HorusVision Scopes
- Thread starter KDX
- Start date
ontariodoubletapper
CGN Regular
- Location
- Windsor, Ontario
Cabelas used to carry them a few years back. Great clarity and the H25 reticle was pretty cool for windage and elevation. Had to pull my socks off to remember the count for how far to go up and over though. Pricing seemed to be right in line with the higher end target scopes.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
There are simpler and I feel, better ways of accomplishing the same thing. Big flaw to this system, most users will assume that their input data will create correct output data. Without a weather station, muzzle velocity at time of shooting, and a few other relavent numbers, your data can be way off. Enough to wound an animal at extended distances. And extended distance is the whole point to this system.
500yds is not an extended distance!
I feel this falls into the techno 'crutch' allowing some shooters to reach beyond their true skill levels.
Jerry
500yds is not an extended distance!
I feel this falls into the techno 'crutch' allowing some shooters to reach beyond their true skill levels.
Jerry
The big advantage of the system is that you "see" what kind of elevation and windage you need at different distance and weather conditions.
To me, it really force you to learn what correction you need to hit the target.
Instead of turning the elevation to the distance you are shooting at and forgeting that adjustement. To visualise what correction you need to every shot is the key.
In regard to the comment about "techno crutch" I have absolutely no idea what you mean, this system is simpler and more reliable because you dont have to make any mechanical adjustement.
To shoot long distance you need to take in consideration the weather,muzzle velocity, etc, with any kind of scope or metallic sights, so what is your point?
I am not saying that this system is the only one worth using, what I am saying is that in long range shooting it is as good or better than the conventional way of adjusting mechanicly your sighting device.
Once you have tried it, I will be very interested in your review.
To me, it really force you to learn what correction you need to hit the target.
Instead of turning the elevation to the distance you are shooting at and forgeting that adjustement. To visualise what correction you need to every shot is the key.
In regard to the comment about "techno crutch" I have absolutely no idea what you mean, this system is simpler and more reliable because you dont have to make any mechanical adjustement.
To shoot long distance you need to take in consideration the weather,muzzle velocity, etc, with any kind of scope or metallic sights, so what is your point?
I am not saying that this system is the only one worth using, what I am saying is that in long range shooting it is as good or better than the conventional way of adjusting mechanicly your sighting device.
Once you have tried it, I will be very interested in your review.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
So let's cover the system and its application.
First off the system contains these components: A scope with grid reticle and a ballistic program. The system is designed to improve the first shot hit probability at long range, that is distances beyond 400yds.
Also required, a PALM to use the ballistic program, a laser rangefinder (best you can afford but you need that anyways), a wind meter (Kestrel makes some really nice models, a good tool). Extras to really get the most from the system include a barometer and an altimeter, a way of measuring inclination if hunting in very hilly country. Actually, some GPS have barometer and altimeter features so this is easily accomplished. I have a GPS now as I suck at directions in the woods.
How this is supposed to work: When in the field, you spot your quarry. Range, enter all the different data, hit enter and a result is generated for the hold off to engage. A grid value on that reticle. Place that reticle location on the target and squeeze. Worry about how you are going to pack this monster out of the bush.
So why do I have concerns about this system? Let's address some points.
1) Do you need to shoot game beyond 400yds? Inside that range, most hunting cartridges can stay on the animal without needing any scope adjustment. Practise will illustrate the necessary hold over. As to windage, these tend not to drift significantly in 'shootable' winds. Again, practise will let you know what your bullet will drift. Most scope reticles can be brought into play to provide a hold over point instead of just guessing and shooting. I use a mil dot reticle not to range but to provide a convenient way to judge hold over at close range and hold off for windage once dialed up for LR shots.
If you don't feel that shooting at game that far away is ethical, then this system serves no purpose. I do hunt beyond 400yds, so let's move on.
2) You need a lot of support electronics. Will this gear survive being in the field? will that PALM work in the cold and wet? Most everything else is designed to survive. Do you have enough batteries? What happens if the PALM breaks or malfunctions? Don't know about you but I buy armoured everything because everything I bring into the field has met terra firma, not in a nice way.
Loose your PALM, you are out of business. There is one of the techno crutch things.
