Thinking out loud, a reticle for the OEM crew

[J.Boyette]

My comment/response to all this is, everyone thinks they need .2-mil for accuracy, where the human eye/brain is very capable in determining/measuring accurately in smaller incriments with larger reference points, such as .5-mil. You guys need to learn to use your reticle, and how to bracket targets with reticles that have .5 or 1-mil hash marks.

Yes, having something that provides .1 or .2 scale for accurately measuring a know size target to estimate range is helpful, but let's be honest, how many people actually do that?

Most people shooting PRS type matches want target distances handed to them on a silver platter. Or they're shooting at a square range that have targets set at 100-yard increments.

I am lost here, you numbers are way, too broad. BTW, .2 is finer then .5

The goal of any competent user of a MIL reticle for ranging is down to .05 mil. that's as fine as one can go. you can not visually see any more detail then .05MIL. With a tolerance of .05MIL Between 500-700yards caliber dependent, will result in and average of 10-20% failure rate on first round impacts. As distance extends, so does the first rate impact percentage.

Running a simple chart you can see the error in distance:

Distance in yards	.05MIL +/- error
500	9 yards
550	9.9 yards
600	10.8 yards
650	11.7 yards
700	12.6 yards

The human error jumps a bit more from 750-1000yds in range estimation.

 

[Mr.BR]

Years ago i made this reticle for a 12-36X FFP Spotter so its not driven by the same requirements...higher magnifications and a wider field of view ,host of features are not needed in a scope .

 

[Alpine 338]

I am lost here, you numbers are way, too broad. BTW, .2 is finer then .5

The goal of any competent user of a MIL reticle for ranging is down to .05 mil. that's as fine as one can go. you can not visually see any more detail then .05MIL. With a tolerance of .05MIL Between 500-700yards caliber dependent, will result in and average of 10-20% failure rate on first round impacts. As distance extends, so does the first rate impact percentage.

Running a simple chart you can see the error in distance:

Distance in yards	.05MIL +/- error
500	9 yards
550	9.9 yards
600	10.8 yards
650	11.7 yards
700	12.6 yards

The human error jumps a bit more from 750-1000yds in range estimation.

Yes, I know .2 is smaller than .5

I'll try to explain it in a way even a caveman can under stand...

The human eye/brain is very capable in accurately taking a straight line distance between two points (left and right), and accurately determining the midpoint between those two points. For example, accurately determining the .25 point in a gap between .5

And I'm referring to having .2 vs .5 for wind holds, not measurements for ranging. When measuring a target size for range estimations, yes a finer resolution scale is preferred for accurate measurements, because the human eye/brain cannot accurately judge distance without defined reference points.

You mentioned human error, the human error in holding the rifle, pulling the trigger, recoil management, etc. Do you not think this can be a factor? What about the wind? Who can accurately determine the wind to with in 1-mph, not only at the shooting position, but several points during the bullets flight path, do you think that has an effect or not?

So, why not just have 0.1-mil hash marks all the way across the stadia line for those who think less (finer) is better?

 

[chevy_man]

My favorite reticle overall is the sig dev-l. Enough info, but I can look through it to spot. Small dots, but you can see them when they're needed.


I like my TMR for slower stuff, but I tend to get lost if I'm on a very tight time line.

 

[Lowlight]

I like our reticle the rest are stupid - enough said

nobody understands the human mind anymore, instead they want to entertain it, less is better everything else is dumb

 

[J.Boyette]

I like our reticle the rest are stupid - enough said

nobody understands the human mind anymore, instead they want to entertain it, less is better everything else is dumb

I still enjoy my Leupold VARI-III 4.5-14x40 with oval Mil-Dot because of this reason

 

[Quickoz]

I wont lie, trying to find a decent reticle is hard. Alot are or just look very busy and im worried about spotting impacts with the 22. I learned on the MLR and normal Mildots. I just bought a 2nd hand Vortex DB Tact to see if I didnt mind a chrissy tree reticle and dont mind FFP. Never had either before.

Im liking the reticle thats been thought out here. The circle would give a more defined centre when running on lower power I think. Its just the right amount of info but not too busy.

 

[iceng]

Know when people are young, they are all politically correct, and try to please everyone. As they get older, they get more jaded and don't put up with any BS. Like what grandma is like. She has no time for your shenanigans.

