They all have their pros and cons. I ran a T3 for one season, and dropped it. For me it was too cluttered, same H58/59. Have since started using the T2, which is somewhat less cluttered. Is it perfect? No. Are there things I would change in it? Yes. However, for me it's the best one out there (so far).
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Tremor 3 Reticle
- Thread starter Rterlaje
- Start date
Fair enough.
That certainly happens more often than it ought to.
No it was totally fun trying to talk on second round hits mixing mil corrections and wind calls.. uh you missed L.5 but you can’t hold that without guessing so let’s go.. it’s a Right 6mph wind, hold that.
That thing sucked.
i think maybe the difference you see is between a sporting reticle and a tactical reticle.
in our common civilian applications, we mostly engage static targets where we only have to account for wind, perhaps at times engaging a moving target at human walking or running speeds.
in a tactical environment, you might need to engage a vehicle moving at a decent rate of speed. holding in blank areas makes corrections much more difficult.
depending on the rifle you are using, you might also run out of dial adjustment, and have to holdover just 1-2 mil on your reticle, but also need to hold for wind at 800 yards.
i have no doubts when you say the extended marks on the H59 is useless to you, and this might also be true for most casual shooters.
for me, i don't have lots of different guns for different purposes, and i needed my scope to work for any possible application, no matter how unlikely it might be as a civilian.
hey, if there isn't a tree reticle training game, somebody should make one.
it would be fun.
it would be fun.
The vehicle speed issue can still be handled with something like the G3 pretty easily. Even at 2 mils of elevation (400-500 yards) I can easily hold a large lead on something the size of an IPSC by using the main horizontal - and if I have the 2 seconds or less to crank in 2 MIL of elevation, then it's moot.
With 20 mil of elevation on the dial from a 100y zero, I'm not running out of elevation any time soon.
this is the direction they are going
The dots seem kinda redundant to me, but at least it's not quite as obnoxious as the T3 to me.
perhaps if you can learn to ignore an H59 except for when you are using it, you can learn to put anything in the back of your mind and pull it to the front when you need it.
when i look through the scope, i am not thinking about all the marks.
when i look through the scope, i am not thinking about all the marks.
this is the direction they are going
Frank, is there a certain scope manufacturer involved?
The dots on the ends or the dots between the 1 mil grids? The dots between give you a finer reference than holding in no mans land. The extra dots on the end are for wind holds. Yeah if you're holding 1mil elevation you aren't going to need 3 mils of wind most likely, but have you ever shot ELR? What do you do when you've dialed out all the available elevation in the scope, need to hold a mil or few in the reticle, and your G3 reticle only has a wind reference bar out to .5mil.... There's a lot more than .5mil of wind out that that distance.
These grid reticles aren't designed solely for people who are shooting to 1000 yards on a square range, that's where your head is stuck at. The G3 reticle leaves a lot to be desired.
The dots between the horizontals.
I have gone out to 2k with my SAUM - without much success, as spotting a 6.5 at that distance is a pain in the ass, but still. In the situation you described, I'd either dial wind or reduce the dialed elevation to put me in the fatter part of the tree. Either one is a workable solution for me, and doesn't need the huge grid to be usable.
how awesome for you!
glad you found a reticle that wasn't too overwhelming for you.
That's so that when you're holding both elevation and wind and your drop isn't an even mil or very close to it that you have a reference mark out there. Really not that hard to understand or see why it's useful.
Maybe you'd have better success if you weren't so opposed to better gear... Just a thought.
Yeah, that T3 is really going to make it easier to spot a dinky little 147 at 2k. Hah.
Eventually I'll get off my ass and build a 300PRC for that shit. When I do, it'll still have an XRS2 with a G3 on it.
I gotta agree with Frank, you either instantly like the reticle or hate it. It took me several years before I would entertain the thought of it but I did my research before hand and by the time I got behind the reticle I already knew what I was looking at and how it worked. I immediately started sending rounds down range and was very successful with it. Prior Proper Planning...
I really feel most guys overthink what the reticle is and crawl behind it for the first time on a buddies gun and say man thats cluttered I hate it. But its nothing that hasn't been out for years previously, just with wind dots added. Don't like the wind dots? Then you don't have to use them. It's still a H59 reticle.
The wind dots take the need to calculate wind drift out of the firing solution. If you watch the calibration video you'll find that most of the efficient short action calibers will end up with a 4mph wind dot value. How can that be? Well it's based on time of flight technically, but what it breaks down to is that each dot stands for 4mph of wind. If your ballistic app tells you you need 6 mils and you have a 4mph wind, then use the 6 mil line and hold into the wind 1 dot. If you need 10.5 mils with a 12mph wind, hold on the 10.5 line and use the 3rd dot. That's it.
It's simply a grid in front of your face. I shoot a 6mm at some pretty ridiculous distances. Sure there are impacts that I can't detect, but I don't blame it on the reticle. I watched a lot of different calibers sail into a brush berm at a match last weekend, with MANY sets of eyes on the target, looking thru everything from Athlon to Swarovski, and splash was not seen. It's just part of the game.
I really feel most guys overthink what the reticle is and crawl behind it for the first time on a buddies gun and say man thats cluttered I hate it. But its nothing that hasn't been out for years previously, just with wind dots added. Don't like the wind dots? Then you don't have to use them. It's still a H59 reticle.
The wind dots take the need to calculate wind drift out of the firing solution. If you watch the calibration video you'll find that most of the efficient short action calibers will end up with a 4mph wind dot value. How can that be? Well it's based on time of flight technically, but what it breaks down to is that each dot stands for 4mph of wind. If your ballistic app tells you you need 6 mils and you have a 4mph wind, then use the 6 mil line and hold into the wind 1 dot. If you need 10.5 mils with a 12mph wind, hold on the 10.5 line and use the 3rd dot. That's it.
It's simply a grid in front of your face. I shoot a 6mm at some pretty ridiculous distances. Sure there are impacts that I can't detect, but I don't blame it on the reticle. I watched a lot of different calibers sail into a brush berm at a match last weekend, with MANY sets of eyes on the target, looking thru everything from Athlon to Swarovski, and splash was not seen. It's just part of the game.
I wonder if they had the same arguments decades back, when Duplex users were asked about Mil-Dot reticles... lol
lol YES. We call them bubs now.
Depends on how low your bottom end is and what your environment is. My 3.6-18 Mark 5 is admittedly hard to pick up at 3.6 in the woods. My 5-20 Ultra Short is small but usable at 5x. My 5-25 PM2 gets pretty small under 7x. FFP is what it is in a low mag hunting role.
Depends on how low your bottom end is and what your environment is. My 3.6-18 Mark 5 is admittedly hard to pick up at 3.6 in the woods. My 5-20 Ultra Short is small but usable at 5x. My 5-25 PM2 gets pretty small under 7x. FFP is what it is in a low mag hunting role.
I could live with that but a bit less bold tree would be my preference.this is the direction they are going
I do understand why it is bold though, that probably shows pretty well at lower magnification.
One of my buddies and I hit a range about a year ago that goes to 2k+. He took his 6.5CM and I had a 6.5 SAUM. We both got hits at a mile, but I never had any luck further than that before we got chased out by weather. I hit the same target earlier this year with my 6 Creedmoor in better conditions. Anything that missed the berm was all but impossible to spot (largely due to layout), and even stuff hitting the berm or steel was hard to see for much of it. Those little 6-6.5 pills don't have much ass left at a mile or more, even driving 147s at 3125. It doesn't help when you're functionally at sea level, either.
Thats why I didn’t build a 6.5 PRC or Saum.
The 180’s in my 7 saum are a fair bit easier to spot and cost the same.
Thursday I was shooting a bit past 1800 and we were able to spot hits and misses pretty well even with wet ground.
Mine is just a spare bolt/barrel for my Tempest, and I built it for belly/field matches with more wind that what we usually get at SE matches, not really to shoot out to a mile or more. Flinging 147s at 3k, it's great in that role, and splash is really hard to miss inside 1300 or so. I've considered playing with the 135 ATips in it and loading them LOOOONG and seeing how strupidly fast I can get them in a single feed length, then taking them back out to a mile or more for S&Gs.
