Rifle Scopes Why no .5 MOA reticle subtensions?

[Subwrx300]

I've owned 6+ MOA reticle systems and been wondering why most MOA reticles use a 1MOA hash or 2MOA has rather than .5MOA?
It's kind of odd to me: MOA resolves slightly finer than MIL but in all instances of reticles (that I have found to date) virtually all of them use either 1 or 2 MOA stadia. This means that while I can dial with slightly better precision, wind holds or elevation holds are actually LESS precise than with a .2 Mil hash (~.69MOA equivalent).

It would seem that a .5MOA hash would be fairly easy to etch and would then give better resolution to match the improved resolution of turrets. Given the level of detail that some reticles have, it doesn't seem like a technology limit of etching but maybe it is?

Disclaimer: I get that the competition community at large is predominantly MIL based; this is more of a "why the F$+#? Did they choose 1-2MOA hash" Question. This is NOT a MIL vs MOA discussion in the normal sense, but a "why aren't manufacturers taking advantage of the enhanced resolution of MOA discussion".

 

[spife7980]

Here a cronus btr in mil with .2 dashes

Here it is in moa with 1moa dashes, looks pretty nicely proportioned to me

I filled the moa with dashes in between to simulate the half moa dashes (which equates to .15 mils). Looks a bit cluttered and I could see myself getting lost in it.

 

[Subwrx300]

Here an example if NF MOAR had .5 hash/open area (and slight Xmas tree grid):

 

[Subwrx300]

Here a cronus btr in mil with .2 dashes
View attachment 6981661

Here it is in moa with 1moa dashes, looks pretty nicely proportioned to me
View attachment 6981663


I filled the moa with dashes in between to simulate the half moa dashes (which equates to .15 mils). Looks a bit cluttered and I could see myself getting lost in it.
View attachment 6981664

I agree that .5MOA hash would be too cluttered, which is why I was thinking more of open spots to indicate .5MOA. A .5 open indicator would likely only work on higher mag range (18-30x) but that power would only be used for precision at longer range. Inside 500 or so, wind isn't as influential holding between two 1moa lines would probably work (and does). I'm going to take photos of actual reticles through scope and see if I can photo shop on a 16x ATACR and 7-35 at different magnification levels.

 

[Subwrx300]

Here is a photo of MOAR reticle with .5 open subtensions: 16x and 25x.

 

[GhostFace]

I’m a MOA guy and I really like that NF reticle, is that new or something photoshopped?

Here an example if NF MOAR had .5 hash/open area (and slight Xmas tree grid):
View attachment 6981658

 

[Subwrx300]

I’m a MOA guy and I really like that NF reticle, is that new or something photoshopped?

Photoshop... It's a MOAR reticle with gaps at each .5MOA. concept was to prevent clutter but use the gap to have a .5moa wind/elevation hold marks. Who knows? Maybe a company out there will create something similar.
Mocked up the Burris SCR the same way:

 

[SporterII]

I too like the MOAR. Un cluttered is one reason why. As for half min. wind holds if I think I need it I favor the target.
The modified reticle is work well done. I can see real value in it , especially the grid.

 

[GhostFace]

Two reasons why i dont own any NF scopes, one most of their reticles are kinda blah. Usable ? Yes but not my cup of tea. The other with me being a MOA user makes the choices being blah or blah. I know most use mils but Vortex must see enough MOA sells for them to continue to make them.

 

[Subwrx300]

Yeah I'm hoping for a MOA version of the Mil-XT reticle they are releasing this year. Probably won't happen until late 2019 or 2020 but here to hoping.

 

[GhostFace]

If that happens I will buy one. I will be in need of a new scope next year so....