Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Medium Range (Short Long Range) HUNTING Reticle

Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44 with the 4W reticle. Closest thing I have found that I like. I dial for elevation and hold for wind if need be.

CT- The Gen2 reticle by Greybull is sorta like what you drew, however the hashmarks go quite a bit further. Scroll down a bit for the picture
http://greybullprecision.com/products/product/33-precision-hunting-optic.html

That said, I'm thinking I could easily like what you drew.

Modified

I didn't draw it but the first .5 MIL mark would be a small break in crosshair, or else a small hash mark.

Or perhaps I know that after 42 years of big game hunting, nobody can dope 15-30mph swirling winds very accurately, especially the first shot. Windy conditions are a way of life here, so I know to get closer or pass, which is why I posted the reticles I like. I also know that older hunters like myself (53 yr old eyes)cannot see the dots, hashes, etc in challenging light very well. Once again, if all that stuff hanging off the reticle works for you, more power to you.

I've shot 4 muley bucks over 190", one of them a 200"+ typical. Longest shot was 160'ish yds. I like getting close to take the guessing out of the equation, even though I"m CDS equipped.

Can we please have a thread without protesters? If you dont dial and hold off this thread is not for you.

Didn't mean to ruin your day ct. Have fun with it....I'm out.

Thank you, and you certainly did not ruin my day.

The IOR MP-8 reticle is essentially what you drew, just inverted.

Guys, MIL or MOA? I have recently started using MILs and prefer it. There was very little learning curve. My mind thinks logically and tenths just seems to click better for me. But I could do MOA if the need be. If we could have a reticle designed would MOA or MIL sell better?

I think moa would be the better seller but Mils would not stop my purchase if it was the only choice available, ct are you thinking about trying to talk NF into a new reticle?

Been playing with this lately:

Tenths are easier for you to think in just like it is for everyone.


The only way for this to sell enough to actually get made is for it to sell as an AR optic for SDM's, snipers, etc. That by default means mils. What you've drawn is so close to a correct mil based reticle such as a TMR. With only 3 mils of elevation and 2 mils of windage you will not sell it to the LR market. Bthe . 5mil marks need to start at .5 and not go atraight to 1 mil.

I know that you are meaning for it to be a hunter specific reticle, however that market is tiny in comparison.

A straight mil dot reticle while not being "cool" is not a bad place to be.


The SWFA Mil Quad is really good. Very thick outer posts.

SWFA Mil Quad in 3-9x42mm-

I can't imagine the mil-dot not working 90% of the time.

The Mil Quad looks uber, but I have not used one in low light.

I like the TMR but had a hard time using it in low light.

Leupold makes the TMOA for all you MOA losers.

That is all.


Travis

Formidilosus, do you keep the parallax on the 3-9x42 at the factory setting of 100 meters or adjust it out further? Also, the lack of a zero stop on the SS is a deal breaker for me. I realize that a lot of guys think it is not a necessity but I got burned once being off a rotation. Wont let that happen again.

Parallax is factory. It is no issue to as far as you care to shoot.

It takes but a second with a marker to make knowing what rotation your on OBVIOUS. However, there are shims available to make it have a zero stop.

Regarding the MIL R, what are the chances (i.e. can they sell it) if the hollow section of the thick portion is filled in to solid and the thin portion is increased from .035 MIL to .1 MIL?

This is not exactly to scale but close. All that I did was fill in the hollow section and make the thin section approximately 0.1 MIL

I could definitely run this.

HUGE difference.

Ackleyfan, like Formidilosus mentioned, NF will only make a financially sound decision. I'm afraid he's correct, the market for such a reticle is not there.

That said, I've talked to a CS rep at NF and and he conceded that he tried to hunt with the reticle but had to go a different route for a meat-n-tators rig. The reticle is just too fine. I was also told that it is NF's objective for this particular scope (2.5-10x42) to do it all on a hunting rig. Obviously the reticle is too thin to do it all, even the CS rep said it.

I don't know if anything will come of it but they will listen. Probably the best approach is to just beef up the current MIL R. Heck they've done much crazier (worst) things. Exhibit A: IHR reticle