3) Agreed that dialing up a scope can have its problems. That is why only the best mechanical scopes need apply (you tested that didn't you?). Plus, if you don't zero your scope religiously, you could dial yourself to the moon (but that is simple discipline like putting the right ammo in your pocket). So the etched glass reticle makes for an almost zero error system. Where it can cause error is at different magnification.
But the scope is designed so that the scope always has the same effect dispite magnification? Really...better check that. The scope center on good quality scopes don't move dispite changes in mag. Yeah, check that too.
4) calibration. The program works with all your inputted data. If that data is wrong, you will get bad results. The amount of error grows as range increases. You tested everything didn't you? Well, some will go with printed BC, estimated muzzle velocities (alright most have access to a chronograph) and assume that all is well. That rarely ever works in the real world. If you believe print BC applies to you and your rifle, you don't shoot enough at LR.
All this must be verified in real world shooting. With the tech, do I need to? I checked it at 200yds and it was bang on. That can lead to some really bad assumptions. Techno crutch. Nothing will ever replace real world practise. You don't know if you can hit a target at long range until you shoot at that range.
What happens if velocity is different at lower temps or different atmospheric conditions? If your actual drop changes by 1/2 min, that can be significant enough for a miss or worse a wounding shot. These are issues for anyone LR hunting and must be resolved.
5) Reticle: Some will be able to work with that busy grid. Personally, I believe it can lead to error. What if in the excitement and haste you use the wrong aiming point? With the dial up, you are always aiming dead center.
Plus I can pretty much say that at some distance and condition, your actual POI will be the space between the grid points. Now there is some degree of guesswork. A source of error. Is this really a big deal? You would already have that answer if you shot enough LR.
6) Conditions. The benefit is that this program will compensate for elevation, changes in atmospheric conditions. If you believe this you are either hunting on top of the Himalayas or don't shoot LR enough. For most hunting, even sheep hunting, the change in elevation will have very small effect on the actual bullet POI. If there is doubt, you can use the shoot and spot sighter method which I will explain later.
7) Wind: with my wind meter, I just put in the value and out comes the 'right' hold off. Again, you don't shoot LR enough because you will know that wind doesn't always stay the same from you to the target. Being able to read conditions only comes from trigger time. Most importantly, that experience will also tell you when NOT to shoot.
I hunt at LR and have very strict rules that I follow to ensure success. I always test my load, scope, rangefinder, and drop chart in a variety of conditions and at distance. I know I need so many clicks at 800yds because I shoot 800yds. I know what my rifle will do at 5 below because I shoot in the winter.
I know how much hold off for wind because I practise. For wind, I have a simple rule. I don't shoot in wind that is more then one mildot at LR. That usually limits me to winds under 12MPH, speeds that can be doped using the surrounding foilage and a slight misjudgement still allows the bullet to hit home.
Here are potential flaws to having this system: a shooter feels that they can shoot at any distance because they have entered all the necessary printed data, even though that data may not be accurate in that rifle under present conditions.
They feel they can shoot in windy conditions because their wind meter gives them a reading that the software gives a hold off for. Do they need to practise with this kind of support?
They feel they can shoot at very far distances even though the accuracy of the rifle was never verified let alone practised.
They believe that result on that PALM and have no other frame of reference. Or at least rely heavily on its results. What if that PALM fails?
Finally, this is what I feel is this systems biggest weakest...time to engage. Unless you are hunting out of a blind/fixed location, how long will it take to get set up (take all that stuff out of your pockets), take all those readings (if you feel so inclined) or at least enter the distance and get a result???
LR hunting should never be rushed but animals tend not to just sit there and watch you boot up computers, measure conditions, punch in numbers (not so much fun with cold hands), figure out where on that reticle the target should be aimed and engage. With practise, much of this can be reduced. But then with practise, will you need all this stuff?
There is too much dependance on things that can break or be lost. The Techno crutch.
The only piece of electronic gear I must have is my rangefinder. Not someone elses as that can also provide another source of error. If my rangefinder fails, I get closer. My drop tables (several on my person and rifle) are laminated cards that give come ups and windage hold offs. They can't break or fail to function and if one gets lost or damaged, a spare is in the other pocket.
I spot the game, range the game (only thing I need to take out of my pocket), read the chart (either on my rifle or rangefinder), dial up, dope, shoot. This all happens very quickly.
