-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Vortex AMG new reticle??
- Thread starter remington patriot
- Start date
Ok, this is pretty bad ass. I know I could count on you Rob. I was pretty much dead set on the NF ATACR 5-25 MIL-C until I caught wind of this new reticle from Vortex!!!! Any talk about a variation of this making its way into the HD Gen II?
How do we do that? I would pay cash money for 4-16 AMG with this reticle, or a Razor Gen 2 3-18x with this reticle...that weighed 30 oz.
I would consider paying to have this reticle put in the Razor Gen 2 I just ordered. Hope they end up offering that service.
http://vortexoptics.com/content/contact_us
But why not just get the 6-24x AMG? The 2x on the bottom is nothing and you get more higher power if needed. Just dial down. It's a nice light package now.
I messaged Dave about it and he replied, I'll paste it below. Hopefully they do end up releasing it for the Razor Gen 2 because I'd be very interested in swapping over to it.
Hi Nate,
Unfortunately reticles are not swappable from one scope to another. We only have the EBR-7B for the Razor AMG 6-24x50 created. The physical reticle glass (substrate) is not the same size as the Razor Gen II and also the objective focal lengths are not the same between the scopes which means the sizing of the reticle features for the AMG will not work in the Gen II Razor.
With that said we may have the EBR-7B in the Razor Gen II at some point in the future. There are a few reasons that are proprietary that we may wait a little while before releasing it in the Razor Gen II and I cannot speak to that timeline right now. When it is released we can do a swap for the reticle for a fee. I don't know what the fee is. I will have to talk to our sales department to find out. Keep an eye out for when we release it for the Razor Gen II and then we can talk about it. Thanks
Dave
Hi Nate,
Unfortunately reticles are not swappable from one scope to another. We only have the EBR-7B for the Razor AMG 6-24x50 created. The physical reticle glass (substrate) is not the same size as the Razor Gen II and also the objective focal lengths are not the same between the scopes which means the sizing of the reticle features for the AMG will not work in the Gen II Razor.
With that said we may have the EBR-7B in the Razor Gen II at some point in the future. There are a few reasons that are proprietary that we may wait a little while before releasing it in the Razor Gen II and I cannot speak to that timeline right now. When it is released we can do a swap for the reticle for a fee. I don't know what the fee is. I will have to talk to our sales department to find out. Keep an eye out for when we release it for the Razor Gen II and then we can talk about it. Thanks
Dave
Agreed that the AMG is a nice package. For my needs, I would rather have the low end field of view of the Razor 3-18 at 37 feet over the AMG at 20 feet. I have to work to find a place to shoot at over 600 yards and <50 is common.
Vortex, if you are listening, PLEASE move the mil number indications below the horizontal OUT TO THE ENDS on any further incantations of that reticle or at least so they are not right up against the verticle line. I have seen PLENTY of vortex owners ask for this over the last couple of years. Kahles got it right, takes a look at the SKMR reticle, makes much more sense. There's certainly no problem seeing those numbers out at the ends, they really don't need to be crammed up against the line where they interfere with holds. Congratulations on the center dot and other improvements however, very nice! Those would wear very well on a new gen 3.
Good info Nate. I too have spoken with Dave and just want to stress that the 7B will be out in the Gen II but not anytime soon so to all wanting the combo you will have to wait unfortunately. Vortex knows you want it so emails and calls for it won't be needed as it will come but not in the near future. Putting it in the Gen II is not as easy as a swap as the scopes are completely different and it can't be done. It will come though.
Fursniper I like the number close to the reticle myself. Allows for quick slide down the reticle to where I need to be for elevation hold and then over to hold wind if needed. No need to look far out and then back in to reticle. Also the numbers are right in the .4 mil mark area and you use it like any of the dots so they serve a purpose.
Fursniper I like the number close to the reticle myself. Allows for quick slide down the reticle to where I need to be for elevation hold and then over to hold wind if needed. No need to look far out and then back in to reticle. Also the numbers are right in the .4 mil mark area and you use it like any of the dots so they serve a purpose.