@lowlight has hit this point in his life. He calls a dumbass a dumbass, and a bad idea just that, a bad idea. He knows what he likes and goes with it.

The SH1 reticle or whatever it's called is great. If it ever goes production (which I'm sure is planned, which is why Frank asked us) will be a first step.

Embrace it people, hold on and enjoy the ride.

Vortex optics - are you seeing this ?? 6-36x56 scope, ebr(insert number here)C reticle and the SH1 option. Do it !

 

[ma smith]

Heres a scaled test image, Overlay Image is done at 15x (tpical for OEM demo)
However, here it is shown @ ~50% scale to approximate 7.5x magnification

 

[LeftyJason]

Heres a scaled test image, Overlay Image is done at 15x (tpical for OEM demo)
However, here it is shown @ ~50% scale to approximate 7.5x magnification

View attachment 7609763

Illumination is a thing that exists.

 

[Steel head]

This would be my final design at this reticle.

This reticle has 4 mils above the horizontal main stadia with 0.1 milling bars in the top mil.
I kept the 9 mils of tree height but trimmed the edges of the tree a bit to limit the width. Could add a 10th line the same width as 8 mil if needed.
Circle or no circle is a big question. Some will hate it, some will like it. I could really go either way. I think the circle would make the reticle more useable on lower powers.

0.2 hash marks are 0.1 above and below the main stadia. (0.2 mil total)
1 mil hash marks are 2.5 mils above and below the stadia (0.5mil total)
Center dot is 0.05mil (3/16" at 100yds) - this could be changed if needed. (0.085 would be a 308 bullet at 100yds)
Tree dots are 0.1 at the full mil and 0.5 at the 1/2 mil

I struggle with not having something at the 1mil hold over tree mark. Adding just a 1 mil and 1/2 mil dot might help this area but I know Frank wants it open.

View attachment 7593903View attachment 7593904

I used to like the clean 1 line idea but now I feel some wind holds there are more helpful than not.

 

[godofthunder]

Just came here to say keep the circle.

OH, and let me now when I can buy it.

 

[MarkyMark007]

To @koshkin point the lines might have to get thicker than what I have drawn them to make the lithography work. Each of the reticles below have a thicker line weight to simulate what this will look like.

Circle or No Circle (or Box or Point)​

I want you guys to see the reticle at lower power to understand what that center circle is doing for a 1st focal plane. Each of the views we have been looking at are about 16x (12 mils wide) and then 25x (8mils wide)

Remember this is a design for OEMs that ENTRY LEVEL! not top 20 Competition users. Fellas the will be hunting with thier optics too. As a Brand new Shooter looking for your first scope what did you look for?

From the comments I see new shooters say they like the circle and competition snobs hate it.

Here are 3 examples of what we could do. Circle - 0.2 Hash mark (Box) or just the end of the line (point) on 8 or 10x

Circle 8-10x​

View attachment 7594508

Box 8-10x​

View attachment 7594509

Point 8-10x​

View attachment 7594511

Circle - 25x​

View attachment 7594514

Box 25x​

View attachment 7594515

Point 25x​

View attachment 7594516


In the end the center circle is a fine aiming point on lower magnifications, its a 0.2 reference at higher magnifications. No one likes it because its not what you are used to seeing. You might have though different on Day 1.

very nice! like both circle and box.
and I would also like thicker lines so that reticle would be normaly visible at lowest magnification for center aiming and normal aiming on lines started at ~8× magnification.

for other users can be this reticle withouth center dot; just lines.

 

[iceng]

Did anyone (mods) have official word on this ?

Was it just us "dreaming" or was it a legit request, which is being looked into ?

 

[drewthebrave]

I like the circle. It reminds be a bit of the SWFA DM diamond reticle on their SFP 1-4x and 3-15x optics. It does a great job of drawing the eye to the center for quick shots at close range, but still offers a finer dot in the center when needed. Honestly, if this reticle had more .1 and .2 stadia and a very simple tree, I think SWFA would have a hit.

 

[Va_Gentleman]

Circle... Great on 8x and 25x.

The Reticle reminds me of the SCR reticle. People will not admit it, but Steiner/Burris' SCR reticle always gets a "Man, I didn't realize how good that recticle looks. Very simple and useful.

The Christmas Tree is not overbearing and can be a good useful tool for follow-up shot correction.