I don't need to worry about taking too many things out of my pockets, then putting them back in or putting them into dirt/mud/snow or water. All the while trying to be as stealth and quiet as possible and not drop my rifle. Try using this much stuff while being in the bush. It's a royal pain. If you don't believe me, try it. Simplify...
About the only way to streamline and speed up my technique is to have a rangefinder in the binos (too big, too much money for now).
If the practise and testing is done as I described, you will have all the info you need to make that shot, on a card. If time is limited and conditions iffy, you can always take a spotter shot just to verify everything. If the shoot and spot method is used, all the variables that the electronics TRY and solve are resolved in one real world impact.
If the animal is close enough to be scared off by the bang, just go shoot it. You did practise didn't you?
In theory and on a nice clean dry bench, the Horus system works. I questions its real world effect and appeal. The best computer I carry is between my ears. The data I plug in happens during the launching of a bunch of bullets. If the batteries ever fail, someone else will have to figure out how to carry this monster out of the bush.
Jerry
PS did I mention that this system is really pricey?
First off the system contains these components: A scope with grid reticle and a ballistic program. The system is designed to improve the first shot hit probability at long range, that is distances beyond 400yds.
Also required, a PALM to use the ballistic program, a laser rangefinder (best you can afford but you need that anyways), a wind meter (Kestrel makes some really nice models, a good tool). Extras to really get the most from the system include a barometer and an altimeter, a way of measuring inclination if hunting in very hilly country. Actually, some GPS have barometer and altimeter features so this is easily accomplished. I have a GPS now as I suck at directions in the woods.
How this is supposed to work: When in the field, you spot your quarry. Range, enter all the different data, hit enter and a result is generated for the hold off to engage. A grid value on that reticle. Place that reticle location on the target and squeeze. Worry about how you are going to pack this monster out of the bush.
So why do I have concerns about this system? Let's address some points.
1) Do you need to shoot game beyond 400yds? Inside that range, most hunting cartridges can stay on the animal without needing any scope adjustment. Practise will illustrate the necessary hold over. As to windage, these tend not to drift significantly in 'shootable' winds. Again, practise will let you know what your bullet will drift. Most scope reticles can be brought into play to provide a hold over point instead of just guessing and shooting. I use a mil dot reticle not to range but to provide a convenient way to judge hold over at close range and hold off for windage once dialed up for LR shots.
If you don't feel that shooting at game that far away is ethical, then this system serves no purpose. I do hunt beyond 400yds, so let's move on.
2) You need a lot of support electronics. Will this gear survive being in the field? will that PALM work in the cold and wet? Most everything else is designed to survive. Do you have enough batteries? What happens if the PALM breaks or malfunctions? Don't know about you but I buy armoured everything because everything I bring into the field has met terra firma, not in a nice way.
Loose your PALM, you are out of business. There is one of the techno crutch things.
3) Agreed that dialing up a scope can have its problems. That is why only the best mechanical scopes need apply (you tested that didn't you?). Plus, if you don't zero your scope religiously, you could dial yourself to the moon (but that is simple discipline like putting the right ammo in your pocket). So the etched glass reticle makes for an almost zero error system. Where it can cause error is at different magnification.
But the scope is designed so that the scope always has the same effect dispite magnification? Really...better check that. The scope center on good quality scopes don't move dispite changes in mag. Yeah, check that too.
4) calibration. The program works with all your inputted data. If that data is wrong, you will get bad results. The amount of error grows as range increases. You tested everything didn't you? Well, some will go with printed BC, estimated muzzle velocities (alright most have access to a chronograph) and assume that all is well. That rarely ever works in the real world. If you believe print BC applies to you and your rifle, you don't shoot enough at LR.
All this must be verified in real world shooting. With the tech, do I need to? I checked it at 200yds and it was bang on. That can lead to some really bad assumptions. Techno crutch. Nothing will ever replace real world practise. You don't know if you can hit a target at long range until you shoot at that range.
What happens if velocity is different at lower temps or different atmospheric conditions? If your actual drop changes by 1/2 min, that can be significant enough for a miss or worse a wounding shot. These are issues for anyone LR hunting and must be resolved.
