I wasn't really thinking observing splash just obscuring the target in the first place at that distance. Probably not that bad on 10-15x didn't think about dialing down. At 25x i hated how thick the H59 was.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes SHOT Show 2019 Releases
- Thread starter derk
- Start date
I wasn't really thinking observing splash just obscuring the target in the first place at that distance. Probably not that bad on 10-15x didn't think about dialing down. At 25x i hated how thick the H59 was.
It does get to be a personal preference thing, if one doesn't like something then so be it. I'm picky about reticles myself, as in all .2's, it's just what I prefer.
But I never missed because a reticle could be considered on the thick side and well I wouldn't consider .05 mil thick.
I grew up, so to speak, using H reticles, thus I got used to them.
Yeah completely fair point just preference. I hated it while i had it with my mark 5, i love the idea on paper but i didn't practice enough with it (admittedly) and started to note the thickness running it in competition. I could see myself liking the tremor 3 more than the H59 i've never used it though. The H59 was never totally obscuring a target but it was up there with my GAP milling reticle approaching pretty thick IMHO. SKMR3 on the other hand even at max power is pretty thin in regards to FFP, of course as you noted the trade off is at low power. Without illumination it's nearly useless at 3x and that's with 20/15 vision.
On the 2/10th vertical deviations being the exact same size/width be it Horus or MR4 or whatever i find myself double checking and counting mid stage without a numerical indicator to make sure. Have all As in math based classes don't consider myself dumb but under pressure in a stage i felt slower than i should've been lol. I'm sure it could be learned but i'd opt for a 2/10th vertical that has more of visual cue. Granted this is picky as hell but just what i found myself doing on a holdover stage at Providence with the H59. Take how the Mil C approaches it, i love that design. But NF wont give me a tree on it, otherwise i'd undoubtedly be running NF.
I'd like to see a more intuitive reticle come out myself.
The fault I see with the H59 is everything in the grid pattern is the same in it except that the mil lines are numbered every other line. I'm proficient with it but I get to fixating on what the wind is doing or my next move is in a stage so I accidentally use the wrong mil line sometimes, which I hate, lol.
I do have some awesome ideas on how to greatly improve on the H59 or any tree reticle for that matter!
I'm too used to .2's so I can go quickly within the mil but I see room for improvement there also. Somewhat reminds me of revolver shooting, I know exactly when I fire 6 rounds, I don't have to count anymore, it becomes second nature.
I hate mil line numbers just off the vertical crosshair so Mil C and most of the reticles out there annoy me.
I’d sell my S&B in a heartbeat for a 3-18x50 AMG since I mainly use my rifle for hunting.
I'm not holding my breath for anything new on the AMG scope front in 2019, I sure would love to see a 4-20 or 3-18 but I hesitate to hope for that since the AMG boasts a 4x erector, too much competition with 4-16 if you ask me, so hopeful that the AMG crew is working on a 5x design that is lightweight and fills the niche below the 6-24 (which is why I think 4-20 is an ideal mag range).
Agreed. For a crossover optic, I tend to think 4-20x is a better range anyway. At 4x, it's low enough to bag game without issue, and at 20x, you get a slight edge over an 18x. I know I'd be all over one!
Put me on the list for a 3-18 or equivalent AMG.
There is definitely a market for a quality rifle scope with the following requirements.
- $1500 - $2100 Street Price
- Christmas Tree Reticle EBR-7B or SKMR-3 or similar
- 3-18/4-20 or similar zoom
- Under 27 ounces
- Under 13 inches
- Illuminated
I think this fits the rapidly growing market for that hybrid hunting/long range shooting scope, the market of people building short lightweight long range builds, and the Long Range Semi-Auto market. Right now you have to get up to the $2800+ Street price for a scope that meets those requirements (ZCO, SB PM Ultra Short, Kahles K318i.
Leupold tried to hit this market with the Mark 5 3.6-18 but the reticle options and lack of illumination (without paying a big premium) have kept them from maximizing that market. I have also read mixed reviews about the Mark 5 pertaining to glass. I have almost bought a Mark 5 multiple times, but the reasons listed above have kept me from pulling the trigger.
Excited to see what Burris is doing with the XTR III. Hopefully others will follow suite...
There is definitely a market for a quality rifle scope with the following requirements.
- $1500 - $2100 Street Price
- Christmas Tree Reticle EBR-7B or SKMR-3 or similar
- 3-18/4-20 or similar zoom
- Under 27 ounces
- Under 13 inches
- Illuminated
I think this fits the rapidly growing market for that hybrid hunting/long range shooting scope, the market of people building short lightweight long range builds, and the Long Range Semi-Auto market. Right now you have to get up to the $2800+ Street price for a scope that meets those requirements (ZCO, SB PM Ultra Short, Kahles K318i.
