Rifle Scopes Tangent Theta reticle update request thread

[HodgdonExtreme]

The purpose of this thread is to gage interest in updating and/or improving the reticle options for TT 3-15 and 5-25 "P-series" scopes.

Currently offered is the Gen2XR, with Gen2mildot to follow.

I contend both of these are lacking in comparison to the competition, such as but not limited to the MSR.

Please post here if you think TT should revisit their reticle options, and include a BRIEF synopsis of what's wrong with the current ones, and what a new one should be like.

I'll go first.

Gen2XR - too thin, making it unusable at magnifications less than about 8x. Even too thin for "practical" rifle work at magnifications between 12-20. Gets lost easily in dark backgrounds. Should have .2mrad stadia visible at the outboard edges at 20x+ power.

Gen2mildot - size/thickness is actually pretty good. A little thick for small (tiny) targets, but quite use able at all magnifications. My gripe is it could really use some finer stadia for ranging purposes, or a little Christmas tree hold off mark action.

Honestly, bumping up the G2XR thickness to ALMOST G2MD would be a huge improvement.

MSR or similar is awesome

 

[ckmcmuso308]

MSR

 

[Luvman]

MSR & H2CMR. I won't even consider them until the GEN 2 mil dot is available.

 

[918v]

NH1 please.

 

[vivo]

I love the Gen2xr reticle, I think its great, put a scale in it and it would be perfect. I also like the MSR but its too chunky for my liking, if it was the thickness if the P4F it would be much better.

 

[HodgdonExtreme]

Fellas, we'll never get a consensus of "the" reticle to have available.

Let's try to provide constructive criticism of the current offerings, so TT has a good idea of where to go.

Nothing wrong with mentioning a reticle you like, but specify what it is in particular (that G2XR and G2MD don't have) that makes them good.

Keep the criticisms coming!

 

[K_4c]

I wish the G2MD had hollow mil dots and perhaps .2 mil increments to the 2nd mil (4 way axis)... This may seem "busy" to some but I prefer small incremental indications for fine holdover.

just my 2 cents.

 

[918v]

Well, the NH1 is simple and uncluttered. It has even mil spacing in groups of 2. I think it is easier to find the correct holdover that way.

But the best part of the NH-1 reticle is the open center. No more bitching about crosshairs thickness. You can put the bullet up a gnat's ass without straining your eye.

 

[oinco]

a reticule (nearly as K_4c mentioned) with .2mil hash marks on windage to 2-2.5mils with a thick enough outer stadia for faster/low light pickup on lower magnification would be ideal, I have been trying to force my NH-1/H2CMR's to produce a love-child to affect this but nothing yet...

maybe it is my skillset, but where I shoot wind doesn't change in .5mil increments and/or the targets are significantly smaller than 1mil.

 

[0311 Hesco]

Current offerings are lacking variety. I would like to see one similar to Vortex's EBR-2C. I think that would give a decent hybrid reticle option for those of us who like that. I am torn between the Gen II, the TT, and the Kahles, and I think that reticle offering would tip the scale.

 

[Alpine 338]

For me, the problem with the XR reticle is the Hash marks are the full Mil value, and the Dots are the Half-Mil value, which is backwards compared to other Gen 2 style Mildot Reticle's The XR is usable at high magnification, but as others have stated, too thin at low magnifications, especially during low-light conditions.k

The Premier Gen 2 Mildot is a great reticle for the 3-15 or 4-16 magnification range. I have this reticle in both Premier and S&B scopes, and feel it's the perfect reticle for a tactical environment, engaging targets under 800-meters.

As far as reticle options for the new TT 5-25, I wish they would offer the MSR. I realize they would have to pay a royalty to FinnAccuracy to use that reticle, thus increasing the price of the scope. However, if S&B, Steiner, and Kahles can offer the MSR, and keep their prices competitive, then ATI can do the same.

Another option would be to take the MOA reticle, and design a Mil reticle around that.