5) Reticle: Some will be able to work with that busy grid. Personally, I believe it can lead to error. What if in the excitement and haste you use the wrong aiming point? With the dial up, you are always aiming dead center.
Plus I can pretty much say that at some distance and condition, your actual POI will be the space between the grid points. Now there is some degree of guesswork. A source of error. Is this really a big deal? You would already have that answer if you shot enough LR.
6) Conditions. The benefit is that this program will compensate for elevation, changes in atmospheric conditions. If you believe this you are either hunting on top of the Himalayas or don't shoot LR enough. For most hunting, even sheep hunting, the change in elevation will have very small effect on the actual bullet POI. If there is doubt, you can use the shoot and spot sighter method which I will explain later.
7) Wind: with my wind meter, I just put in the value and out comes the 'right' hold off. Again, you don't shoot LR enough because you will know that wind doesn't always stay the same from you to the target. Being able to read conditions only comes from trigger time. Most importantly, that experience will also tell you when NOT to shoot.
I hunt at LR and have very strict rules that I follow to ensure success. I always test my load, scope, rangefinder, and drop chart in a variety of conditions and at distance. I know I need so many clicks at 800yds because I shoot 800yds. I know what my rifle will do at 5 below because I shoot in the winter.
I know how much hold off for wind because I practise. For wind, I have a simple rule. I don't shoot in wind that is more then one mildot at LR. That usually limits me to winds under 12MPH, speeds that can be doped using the surrounding foilage and a slight misjudgement still allows the bullet to hit home.
Here are potential flaws to having this system: a shooter feels that they can shoot at any distance because they have entered all the necessary printed data, even though that data may not be accurate in that rifle under present conditions.
They feel they can shoot in windy conditions because their wind meter gives them a reading that the software gives a hold off for. Do they need to practise with this kind of support?
They feel they can shoot at very far distances even though the accuracy of the rifle was never verified let alone practised.
They believe that result on that PALM and have no other frame of reference. Or at least rely heavily on its results. What if that PALM fails?
Finally, this is what I feel is this systems biggest weakest...time to engage. Unless you are hunting out of a blind/fixed location, how long will it take to get set up (take all that stuff out of your pockets), take all those readings (if you feel so inclined) or at least enter the distance and get a result???
LR hunting should never be rushed but animals tend not to just sit there and watch you boot up computers, measure conditions, punch in numbers (not so much fun with cold hands), figure out where on that reticle the target should be aimed and engage. With practise, much of this can be reduced. But then with practise, will you need all this stuff?
There is too much dependance on things that can break or be lost. The Techno crutch.
The only piece of electronic gear I must have is my rangefinder. Not someone elses as that can also provide another source of error. If my rangefinder fails, I get closer. My drop tables (several on my person and rifle) are laminated cards that give come ups and windage hold offs. They can't break or fail to function and if one gets lost or damaged, a spare is in the other pocket.
I spot the game, range the game (only thing I need to take out of my pocket), read the chart (either on my rifle or rangefinder), dial up, dope, shoot. This all happens very quickly.
I don't need to worry about taking too many things out of my pockets, then putting them back in or putting them into dirt/mud/snow or water. All the while trying to be as stealth and quiet as possible and not drop my rifle. Try using this much stuff while being in the bush. It's a royal pain. If you don't believe me, try it. Simplify...
About the only way to streamline and speed up my technique is to have a rangefinder in the binos (too big, too much money for now).
If the practise and testing is done as I described, you will have all the info you need to make that shot, on a card. If time is limited and conditions iffy, you can always take a spotter shot just to verify everything. If the shoot and spot method is used, all the variables that the electronics TRY and solve are resolved in one real world impact.
If the animal is close enough to be scared off by the bang, just go shoot it. You did practise didn't you?
In theory and on a nice clean dry bench, the Horus system works. I questions its real world effect and appeal. The best computer I carry is between my ears. The data I plug in happens during the launching of a bunch of bullets. If the batteries ever fail, someone else will have to figure out how to carry this monster out of the bush.
Jerry
PS did I mention that this system is really pricey?
Well I wont even take the time to read all this...
Your first assomption is that you need a palm or electronic device ,WRONG!
Your knowledge of this system is limited, I own an Horus Vision reticle(H38) on my SN-3 and I do not use any device other than a small ballistic chart.
This post is not under HUNTING it is about precision rifle...
