00bullitt

I'm not missing THE point....I refuse to acknowledge it. I know and talk to way too many people in SF MIL and LE groups. They are not happy with what they have. If the product was out there....it would sell. Where the scope companies are wrong is that they don't listen where it matters. They get info from wrong sources and act off input from the wrong people. and then they invest big money and make the wrong product. And actually.....A persons perception is their reality. Nothing big is wrong with my Swarovski. I would prefer bigger zeroing knobs and a reticle like we are discussing such as Erik's with a 2moa dot. But it does everything I need it to in its current state.

It needs to be much brighter. But just the dot. Mine was not even visible with cloud cover in mid day. It needs to be BRIGHT. Bobby.....As for 3G guys.....if they can do what they do as fast as they do......don't you think it would translate to an advantage in MIL/LE?

NF is definitely behind the curve without daytime illumination. That would make their 1-4 much more marketable and cause sales to go way up currently. Still not perfect but a huge move in the right direction. The Eotechs are not perfect and the ACOGs have lotsa shortcomings. If the perfect scope was out there....it would sell. And a $1200 price point is totally worth it to me if its what I need. The 3G crowd knows what a low power CQB optic needs to be. I sometimes question if the Mil and LE actually do. They can easily fall into the category of "they don't know what they don't know". Just because they have the LE or MIL title does not put them in the know. There are plenty of them in the know out there. But are they the ones pitching to the scope manufacturers?

Yeah.....but what works in 3gun....works for LE/MIL as well. NF will remain behind the curve in the low power optic category. Thats their choice. When it comes to optics that work for me.....I'll buy them.....regardless of cost.....if and when they come out. Right now....I can't find anything to beat the Z6.

Its decent. could be used for CQB/3 gun but still not ideal. Trapr.....yours sounds good.

I won't buy anything until something more useful than my Swaro Z6 comes out. I also prefer 6x too on the top end. I really do like the stadia tree of your new reticle though.

I dont need to bracket a target. I just need to place the dot on it and know that the scope is horizontal to the target. Remove the vertical line above the dot too. Thats lookin better though. The key is how bright the dot can be in the daylight. It needs to be Aimpoint bright.

I like that stadia tree alot. I'd like a 2moa dot for a center aiming point that is not intersected by a horizontal line that would illuminate in daylight. Lose the vertical line below the tree. And take the thick parts on the horizontal line further to the outside of the reticle. Or take that stadia tree and place it below the dot in the new Vortec reticle in the OP.

Yes....its usable but still a little more cluttered than I like. It could still be simpler for our/CQB uses. But daytime illumination is a must have.

Well.....with a 200 yard zero.....it would simply be to place your dot about 6" above(2moa) intended POI. For instance.....shooting at a 10" MGM flash target.....I would place the dot at the top of the plate for a center POI. I personally don't need a 300 yard hash mark. I know my dope with the 200 yard zero i use. Having it would not be bad....but not having it reduces clutter.

I thought I read that this reticle was in the front plane. My bad. Second plane is good. As for illumination....the only thing that really needs to illuminate is the dot. And it needs to illuminate to be daylight visible. The hash marks need to be 1/4 moa or less. I prefer 1/3moa. It should start at 400 preferrable but 300 would work and go to 600. Midway incremental marks are not needed.

I guess one of the biggest problems is that reticle desires tend to be very subjective. Not one design suits everyone as witnessed in these threads. There are alot of good reticles out there that have slight shortcomings to make them awesome. As for a calibrated stadia tree. Calibrate it for one velocity and bullet weight and they tend to intersect somewhere useful on the tree with other bullet types. Or do as you say and use 2moa increments. Its really up to the shooter to know their dope for the reticle and how to hold it on target. I personally don't care for a windage hold....but its not hard to incorporate it into the stadia tree and have minimal clutter. And again.....another scope mfg. put the reticle of a low power optic in the front focal plane. I just don't get it. for a scope up to 6x....its just not needed.

Its a combination of reticle design and daytime visible illumination. Take Erik Lund's design with a 2moa dot to your people. Tell them to daylight illuminate it and put the reticle in the second focal plane. Hell....the broken circle/dot design you show with a stadia tree to 600 yards would be really nice.Get rid of the other clutter. But again....low power optics in the front focal plane really have no place in CQB. Oh....and its nice to have zeroing turrets to dial dope with for precision shots. And DMR and CQB are really different animals. The game of 3 gun is as close to CQB requirements as you can get for needing design criteria in an optic.

There definitely seems to be no shortage of precision rifleman that think they know what a CQB reticle needs to be. I'm sure that is who we have churning out these designs.

BarryRM 18(65), Larry White(63), Ponytail(51), Impetus Gunworx(34), Morten(51), Rmack(42), stellarpod(54), antonio carrillo(38), abn-rgr(39), Treym7(33), NoShootRanger(39) Happy Birthday to all and to my good friends Kevin(noshootranger) and Chad(abn-rgr)

Kinda....it speeds them up by not letting your thumb get stuck in the load port. If your thumb gets pierced and stuck....reloads become very slow.

Not my cup of tea for a low power optic. I like the center dot and broken outer circle though.

The LD-I reticle is hard to get here in the states for some reason. I'm much more fond of my CD-I reticle though.

If you are not LEO....the best price going is to get one off of the SWFA Samplelist assuming they have one.

Congrats Sam!!! Thats real cool. But i'm with Mark......this thread is worthless without pics.

By modified....can I assume you mean welded up? If so.....Jeff Cockrum aka member name C-rums can weld it up for you.

The 6.5 bolt is the same as the 7.62x39. But thats all that is really needed. A new barrel,bolt and muzzle device. Everything else works. With a long enough barrel.....the 6.5 is great to 1000. I like a 24" to poke way out there but a 20 will do what you want well.

WOW......just WOW!!! Awesome accomplishment. I think Max Michel was the last junior to make GM. And way to go Dad for being such a supportive father to help him get there.

nope and that was on purpose... Tod, I totally understand the balance point that you make, however that's a function of overall weight as well.. for example, if the top ends weight less, then the balance point can be made to be the same with lighter backend componets as well. I know you guys like the PRS, but it's large, bulky and one of the heaviest. I have a UBR that I also really like, has all the features of the PRS, for a few less oz... I'm most likely going to pick up an upper from Paul at MSTN, but in thinking thru all of this, I decided I'd see what others weighed.... I shall have to pull my RR 16" mid with AA piston out and see what it weight, with UBR Alan As you shoot some matches and gain some more experience and actually get a stuck case(it will happen)......you'll realize the benefits of the PRS when you buttstoke your UBR on the ground to clear it and watch the tube snap off at the receiver. The PRS is robust and strong. While the UBR is stronger than most other adjustables.....they still break. I have yet to break or even scratch the PRS. I shot with a UBR prior to the PRS.....until it broke doing what I speak of above. A light rifle actually can have adverse effects in this game. It can become pretty jumpy and harder to settle. I've made them too light before. My rifle now balances well and actually feels light at a little over 9lbs. and does not move when the trigger is pressed. I think you'll find this to be an evolutionary process. What works for one doesn't always work for someone else.

Paul kinda followed in your footsteps......he was like the squad role model.