 

[kombayotch]

One of the biggest benefits of the Gen2 XR IS that the reticle is thin. More FFP reticles should be that thin, at the center. I would keep it that thing at the center, then have it get thicker after the first 0.5 mil hash mark, then get even thicker after the 1.0 or 1.5 mil hashes. I love the FML-1 reticle on my March 3-24x in that when you turn it down, to 3x, as you can use the thick outer posts when the center gets too thin.

 

[Lowlight]

I talked to them about Reticles, they asked as they are looking. My suggestion was to talk to the Finn Accuracy guys and use the MSR or some variant.

I see see no reason to reinvent the wheel. Why go through the effort for a minor change on what is already out there and proven.

 

[steve123]

For me, the problem with the XR reticle is the Hash marks are the full Mil value, and the Dots are the Half-Mil value, which is backwards compared to other Gen 2 style Mildot Reticle's The XR is usable at high magnification, but as others have stated, too thin at low magnifications, especially during low-light conditions.k

The Premier Gen 2 Mildot is a great reticle for the 3-15 or 4-16 magnification range. I have this reticle in both Premier and S&B scopes, and feel it's the perfect reticle for a tactical environment, engaging targets under 800-meters.

As far as reticle options for the new TT 5-25, I wish they would offer the MSR. I realize they would have to pay a royalty to FinnAccuracy to use that reticle, thus increasing the price of the scope. However, if S&B, Steiner, and Kahles can offer the MSR, and keep their prices competitive, then ATI can do the same.

Another option would be to take the MOA reticle, and design a Mil reticle around that.

That's main reason I don't like the XR.


What TT needs to do is make their own christmas tree type reticle.

With the mil number markings off to the ends so not to obstruct when holding off for wind.

With thin .2 mil lines off the center for wind holds.

With a .03 mil center dot or thinned crosshair .2 mils out from the center on both axis.

Very few guys are going to be using a 5-25 at 5x so most of the attention must be concentrated on what works best at 10-25X.

 

[Flyingbullseye]

I always felt the Gen2 XR was one of the best designed reticles out there. But I feel its implementation could have been better. So I just addressed what I've read were some of its shortcomings.

Below are 2 slightly different versions of the XR. The only difference between the two is the amount of illumination on the elevation hold over. What I did was to increase the mil dots to standard 0.2 mil size, increased the half mil hash to what should be 0.4mil (I may be a little off but go with it) and added a fine milling to both left and right windage and upper elevation. Line thickness would stay the same.



I personally like the second one with less illumination better.

 

[knockemdown]

I like what you did there with the XR, FB.

Would like to see the XR further modified, as follows.

Have 'floating' + shaped center aiming point of the Gen II MD incorporated into the XR, but make it a full 1 mil width & height (ala MSR). Keep that center + portion the same thin .025mil thickness as original XR to retain a fine aiming point for precision.

Have the main subtending reticle thickness enlarged to .04 mil, from center + to outer heavy posts.

Enlarge the 1mil dots of main reticle from .1mil to .15-.2 mil thick, to better stand out against larger .04mail main reticle

Keep .5mil vertical hashes, as is.
Keep thick outer posts, as is.

Incorporate a fine L shaped ranging portion between the 6mil-10 mil portion on vertical section.
The horizontal sections will extend out from main vertical @ 10 mil subtension to complete a 4x4mil ranging section on either side of vertical post.
This will maintain symmetry of reticle and preserve the 'christmas tree' effect of the original XR

Just thinking out loud...

 

[Flyingbullseye]

Replies in red.

I like what you did there with the XR, FB.

Would like to see the XR further modified, as follows.

Have 'floating' + shaped center aiming point of the Gen II MD incorporated into the XR, but make it a full 1 mil width & height (ala MSR). Keep that center + portion the same thin .025mil thickness as original XR to retain a fine aiming point for precision. Not really a fan of shrinking the illumination portion on the windage lines and would like to keep any open space away from the point of focus. I always feel its nice to have something and not need it all the time than to need it and not have it at all. LEO/Mil, hunters, competition shooters (the rare times its done in low light) would still benefit to having at least 2 mil each way left and right so they don't loose the reticle.