Anyway, KDX if you want info on the pro and con of the system, ask away and I'll be glad to give you an experienced answer.
I shoot at 600 and 1000yds with a 308 and 223.
Your first assomption is that you need a palm or electronic device ,WRONG!
Your knowledge of this system is limited, I own an Horus Vision reticle(H38) on my SN-3 and I do not use any device other than a small ballistic chart.
This post is not under HUNTING it is about precision rifle...
Anyway, KDX if you want info on the pro and con of the system, ask away and I'll be glad to give you an experienced answer.
I shoot at 600 and 1000yds with a 308 and 223.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
You might want to take the time to read the above. It does cover the Horus system in its complete form, not just the reticle. Horus certainly doesn't market the reticle alone.
You are right, this is the precision forum. Even more important that you read the above. The horus system is marketed for 'hunting' in its different forms at LR. Marketed as a system to aid in first rd hits. The above challenges that.
If not for the "benefits" of that software support system, the Horus just becomes an enormous BDC reticle. There are many other versions for that. The IOR MP8 comes to mind.
Jerry
You are right, this is the precision forum. Even more important that you read the above. The horus system is marketed for 'hunting' in its different forms at LR. Marketed as a system to aid in first rd hits. The above challenges that.
If not for the "benefits" of that software support system, the Horus just becomes an enormous BDC reticle. There are many other versions for that. The IOR MP8 comes to mind.
Jerry
ssgp2 said:
That's true........
I own the 511 Tactical Watch (click here)http://www.order-gear.com/product-511.asp?0=994&1=1024&3=4801 that uses the HorusVision software built-in. I have to say that I find it not all that good as compared to other computer based software available.
I just came off two week's of LR sniper training at Milcun where I had the chance to try it out against other systems I've used, as well as measure it's accuracy and correction capability under real world conditions. Even feeding it the correct BC for Federal 168gr Match, a chronographed MV (2631 average), temp, altitude, incline and zero range, I found it to be anywhere from 1 MoA to 1.75 MoA inaccurate at all ranges out to 600 meters.
I also found that the wind calcs it uses are not the same as I was trained. ie: no wind, full wind, half wind etc. It just uses a simple formula for round the clock, that makes windage corrections a little too coarse.
Anyway, having tried them all, I still think my straightforward mildot scope with good E/W turrets works the best for me, but that's just my opinion.
Regards,
Badger
I live in Ontario and only have access to a 300 yard range. I think the Horus system would probably not be of much benefit at this facility especially if using a rifle with a verfy flat trajectory like say a 7mmWSM. BUT would this scope be a good idea for a shooter in my situation who occasionally might do some shooting at longer ranges once or twice per year? For a shooter out West who gets to practice at long ranges often, a Mildot setup may be just as good if not better but many shooters don't have that opportunity to practice long range shooting. I was thinking that the Horus25 on a US Optics SN3 might be beneficial to shooter in my situation. At my range (300 yards) I could used the crosshairs and learn how many clicks of elevation are needed to hit targets as well as figure the minor adjustments needed to hit these relatively close targets but for the rare occasion that I get to shoot at much longer ranges then the Horus system may be my best bet to have a first round hit. What do you think???
Long Range Canuck
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Athabasca Alberta aka God's Country
Myself in all I have read on the Horus system I can not find anything that can be accomplished with it that can not be accomplished with a mil-dot scope. After saying this I have to say I have never used the system except in simulation and know some that swear by it. Im old school when it comes to these systems and prefer the mil-dots or hash mark scopes due to the fact that it makes for a less busy rectical and in my opinion is easier to judge distance, windage and follow up shots, but this is just what works for me and just an opinion. There are many shooting systems out there, many types of scopes, recticals and accessories. I thought an anti-cant device was a gimmic until I tried one....I can't believe my natural hold was a little bit out.
...but there ya go. If it works for ya, and it gets you out there accurately then give her!! If it is a first time purchase I would personaly go mil-dot.
I have to agree with MysticPlayer 100% on his opinion of the system, but then again that is Our personal opinion. That being said when using Mil-dot's or various mil-dot systems if you are out in your target size or milradian read it will transmit into errors and misses down range.So Practice practice practice, Now in pops Laser range finders and wind meters to minimize those mistakes. So eliminate mil-dot math, Horus grids, and we are back to a less busy scope dialing in comeups and windage in MOA based on the trajectory of our particular rifle/load. In my opinion Mil-dot still wins.
