Which one do you like? Why? The Mil-scale GAP looks good to me as it is not as cluttered as the Mil-scale MPR. What are your thoughts? Thanks in advance. Steve.
Rifle Scopes USO reticles?
- Thread starter Sumpter Steve
- Start date
Re: USO reticles?
i have on order the mil mpr i picked this so i would have a more presice miling capability
i have on order the mil mpr i picked this so i would have a more presice miling capability
Re: USO reticles?
Its technically not a USO reticle but I have heard they offer it. If I were to get a USO scope I would probably opt for the Premier Gen II XR over the USO MPR or the JNG.
I think there is an up charge on the Gen II XR due to USO having to pay Premier for its use but hey if you are spending a couple grand an extra $50 really isn't going to make or break it.
Its technically not a USO reticle but I have heard they offer it. If I were to get a USO scope I would probably opt for the Premier Gen II XR over the USO MPR or the JNG.
I think there is an up charge on the Gen II XR due to USO having to pay Premier for its use but hey if you are spending a couple grand an extra $50 really isn't going to make or break it.
Re: USO reticles?
I have a USO SN3 1.8-10 with a Mildot. It is ok, but the reticle is a little think when you are lookin at smaller targets but it gets the job done.
My SN3 3.2-17 has the GAP-Mil reticle and I like it much better, the reticle is much thinner and makes holds for wind or elevation much easier.
I also have a USO spotter with the Mil-MPR reticle. It does seem "busier" than the GAP but once you use it a little bit its great. I like it because I can call shots much easier due to the increase in reticle divisions.
All in all, I dont really think you could go wrong with either the MPR or the GAP reticle. In the end I guess its really your choice.
I hope this helps, good luck with your decision.
I have a USO SN3 1.8-10 with a Mildot. It is ok, but the reticle is a little think when you are lookin at smaller targets but it gets the job done.
My SN3 3.2-17 has the GAP-Mil reticle and I like it much better, the reticle is much thinner and makes holds for wind or elevation much easier.
I also have a USO spotter with the Mil-MPR reticle. It does seem "busier" than the GAP but once you use it a little bit its great. I like it because I can call shots much easier due to the increase in reticle divisions.
All in all, I dont really think you could go wrong with either the MPR or the GAP reticle. In the end I guess its really your choice.
I hope this helps, good luck with your decision.
Re: USO reticles?
My favorite right now is the RDP MIL Scale. The very center of the reticle is non-lit and it allows us to make a super fine crosshair in the center. Great for exploding ground squirrels!!
Here is a link to the RDP MOA, basically the same as above, just MOA instead of MIL's. http://www.usoptics.com/upgradesD.php?recordID=RET-081
John III
My favorite right now is the RDP MIL Scale. The very center of the reticle is non-lit and it allows us to make a super fine crosshair in the center. Great for exploding ground squirrels!!
Here is a link to the RDP MOA, basically the same as above, just MOA instead of MIL's. http://www.usoptics.com/upgradesD.php?recordID=RET-081
John III
Re: USO reticles?
RDP MOA in my opinion is well thought out and best choice, I prefer the MOA but I do understand it is offered in Mil. The advantage is the center crosshair is .07MOA which means it's thinner than the rest of the recticle. This is most helpful in a FFP as when the mag is increase and the Recticle gets bigger, the thinner crosshair let you see your target rather than block it. Now, there is no guessing on the head shot or body shot of the ground squrriel.
Too funny, as I was writing this up John at USO beat me to it!
RDP MOA in my opinion is well thought out and best choice, I prefer the MOA but I do understand it is offered in Mil. The advantage is the center crosshair is .07MOA which means it's thinner than the rest of the recticle. This is most helpful in a FFP as when the mag is increase and the Recticle gets bigger, the thinner crosshair let you see your target rather than block it. Now, there is no guessing on the head shot or body shot of the ground squrriel.
Too funny, as I was writing this up John at USO beat me to it!
Re: USO reticles?
Clutter is in the eye of the beholder......keep in mind that eye on target will look WAY different than a drawing of a reticle.
That said, I have 3 USO's, all have Mil MPR....take a guess which one I like.
Here's a lot of discussion recently had on the MPR:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...006#Post1971006
Clutter is in the eye of the beholder......keep in mind that eye on target will look WAY different than a drawing of a reticle.
That said, I have 3 USO's, all have Mil MPR....take a guess which one I like.
Here's a lot of discussion recently had on the MPR:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...006#Post1971006
Re: USO reticles?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Clutter is in the eye of the beholder......keep in mind that eye on target will look WAY different than a drawing of a reticle.
That said, I have 3 USO's, all have Mil MPR....take a guess which one I like.
Here's a lot of discussion recently had on the MPR:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...006#Post1971006 </div></div>
Very true. Thanks for the link. Now that I see it more clearly I really like the MPR. Thanks SB883.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Clutter is in the eye of the beholder......keep in mind that eye on target will look WAY different than a drawing of a reticle.
That said, I have 3 USO's, all have Mil MPR....take a guess which one I like.
Here's a lot of discussion recently had on the MPR:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...006#Post1971006 </div></div>
Very true. Thanks for the link. Now that I see it more clearly I really like the MPR. Thanks SB883.
Re: USO reticles?
Canadian Mil-Scale, accuracy of hash marks and just a smidge more 'busy' than mil-dot
Canadian Mil-Scale, accuracy of hash marks and just a smidge more 'busy' than mil-dot
Re: USO reticles?
No complaints with my GAP reticle. Then again, I don't have a problem with a standard MilDot reticle or TMR type.
I do use my rifle quite a bit in the dark though.
No complaints with my GAP reticle. Then again, I don't have a problem with a standard MilDot reticle or TMR type.
I do use my rifle quite a bit in the dark though.
Re: USO reticles?
mpr is not as cluttered once you start looking through it at a target.easier to range with than a gap which has half mil incs.the mpr has half and two other marks[not quarter mil]i forgot what they measure out to be but at uso jeff is really helpful and can explain what they are.
mpr is not as cluttered once you start looking through it at a target.easier to range with than a gap which has half mil incs.the mpr has half and two other marks[not quarter mil]i forgot what they measure out to be but at uso jeff is really helpful and can explain what they are.
Re: USO reticles?
I like the PCMOA and Scale Type 1 MOA... but for mil I would go with the GAP. Just my 2 cents
I like the PCMOA and Scale Type 1 MOA... but for mil I would go with the GAP. Just my 2 cents
Re: USO reticles?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 762frmafr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">MDMOA
</div></div>
This...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 762frmafr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">MDMOA
</div></div>
This...
Re: USO reticles?
Unless everyone who spots for you runs MOA rigs, I suggest sticking with a Mil Reticle.
It's also getting easier to find spotting scopes and other optics with Mil reticles. It's difficult to find any with MOA reticles.
Unless everyone who spots for you runs MOA rigs, I suggest sticking with a Mil Reticle.
It's also getting easier to find spotting scopes and other optics with Mil reticles. It's difficult to find any with MOA reticles.
Re: USO reticles?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unless everyone who spots for you runs MOA rigs, I suggest sticking with a Mil Reticle.
</div></div>
Honestly, that is the reason I went mil/mil. I prefer IPHY/IPHY, but everyone I shoot with spots in mils (that is they did, until I got all mil/mil, and now it seems I hear "how many minutes" all the time........
).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unless everyone who spots for you runs MOA rigs, I suggest sticking with a Mil Reticle.
</div></div>
Honestly, that is the reason I went mil/mil. I prefer IPHY/IPHY, but everyone I shoot with spots in mils (that is they did, until I got all mil/mil, and now it seems I hear "how many minutes" all the time........
Re: USO reticles?
I went from MOA to mil and retaught myelf because of hold offs it just makes it that much easier to accomplish your task be it ranges, comps, or wtvr your cup of tea is. Less conversions more accurate follow up shots at different distances
I went from MOA to mil and retaught myelf because of hold offs it just makes it that much easier to accomplish your task be it ranges, comps, or wtvr your cup of tea is. Less conversions more accurate follow up shots at different distances
Re: USO reticles?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sumpter Steve</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which one do you like? Why? The Mil-scale GAP looks good to me as it is not as cluttered as the Mil-scale MPR. What are your thoughts? Thanks in advance. Steve. </div></div>
Before I got my second USO (SN-3 3.2-17X 44 LP ERGO .1 MIL EREK & LH US#3 .1 MIL w/GAP reticle) I spent a lot of time studying the schematics and specs on USO's web site <span style="font-weight: bold">as well as looking through scopes with the GAP, MPR, and MIL Scale Canadian down at USO.</span> Here is what I liked and/or disliked/wish I could change about each of them:
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">GAP Reticle</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Advantages/Pros</span> - Very clean reticle combined with fine .1 MOA main vertices (vertical and horizontal main lines) provides an uncluttered survey area. Only the MIL hashes bisect the main vertices, and they are short which keeps the view uncluttered. The .5 MIL hashes are very short and do not bisect the main vertices, keeping the view uncluttered, which is especially useful when shooting at and spotting small targets (think 1/2 MOA or less).
<span style="font-weight: bold">Disadvantages/Cons</span> - The GAP reticle's "cleaness" also cuts the other way - because it only has hashes at MIL and .5 MIL on the main vertices, reticle-based elevation and wind holds cannot be as fine as with the MPR, which has .2 MIL hashes in addition to MIL and .5 MIL hashes. I wish that the GAP reticle had a MIL broken down into .2 MIL sections at 12, and 3 O'Clock like on the USO <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MIL-Scale Canadian</span></span>. Definitely not a deal-breaker, especially on a tactical scope.
<span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MIL-Scale Canadian</span></span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Advantages/Pros</span> - Similar to the GAP with MIL and .5 MIL hashes, combined with fine .125 MOA main vertices (vertical and horizontal main lines) provides an uncluttered survey area. Unlike the GAP reticle, both the MIL and .5 MIL hashes bisect the main vertices, and they are short which keeps the view uncluttered. Again, especially useful when shooting at and spotting small targets. I also like that a MIL is broken down into .2 MIL sections at 12, and 3 O'Clock.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Disadvantages/Cons</span> - Similar to the GAP reticle, the MIL-Scale Canadian's "cleaness" also cuts the other way -(it only has hashes at MIL and .5 MIL on the main vertices, reticle-based elevation and wind holds cannot be as fine as with the MPR, which has .2 MIL hashes in addition to MIL and .5 MIL hashes. The .15 MOA <span style="font-style: italic">line thickness</span> on the main vertices is also a bit more coarse than on the GAP and MPR reticles, so quartering the target is slightly more difficult than with a GAP or MPR reticle. Definitely not a deal-breaker, especially on a tactical scope.
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MPR Reticle</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Advantages/Pros</span> - Fine .1 MOA main vertices (vertical and horizontal main lines) and hashes at MIL, .5 MIL, and .2 MIL allow more accurate reticle-based elevation and wind holds.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Disadvantages/Cons</span> - The MPR's hashes all bisect the main vertices, and combined with their close proximity to each other they do clutter the view. If I could change the MPR reticle I would: (a) shorten the OAL of the MIL hashes to .5 MIL, (b) shorten the OAL of the .250 MIL, and shorten the OAL of the .2 MIL hash to .125 MIL, but also re-position it so it does not bisect the main vertices (like the .5 MIL hashes on the GAP reticle).
