Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics If SWFA were to make a hunting model......

Yes even the tactical guys don't dial for wind

Wow lots of different ideas here, but it seems like there is a common theme with lower profile capped turrets. I spoke with Chris this morning and he said he would do a special run for the Campfire of fixed 6X scopes if we like. One idea was a thick duplex reticle with capped moa turrets. Your thoughts on this ? Designing a new reticle or modifications to a heavy/thicker duplex reticle with hold offs costs money and time and judging by all the responses here, I doubt we could get enough people to agree on one design anyway. So, as they say, penny for your thoughts.

SWFA SS 6 X with capped MOA turrets and a thicker style duplex ?

a 6x with capped windage and a low profile ele turrent something like the Bushnell LRHS

the mil quad is fine just make the center section heavier say around 1/3 MOA

Mil or MOA clicks , either one is entirely functional , just have the reticle match

Without windage marks on the horizontal wire and an exposed elevation turret, I would have no interest.

John

+1 and add zero stop.

John

Me too. I'm reading that folks just want the windage capped and not the elevation. Otherwise it'd be a Leupold...

C'mon man, don't quit that easy.

Set some criteria. Take a poll for holdoffs





Dammit man, I got to have a few stadia lines or I'll just die...

I'll be happy to collate any data and crunch numbers if need be.

Could you elaborate on that a little bit ? Interesting you said that as I was speaking with one of the guys who has had input on reticle designs and we were speaking about bringing the horizontal thicker sections closer to the intersection by perhaps eliminating one of the windage hold off hash marks. In all practicality how many windage hold offs does a guy need before he's says ....hey maybe it's blowing to hard to chance a shot on live targets at this distance...."

...see my above post cause that's where I'm heading. Maybe just leave the MilQuad alone and offer a SS 6X with a LP capped windage turret. So.......MilQuad in mils or the new MOA MilQuad in moa graduations ?


MilQuad MOA

Maybe its a terminology thing, but for a hunting scope I like a clearer picture.

Don't get me wrong, I don't own a single scope without a BDC right now, but I think the milquad is too cluttered for a walk around, multiuse, not dedicated to prairie dog or long range yote hunting rifle.

If all they are going to do is tighten up the horizontal and make a smaller turret, it will sell I'm sure, but it won't be to hunting scopes what the SS is to tactical. It will just be "tactical lite".

But to your question, if they wanted to attract hunters that don't want too much to think about, then MOA.


to your pic, I would add the heavy line below the 40, and knock out some of the intermediate hash marks just to clear it up some.

I'd prefer mils, but as long as the reticle and turrets match, neither is a show stopper. If they didn't make the reticle thick enough to be used throughout legal shooting hours, I might as well live with the scopes as they are currently sold.

John

The center section of the crosshairs is too fine for my tired old eyes to make use of the mil marks at sunset +30. Gets mighty tough at SS+20. I don't worry about the close shots in low light as I just bracket with the fat parts of the reticle. The only change to the reticle I care about is I would like to see the center section (at least in the 6x) made thicker, say about .1 mil thick. Wouldn't mind seeing the same for the 10x, but it being 10x, 1/4 MOA thick would be ok. This would make the long range features of the reticle actually visible, thus useful through legal shooting hours on game and still offer enough precision for game sized targets. As it is, at about SS+20 or so, a very fine long range scope becomes a short range only scope. As much as I like my LRHS, I feel the same way about it's reticle.

John

fixed six with30mm tube but much smaller objective like maybe 24 or so..

Cheaper 1x6

Same here. Just cap the windage off and we're there. I wouldn't cuss about a bolder reticle for lower light but it's not s deal breaker either.

yup , Id make the center section .1 mil or 1/3 MOA

you could take the heavy portion to around 15 MOA or less from the center , as seldom would you try to hold more wind than that , and bring the bottom up even with the three other posts...the whole idea is to dial elevation after all

1/2 mil or 2 MOA increments for the hashmarks , anything finer is scarcely visible in a 6x

Yep on the 6x42. Just go with a bit bolder duplex design, perhaps even offering some windage marks in mils or moa. Leave the top turret exposed and of the same units as the turret. Would allow for a bit better view of the aiming point in lower light against a dark background. Would only require a reticle tweak, so not much $$ there for development.

Will add close to dark my MQ reticle becomes standard duplex with my eyes. I can still make hits but "I" can't make use of the subtensions any longer.

That would be just fine too. I've not read all the responses but I think most are agreeing more than disagreeing.

the solution to the mil quad MOA reticle being thick enough is make the reticle SFP and put it in the 3-15 model. It would be similar to the nxs MOAR reticle which is great in that power range. trying to put it in a 6x scope is a no go, heck IMO a 10x isn't that great of idea. Its gets pretty tuff to see 1 moa on a target when you have less than 1x. being the reticle would be SFP it would grow at low powers retaining its visibility.

I don't get the fixed power fixation. Other than durability what do you gain with fixed power? Since the super chicken line offers durability and reliable adjustments, or so they say. why not keep the strengths of the scope. duplex and capped turrets on a fixed power scope is no better than just buying a leupold.

some simple wind hold offs and capped windage turrets should satisfy most of the hunting crowd. and adding a zero stop or a way to put one on the scope would seal the deal.

Well I can't say that I agree with that completely. First of all, by the time you added an elevation turret to a fixed power Leupold, you would be some where in the neighborhood of spending $200-$300 more. Second, the SWFA has a proven track record of durability, more so than the Leupold I'd bet judging from all the reports from the field.