Just an opinion
...but there ya go. If it works for ya, and it gets you out there accurately then give her!! If it is a first time purchase I would personaly go mil-dot. I have to agree with MysticPlayer 100% on his opinion of the system, but then again that is Our personal opinion. That being said when using Mil-dot's or various mil-dot systems if you are out in your target size or milradian read it will transmit into errors and misses down range.So Practice practice practice, Now in pops Laser range finders and wind meters to minimize those mistakes. So eliminate mil-dot math, Horus grids, and we are back to a less busy scope dialing in comeups and windage in MOA based on the trajectory of our particular rifle/load. In my opinion Mil-dot still wins.
Just an opinion
Horus User report
I have the complete HORUS system and swear by it.
This includes M40A3 clone, U.S. Optics SN-3 3.2-17x44 Metric EREK, TPAL, Lit H-25, and Kestrel 4000, Horus Hard wired software on chip for PALM, Leica BRF 7x and ACI for angle shooting.
This basically makes it a totally integrated fire control system equal to that on M1 Abrams tank, except it is manual. With calibrated ammunition for my rifle I can walk into a totally unknown situation and produce .5-1.0 moa hits on first round, regardless of weather, terrain, or range. Now admittedly, up to 500 or so yards this become unnecessary after a little practice, but at longer ranges it is very useful. Well defined projectiles like the .308 175SMK are helpful. I have all my rifles and basic data loaded in the ATRAG2P software, so data entry for basic calibration data is not required.
Metric EREK is also useful, because I can dial in 1.5 mils very much more easily than the MOA equivalent of 22 click for 325 yards for example.
If you can't make the Horus demo work then you don't understand the system.
Further 1 shot zero is practical because you put the shot in, measure the displacement under the given conditions with the scale and then dial in the correction. Also if you miss on the first shot and you can see the impact just put the point of impact as it appears on the reticle matrix on the target and hit with second shot regardless of data or conditions. Fastest second shot in the business.
Very important is accurate reticle markings for the scope. Front focal plain and accurate tracking of erector movement mechanism is equally as important.
Third most important factor is rifle capable of .3 to .5 moa accuracy.
If you don't understand all this, then you have some work to do. That is part of the fun.
System is vastly more capable than antique Mil Dot reticle system.
I have the complete HORUS system and swear by it.
This includes M40A3 clone, U.S. Optics SN-3 3.2-17x44 Metric EREK, TPAL, Lit H-25, and Kestrel 4000, Horus Hard wired software on chip for PALM, Leica BRF 7x and ACI for angle shooting.
This basically makes it a totally integrated fire control system equal to that on M1 Abrams tank, except it is manual. With calibrated ammunition for my rifle I can walk into a totally unknown situation and produce .5-1.0 moa hits on first round, regardless of weather, terrain, or range. Now admittedly, up to 500 or so yards this become unnecessary after a little practice, but at longer ranges it is very useful. Well defined projectiles like the .308 175SMK are helpful. I have all my rifles and basic data loaded in the ATRAG2P software, so data entry for basic calibration data is not required.
Metric EREK is also useful, because I can dial in 1.5 mils very much more easily than the MOA equivalent of 22 click for 325 yards for example.
If you can't make the Horus demo work then you don't understand the system.
Further 1 shot zero is practical because you put the shot in, measure the displacement under the given conditions with the scale and then dial in the correction. Also if you miss on the first shot and you can see the impact just put the point of impact as it appears on the reticle matrix on the target and hit with second shot regardless of data or conditions. Fastest second shot in the business.
Very important is accurate reticle markings for the scope. Front focal plain and accurate tracking of erector movement mechanism is equally as important.
Third most important factor is rifle capable of .3 to .5 moa accuracy.
If you don't understand all this, then you have some work to do. That is part of the fun.
System is vastly more capable than antique Mil Dot reticle system.
Last edited:
I think I might be sold on the Horus system. At longer distances (>500yrds) it seems to be pretty technology dependant? I'd like to be able to make a shot if the batteries run out on my palm. Is it also the case with other reticles/systems that the shooter has to rely so much on technology?