Eventually I will get off my ass and get a LA Tenacity and a 300PRC barrel spun up for it, though. 225s at 2950 are still supersonic at 1900+ down here at sea level.
What are the downward arrows at 1.6 and 3.2 mils for?this is the direction they are going
the CCH is a hunting scope, so i assume those are ranging marks, since 1.6mil = 18" at ~300 yards.
This is the reticle I’m using on my 260 right now.
I actually like this Horus reticle
the H25.
It good practice to not dial, just holds.
I actually like this Horus reticle
the H25.
It good practice to not dial, just holds.
Every piece of gear we use is obviously subject to user preference, but reticles take the cake.
I still appreciate these threads...because, despite the inevitable digression into emotions and forgetting these are opinions, the threads contain valuable information about WHY people like/dislike particular reticles. As heytonyman mentioned, this builds a database you can reference against your own known likes/dislikes...and narrow your testing/purchase decisions.
One aspect of T3 (or any 'busy' tree reticle) discussions I find interesting is how you'll hear both of the following:
1. "The T3 doesn't do anything you can't do with a simple mil-based reticle...it's basically for those that don't have the time, brains, or inclination to properly learn holds with a non-tree reticle."
2. "Sure, with enough time and training, anyone can learn to use the T3."
Those 2 sentiments are on opposite sides of the same argument. Which reticle type requires more training? (answer: yes)
Lastly, I'm in the 'have the T3 and like it' camp. That said, I also like my H2CMR. Makes range time new and interesting. How boring would our safes be if every rifle/optic/reticle was a clone of the one next to it.
Anyways, these are good problems to have... a market with large selection of great optics and tons of reticle options. The obvious burden is finding yours.
I still appreciate these threads...because, despite the inevitable digression into emotions and forgetting these are opinions, the threads contain valuable information about WHY people like/dislike particular reticles. As heytonyman mentioned, this builds a database you can reference against your own known likes/dislikes...and narrow your testing/purchase decisions.
One aspect of T3 (or any 'busy' tree reticle) discussions I find interesting is how you'll hear both of the following:
1. "The T3 doesn't do anything you can't do with a simple mil-based reticle...it's basically for those that don't have the time, brains, or inclination to properly learn holds with a non-tree reticle."
2. "Sure, with enough time and training, anyone can learn to use the T3."
Those 2 sentiments are on opposite sides of the same argument. Which reticle type requires more training? (answer: yes)
Lastly, I'm in the 'have the T3 and like it' camp. That said, I also like my H2CMR. Makes range time new and interesting. How boring would our safes be if every rifle/optic/reticle was a clone of the one next to it.
Anyways, these are good problems to have... a market with large selection of great optics and tons of reticle options. The obvious burden is finding yours.
Yeah you should be carful about quoting other people. In my last Afghan trip my teams averaged engagement was right around 1600m and I think the closest engagement was 750ish. Point being is its vary AO dependent and drawing a conclusion from one second hand source isn't useful. Based off of my personal experience and the data reported to us by returning students I submitted a proposal in 2015 at the 1st SFG(A) SFSC to restart and expand the HTI/ELR program, and was approved to do so. Specifically because of the operational requirements of SOF snipers to effectively engage targets within the 1000-2000m envelope.
As the T3 goes as a reticle, its great for the intended application. Yes there is a lot of stuff going on and it can be very overwhelming to those inexperienced with it but if you put it the time, it can be come very quick. The T3 is my preferred reticle for the 0-600m dirt squirrel game. Running the H59 and the T3 side by side I found my average speed with the H59 was about 43 seconds per target ,across 10 targets (B zone steel) placed randomly from 150- 600m, with 9/10 first round hits. The T3 cut those slits to about 16 seconds with 10/10. Wind dots work, everyone seems to make a huge deal about calibrating. The simplest approach I've found is just take the first number that appears in your G1 BC and that the value of your first wind dot in mph.
Example: 175g SMK (going any reasonable velocity a 18" to 24" will produce) usually lands you in a 0.475ish. So your first number in that BC was "4" so your first wind dot is 4 mph, the second is 8 mph, etc. Literally just scale the dots value to your wind speed and you're doing to be really close inside of that first 10 mils of elevation.