Have the main subtending reticle thickness enlarged to .04 mil, from center + to outer heavy posts. It already is on the 15X. The 25X is 0.025 thick. The 15X line thickness is perfect in my opinion for that mag.

Enlarge the 1mil dots of main reticle from .1mil to .15-.2 mil thick, to better stand out against larger .04mail main reticle. I agree with you but I think you missed the part where I mentioned I made the mil dots standard 0.2 mil.

Keep .5mil vertical hashes, as is. Mine or the original? The original is so small on a thin line that it gets lost easy, I figured at 0.4mil long its easier to see at more than just max magnification.
Keep thick outer posts, as is. Definitely.

Incorporate a fine L shaped ranging portion between the 6mil-10 mil portion on vertical section. Uploaded another one below to what I think you are referring to.
The horizontal sections will extend out from main vertical @ 10 mil subtension to complete a 4x4mil ranging section on either side of vertical post. For some reason I can't see this in my mind. A little more explanation.
This will maintain symmetry of reticle and preserve the 'christmas tree' effect of the original XR. Its a very clean and quick reticle and I didn't want to do too much and cause too much clutter.

Just thinking out loud... Always good to get another persons point of view/ideas.

knockemdown is this what you were referring to about the 6-10 mil portion?

 

[Lowlight]

The problem with Premier's GEN2 is, there is not enough separation between the lines and the dots... the main crosshair needs to be thinner.

They referenced the Klein in their Patent, the Klein is non-US so they didn't infringe but the Klein was prior to the GEN2.

The Klein is a much more useable version of the GEN 2 in my opinion.

if they do the GEN2 or any variation of it, they 1/2 mil hash marks should be taller, the main crosshair lines need to be thinner and then the dots will stand out better.

 

[knockemdown]

Replies in red.



knockemdown is this what you were referring to about the 6-10 mil portion?

View attachment 27522

Yes.
Now, take those fine milling lines you added @ 6-10 mils on the vertical axis and repeat them on a horizontal plane, perpendicular to the 10 mil subtension. That will effectively make an L shaped mil-ranging scale to bracket angular targets into.
Extending that scale on both sides will retain the symmetry of the reticle, and better allow measuring right angles on either side of a target...

Upon looking again at the XR in my 5-25x, it might be advantageous to have this L shaped fine milling scale sitting between the 4-8 mil vertical subtensions. And have the horizontal part of the 'L' shape extend perpendicular to the 8 mil dot. That would replace the lowest " branch" of the XR Christmas tree , if you will.
Moving this feature up To 4-8 miles in the reticle will insure accurate ranging can still be measured @ 25x with that portion of the reticle still visible at max magnification.

Basically trying to incorporate a fine milling scale into the reticle while retaining the Christmas tree style of the original XR.

 

[Flyingbullseye]

I'm pretty sure I know what you are trying to say. I just didn't want to add too much and clutter up the reticle. Just addressing the shortcomings and adding a fine milling on the L/R windage and top vertical was all. Less illumination on the vertical hold over makes it look more balanced.

Lowlight, are you referring to Premier's gen 2 mil dot or XR reticle? If its the XR then one could just lengthen the hashes to 0.5mil and be done. I doubt the klein has the patent on the standard mil dot size but I could be wrong.

 

[knockemdown]

OK, please excuse my amateurish Paint skillz!

Here's what I was thinking, regarding getting a fine milling scale built into the XR
Made it black, so as to contrast it from the existing reticle:

You'd still have the useability of the 'tree',and add fine milling ability @ 25x max power

Also, floated the 1mil center +

 

[Covertnoob5]

Hey guys, stumbled on to this thread. YES I KNOW ITS FROM A FEW YEARS AGO. My idea is that maybe if there is enough chatter, Tangent might take a look at other reticles.

So piggybacking on the previous posts, I would love to see something like the Ebr-7 (my favorite) reticle or even the h2cmr. Those 2 would be pretty ideal options for me.
If staying with the current Gen2XR design, then I would make the hashes and dots bigger first and foremost. Then put numbers on the horizontal stadia. And if possible some .2 mil marks for wind holds.



Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

 

[pinhead]

Nothing wrong with digging up an old thread when it's still applicable and a TT is on its way to your front door.
The EBR-7 is your favorite, even over the MR-4? You going to thin the herd?

I agree they need to offer some more reticle options at that price point. Seems like reticle choices sway buyers like me.

Vortex seems to do pretty well just offering the EBR1 & 2 in the Razor.
Kahles 624i has the SKMR2/3, AMR, MOAK.
Minox has the MR2, 4, and 5 in their ZP line.
However I understand the business side of keeping additional SKUs.

To me, it seems like it's only TT that I read comments about lack of reticle options.

 

[Delicatessen]

A gen 2xr with either a scale or the .2/.1 off in the side area ala vortex, msr would be fine as well. I am seriously considering one but I prefer other reticles. Anything like the minox mr4/skirmr 3 would all be good

 

[Delicatessen]

I actually emailed them a couple days ago about this...they said they are looking but it would be a couple years out to incorporate a new reticle. Then again I am just a random person enough people ask maybe they would speed up.

 

[hk dave]

Minox MR5, MR2 and MR4
Kahles MSR and SKMR, SKMR2, SKMR3
Vortex EBR-1C, EBR-2C

I would buy one with any of those reticles in a heartbeat... hell... I'd buy one even with a simple P4F or the old school NF MLR2.0

 

[FourT6and2]

I don't mind the Gen 2 XR. But a great update to it would be adding 0.2 stadia (at the very least, on the windage axis) and a floating center dot. Just those two simple updates would go a long way.

The Minox MR4 and Kahles SKMR reticles are very nice as well.

Oh, I also did this up in InDesign a while back for shits and giggles. BEHOLD! The "Gen 3 XR":
.
.

 

[Delicatessen]

Yeah that would be nice if they would make it, maybe fine stadia in vertical at edge to for range but that's about it

 

[delfuego]

I love the XR. I think the MSR is terrible. Only thing I would change would be 2/10th mils for wind, or even 2.5 mils. No floating dots, crosshairs or stupid milling things.

 

[HodgdonExtreme]

Since authoring this thread, I've competed for 2 years with a Kahles AMR which I've come to really really like. The H59 and Minox MR4 are also quite nice.

I'm not recommending TT add another ~$500 to the cost of an already-pricey scope by using Horus, but if they'd incorporate a 2/10 mil based holdover reticle - I'd buy one.

 

[Mute]

For me, the problem with the XR reticle is the Hash marks are the full Mil value, and the Dots are the Half-Mil value, which is backwards compared to other Gen 2 style Mildot Reticle's The XR is usable at high magnification, but as others have stated, too thin at low magnifications, especially during low-light conditions.k

The Premier Gen 2 Mildot is a great reticle for the 3-15 or 4-16 magnification range. I have this reticle in both Premier and S&B scopes, and feel it's the perfect reticle for a tactical environment, engaging targets under 800-meters.

As far as reticle options for the new TT 5-25, I wish they would offer the MSR. I realize they would have to pay a royalty to FinnAccuracy to use that reticle, thus increasing the price of the scope. However, if S&B, Steiner, and Kahles can offer the MSR, and keep their prices competitive, then ATI can do the same.

Another option would be to take the MOA reticle, and design a Mil reticle around that.

These are the exact reasons why I don't care for the XR reticle and why I've not purchased a TT scope. The mildot is ok but not much different than many other offerings out there and there are far better choices available. If they'd offer something that has scales with finer granularity and quick ranging capability (e.g. MSR or Minox MR2/5), I'd get a TT in a heartbeat.

 

[Covertnoob5]

Nothing wrong with digging up an old thread when it's still applicable and a TT is on its way to your front door.
The EBR-7 is your favorite, even over the MR-4? You going to thin the herd?

I agree they need to offer some more reticle options at that price point. Seems like reticle choices sway buyers like me.