The above-mentioned changes would retain the MPR's more fine reticle-based elevation and wind holds while providing a cleaner, less cluttered view. Also, having a MIL broken down into .2 MIL sections at 12, and 3 O'Clock like on the <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MIL-Scale Canadian</span></span> would be great too, but definitely not a deal-breaker, especially on a tactical scope.
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sumpter Steve</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which one do you like? Why? The Mil-scale GAP looks good to me as it is not as cluttered as the Mil-scale MPR. What are your thoughts? Thanks in advance. Steve. </div></div>
Before I got my second USO (SN-3 3.2-17X 44 LP ERGO .1 MIL EREK & LH US#3 .1 MIL w/GAP reticle) I spent a lot of time studying the schematics and specs on USO's web site <span style="font-weight: bold">as well as looking through scopes with the GAP, MPR, and MIL Scale Canadian down at USO.</span> Here is what I liked and/or disliked/wish I could change about each of them:
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">GAP Reticle</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Advantages/Pros</span> - Very clean reticle combined with fine .1 MOA main vertices (vertical and horizontal main lines) provides an uncluttered survey area. Only the MIL hashes bisect the main vertices, and they are short which keeps the view uncluttered. The .5 MIL hashes are very short and do not bisect the main vertices, keeping the view uncluttered, which is especially useful when shooting at and spotting small targets (think 1/2 MOA or less).
<span style="font-weight: bold">Disadvantages/Cons</span> - The GAP reticle's "cleaness" also cuts the other way - because it only has hashes at MIL and .5 MIL on the main vertices, reticle-based elevation and wind holds cannot be as fine as with the MPR, which has .2 MIL hashes in addition to MIL and .5 MIL hashes. I wish that the GAP reticle had a MIL broken down into .2 MIL sections at 12, and 3 O'Clock like on the USO <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MIL-Scale Canadian</span></span>. Definitely not a deal-breaker, especially on a tactical scope.
<span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MIL-Scale Canadian</span></span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Advantages/Pros</span> - Similar to the GAP with MIL and .5 MIL hashes, combined with fine .125 MOA main vertices (vertical and horizontal main lines) provides an uncluttered survey area. Unlike the GAP reticle, both the MIL and .5 MIL hashes bisect the main vertices, and they are short which keeps the view uncluttered. Again, especially useful when shooting at and spotting small targets. I also like that a MIL is broken down into .2 MIL sections at 12, and 3 O'Clock.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Disadvantages/Cons</span> - Similar to the GAP reticle, the MIL-Scale Canadian's "cleaness" also cuts the other way -(it only has hashes at MIL and .5 MIL on the main vertices, reticle-based elevation and wind holds cannot be as fine as with the MPR, which has .2 MIL hashes in addition to MIL and .5 MIL hashes. The .15 MOA <span style="font-style: italic">line thickness</span> on the main vertices is also a bit more coarse than on the GAP and MPR reticles, so quartering the target is slightly more difficult than with a GAP or MPR reticle. Definitely not a deal-breaker, especially on a tactical scope.
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MPR Reticle</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Advantages/Pros</span> - Fine .1 MOA main vertices (vertical and horizontal main lines) and hashes at MIL, .5 MIL, and .2 MIL allow more accurate reticle-based elevation and wind holds.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Disadvantages/Cons</span> - The MPR's hashes all bisect the main vertices, and combined with their close proximity to each other they do clutter the view. If I could change the MPR reticle I would: (a) shorten the OAL of the MIL hashes to .5 MIL, (b) shorten the OAL of the .250 MIL, and shorten the OAL of the .2 MIL hash to .125 MIL, but also re-position it so it does not bisect the main vertices (like the .5 MIL hashes on the GAP reticle).
The above-mentioned changes would retain the MPR's more fine reticle-based elevation and wind holds while providing a cleaner, less cluttered view. Also, having a MIL broken down into .2 MIL sections at 12, and 3 O'Clock like on the <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">MIL-Scale Canadian</span></span> would be great too, but definitely not a deal-breaker, especially on a tactical scope.
Keith
Similar threads