That said I never really warmed to the T2.
Glad to see you around. Some of the idiots here run off the people with the most knowledge.
Man, you guys make me feel like a dumbass! I've got a little experience using Mil-dot reticles, but I have to admit, after reading this thread, I understand the Horus reticles much better now. I had apprehensions about going to a "Tree" reticle, when I wanted to get away from a simple BDC type. I did realize that with Mil/MOA reticles, math was going to be involved and I'm fairly proficient with it, but I have to say, the Horus reticles are way more advanced/busy, than what I feel I could adapt to. I would, IMHO anyways, be totally lost deciphering every dot/hash in that thing, especially with a mover. My hat's off to you "operators", that can use this type of reticle and use it proficiently/quickly. I do want to say it again, thanks for the eye-opening info. and it's given me a better understanding of this reticle. Carry on! Mac
Yeah I've been gone tripping balls in the jungle on psychedelics, with shaman from an obscure Amazonian tribe, who speaks in a language I cannot understand, about mysteries I cannot comprehend.
And yet I come back to this place...
I'm not sure what scares folks about the Tremor 3 so much, it can be learned with little bit of instruction and some hands on. But I also understand it's not for everybody.
I can see Lowlight's reasoning and appreciate his wealth of knowledge, however, I do like the T3 that Todd came up with...
I have always enjoyed learning from the greats.
To me, it is a shame that they don't seem to get along, both guys are really solid dudes.
But really, use what you know, that's gonna be the best choice.
I have always enjoyed learning from the greats.
To me, it is a shame that they don't seem to get along, both guys are really solid dudes.
But really, use what you know, that's gonna be the best choice.
Thanks for this - I’ve been thinking about a Mark 5 Tremor 3 and have been doing a lot of reading to find this type of information.
I don’t mind shelling out for the illumination...I’m curious if anyone has a picture of an illuminated Tremor 3 at low power against a wooded background? To clarify, at low power my concern is the main crosshair, not the grid.
I had the chance to look through the CCH in person and can’t imagine it would be very useful at the lowest power setting, and if I’m not mistaken the main lines on the Tremor 3 are the same thickness at .05 mil.
You’re not going to get bright enough illumination in any magnified optic to be daylight bright without washing out the entire image. Just the nature of the beast. They aren’t red-dots. Fortunately Leupold does their illumination right On the T3, and the entire reticle is illuminated, not just the center crosshairs.
The concern you have with picking up the reticle on low power against a dark background is what has plagued FFP reticles since the advent and is why SFP still rules the hunting market.
My 3.6-18 non-illuminated:
The concern you have with picking up the reticle on low power against a dark background is what has plagued FFP reticles since the advent and is why SFP still rules the hunting market.
My 3.6-18 non-illuminated:
Interesting thread. I try to find out as much as I can about things I'm interested in &, peoples opinions can be very helpful.
Since I am keen on purchasing a Schmidt & bender with T3 ret, I've had quite a lot of time to carefully consider the information available. I have an FFP scope with illuminated tree ret &, I just can't see why people have the opinion that the T3 is significantly more cluttered. All the pics through the scope that I've seen don't appear to me to be much different in comparison to any other Tree type ret.
I have a question that I'd like to see some opinions on though.
Q: What would happen if say, the PRS changed their rules so that all targets in all stages had to be laser ranged by the shooter during competition &, no pre-stage DOPE or range info allowed?
My suspicion is that, the T3 would become far more desirable, particularly if time was of importance.
If such a scenario were to eventuate, would it be possible to remain competitive without a T3?
Since I am keen on purchasing a Schmidt & bender with T3 ret, I've had quite a lot of time to carefully consider the information available. I have an FFP scope with illuminated tree ret &, I just can't see why people have the opinion that the T3 is significantly more cluttered. All the pics through the scope that I've seen don't appear to me to be much different in comparison to any other Tree type ret.
I have a question that I'd like to see some opinions on though.
Q: What would happen if say, the PRS changed their rules so that all targets in all stages had to be laser ranged by the shooter during competition &, no pre-stage DOPE or range info allowed?