Vortex seems to do pretty well just offering the EBR1 & 2 in the Razor.
Kahles 624i has the SKMR2/3, AMR, MOAK.
Minox has the MR2, 4, and 5 in their ZP line.
However I understand the business side of keeping additional SKUs.

To me, it seems like it's only TT that I read comments about lack of reticle options.

While I do like the MR4, I prefer the EBR-7 for the center cross. But I do think the MR4 is great as well. I'd be happy with a SKMR3 as well.



Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

 

[Covertnoob5]

If they updated it to that "Gen3XR" I'd be completely satisfied. That looks like it could be a GREAT reticle!


Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

 

[FourT6and2]

If they updated it to that "Gen3XR" I'd be completely satisfied. That looks like it could be a GREAT reticle!


Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

Maybe I should license it haha!

 

[mrtoyz]

I wish I could upgrade my PM2's to your Gen3XR....

 

[MOUNTIC]

I emailed them last week about possible reticle change. They said "Thank you for your interest in Tangent Theta! There are no immediate plans to introduce new reticles in the TT line. Currently, we are selling these products faster than they can be produced with the reticle options that are available."

Contact the dealer nearest you to place your order, https://armament.com/find-dealer

So I ordered one anyway.. Went with the Gen2XR and hopefully it will suit me well.

 

[Covertnoob5]

I emailed them last week about possible reticle change. They said "Thank you for your interest in Tangent Theta! There are no immediate plans to introduce new reticles in the TT line. Currently, we are selling these products faster than they can be produced with the reticle options that are available."

Contact the dealer nearest you to place your order, [video]https://armament.com/find-dealer[/video]

So I ordered one anyway.. Went with the Gen2XR and hopefully it will suit me well.

I've gotten really used to the Gen2XR recently. So much so that today when I was shooting my AMG it took me a minute to get used to the ebr-7.
Not to say the Gen2XR couldn't be improved because it certainly can imo, but it's not bad by any stretch.


Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

 

[Nathanm40a1]

I'd love to see an H59, but I doubt that would happen...

 

[Covertnoob5]

I wouldn't mind an h59 but that would drive up the price a good bit for an already super expensive scope.


Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

 

[Long Range 338]

I talked to them about Reticles, they asked as they are looking. My suggestion was to talk to the Finn Accuracy guys and use the MSR or some variant.

I see see no reason to reinvent the wheel. Why go through the effort for a minor change on what is already out there and proven.

+1 for the MSR

 

[Covertnoob5]

I would be game for an msr as well, but would prefer something with .2 mil marks.


Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

 

[knockemdown]

Funny, I'd actually like to see the functionally simplistic & lovely Gen 2XR reticle sourced out to other manufacturers, not the other way around...

 

[FourT6and2]

Funny, I'd actually like to see the functionally simplistic & lovely Gen 2XR reticle sourced out to other manufacturers, not the other way around...

Other companies already do use it. Not a lot. But I think S&B and maybe one or two others?

 

[mrtoyz]

Yes indeed S&B does do a Gen2xr

 

[Covertnoob5]

USO also uses it. I don't think it's a bad reticle, but I think it could definitely be improved upon or updated. Especially for those wanting to use it in a competitive setting.


Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.

 

[knockemdown]

Its already well known that S&B & USO offer(ed) the 2XR, I assumed that as a given. My fault for not being crystal clear on reiterating that fact.

Considering that a few companies already use/have used the 2XR in their own line, is specifically why I'd like to see other companies do the same.
Heck, if Nightforce did the 2XR, or a mildly modified variation of it, that'd prolly be all I'd own...

 

[700smooth]

im game for a gen 2 xr

 

[FourT6and2]

im game for a gen 2 xr

I think the point of this thread went a little over your head.

 

[Dag34]

Mil-c and h59, or msr and amr

Those 2 combos would be perfect offerings.

 

[Covertnoob5]

Mil-c and h59, or msr and amr

Those 2 combos would be perfect offerings.

A Mil-C variation would be really great as well.


Covert is as Covert does.

Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.