what good is a spotting scope without a decent (front focal) reticlue

[lostcoyote]

well?

we don't need the frickin' birdwatcher scopes with no frickin' reticule.
what we need, as precision shooters, are calibrated reticules for spotters to call out how far to go up, left, right, down.... in realtime.
and not to have to pay in excess of $1000.

yeah scope makers, do get a reticlue.

 

[D.ID]

Love reticles but............ magnification is magnification. #1 reason...........Spotting.........Hunting is a much more diverse market share.
"tactical" correction is a small sliver of a much bigger market but.............Still got to side with you, just because I would like to see more of them on the market.

 

[Erud]

I like to think of myself as something of a precision shooter, but I have no use for a reticle in a spotting scope. Perhaps I am not as tactical as you?

 

[WilyCoyote]

A reticule is a woman's small purse. Why would my spotting scope need a purse? Did you mean to spell reticle? That seems to be a common misspelling on this sight.

 

[-R-]

Reticule is also an alternate spelling for reticle.

 

[Nortonious]

Only if your testicules are in your woman's reticule?

 

[Killswitch Engage]

As long as the reticule matches the "turrents" it's tactical as fuck

 

[Graham]

what good is a spotting scope without a decent (front focal) reticlue

I was on the spotting scope during a week-long class last month. The scope had no reticle. I gave accurate corrections to the students in Mils.

Seriously.

 

[D.ID]

I was on the spotting scope during a week-long class last month. The scope had no reticle. I gave accurate corrections to the students in Mils.

Seriously.

+1 .......... Seriously, a little experience makes up for a lot of little features and even some do-hickey whatchamacallits.. No doubt.
.
Turrents and reticules are "tactical as fuck".............. and a new classic one liner has bean inscribed in the archives of history. Did this classic phrase originate in low lights (pupil) video or was it pre existing?

 

[Monmouth]

I was on the spotting scope during a week-long class last month. The scope had no reticle. I gave accurate corrections to the students in Mils.

Seriously.

Makes me think of the Gladwell's Outlier application to you behind a scope. Have you ever thought about how many hours you looked through a scope throughout the course of your life?

 

[Nortonious]

Makes me think of the Gladwell's Outlier application to you behind a scope. Have you ever thought about how many hours you looked through a scope throughout the course of your life?

whew, hopefully not 10,000 hours....but your point is well taken. Those necessary hours of tradecraft certainly overshadow the short time of flight from muzzle to target.

Back to reticules & testicules (for the OP):
- it (a reticle) is just another tool that some might turn into a crutch. With uncertain range and/or target size it becomes more useful.

 

[atlsniper6.5]

Good recoil management allows you to see your "complete misses" through the rifle scope anyway... I use my spotting scope to fine tune my hits on steel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Six Feet Under]

I agree with lost coyote.. If the spotter doesn't have a "reticule" I don't want it... But I'm sure most of you guys are way more tactical than me. A "crutch"? However you want to say it but they work.

 

[M40_A1]

Range estimation is the best reason to have a reticle in a spotting scope.

 

[sandwarrior]

If you know the size of the target you can then translate that to an angular measurement to call corrections. If the target sizes are not known then the reticle is much less of a crutch.

You need to be very familiar with various pieces of equipment, so studying the mil-dot master is a must. Comparison of sizes from like targets helps estimate range within the view of the spotter as well. It helps tremendously to have seen the various targets at different ranges to at least give you an idea of the size. There simply isn't a quick rule to substitute for experience when estimating range without a reticle.

 

[Nukes]

Reticule is also an alternate spelling for reticle.

'zackly

^^^^
an alternate spelling of "exactly"

If a person is inclined towards pedantry, they should get it right.

 

[DT1]

Range estimation is the best reason to have a reticle in a spotting scope.

+1 As Graham said, making corrections in mils or 1/10ths of mils using a spotting scope w/o a reticle is not a problem if you have a experience. If you need to "mil" a target in order to determine distance, a reticle in the spotter is nice to have.