Can someone without a Kestrel, Palm device and laser range finder make an accurate shot with some other reticle? I've heard even the military uses a lot of high tech equipment for long distance shots...
Can someone without a Kestrel, Palm device and laser range finder make an accurate shot with some other reticle? I've heard even the military uses a lot of high tech equipment for long distance shots...
Longrange Canuck
The US Army tested the Hourus System 3 Yrs ago the test was conducted at FT.Lewis and was conducted by the Special Forces sniper school instructors. They tested the Huorus system with the PDA,Schmidt& Bender Rifle Scope and a spotting scope.They found the reticules were to cluttered IE to busy, there were issues with the PDA as there were erroneous errors on the PDA which translated to wrong come up data. The spotting scope the reticle became dislodged after falling off the table and had to be sent back for repair and another sent out to complete the test it did not have the same recticle as the scope so giving corrections was out of the question. The bottom line is that while long range shooting requires skill it is not "Rocket Science" . The general consensus was that it was better suited to the Civilian and Law Enforcement market. Yes you can there are several different PDA ballistics programs on the market the Exbal is probably the best on the market and is not dependant on any particular reticule . The High tech gear is used by CF snipers on the Tac 50 rifles it uses the Leica Vector binoculars,GPS and a Mil spec Lap top Computer which are linked together
The US Army tested the Hourus System 3 Yrs ago the test was conducted at FT.Lewis and was conducted by the Special Forces sniper school instructors. They tested the Huorus system with the PDA,Schmidt& Bender Rifle Scope and a spotting scope.They found the reticules were to cluttered IE to busy, there were issues with the PDA as there were erroneous errors on the PDA which translated to wrong come up data. The spotting scope the reticle became dislodged after falling off the table and had to be sent back for repair and another sent out to complete the test it did not have the same recticle as the scope so giving corrections was out of the question. The bottom line is that while long range shooting requires skill it is not "Rocket Science" . The general consensus was that it was better suited to the Civilian and Law Enforcement market. Yes you can there are several different PDA ballistics programs on the market the Exbal is probably the best on the market and is not dependant on any particular reticule . The High tech gear is used by CF snipers on the Tac 50 rifles it uses the Leica Vector binoculars,GPS and a Mil spec Lap top Computer which are linked together
Last edited:
I agree with Long Range Canook
The Horus system ain't perfect, but it's the best out there.
Manual back up consists of a hand written come up chart and the MOA reticle or Horus used in the conventional sense as a range finding device, and out to 700 plus yards it is more than accurate enough on tactical targets.
The chief benefit to the palm is that you can calculate your ranging data with a subroutine and the device also provides a shooting solution for a variety of conditions and weapons with a single out put of comeups and leads for a particular situation.
I have been informed by USMC S/S types that their schools spend 2 weeks teaching the use of MILDOT reticle. I can teach Horus in an afternoon.
Does it have warts? Indeed it does, it certainly isn't perfect. But I sense the strongest opinions regarding this subject from individuals who have not used it except in simulation or have no actual experience with the system. Biggest problem for most users is acquiring low SD rounds, accurate base line data and getting scopes with repeatable and accurate scope erector motion systems as stated before.
The Horus system ain't perfect, but it's the best out there.
Manual back up consists of a hand written come up chart and the MOA reticle or Horus used in the conventional sense as a range finding device, and out to 700 plus yards it is more than accurate enough on tactical targets.
The chief benefit to the palm is that you can calculate your ranging data with a subroutine and the device also provides a shooting solution for a variety of conditions and weapons with a single out put of comeups and leads for a particular situation.
I have been informed by USMC S/S types that their schools spend 2 weeks teaching the use of MILDOT reticle. I can teach Horus in an afternoon.
Does it have warts? Indeed it does, it certainly isn't perfect. But I sense the strongest opinions regarding this subject from individuals who have not used it except in simulation or have no actual experience with the system. Biggest problem for most users is acquiring low SD rounds, accurate base line data and getting scopes with repeatable and accurate scope erector motion systems as stated before.
This looks to be about the point at which some new guy jumps into the frey and makes an arse of himself,, guess that would be me!