Leupold tried to hit this market with the Mark 5 3.6-18 but the reticle options and lack of illumination (without paying a big premium) have kept them from maximizing that market. I have also read mixed reviews about the Mark 5 pertaining to glass. I have almost bought a Mark 5 multiple times, but the reasons listed above have kept me from pulling the trigger.
Excited to see what Burris is doing with the XTR III. Hopefully others will follow suite...
You guys will have to swing by the Burris booth and look at the new XTR III. It seems to fit the bill for the most common requests on this thread.
Compact at under 13", 3.3- 18 on a 7x erector system, HD glass, under 28ozs, capped windage, locking diopter, huge eyebox, $1650 MAP, and industry leading field of view.
Compact at under 13", 3.3- 18 on a 7x erector system, HD glass, under 28ozs, capped windage, locking diopter, huge eyebox, $1650 MAP, and industry leading field of view.
Last edited:
Is the tree reticle going to be released when the scope is? I know you were saying in another thread that it's tied up with lawyers and such right now.
I need some help understanding how this could be described as 7x. 3.3 x 7 = 23.1 As I see it, 18 / 3.3 = 5.45. Am I wrong? Is there some relevance to the erector being 7x on paper but 5.45x in use?
It's a 7x erector, but to preserve image quality they restrict travel to less than full range. Most optics begin to suffer in image quality if you go all the way to the top, so Burris prevents that. I think letting it top out at 20x would have been amazing, but I'm guessing 18x was optically superior than 20x. Either way, they're listening.
The new reticle will not be released with the new scopes. It's not past the paperwork and the scope is already in production. It's close though..
@bgavin these scopes are already in production in Greeley as we speak. There will be scopes on the market and available for purchase at Shot Show.
@phlegm Burris is using the 7x erector, but as you noted, they aren't using the full range of travel. They made that decision because they didnt want to negatively impact the eye box or quality of the sight picture. These were the two most commonly mentioned detriments of the XTR II, and they really wanted to eliminate that issue in this optic.
The 5.5-30x56 that is also releasing in 2019 could have been a 35x. But again, they have a goal of having good glass and a user friendly eyebox. So far, what I'm hearing is the eyebox on these is fantastic. The tube of the scope turns into a thin black ring and the field of view is the best in the industry with no tunneling.
Edit; Basher beat me to it. Thanks brother
Assembled here in the USA. Glass from Japan and parts from here and there, but assembly and all that will be in the US.
The new reticle will not be released with the new scopes. It's not past the paperwork and the scope is already in production. It's close though..
@bgavin these scopes are already in production in Greeley as we speak. There will be scopes on the market and available for purchase at Shot Show.
@phlegm Burris is using the 7x erector, but as you noted, they aren't using the full range of travel. They made that decision because they didnt want to negatively impact the eye box or quality of the sight picture. These were the two most commonly mentioned detriments of the XTR II, and they really wanted to eliminate that issue in this optic.
The 5.5-30x56 that is also releasing in 2019 could have been a 35x. But again, they have a goal of having good glass and a user friendly eyebox. So far, what I'm hearing is the eyebox on these is fantastic. The tube of the scope turns into a thin black ring and the field of view is the best in the industry with no tunneling.
Edit; Basher beat me to it. Thanks brother
The restricted magnification ratio has nothing to do with image quality. It has everything to do with maintaining full FOV and large adjustment range.
The erector is indeed capable of 7x erector ratios and I would not be surprised if they used the full range on some future models where the optics can be sized appropriately for the magnifications and reticle travel involved.
Companies do not design broad range erector systems and then neuter that range with image quality issues.
ILya
YES! Or a lighter LRHS. Sounds like the XTRIII may be one to check out. I want the weight and contrast of my VX6 with the adjustment and FFP of my LRHS!
Image quality and user friendly eyebox is what was relayed to me. And I'm sure with what they have achieved with the field of view on this optic, that they would love to maintain that.
I think what Ilya is saying, is the image quality isn't necessarily related to it being a 7x erector per se, that by over loading the erector design, that you somehow get a better image quality. But that maintaining full FOV over the entire range of magnification is related to that over sized erector system. Image quality is still (correct me if I'm wrong Ilya) largely driven by the quality of the lenses and coatings.
Again, I'm just taking a stab at what I think Ilya was saying...
Again, I'm just taking a stab at what I think Ilya was saying...
Image quality is driven by the overall design including the quality of the lenses and coatings.
All I am saying is that their 7x erector is sufficiently well designed to be utilized as such when the rest of the system constraints are up to it. In this case, in order to keep the FOV and adjustment range without going to a larger tube size, they restricted the mag range a little.
For other future models, they might be able to use the entire erector range. Time will tell.
ILya
All I am saying is that their 7x erector is sufficiently well designed to be utilized as such when the rest of the system constraints are up to it. In this case, in order to keep the FOV and adjustment range without going to a larger tube size, they restricted the mag range a little.
For other future models, they might be able to use the entire erector range. Time will tell.
ILya