I just hope the "proprietary reason" isn't a Gen 3. I just finally ordered a Gen 2 so if they release a G3 at SHOT that'd bum me out haha.
Okay, I'm interpreting the following conversation as "can I have the new AMG EBR-7B reticle put in a Razor Gen 2" with the reply from Dave that it "will not work in the Razor Gen 2" because of size, etc..
Now the question that remains is: "can the new AMG EBR-7B be swapped out with the original AMG EBR-7 reticle"?
Guess I have to call Dave...
I have two AMGs and I'm interested in changing from the EBR7 to the new 7B. Could you please keep me updated of your findings?
I would like to have this in the Razor Gen II. I see where it won't fit I wonder what it would take to just add the dot to the center? I did contact Vortex and they were just not interested in doing it. I really like the gen II but NF and USO both have the new reticle with the dot.
I am liking the numbers on the outside of the reticle. As someone who is transitioning from the EBR-1, I get a bit lost in the christmas tree, so having the reference outside appealed to me. Maybe with time I could get used to it, but for now the SKMR3 reticle is calling my name, though this 7B looks fantastic with the dot (which is also something I am finding appealing).
Just got off the phone with Travis at Vortex. This information applies ONLY to AMG scopes: the old EBR-7 reticle CAN be swapped out to the new EBR-7B. The service will start around the first of the year and cost $300.
Last edited:
You will be waiting quite a while so if you need a scope soon you might want to go with the 2C.
Rob, are we talking like several years or maybe just a year or so? I shoot the 2c in my razor hd gen 1 and i like it but i was wanting to try a floating dot with my next vortex. I shot with a floating dot reticle in a friends khales and kinda liked it.
I love floating center dot reticles in general, but have been really happy with the EBR-7 so far, not sure if I would switch, but I like that Vortex is offering both now for the AMG. Hoping to see a 4.5-18x50 AMG introduced at SHOT, but more likely it will be a 4-16 which doesn't interest me as much, and if Vortex could do a 5-20x50 short AMG, they would get my money in a heartbeat 
I love floating center dot reticles in general, but have been really happy with the EBR-7 so far, not sure if I would switch, but I like that Vortex is offering both now for the AMG. Hoping to see a 4.5-18x50 AMG introduced at SHOT, but more likely it will be a 4-16 which doesn't interest me as much, and if Vortex could do a 5-20x50 short AMG, they would get my money in a heartbeat
send them an email with your ideas. Supposedly they listen to the community. I personally wouldn't mind seeing a 6-30x.
I think it looks like a lot of overkill to me. And I get overkill, I run an H59, so I'm used to a busy reticle. But this one has a lot of things I have no use for and is missing things I do.
I don't see the reason to go to .1 mil increments past 4 mils windage or hold under. Especially another 4 mils of .1's. That's a lot of .1 measurement, but it's way out beyond where you would need it. I understand having a vertical and horizontal section of .1's for mil ranging, which is very rare. But needing more than 2 mils of that measuring space means the target is as big as a barn door or closer than you need to measure. And it doesn't need to be on both sides of the crosshair. It makes the reticle look cluttered. And I also dislike the numbers right next to the vertical line. That's space with a number stamped on it instead of useable increments.
And I like the floating dot, but if they wanted a workhorse reticle then they should have made the 1, 2, 3, 4 mil holdovers, etc, floating dots as well. And in lieu of all those aforementioned .1 increments, .2 increments on the verticle line would see FAR more usage. And why a .5 increment hanging below the horizontal line when you already have .2's on top? I think most folks can hold between .4 and .6 for a workable .5. If they wanted to indicate .5's, they should have done them down in the holdover grid in between the full mil horizontal lines. Something to help with holdovers combined with windage holds.
It looks like they wanted a busy reticle, but to me, ended up with a bunch of useless stuff. And left out some very useful stuff.
But reticles are a very personal thing. I know what I have a use for and what I dont, and everyone is different. So just my humble opinion.