My suspicion is that, the T3 would become far more desirable, particularly if time was of importance.
If such a scenario were to eventuate, would it be possible to remain competitive without a T3?
Never going to happen, but I'll play along for the sake of field matches exist outside of PRS
Yes, because
Laser rangefinders are MUCH faster then trying to get super stable and estimating with the reticle. All that ends up happening is that guys find a way to mount it to their rifle or carry a good tripod much more often. With connectivity software that's been around for damn near decades (see Bushnell's CONX) the rangefinder could tell you everything you need to know.
The T3 really isn't much different than the Mil-XT or some other reticles offered. The T3 charges usually $200-$300 more for wind dots and whatever the numbers on top of the center line are (I suspect some kind of mover but nothing matches up for me). For military guys who can't just borrow the next guy's gear if theirs goes down shooting at man size targets at 600, it might be a worthy backup to a laser rangefinder and a good target reference card, and the wind dots may be precise enough for that kind of shooting, but hey, they're also not footing the bill usually. For the game we play and even for most practical applications I'd much rather save the couple hundred bucks and buy a rangefinder with it. At a minimum they're more accurate.
I do own a Razor with a T3 and I do enjoy it, but I would not do it again for pure sake of the extra cost is not worth it. Also the illumination on the razor only lights up the center dot and a dot every 2 mils down which is almost worthless.
It's a fair point, but I believe that would come down to taking the time to get stable with a tripod and rangefinder or taking the time to estimate target size in mils then run that through either a kestrel range estimator or a calculator unless your range cards are in meters. Also, I don't know what the dimensions are on a 66% IPSC. Pick your poison.
Either way, the T3 wouldn't offer much in the way of advantages here over any other well-populated xmas tree reticle.
A LRF is not faster in some situations. I have specifically designed stages to prove that. Because I've seen those situations. Put a 66% IPSC on a tall tpost poking out from a defilade. I've watched people spend two minutes trying to hit it and verify at 750yds.
Yes, I see your point & agree totally, however, I'm putting this out there to determine if the T3 would indeed be advantages in most situations because traditional wind DOPE is effectively taken care of.?
Yes, I see your point & agree totally, however, I'm putting this out there to determine if the T3 would indeed be advantages in most situations because traditional wind DOPE is effectively taken care of.?
Still going to say no because any time you calculate your ballistics solution, wind values are typically calculated simultaneously. I can see in some situations if the wind is changing rapidly, you think better in terms of MPH, or really don't like doing quick interpolation it may be useful to you. Chances are however if you got that good at reading wind, you've been shooting long enough to know how to quickly hold for wind without the wind dots.
It's a fair point, but I believe that would come down to taking the time to get stable with a tripod and rangefinder or taking the time to estimate target size in mils then run that through either a kestrel range estimator or a calculator unless your range cards are in meters. Also, I don't know what the dimensions are on a 66% IPSC. Pick your poison.
I see your point as well. From a hunting point of view though, predetermined DOPE is a non existent luxury. I know I have a printed range card for my hunting rifle which, is always good for range DOPE but, only good for the wind value I used when I printed it. A T3 ret seems to simplify things a great deal, especially when game won't often hang around long enough to fiddle with Apps & the like.
I see your point as well. From a hunting point of view though, predetermined DOPE is a non existent luxury. I know I have a printed range card for my hunting rifle which, is always good for range DOPE but, only good for the wind value I used when I printed it. A T3 ret seems to simplify things a great deal, especially when game won't often hang around long enough to fiddle with Apps & the like.
For range cards I usually print a 5 and 10 MPH wind and interpolate from there. If it's a 20MPH wind, double the 10 value, if it's 7, somewhere in the middle of 5 and 10. If you don't like doing this kind of math in your head, the T3 might work great for you.
No Winklche, the math would be no problem, it's more the situation at the time. The shooting that I do is reasonably fast paced, in a vehicle at night. It's distracting enough trying to manage one range card, when that's necessary.
Still though, you've made some good arguments in answer to my Q's.
Thanks for the thoughts
Still though, you've made some good arguments in answer to my Q's.
Thanks for the thoughts
Similar threads
