Here’s the recipe-
1). Mid power 3 or 4x in the low end, 12-16x on the high end.
2). 30mm, 42-45mm objective.
3). sub 24oz weight
4. Specifically designed and built to stay zeroed through impacts and drops.
5). Locking or zero stopped low pro elevation turret, capped windage designed and built for consistent and repeatable use
6). Front focal plane, Mil/Mil with a reticle that is specially designed for low and high power visibility. Cut to the chase and use the THLR reticle from @THLR
7. Large, forgiving eyebox, large FOV if possible.
Then take that scope and actually test them versus the “tests” that everyone does, before placing on the market
Doesn’t the Zeiss V4 check all these boxes?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I want to see THLR‘s reticle. I hope it’s bolder than most. We don’t need .2mil marks for 8mils across the center if we‘re using a tree reticle.
someone got it right. No complaining about the reticle being too small to use. If you can’t bracket an animal between the posts on this one just go ahead and quit shooting all together. Nothing too hard to see and the box will help draw your eye in without having it be thick and blocking your view like some other brands.At close range use like a German #1.
sub 10 yards
View attachment 336943
Some of the reticle feature aren’t for game hunting, however they do not distract from normal use. The reticle deviates from how most reticle are designed because it was designed for how people are actually using and shooting them versus how they think they are. It is without a doubt the best FFP reticle on low power for close shooting, and from 6’ish and up magnification it offers .2 mil holds without cluttering the center where you actually shoot and spot impacts/splash.
The quick answer is: I want to use the scope at mag levels other than 10x, and I’m prioritizing retaining my wind holds and maintaining my sight picture through recoil over magnification. I do struggle to do this with a T3X tikka lite in 6.5CM on 10x, but I’m also a lightweight.Why do you wish it was FFP? I dont see a purpose for a 10x scope to be FFP. If you need to use the reticle for measurement you are shooting far enough for it to be on 10x.
I do wish it was 12x or 14x.
If you need to use the reticle for measurement you are shooting far enough for it to be on 10x.
Thanks for giving another option you are right, specs look good wish they had illuminated reticle. Never thought I needed or wanted illuminated but got a scope with firedot and now any new scope I buy I'm wanting illuminated reticle of some sorts.After a lot of reading and research the closest thing to what most describe here is a huskemaw 4-16x42. It’s 21 ounces. Simple clean reticle with wind holds. It is sfp and from some things I read they retain zero very well. I know it doesn’t get much attention or love maybe because of their advertising but If the scope will retain zero and track it’s probably a solid choice. It does have adjustable parallax, but the only two things that are questionable are the weird .333 moa and I’m not sure I understand the zero stop they have.
I am Only basing this from specs and I have zero first hand experience with a huskemaw. On paper though it sure fits a lot of what many of us are looking for.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thats not true at all. In the couple of seasons I have shot, or been beside people that have needed to hold significant wind well inside the range that less than 10x is applicable. Antelope at 320 yards with more than a 1mil hold, elk at 427, deer at 606, antelope at 317, 270’ish and 250’ish, elk at 735, deer at 606, elk at 248, deer at 497, etc etc. None of those were on max power of the scope, all were below 10x. There is no downside to a well designed FFP at all powers, whereas there is no upside to a reticle that changes size with power when field shooting beyond close range.
As for the 2.5-10x NXS, the last several animals that I killed while using that scope at distance were all on less than 10x due to FOV, and is the reason that I don’t use that scope much anymore.