I don't see the reason to go to .1 mil increments past 4 mils windage or hold under. Especially another 4 mils of .1's. That's a lot of .1 measurement, but it's way out beyond where you would need it. I understand having a vertical and horizontal section of .1's for mil ranging, which is very rare. But needing more than 2 mils of that measuring space means the target is as big as a barn door or closer than you need to measure. And it doesn't need to be on both sides of the crosshair. It makes the reticle look cluttered. And I also dislike the numbers right next to the vertical line. That's space with a number stamped on it instead of useable increments.
And I like the floating dot, but if they wanted a workhorse reticle then they should have made the 1, 2, 3, 4 mil holdovers, etc, floating dots as well. And in lieu of all those aforementioned .1 increments, .2 increments on the verticle line would see FAR more usage. And why a .5 increment hanging below the horizontal line when you already have .2's on top? I think most folks can hold between .4 and .6 for a workable .5. If they wanted to indicate .5's, they should have done them down in the holdover grid in between the full mil horizontal lines. Something to help with holdovers combined with windage holds.
It looks like they wanted a busy reticle, but to me, ended up with a bunch of useless stuff. And left out some very useful stuff.
But reticles are a very personal thing. I know what I have a use for and what I dont, and everyone is different. So just my humble opinion.
Last edited:
The .1 mil marks are for ranging and they are there for more space depending on FOV as if zoomed in you won't have all the marks to see or if you don't want to be looking at the way outer edge. Also nothing says you can't use them for normal holds for wind or hold unders either. They have uses.
You need to look at the reticle again. There are no .2 marks above the horizontal. .5 above and below for holds along with the .1 marks above. With practice a proficent marksman can make a .1 mil hold with a .5 mark as a mild mark. Like holding 1.1 or 1.3 etc. It's pretty simple with practice. Doesn't have to be on either side of the .5 marks. The only .2 mils marks are on the horizontal for wind or mover holds. As far as dots at every mil mark that would be a little over kill.
That reticle is very close to the 7 which is a very useful reticle. Nothing busy or useless. It all has a use.
And you call the 7B busy but use this? LOL
I hope Vortex is reading this & the powers that be to make decisions on product development get copies.....Especially the parts about the numbers on the verticle line & all those .1 increments out at the ends & top. Put a proper ranging reticle in one of the lower corners & get rid of all that clutter. Or reduce the incredible amount of .1 increments, ridiculous.
The .1 mil marks are for ranging and they are there for more space depending on FOV as if zoomed in you won't have all the marks to see or if you don't want to be looking at the way outer edge. Also nothing says you can't use them for normal holds for wind or hold unders either. They have uses.
You need to look at the reticle again. There are no .2 marks above the horizontal. .5 above and below for holds along with the .1 marks above. With practice a proficent marksman can make a .1 mil hold with a .5 mark as a mild mark. Like holding 1.1 or 1.3 etc. It's pretty simple with practice. Doesn't have to be on either side of the .5 marks. The only .2 mils marks are on the horizontal for wind or mover holds. As far as dots at every mil mark that would be a little over kill.
That reticle is very close to the 7 which is a very useful reticle. Nothing busy or useless. It all has a use.
And you call the 7B busy but use this? LOL
Yeah, but the H59 is designed to actually be useful.....
And the 7 or 7B aren't useful? Come on. The 2C is very useful and these just add .2 marks on the horizontal and a small crosshair or dot. Basically the same after that. Try a good hold under with that H59. Hows that work out? LOL Not very useful.
I know you hate the numbers in the .4 mil hold mark but as I said before I like them as they are quick to reference for a hold. Personal preference but don't expect them to be moved anytime soon.