 

[Bonjourjr]

I am kinda in the same boat as the op but my budget is a little more. I have a line on a used vortex razor hd with 20-60x eyepiece and 30x mil ret eyepiece for $1600. I also have a line on a used leupold mk4 20-60x with tmr reticle for $1700. Which would benefit me more? Since they are priced about the same.

 

[DT1]

I am kinda in the same boat as the op but my budget is a little more. I have a line on a used vortex razor hd with 20-60x eyepiece and 30x mil ret eyepiece for $1600. I also have a line on a used leupold mk4 20-60x with tmr reticle for $1700. Which would benefit me more? Since they are priced about the same.

What is your primary use for the spotter? Both are very nice and you can find many threads where they've been discussed. The MK4 is more compact and handy for field use if that's a consideration.

 

[Bonjourjr]

I want to use it on the 600yd line when competing in cmp/NRA service rifle competitions. I will also want to use it to spot splash and call corrections up to 1100 yds. I won't be hiking up any mountains but I will take it on hunts. I have found very little on the mk4 20-60. Most threads cover the 12-40x.

 

[Erud]

I want to use it on the 600yd line when competing in cmp/NRA service rifle competitions. I will also want to use it to spot splash and call corrections up to 1100 yds. I won't be hiking up any mountains but I will take it on hunts. I have found very little on the mk4 20-60. Most threads cover the 12-40x.

If you are going to use it for HP, make sure you get a scope with an angled eyepiece. The Leupold is a good scope, but is not suitable for that type of shooting. You will hate it if you try to use it for that application.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M40_A1]

I've only ever used a straight scope for HP, and never hated it. That's not to say that an angled eyepiece wouldn't be nicer though.

 

[Erud]

I've only ever used a straight scope for HP, and never hated it. That's not to say that an angled eyepiece wouldn't be nicer though.

To each his own, but I can almost guarantee that you'd switch to an angled if you tried it. The idea behind the angled eyepiece for hp is that you can look through it while in position with little or no movement of your head. In order to do this with a straight scope, it would need to be so close as to almost be touching your rifle. If you don't mind breaking position to look in the spotter, a straight spotter will indeed work fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M40_A1]

To each his own, but I can almost guarantee that you'd switch to an angled if you tried it. The idea behind the angled eyepiece for hp is that you can look through it while in position with little or no movement of your head. In order to do this with a straight scope, it would need to be so close as to almost be touching your rifle. If you don't mind breaking position to look in the spotter, a straight spotter will indeed work fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand the purpose of the angled eye piece. With my straight scope I am able to set up with the scope close and I only have to shift my head slightly, never breaking my position. You are correct that I'm almost touching the scope, but it works fine for me. I'm sure if I were to switch to an angled eye piece, though, I'd be spoiled forever.

 

[Erud]

No problem. I don't know how much you shoot or what level of shooter you are, but if it works for you, keep doing it. You are the exception that proves the rule, as I'm sure you already know from seeing what others at matches are using.

When I set up to shoot prone, the eyepiece is below my left eye. When I get it set up right, it's just a matter of looking down into the scope with my eye. I keep the rifle in my shoulder for the string, and keep my face on the rifle unless something weird happens. The less movement of any sort, the better.

Bonjourjr, I will revise my earlier statement to read; "you will hate it for that application if you are like 90% of Highpower shooters." It can be made to work if that's what you have to work with, but is not ideal. If I were buying a scope with Highpower shooting as a primary use, I would not buy a straight eye piece.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lostcoyote]

A reticule is a woman's small purse. Why would my spotting scope need a purse? Did you mean to spell reticle? That seems to be a common misspelling on this sight.

ha, i knew the mispelling, but i changed it to reticlue.

but regarding the womans purse, well, if one uses a scope on their gun, then that's also a crutch replacing old ironsights. hahahahahahaha
maybe i'm not a MAN like you are - but whatever. i like being a pussy and will opt for a FFP reticlUEd scope anyday over a spotting scope designed for birdwatching - ANYDAY.

but heck, if i am out in the sticks target shooting at past a mile and using a rock (without known dimensions like it's 1 mil wide of whatever) i'd sure like to know that my spotter could simply measure the dust cloud relative to the target and give me an easy answer based on an ANGULAR measurement with no other computations nessessary.... like nice n' quick-like without having to get out his calculator & memorized formulas to fumble around with.

now as for recoil management, yeah, that's easier if using a low power but if on high magnification, i may not get back on target within the time it takes the bullet to smash its target.... so....... i'm just saying..... where are the frickin' $400 FFP sptting scopes at.

yes, there is a market imo.

