kgunz11 Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Whatcha think? It's in mils and might be a little busy for most. In pre-production testing phases right now so I don't know if the illumination is daylight visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Not my cup of tea for a low power optic. I like the center dot and broken outer circle though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlamoShooter Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I would like it more with the top removed. and if the side marks were 1/2 the size that they are and the center post went one more jump lower/longer. It would be cool if the outer circle only was visible when it was turned on, = so that you could see through it I use a Meopta, and it is good , but I have to estimate 1 min down from the top or on longer shots 1 min up from the bottom The Meopta dot + gap + post is 14 min long 14 min of elevation is good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risasi Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 (edited) It depends. Is that reticle in FFP? If so and the hash lines are super thin (i.e. small enough you can't really see at 1x) you might have something. P.S. I'll take mine in MOA. Addendum: Ah, it appears to be the new Vortex Viper 1-4x24 coming out this next spring. It appears to be the TMCQ Reticle they have been working on. It also looks like it will be SFP. I'm losing interest. Edited December 16, 2009 by Risasi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpeltier Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Too busy for my taste. Illumination on par with Meopta/Aimpoint/Trijicon etc. is a must in my opinion for a 3-gun scope. Not mearly daytime visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlamoShooter Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Too busy for my taste.Illumination on par with Meopta/Aimpoint/Trijicon etc. is a must in my opinion for a 3-gun scope. Not mearly daytime visible. Thread drift kind of ...Congrats M.P. on you finish at Fort Benning I am new to 3gun , but the time I want the dot bright is with mixed targets close and far. = I can turn up the scope to 4x and turn up the dot Illumination and shoot the close targets with my left eye target focus and keep going at 4x fast splits and transitions , shoot the close targets like a cap was over the front lenz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bore Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 (edited) A little to busy for me and mils is probably not the best for 3 gun. Edited December 16, 2009 by Big Bore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outerlimits Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 (edited) i think we're getting closer. here are an assortment of horseshoe shaped BDC reticles. the IOA-cqb and the grsc were created by the same gentleman. i'm using the GRSC now, but unfortunately, it is not daylight illuminated. the burris is just way too busy. the new trijicon is getting really close, but still a bit much on the left & right. the GRSC is a FFP scope, and if it was bright enuf in the daylight, would be a perfect red dot. all in all, fiber optic is the way to go for brightness. blend the good points of these reticles and i like it for 3 gun. Edited December 16, 2009 by outerlimits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokshwn Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Not my cup of tea for a low power optic.I like the center dot and broken outer circle though. I like the concept of the broken circle and center dot as well, we just don't need the ability to range things will mils in our scopes. Cut out the 12 o clock post and just give me some 5mph and 10 mph wind holds at 3 and 9 with a 300 400 500 600 bdc at 6 oclock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbrowndog Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 For our sport a central aiming point and marks for further than zero range holdover is all that is needed. Windage marks are worthless we either hold on edges or slightly off, we do not need bars and marks giving us clutter. Marks above center are also worthless becuase the zeros that are normally used provide a flat enough trajectory to eliminate holding under something, we may aim low on it but we do not need to aim under it. Precision rifle maybe able to use all the little hash marks and hold offs, but practical rifle does not. Trapr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIO Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I think this is the new Vortex reticle. They are releasing a much needed mid priced FFP mil/mil LR optic along with a new 1-4. Vortec HD line seems to be top notch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokshwn Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 (edited) For our sport a central aiming point and marks for further than zero range holdover is all that is needed. Windage marks are worthless we either hold on edges or slightly off, we do not need bars and marks giving us clutter. Marks above center are also worthless becuase the zeros that are normally used provide a flat enough trajectory to eliminate holding under something, we may aim low on it but we do not need to aim under it.Precision rifle maybe able to use all the little hash marks and hold offs, but practical rifle does not. Trapr Trap as usual uer rhong Tod +1 Edited December 16, 2009 by smokshwn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Tischauser Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 For our sport a central aiming point and marks for further than zero range holdover is all that is needed. Windage marks are worthless we either hold on edges or slightly off, we do not need bars and marks giving us clutter. Marks above center are also worthless becuase the zeros that are normally used provide a flat enough trajectory to eliminate holding under something, we may aim low on it but we do not need to aim under it.Precision rifle maybe able to use all the little hash marks and hold offs, but practical rifle does not. Trapr +1 I like the dot green rather than red too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbrowndog Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 what do you expect I'm an iron sight shooter!!!!!! right now?????????????????? Trapr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 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. I cannot comment on who designed the reticle, and it is in fact the reticle being placed in the Vortex 1-4x24 HD. If you have better suggestions on what a CQB reticle should look like feel free to submit some drawing and I'll pass them along. A lot of these scope in this size/power range are being built for military and LE designated marksman and they are listening to their requests. Wouldn't hurt to have more options. I'm in the ear of a scope company now with outstanding German glass that want to do more than they are doing. If you have a drawing for the perfect CQB reticle I'd be glad to pass it along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken hebert Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Start with the Meopta K dot, take the lower vertical bar out and replace with hold points for 300, 400, 500, and 600 yards. Maybe throw some 10mph wind dots in there, but not multiples. If its 5mph wind, hold between ___yards and the dot, if 20mph wind then double the distance outside the left/right dot at ___yards. Usable info in the reticle WITHOUT being overly busy. Remember that speed is one of the main factors in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 3G people are way outnumbered by Mil and LEO, so they are trying to build an optic for the larger market. Having something that will work for both would be nice to offer. Don't expect to see a ballistic holding reticle from them, loads are different according to temps, ASL, and MV. They just don't want to do it. A reticle with 2 MOA graduations would work fine, you should know your own holds for YOUR load. 200 yards hold 2 MOA, 300 yards hold 4 MOA, 500 yards hold 8 MOA, 600 yards hold 12 MOA. Favor high or low on the target face with those holds and it would be just as effective, but they really don't want to do a BDC reticle that works for some folks but not others. I agree with Trapr, learn to hold left or right edge according to your current environmental for wind holds and don't clutter the reticle with that stuff. I mean you guys complain that there is clutter then you want to add more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 These are rear focal scopes Tod. How about if we made the subtensions darker for corresponding distance marks. For example, the 200, 300, and 400 yard marks could be illuminated and the center also, but everything else black. Would that be too confusing for folks? Next question, how thick would you want the lines to be? .5 MOA thick would be twice as thick as the NF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 OK, so what is your come up at 300 yards? 4MOA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 OK, so what is your come up at 300 yards? 4MOA? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 So you could use something like this assuming it were daylight illuminated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now