I have on many occasions shared my hopes and dreams with them, one thing we have to realize is that it takes a very long time for a rifle scope to make it from imagination to reality. God only knows what Vortex is cooking up in the Razor and AMG labs that we will see in 2018 and future... Frank usually knows, but he makes you send overseas funds in order to divulge his insider information
Dave, if you're watching, I'd love to see a new reticle similar to what I drew up here, if you'd like to see the full design drawing I have in CAD I'd be happy to share, you know how to get in touch with me
I was being sarcastic, yes of course the "7evans" are useful and a huge improvement to the 2C. I wish I could transfer them to my two 4.5 - 27's! However, I have used the H59 quite a bit and find it just fine for hold unders as we'll as even more usefull for an even more accurate & faster follow up shot following a miss (assuming of course you see the miss!) than the 2C, one of the more useful things of that particular design. I was referring more or less to that in my comment really. The H59 takes some getting used to granted, but once a person is comfortable with it, its really rather amazing. Probably why I don't like the ".4 numbers" in the way. Though I'd be willing to bet you a 6pak that more people lean my way on that than not. I think "birddog" had some very good comments on this as well as articulating his suggestions well on other potential improvements to the new AMG reticle. It's not that I don't like it, it's just that it could be SO much better even (yeah, I know, personal preference). I mean, even our own "in-house expert resident scope advisor", Bill, has designed a new reticle with some VERY interesting features with those "Nasty numbers" to the outside....
!I don't understand the struggles scope companies have with reticles. My complaint is a lack of consistency throughout.
The best reticles are broken up in either 1 MOA or .2 MIL increments. If you use .2 MIL on the horizontal then use it on the vertical as well. I don't see the need for .5 MIL but whatever you put on the horizontal use it on the vertical. Going from areas marked in .1 MIL, .2 Mil, and .5 Mil is slower than a consistent subtension throughout. The human eye is amazingly accurate at "halving" distances.
Another area that is usually a disaster is from the center dot or crosshair transitioning to the .2 increments on the rest of the reticle.
Take a look at the Gen ll Razor with the EBR-2C MOA. Everything is nicely laid out in 1 moa increments with numbers at the 5 and 10 MOA intersections. Then Vortex for some reason decided to put bold dots in the tree portion of the reticle every 4 MOA.......WHY????? What is wrong with consistency? What am I missing?
wjm308 I like your reticle. I mentioned that to you back when you drew it up (about the time that Vortex announced the AMG). I would like it better if it was entirely .2 mil but again maybe I'm the only one that sees it that way. I like the numbers on the outside of the tree!
The best reticles are broken up in either 1 MOA or .2 MIL increments. If you use .2 MIL on the horizontal then use it on the vertical as well. I don't see the need for .5 MIL but whatever you put on the horizontal use it on the vertical. Going from areas marked in .1 MIL, .2 Mil, and .5 Mil is slower than a consistent subtension throughout. The human eye is amazingly accurate at "halving" distances.
Another area that is usually a disaster is from the center dot or crosshair transitioning to the .2 increments on the rest of the reticle.
Take a look at the Gen ll Razor with the EBR-2C MOA. Everything is nicely laid out in 1 moa increments with numbers at the 5 and 10 MOA intersections. Then Vortex for some reason decided to put bold dots in the tree portion of the reticle every 4 MOA.......WHY????? What is wrong with consistency? What am I missing?
wjm308 I like your reticle. I mentioned that to you back when you drew it up (about the time that Vortex announced the AMG). I would like it better if it was entirely .2 mil but again maybe I'm the only one that sees it that way. I like the numbers on the outside of the tree!
Thanks guys! We definitely try to take everyone's feedback and apply it the best we can. There are a lot of forces behind the scenes that drive reticle design that I will not address publicly. It certainly is not because we aren't listening. In fact many of us here at Vortex are shooters and express the same "wants" in reticle design, as well, so we are well aware. However, sometimes there are things that we just cannot do. Again, I won't address why publicly. Many of the design ideas mentioned we can implement and we have taken note. While there are many, many different opinions on reticle design out there we will continue to take your suggestions and incorporate them into reticles that will make as many people as happy as we can. Thank you for the feedback!
Dave
Dave
Yep! A 4-16 AMG with this reticle would get my money, that is if I ever get my hands on some more of it
+111111111
a light weight 3-15 with this reticle would end up in my safe instantly.
unfortunately the 5-25 is too big, so I’ll end up with a 4-16 ATACR Mil-C unless something earth shattering comes along.
I've said before, if you let 100 long range shooters design a reticle, you'd get 100 different reticles. And the next day they'd all have something to change!
