Originally Posted by RDFinn

A standard or heavy type reticle would be much easier for SWFA, but it seems, unless I haven't read all these posts correctly, that more folks want to dial and have a MilQuad reticle too. If you just put a duplex type reticle in the SS, all you'll have is an ultra durable version of a thousand other type scope that are already on the market or one that the vast majority of folks wouldn't or couldn't differentiate it from the masses already out there. In all honesty, the MilQuad offers enough elevation on the reticle alone that most people wouldn't ever need to twist a turret in 99% of the hunting situations they'll take a shot in. So an illuminated MQ might cover all the bases. I hunt whitetails so I completely get the "disappearing" reticle against timber/pines/woods landscape.

If folks could see the benefit of something like this ([bleep] rendering)

[Linked Image]

Or something like this....

[Linked Image]

it makes no difference to me. The later would be easy. The former would require a new reticle along with taking the main tube from the Classic SS 10 with the SF knob and putting the illumination assembly in it's place. At least that's what I would tell the OEM to do.


I like the first one,I dont like the second one
That doesn,t look like a standard Leupold Reticle,its still too fine in the middle.
If the second was like a STANDARD Leupold duplex then that would work Great,But there is nothing to be gained by going to a duplex with a thinnly visible inner crosshair !
That defeats the whole purpose of having a duplex because it is easier to see !


Faster horses,Younger women,Older Whiskey,More money