Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Hunting with the MQ Reticle

For those of you that hunt with your SWFA and MQ reticle, how does it do in low light? Not necessarily the glass, but how visible is the reticle in early or late shooting light?

I have a mil dot SWFA 6x on an AR that punches paper and the occasional coyote but I haven’t had one in the deer woods yet.

Take one out early or late and see for yourself.

I tried mine in my yard, and near the end of legal hours found it impossible to see in the shade, while other hunting reticles were easily visible. End of discussion for me. Your eyes may be different.

Great scope (6x) where it works for me. Want another one or two.

Same experience for me.

I also took the 6x hunting with another rifle with a Nightforce 2-10x42.

Was not able to see pigs at dusk with the SWFA SS 6x. Picked up the rifle with the Nightforce and shot three.

About to shoot a pig right now with a Nightforce.

I plan to do that sometime this week just to see what it’s like. Thank you. I haven’t ordered one for a hunting rifle but had considered it. I just wasn’t sure what hunting experience had revealed. Thanks!

I have both a 6X and a 3X9 on a pair of Kimber Hunters and another 6X on an RAR .223.
While I haven’t had them long, they’ve all spent quite a bit of time in the woods.
I hunt in oak savanna, rolling hills and deep draws here in southern Oregon and find that if I can see them with my binoculars I can certainly kill them with my rifle (deer, elk, rock chucks & ground squirrels)...
I usually run the 3X9 on 4 or 5x and roll it up to 9x to go long.
I have a bunch of Leupold scopes - 2x7, 2.5x8, 3x9, 3.5x10 and 4.5x14 and I haven’t noticed any difference in low light usage compared to the SWFA’s....... my $.02

....

I've hunted with them a fair bit and spent time comparing them with others. The heavy outer bars can be used to subtend fairly late....the thin inner section is lost much earlier on dark broken backgournds (heavy pines/brush/etc). Like any scope if it's a lighter, open, solid background (field) you can see the inner plex longer. Lacking a lower outer bar hurts it a little on subtending in low light depending on the background, pine tops with lighter ground cover....but it most cases it will still work.

It's the trade off for precision with the finer reticle. If you're comfortable subtending off the outer bars it extends how long you can use it...but the inner section gets lost in dim light and broken backgrounds.

I tried subtending while testing my 6x, and the gap is a bit wide to pull that off quickly, and quick is important most of the time here when a good many deer are on their way someplace else. If the top bar came closer to the center, it would be much better. Not sure why that’s up there so far.

Ain’t only the MQ with this problem. I had my Grendel out Saturday and the Ballistic Plex in the Burris 4.5-14 E1 was a bit thin as well even in thin open brush at first light. Plus, that side focus knob kept digging into my leg. Be nice if they would offer a plain duplex in more models. Think I’m going to swap that one out.

Yep. Sent mine down the road after difficulties picking up the reticle in low light. Lots of my animals around here don't show up until those last few minutes of the evening.

Makers sure have screwed up hunting reticles in recent years, all I need is a good bold dark duplex like the 3-9 Conquests had.

But for my use I need to add a lit dot to it.

Same worries for me. I would love the SS 6x42 with their turrets and a duplex reticle. Maybe even an illuminated center dot. I don’t need the whole screen lit up. A guy can wish!

I have shot a lot of deer in fading light with both the 10x and the 6x. I have never had one issue using it during the time when it was prudent to use them. It was not in heavy timber, which could be a bit more of a problem. I like them just fine.

How is the MOA reticle compared to the MQ in the 6X, same, better or worse?

After playing around with one for a summer, I pulled it off a hunting rig because of low light deficiency. Love it for general shooting.

MOA is a unit of measure AR. I'm assuming, without putting words in your mouth, you intended to ask how is the Mil Dot reticle compared to the MQ. If not, I apologize. In my opinion, all else being equal, the Mil Dot shows up better than does the MQ. I prefer the MQ to the Mil Dot; but, to me, I can see the Mil Dot better than the MQ in the same scope, at the same power in the same light.

This is the scope and reticle I was referring to.

https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-6x42-tactical-30mm-riflescope-3.html?___SID=U

Described as an MOA Quad.

AR, this is why I said I didn't want to put words in your mouth. Thanks for clarifying. I have used Mil Quad and Mil Dot and many others. I have never used the MOA Quad which, for lack of a better description, is SWFAs utilization of the popular hash and diamond setup (as opposed to Mil Dot) while utilizing moa subtensions and adjustments. I'll provide a couple of pictures below which came from SWFA.

Mil Quad



MOA Quad

Drop that top post down to within a couple tics of center, and most of our low-light troubles are over. Back in the bad old days before internal adjustments, some of the boys used to mount scopes with picket post reticles upside down to simplify holdover, or so I’ve read; I ain’t quite that old.

To my eyes I could not see the crosshairs on the two super chickens I had in lower light and in the woods. Daylight and no problem but not a low light scope for my eyes so I sold both.

The 10x classic mil quad is the only one I've ever had to look for in low light. The 6x classic, 10x HD and 3-9 HD I've used past legal shooting time without any problems. Last pig I shot at dark was across a field in the brush, if it wasn't black I couldn't have seen the pig but it stood out against the brush and I had no problem seeing my reticle on the 3-9 mil quad.

But everyone's eyes are different...