 

[Highbrass]

Got in on this discussion a bit late ..
I like the variations on the Christmas Tree and the circle would pull your eye to center,
If you are talking "simple" I found this G3 reticle on the Burris FullField IV for a hunting rifle and I really like it.
Kinda reminds me of the old German G4 ?
Simple and un-cluttered.

 

[Aqua Mark]

Another vote Yes on Jack's reticle with the circle.

 

[sharac]

NUff said, nuff shown, and there is a reason this is called NO#1

...

 

[LeftyJason]

NUff said, nuff shown, and there is a reason this is called NO#1View attachment 7659219...

... as in noone should use it anymore.

 

[iceng]

Hah, burn.

 

[ChrisF308]

Looks good with out lines on X-tree , I would maybe use a "L" or "T" milling romer in one of the top quadrant , like a MSR ?

 

[scatterbrains]

I would almost want to built one with the circle because I think on a 25x it will work

especially consider with illumination, don't illuminate the circle, but do the dot...

For me it's the point or circle the box is okay but boring

After seeing the box,circle and points, my eye def pulled to circle fastest. I'm in for the circle reticle.

 

[XP1K]

I wasn't hip on the circle at first but it grew on me. I like the pointed version more for paper punching but overall I think the circle will be better in low light hunting scenarios. I hunt with my stuff more than I target shoot. I don't compete at any level. Shoot some steel on occasion. Rarely get to stretch out to any distance over 300 yards. For this reason I mainly shoot 22.

I'm about to be in the market for three scopes. Really wish this reticle was available now.

 

[Jack Master]

Did anyone (mods) have official word on this ?

Was it just us "dreaming" or was it a legit request, which is being looked into ?

Check out Sitron's new reticle in thier 4-40 (maybe its not new but this is the first I have seen it.)

Looks real close

The idea was to have a reticle for the OEM scope manufactures so they have something useable. I think we'll see more low end scopes pick it up in the coming year.

 

[danatkins]

I say the one on post 29 in a 4-20 that would parallax down to 25 yards, with a zero stop something like the burris xtrii would be about a perfect scope

 

[danatkins]

Circle... Great on 8x and 25x.

The Reticle reminds me of the SCR reticle. People will not admit it, but Steiner/Burris' SCR reticle always gets a "Man, I didn't realize how good that recticle looks. Very simple and useful.

The Christmas Tree is not overbearing and can be a good useful tool for follow-up shot correction.

In all honesty the reticle is what keeps me from ditching my xtrii and getting something different lol. I love that reticle

 

[makepeace2000]

Athlon AHMR2 2-12 FFP is my current favorite for all around reticle design.

 

[danatkins]

What's that available on from them

 

[beetroot]

What's that available on from them

Helos BTR Gen2 2-12x42

 

[danatkins]

That would be nice on a mid range dmr rifle

 

[makepeace2000]

That would be nice on a mid range dmr rifle

I’m planning to put on on a 6.5 Grendel AR…sooooo.

 

[makepeace2000]

I’m planning to put on on a 6.5 Grendel AR…sooooo.

My other option is the Primary Arms 2.5-10 GLX ACSS.

 

[Bro Mo]

I like our reticle the rest are stupid - enough said

nobody understands the human mind anymore, instead they want to entertain it, less is better everything else is dumb

As I was shooting that chaos drill last weekend, I was thinking to myself about this thread and how this reticle seemed perfect.

Was that reticle picked up by any manufacturers? If not, what is the closest alternative?

 

[Lowlight]

Honestly I have been too busy to talk to anyone, but nobody has expressed interest, as well not sure who has seen it

 

[Jack Master]

As I was shooting that chaos drill last weekend, I was thinking to myself about this thread and how this reticle seemed perfect.

Was that reticle picked up by any manufacturers? If not, what is the closest alternative?

Post # 225 above - Sitron did something very close.

Athlon APRS6 is the next closest.

 

[stanley_white]

I feel duty bound to BTT this so someday I can buy the @Jack Master design with the circle.

-Stan

 

[Basher]

I feel duty bound to BTT this so someday I can buy @Jack Master’s design with the circle.

-Stan

You mean @Jack Master ?

 

[stanley_white]

You mean @Jack Master ?

When I added the ‘s to the tag it changed to another user. I just fixed it. Thank you for the correction @Basher.

-Stan