex since i wont exactly be doing precision shooting or long range varminting with this scope
Re: reticle choice for hunting
Damned hard to beat an Accupoint 3-9x40 mildot / green dot for a hunting scope
light, glass on par with the Conquest, perfectly lit small dot
I have used one quite a bit and will probably run on my Sako 25-06 for this upcoming season.
I like tactical scopes but for hunting and only having a split second or two to get on a nice buck at 300 yards through the trees or across a 20ft clearing, I am going back to a flat shooting gun and a simple, non knob twisting scope and run a 250 yard zero:
Damned hard to beat an Accupoint 3-9x40 mildot / green dot for a hunting scope
light, glass on par with the Conquest, perfectly lit small dot
I have used one quite a bit and will probably run on my Sako 25-06 for this upcoming season.
I like tactical scopes but for hunting and only having a split second or two to get on a nice buck at 300 yards through the trees or across a 20ft clearing, I am going back to a flat shooting gun and a simple, non knob twisting scope and run a 250 yard zero:
Similar threads