While I don't think this new 7b is perfect to me, I do think it's the best (for my preferences) of any reticle I've seen. If that's still the case when it becomes available in a Gen2 I just might switch back.
While I don't think this new 7b is perfect to me, I do think it's the best (for my preferences) of any reticle I've seen. If that's still the case when it becomes available in a Gen2 I just might switch back.
Thanks for listening & letting us KNOW you guys are listening! Just one more of many reasons why so many of us "talk up" & support Vortex products and customer service.
Yes, I did say "I am used to a busy reticle". But the H59 is usefully busy. Sure there are some unnecessary components that I don't use, but the grid itself is spot on. I simply disagree that all those .1 increments have any use. Yes, you need some, I'm just saying there is way more there than you need or will use. I've done a fair share of mil ranging and I simply have never encountered a scenario where I would have needed all that. So it clutters up the reticle with thick lines. It almost looks to me like they put it in there because they think it looks cool.
And the horizontal definitely has .2 mil increments for wind above the line, with an additional .5 hanging below out to 4 mils, so I'm not sure what you're talking about here. But I'm not trying to be argumentative. It's just my opinion that they put a lot of detail in areas where it's less useful. Having used my Horus to do a lot of holds and less dialing, I know that when you are trying to make a shot that requires 1.7 mils elevation and .6 wind, that's suddenly a very empty space in your reticle. Having .2 increments going down your vertical line and .5 marks hanging .5 down between the full mil lines and .5 left and right on the grid are incredibly useful. As well as the increment lines themselves on the grid protruding .2 above and below each line, reducing the empty space and thus reducing the guesswork. Aim small, miss small.
Again, just my two bits. Not trying to beat anyone up, just providing feedback based on my experiences, what I have used, and would like to see.
Edit; This is actually my reticle. A slight variant with a floating dot crosshair, finer lines, and an added hold under component. If it weren't for the flash milling 2/4/6/8/10 lines, I would honestly say I use every single part of this reticle.
[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/i.imgur.com\/upYPAV9.png"}[/IMG2]
Last edited:
Rob, my mistake, in rereading your post I realized you were referring to hold unders and my brain read "hold overs". Duh, my mistake. You are absolutely correct that the H59 is pretty worthless for holding under by much. Although, the only time I can remember using a hold under is when I didn't have enough scope elevation shooting ELR and was forced to use the reticle (on a different reticle of course). Now I make sure I have enough rail for the job! Seems like it would be a moot point for normal distances though. Anyway, you got me on that one lol. I'll stick to my guns on the other points though. ...
Last edited:
The lines aren't there to look cool but to be functional. Having shot matches that are completely UKD I would have loved to have that reticle and not the older mil versions I had years back. The .1 mil lines are put out far enough to where you most likely won;t be using those areas for holds as wind holds of more than 4 mils is a lot and same for hold unders.
I thought you meant .2 mils on the vertical line when you said above and below. Yes on the horizontal there are both. The .2 mil lines are very useful and you won;t get lost with a wind or mover hold. It comes back to training again. Personally i would have just made all .2 mil marks but the way it is it is not useless.
And still that H59 is going to be tough for hold unders.
Rob, my mistake, in rereading your post I realized you were referring to hold unders and my brain read "hold overs". Duh, my mistake. You are absolutely correct that the H59 is pretty worthless for holding under by much. Although, the only time I can remember using a hold under is when I didn't have enough scope elevation shooting ELR and was forced to use the reticle (on a different reticle of course). Now I make sure I have enough rail for the job! Seems like it would be a moot point for normal distances though. Anyway, you got me on that one lol. I'll stick to my guns on the other points though. ...
No problem. I use hold unders at matches a lot when you have multiple targets and you dial a mid range data on the scope and then hold over and under to speed up the time needed for all the shots. You can get more shots in that way when not having to reach up to dial. Also some matches are set up where you dial in a mid range and do the holds. The H59 would be less than ideal for that.
If you can keep all that in your head with a mid range dial and on the clock, then you're a better man than I lol! Around these parts we only get 2 shots per target, plenty of time to dial for us slow on the uptake types....
Similar threads