I've taken a look at mil-dot reticles and the horus vision system as well. Guys, from my newbie perspective I've gotta say I find the Mil-dot reticle the most confusing, not graphically, but all those millirad distances between different points on the dots and spaces, and there's the one the marines use and the one the army uses, shaped like little footballs, or is it the other way around, and do you use 3.6 or 3.45 to convert to MOA,,,etc. Horus gives you a grid, graphically busy it may be but you gotta admit a simple grid isn't beyond the capability of most folks to understand. Also, am I mistaken or isn't one of the Horus computer programs used to construct a range card based on actual field data? No Palm required?
I'm not trying to endorse one system over the other. It wouldn't mean much if I did. I can say that to this particular new guy, the Horus system just looks easier.
I've taken a look at mil-dot reticles and the horus vision system as well. Guys, from my newbie perspective I've gotta say I find the Mil-dot reticle the most confusing, not graphically, but all those millirad distances between different points on the dots and spaces, and there's the one the marines use and the one the army uses, shaped like little footballs, or is it the other way around, and do you use 3.6 or 3.45 to convert to MOA,,,etc. Horus gives you a grid, graphically busy it may be but you gotta admit a simple grid isn't beyond the capability of most folks to understand. Also, am I mistaken or isn't one of the Horus computer programs used to construct a range card based on actual field data? No Palm required?
I'm not trying to endorse one system over the other. It wouldn't mean much if I did. I can say that to this particular new guy, the Horus system just looks easier.
Getting it right!
3.6: Conversion factor of 100 yard MIL subtension to inches.
1 Mil subtension (distance between dot or football center) is 3.6" (100 yards x 36"/yard / 1000) or alternatively 10 cm at 100 meters (100meters /1000)
3.4: Conversion of mils to MOA
Subtension of 1 MIL is about 3.4 MOA (actually a little more)
There is a reason why U.S. Marines reportedly take two weeks to train sniper candidates on use of MIL DOT reticle.
HKMark23 said:
3.6: Conversion factor of 100 yard MIL subtension to inches.
1 Mil subtension (distance between dot or football center) is 3.6" (100 yards x 36"/yard / 1000) or alternatively 10 cm at 100 meters (100meters /1000)
3.4: Conversion of mils to MOA
Subtension of 1 MIL is about 3.4 MOA (actually a little more)
There is a reason why U.S. Marines reportedly take two weeks to train sniper candidates on use of MIL DOT reticle.
Last edited:
Long Range Canuck
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Athabasca Alberta aka God's Country
DMCI said:
Well I'm quite sure they cover a little more in the 2 weeks than just mil-dots. The flipside of your assesment is that they still use the mil-dot system. If It takes longer to train a individual to perfect the use of the mil-dot system that must say it has aspects that outperform the Horus system or I'm sure they would drop it pretty quick as well as the other military's around the world. That said I go back to my original post on this. There are many different ranging systems out there the key is to find what works best for you.
Just an opinion.
Military adopts latest and greatest???? Hardly!!!
Remember this is the same military that gave Custer single shots when the Indigenees had Winchester repeaters.
Tactically they weren't that great either because Custer decided not to take the Gatling gun as he felt it would be a hindrance.
The other big problem with wide use of Horus at present is that it is patented. The concept is decent but a MOA version would be really cool and that is prohibited by the patents and copyrights.
Remember this is the same military that gave Custer single shots when the Indigenees had Winchester repeaters.
Tactically they weren't that great either because Custer decided not to take the Gatling gun as he felt it would be a hindrance.
The other big problem with wide use of Horus at present is that it is patented. The concept is decent but a MOA version would be really cool and that is prohibited by the patents and copyrights.
Last edited:
I have been re-evaluating my choice of reticle design lately. As a newbie I originally thought that the Horus system might be a good choice (see earlier posts) but after digging into it a little more I think I am going to use the PCMOA reticle that US Optics offers. It is actually not an MOA reticle. It is actually an inch per hundred yards reticle (IPHY). It seems to make sense to me since all the ranges around here use yards not meters. I'm also looking at getting into Precision rifle which uses yards and the targets are 42"X18" or 8"X10". A reticle in inches and adjustment knobs in 1/4" clicks makes a lot of sense, especially since I also tend to think in inches and feet more than Meters/centimeters. Ballistics software like EXBAL works with IPHY reticles too.