 

[Erud]

ha, i knew the mispelling, but i changed it to reticlue.

but regarding the womans purse, well, if one uses a scope on their gun, then that's also a crutch replacing old ironsights. hahahahahahaha
maybe i'm not a MAN like you are - but whatever. i like being a pussy and will opt for a FFP reticlUEd scope anyday over a spotting scope designed for birdwatching - ANYDAY.

but heck, if i am out in the sticks target shooting at past a mile and using a rock (without known dimensions like it's 1 mil wide of whatever) i'd sure like to know that my spotter could simply measure the dust cloud relative to the target and give me an easy answer based on an ANGULAR measurement with no other computations nessessary.... like nice n' quick-like without having to get out his calculator & memorized formulas to fumble around with.

now as for recoil management, yeah, that's easier if using a low power but if on high magnification, i may not get back on target within the time it takes the bullet to smash its target.... so....... i'm just saying..... where are the frickin' $400 FFP sptting scopes at.

yes, there is a market imo.

Holy crap, you can range a dust cloud from your bullet strike at over a mile and get an "easy answer based on an angular measurement with no other computations necessary"? If so, you are a better man than most.

Just out of curiosity, were you abused by a bird watcher as a child?

 

[lostcoyote]

Holy crap, you can range a dust cloud from your bullet strike at over a mile and get an "easy answer based on an angular measurement with no other computations necessary"? If so, you are a better man than most.

Just out of curiosity, were you abused by a bird watcher as a child?

h e l l o........
okay, read my post again v e r y c a r e f u l l y?

i said nothing about ranging a dust cloud.

lolol

i said...
"measure the dust cloud relative to the target and give me an easy answer based on an ANGULAR measurement"

and no, you will not need to use trigonometry either

 

[Erud]

Ok, gotcha. What about the follow-up question about being abused by a bird watcher?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lostcoyote]

funny you should ask....

i used to collect bird feathers and shoot birds with my daisy BB gun.
but abuse... golly, you got me on that one.
i dunno.
do you think so?
if so, then it must be true.

 

[Erud]

Yeah, it's pretty normal. I just hate people bad-mouthing bird watchers cuz that's my people. I only dabble a little in shooting on the side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lostcoyote]

Yeah, it's pretty normal. I just hate people bad-mouthing bird watchers cuz that's my people. I only dabble a little in shooting on the side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ya, ok,,,,,,
but what about all these birdwatcher spotting scopes?
we want reticlues i say, reticlue...as in
get a clue suppliers of gun related spotting scopes.
get a reticlue and start putting FFP reticles in yur scopes!!!!

 

[Erud]

All I know is that if I do my part, my bird scope can spot a snowy owl in a blizzard at 535 yards ALL DAY LONG. Can you do that with one of your fancy reticule scopes?

 

[M40_A1]

All I know is that if I do my part, my bird scope can spot a snowy owl in a blizzard at 535 yards ALL DAY LONG. Can you do that with one of your fancy reticule scopes?

But, with a milling reticle you can gauge that the owl is at 535 yards too

op, I assume from the context you specifically mean a milling reticle. You do realize, of course, that spotting scopes were used by police and military snipers for many decades before mil-dot reticles were ever installed in any. All those scopes were used for.....are you ready for this......yep, spotting! Some even had cross hair reticles to help with.....are you ready for this......spotting! Said in fun, though, as I agree I'd like to see more spotting scopes offered with milling reticles.

 

[lostcoyote]

.......Said in fun, though, as I agree I'd like to see more spotting scopes offered with milling reticles.

yes!

which is my entire point.... as long as it is an FFP where the angular measurement doesn't care about where you are at zooming in or out.

