Z3-BRH/BRX vs Conquest Rapid Z

I have the Rapid Z800, and Rapid Z Varmint, as well as the BRH. The Rapid Z system is less fool proof since the hash marks are labeled, but the BRH is better suited to one of the cartridges that I use. The BRX is too thin for use in low light conditions.
 
stubblejumper said:
I have the Rapid Z800, and Rapid Z Varmint, as well as the BRH. The Rapid Z system is less fool proof since the hash marks are labeled, but the BRH is better suited to one of the cartridges that I use. The BRX is too thin for use in low light conditions.
Click to expand...

Completely agree.
 
CheeseBurger said:
Do you not mean more fool proof?
Click to expand...

LOL! Well perhaps depending on the quality of the fool. The numbers make it much easier to figure out what range each cross hair represents. You don't have to range and then look through the scope and count crosshairs down.
 
I thought that the rapid Z was too thick and covered too much of the target for longer range target shooting. The brx could be considered a bit thin for low light conditions if you had a dark background at dusk but it`s worked for me just fine. The brh was made for those who wanted a bit thicker reticle. I have had the rapid Z but much prefer the swarovski reticle not only for the thinner reticle but also for the spacing of the hold over marks. Each mark is .5 mil from the next one out to 4.5 mils and the top of the bottom post is 5.5 mils from the centre, the wind marks are also in mils as well. If you have some type of ballistic calculator with you for longer shots it great, especially if you`re into plugging in altitude and temp changes. If not you can still use the online calculator just like the rapid Z one. It also comes with stickers that you can match your load to and put on your rifle if you use it like the rapid Z. I do notice that I have to pay attention to counting the lines but it`s not like you don`t have time when taking longer pokes. My 2cents
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom