Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Post and Duplex -vs- German #4

In the past, I have sent several Leupold scopes to their custom shop to have German #4 reticles installed. Easier on the old eyes. Looking at the custom shop reticle options, they also offer a Post and Duplex. The only difference I can observe is the spacing betwen the thick sections.

To the folks who have used both reticles, what are the advantages of one over the other? Preference? Why?

If you are familiar with the heavy duplex, the post and duplex is essentially a heavy duplex minus the heavy vertical post. I am generally a fan of #4 reticles but prefer the post and duplex in the Leupold reticles. The center wires of the #4 are pretty thick with the heavier posts spaced a little too far apart. Both are great for low light

Prefer the PD for the reasons stated by Tx. The 4 posts are too far apart, while the PD gives me something to "paste" on the spot if something is happening quick.

Exactly. I've had both as well as a couple of Heavy Duplexes. I prefer the Heavy Duplex on my 6X42 Leupolds. The 4X, Fx2 that had so equipped turned out to be a bit too much. But the 3X DG scope I have is fine. E

Have 3 of the 3xDG scopes. The last one has the PD and it is about perfect.

#4 reticle subtensions are all over the place. I have a Premier Reticles in a Leupold VX-II 1x4 and find the center wire a bit too thin. The post spacing can be too far apart like Leupold's. I have several P&D reticles in some scopes, fixed 4x, fixed 6x, 2.5x8, and 3x9. The posts are a little thinner than a heavy duplex and the posts are a bit closer in the P&D. I have a heavy duplex in a 3x big bore and like it too.

This is actually what I was thinking about. One of the 3x Big Bore scopes with either a #4 or P&D reticle. Recently had Swarovski put a #4 in an older fixed 4x scope. The thick sections on the Swarovski #4 reticle are much closer together than the Leupold #4.

Appreciate all of the input and rationale.

I have hade Leupold #4 and PD scopes as well. I found the Leupold German #4 to be too far apart on the thick sections, as well as the center cross wires to be too thick. I felt compared to other companies like Swarovski the Leupold #4 covered too much of the target when doing more precise shooting. The PD from Leupold was better than their #4 in my opinion. I still prefer a #4 like Swarovski's or Kahles' over anything Leupold has to offer. This is just my opinion.

Last one I sent, I was debating between P&D and German #1, but it was a 1-4, and I needed fastest, and didn’t care too much about small target precision, so the #1 worked out. Hard fr me to see how the P&D could be as good for speed and easy to see in low light, but it’d probably be easy enough for low light and easier to have some finer precision. Can’t say, for sure....though I like their #4 for typical hunting use, then again, I generally prefer bolder reticles over fine crosshairs centers for hunting scopes.

fwiw...

P&D, from those two. Lupe's Heavy Duplex however, is always gonna show up longer than the Leupold #4 crosshair as it has a heavier crosshair than their #4. At least the examples I had.

An attribute of a #4 in the past FFP euro scopes was that the crosshair increased in girth along with the posts as power was increased to facilitate a low-light shot. The FFP subtensions were similar cross-company.

When it comes right down to it, seeing the crosshair at the last possible opportunity is the measurement to compare, unless yer heavy posts are close enough together to make a target estimation once finer crosshairs have faded. Both the Swaro 4a and the now extinct Zeiss #4 second plane reticles with their post ends relatively close together are easily usable after the crosshair fades. Someone did a little thinking...