 

[lostcoyote]

All I know is that if I do my part, my bird scope can spot a snowy owl in a blizzard at 535 yards ALL DAY LONG. Can you do that with one of your fancy reticule scopes?

but what about 541 yards?
those spotted owls like hanging out at prime number distances ya know.

 

[delixe]

I have bird watchers to thanks for the in depth comparisons between top spotting scopes that led me to the selection of my current spotting scope.
As for their particular pastime/passion, it's not for me, but then they might not enjoy some of the activities I devote big chunks of time to.

I sold off another decent (but not great) spotter for which I already had a mil eyepiece, knowing full well that finding a mil eyepiece for the new scope (Zeiss Diascope) would be an exercise in futility.
Why?
Because I almost never used the mil eyepiece.
I wanted a spotter with great resolution and I got it.
I seldom shoot with a partner, so I need to be able to locate little holes at great distances. That's what I predominantly use my spotter for. Until a top tier scope with the feature set of the Hensoldt Spotter 60 is released with a street price below $3k, I'll opt for superb optics over a reticle if I have to choose.

If you need great optics AND a reticle, get a Razor HD 20-60x85 and spend $200 on the mil eyepiece.

 

[delixe]

All I know is that if I do my part, my bird scope can spot a snowy owl in a blizzard at 535 yards ALL DAY LONG. Can you do that with one of your fancy reticule scopes?

Erud, what scope are you using for birding?

 

[Erud]

Erud, what scope are you using for birding?

I currently have a Kowa 773. I also had the 883, but I just recently sold it as the 773 is just so handy in size and weight, and I couldn't really tell a difference in optical quality between the 2. I am not actually a bird watcher though, I was just being facetious. My needs don't require a reticle though, and I would not want one for the type of shooting I mainly do.

 

[lostcoyote]

okay, here is what i would like to see...

Bushnell Excursion 15-45x 60 mm ED Spotting Scope . Bushnell Spotting Scopes.

dam, it's no longer made.
fk me.

i have to spend $1500+ on, at a minimum cost, a luepold first focal scope costing like $1600.

if bushnell still made this scope, i'd save $1200 and could buy another gun. (hell, i spent nearly $3000 on my long range gun's scope)
but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

reason is this:
my buddy, whom i go long range shooting with, is looking for a dust cloud if i miss.
my target is exactly 1 mil high and 1/2 mil wide...
yet, he always says... you're high, or low, or too far left...etc....
and never computes how many targets (mils) high or wide....


so a cheap scope like that bushnell scope would be ideal cuz...
he doesn't need superior optics to measure pinholes or see colorations in individual snowy owl feathers...
he needs just average optics to measure a dustcloud point of impact to center of target... which any cheap scope could do.
and then i would be on target.

we're talking 1+ mile distances here... and so you'll never see pinholes anyways.
and there are times where, i am always at high magnification, i might not able to get back on target cuz of recoil within 4 seconds of impact.

i cringe at putting out another $1600 bucks when i know the job can be done for $400 like the bushnell.


there IS a market for these scopes - they just need to advertise their product.

 

[M40_A1]

reason is this:
my buddy, whom i go long range shooting with, is looking for a dust cloud if i miss.
my target is exactly 1 mil high and 1/2 mil wide...
yet, he always says... you're high, or low, or too far left...etc....
and never computes how many targets (mils) high or wide....

If he won't gauge according to the known target size, what makes you think he would use a reticle?

 

[delixe]

okay, here is what i would like to see...

Bushnell Excursion 15-45x 60 mm ED Spotting Scope . Bushnell Spotting Scopes.

dam, it's no longer made.
fk me.

i have to spend $1500+ on, at a minimum cost, a luepold first focal scope costing like $1600.

if bushnell still made this scope, i'd save $1200 and could buy another gun. (hell, i spent nearly $3000 on my long range gun's scope)
but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

reason is this:
my buddy, whom i go long range shooting with, is looking for a dust cloud if i miss.
my target is exactly 1 mil high and 1/2 mil wide...
yet, he always says... you're high, or low, or too far left...etc....
and never computes how many targets (mils) high or wide....


so a cheap scope like that bushnell scope would be ideal cuz...
he doesn't need superior optics to measure pinholes or see colorations in individual snowy owl feathers...
he needs just average optics to measure a dustcloud point of impact to center of target... which any cheap scope could do.
and then i would be on target.

we're talking 1+ mile distances here... and so you'll never see pinholes anyways.
and there are times where, i am always at high magnification, i might not able to get back on target cuz of recoil within 4 seconds of impact.

i cringe at putting out another $1600 bucks when i know the job can be done for $400 like the bushnell.


there IS a market for these scopes - they just need to advertise their product.

Yeah that Excursion was a bargain... figures they'd no longer make it.

 

[lostcoyote]

If he won't gauge according to the known target size, what makes you think he would use a reticle?

because - with a reticule right in youtr line of vision, it becomes the obvious thing to do...
it's like having a caliper on your workbench when you need to measure the length of a cartrige after case trimming
you just go for it when it's in your face.
see?

 

[Flatbush Harry]

A reticule is a woman's small purse. Why would my spotting scope need a purse? Did you mean to spell reticle? That seems to be a common misspelling on this sight.

Did you mean "...on this site"?

FH, helpfully

 

[163dm]

I think Vortex has the right idea with interchangeable eyepieces. Sell the same scope but the user gets to select the eyepiece for their needs. Birders and some hunters don't want a reticle, but the small "sliver" of us do. Now if they just offered it in their small scopes. I have a Pentax PF-65 ED spotter that will take any of the standard 1.25" astronomy eyepieces. If someone could come up with a 1.25" mil reticle eyepiece I think this would be a great package in terms of size and well under $1000. The problem with the vortex is its only offered in the 85mm scope which means larger size, weight, and more money.

 

[WilyCoyote]

Did you mean "...on this site"?

FH, helpfully

LOL, that is the law of the internet. Any attempt to correct grammar will in itself contain a grammatical error. That's what I get for being snarky!

 

[goodgorilla]

Range estimation is the best reason to have a reticle in a spotting scope.

That's interesting because there are a shit ton of conditions a rangefinder won't work, and a large zoom would be helpful for targets far away.

hell, i spent nearly $3000 on my long range gun's scope
but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

I knew a spotting scope + a scope was better than a high end scope. I got a SWFA 5x20 for 1500, I have just begun researching the optic scopes. I'm guessing Vortex would be alright for a brand, not sure though.

 

[steve123]

OP, I don't know if you knew about this. Vortex Optics - Solo Tactical R/T 8x36. A friend had one at our local long range match. We rested it off the top of a tripod for spotting and calling corrections but I'm sure a better mounting solution could be attained with a little thought. It worked on the cheap.

Here's another Amazon.com: Bushnell Legend Ultra HD Monocular with Mil-Hash Reticle, 10 x 42-mm, Tan: Sports & Outdoors

I sold my nice $1800 spotting scope because I plan on getting a spotter with a mil reticle someday. Probably going to be the Bushnell Elite tactical spotter 8-40 with H reticle.

We give corrections in mils all the time at our match when we use a spotter with mil reticle. It definitely increases the shooters hit ratio. The poor MOA guys are left to snivel with calls like your friend gives, haha.

 

[goodgorilla]

After all day of searching and searching, one sale popped up I bought immediately.
Amazon.com: Bushnell Excursion FLP 15-45x60 Spotting Scope with Tactical FFP Mil-Dot Reticle and Soft Case/Sleeve plus Tripod 781569ED: Camera & Photo

 

[Pat M]

After all day of searching and searching, one sale popped up I bought immediately.
Amazon.com: Bushnell Excursion FLP 15-45x60 Spotting Scope with Tactical FFP Mil-Dot Reticle and Soft Case/Sleeve plus Tripod 781569ED: Camera & Photo

Keep looking on ebay, and here on the Hide (was one for sale last month)

I have one and like it a lot