Reticle for Hunting

[Dobermann]

Haven’t moved on it. They’ll do it, but it’s relatively expensive and frankly they don’t make the scope (for hunting) that I want to put it in.

Hi Form, I know you've said in the past that a 4-16x42 (to 45) would work for most of your applications ... why not this in the current ATACR for you? Just weight? Or anything else?

 

[Formidilosus]

Hi Form, I know you've said in the past that a 4-16x42 (to 45) would work for most of your applications ... why not this in the current ATACR for you? Just weight? Or anything else?

Weight and cost. It’ll basically be a $3,000 30oz scope with the reticle. It would be good for a lot of use, but wouldn’t replace the 3-9x SWFA’s because of the weight.

 

[roosiebull]

If they (Nightforce) would put the THLR reticle in a first focal plane NXS 2.5-10x42, I'd probably have one on every rifle I own.

That sounds perfect

 

[left hunter]

Swfa 3-9 with any of these reticles, capped windage and get rid of the unnecessary ridges on the ocular. Why the heck isn’t it just smooth?!

 

[N2TRKYS]

A regular, wide duplex is perfect.

 

[PantherCity]

Weight and cost. It’ll basically be a $3,000 30oz scope with the reticle. It would be good for a lot of use, but wouldn’t replace the 3-9x SWFA’s because of the weight.

Form, you might have talked about it, but what are your thoughts on the SHV 4-14 F1?

FFP

Available in MOA or MIL

C556 or C557


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

Form, you might have talked about it, but what are your thoughts on the SHV 4-14 F1?

FFP

Available in MOA or MIL

C556 or C557


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a good scope. Reticle selection sucks. MOA really is a nonstarter. The Mil-R is broken down stupidly quite frankly. If used solely as a .5 mil hash reticle it’s ok, but most want to use the other increments.

 

[Wrangler13]

Hey Form, in your experience what is the most reliable scope for zeroing and not dialing?

 

[Formidilosus]

Hey Form, in your experience what is the most reliable scope for zeroing and not dialing?

The same ones that are reliable dialing.


After that, from what I’ve seen the NF SHV and S&B Klassiks are good.

 

[jmyers]

Or even a 2.5-12 x 44 ... shouldn't put the weight up by much, and might give just a little better performance.

I like it

 

[S-3 ranch]

Good lord , and a post scope makes a comeback
my grandpa had a weaver 6x on a Belgium browning .270
imo not best accuracy scope when I was youger

 

[Esq]

This is my favorite reticle. It is an old Redfield 3x9 that was mounted on a rugger 77 hmr. I bought the package at a gun show thinking the scope was probably junk, but I love it. Shoots the heads off of every central Oregon sage rat I aim at.

 

[prm]

Latest version. Intent is a short to medium range FFP hunting 2-10 scope. I want a bold reticle for the timber and references for more advanced med range techniques. Wind references are 5/10/15 mph at 400-500 yds. .475bc bullet at 2750, 500’ elevation. Marks to indicate zoom in FOV. .5 and 1.5 mil elevation marks make good 200 and 300 holdovers in a pinch. Range estimator, per thread on THLR mods, is for 18” or 36” objects (chest height) and can be used for horizontal or vertical objects.

10x


2x

 

[Formidilosus]

Latest version. Intent is a short medium range FFP hunting 2-10 scope. I want a bold reticle for the timber and references for more advanced med range techniques. Wind references are 5/10/15 mph at 400-500 yds. .475bc bullet at 2750, 500’ elevation. Marks to indicate zoom in FOV. .5 and 1.5 mil elevation marks make good 200 and 300 holdovers in a pinch. Range estimator, per thread on THLR mods, is for 18” or 36” objects (chest height) and can be used for horizontal or vertical objects.

That looks usable. However, I would not illuminate that much. Center dot only, or at very max 1 mil from center. Anything more and it overwhelms your eye in low light no matter how dim it goes.

 

[prm]

I’ve not used a scope where only the dot illuminates. But apparently works well as that is what the THLR does. I do know that I do not like tree reticles all illuminated. This dot would be a bit larger than THLR per Thomas’ recommendation.

 

[prm]

Trivia question: the wind references (on the above examples) are pointed in the direction of the wind. However, to my eye, I almost feel they should be reversed because of the way wind is typically depicted. Starting at a point and expanding away. Which looks right?

The three represent 5/10/15 mph. The inner edge of each is 400yds for that speed, and the outer edge of each cone is 500yds.

 

[Formidilosus]

I’ve not used a scope where only the dot illuminates. But apparently works well as that is what the THLR does. I do know that I do not like tree reticles all illuminated. This dot would be a bit larger than THLR per Thomas’ recommendation.

View attachment 384090

That would be solid. As far as illumination, the THLR illum in the ZP5 is utterly fantastic even in just partial moonlight. If you can see the animal in the scope, the illumination can be low enough to not wash out the animal. All of the European scopes that I have seen that are designed for night hunting with just ambient light, all have only the very center illuminated and it goes very, very dim.

 

[Formidilosus]

Trivia question: the wind references are pointed in the direction of the wind. However, to my eye, I almost feel they should be reversed because of the way wind is typically depicted. Starting at a point and expanding away. Which looks right?

The three represent 5/10/15 mph. The inner edge of each is 400yds for that speed, and the outer edge of each cone is 500yds.
View attachment 384095

At first glance I prefer this if you are including such.

 

[Esq]

I prefer the point oriented in the direction the wind is blowing.

 

[balkodd]

Take my money! Love the idea. Always been a fan of German #4 reticles.