What kind of reticle

I really like using mils so mil based to start. Currently I am using a Bushnell G2 reticle but I have used the Vortex EBR-1 and 2 I think they were called and I liked them too.

Things I like are hash marks every half mil (so twice as fine as mil dots), clearly marked increments (my reticle only has the increments numbered on one side), Christmas tree style hold marks(not essential and 0.5 mil wide hash marks help too), and illumination (useful when your reticle blends into the background even if it's not that dark).

First focal place is a must for me otherwise the markings would be useless most of the time.

I guess I could add reticles and features I really don't like. Second focal plane reticles, bullet drop reticles (they will never match your cartridge in all conditions and don't work well for ranging or dialling, overly thick or thin reticles (a fine balance), and probably the thing I hate most, even though I have never used them, is reticles that don't match the turrets. Leupold and Bushnell have a bunch of mil reticle scopes with MOA turrets. Doesn't make any sense to me.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Roddy

I want to start long range shooting but don't know what kind of reticle to use. There are so many around
 
My favorite is the SKMR3 (Kahles) but I also really like the EBR 2Con my Razor II HD. The MIL R on my ATACR is also growing on me.

At a significantly lower price point I like the G3 on my new DMR II's

All these are mil based on (obviously) FFP glass.
 
jacpor said:
Thanks Roddy

I want to start long range shooting but don't know what kind of reticle to use. There are so many around
Click to expand...

Every scope manf offers a version or two (or more) BUT they all follow the same principle.... they allow you to account for windage and elevation change by using an aiming point on the recticle.

The reticles will either be a cross with aiming points in various shapes or lines... spacing and markings will vary but will fall into only 2 categories.. MOA or MRAD.

Or a cross with addn triangular "xmas" tree markings leading away from the lower vertical stadia. These can make it easier to deal with windage and elevation adjustments way off the center of the reticle.... but for some users, they may find this too cluttered and obscure parts of the image view.

That's it.

The vast majority all work the same way and even have similar spacings.... so they may "look" different.. but they pretty much all do the same thing.

So the key is first:

decide on the scope adjustment unit - moa or mrad. Lots of discussion on this and there is no wrong answer.

Style of reticle size and layout. Try and get behind as many as possible so that you can decide what works best for your application and eyeball. Some of the Xmas tree reticles may actually be difficult for some users to see properly (scope focal adjustments will play a big role here and only you can decide what works and you can only do that by looking through the scope)

So take a bit of time and just read the general specs offered from the scope company. Quickly you will see that they are all saying the same thing with slight variations on the theme.

What I think is important is the new 'hash' mark reticle... the old mildot reticle are quite a bit harder to use.

With a hash mark reticle, you impose what looks like a ruler over your target and field of view. If there is a miss and you spot it in your scope, you can use the reticle to measure the miss and hold over to put the next shot on target assuming conditions are the same.

It is so fast and easy to use... very intuitive and easy to learn too.

Good luck with your purchase.

Jerry
PS since you are looking for LR options, consider brands with better glass/optical qualities, will hold zero and have adjustments that are both repeatable and consistent. Alot of products don't stand up to constant adjustment and this can be really frustrating.
 
MOA vs MRAD, I don't see a huge win one way or the other, as long as the reticle and adjustments match (you would not want MOA clicks and an MRAD reticle for example). If you are planning on holds, you need an FFP scope with some sort of subtensions. I have a h59 reticle, and I believe it is one of the best ones out there, but opinions are like arseholes, some sort of a tree reticle, in FFP is an excellent start, but don't discount optical quality, along with the tracking ability and the repeat ability of the scope. Lots of people sacrifice this when they start for the sake of "more zoom!!!"

If money is tight, start with a basic bushnell, fixed 10X. It isn't the best scope ever, but for the cost, it'll have good optical quality, and track well.if you have a little more money, then the sightrons seem to be very popular.
 
I just bought my first LR scope and went with a Sightron SIII 8-32x56 LRMOA2. I knew I wanted something other than just a fine crosshair or dot, but didn't like how the mildots appeared so large, hashes make it a bunch of little crosshairs on all sides of the center cross hair.
 
I would suggest try looking into one if possible.
I went with the EBR 2C on my Vortex Razor, shot over 200 rounds and still think the EBR 1C would of felt better.
X-mas tree sure feels clustered for me,almost too distracting, maybe if i start to hold instead of dialing i will appreciate it more.
 
kolik1 said:
I just bought my first LR scope and went with a Sightron SIII 8-32x56 LRMOA2. I knew I wanted something other than just a fine crosshair or dot, but didn't like how the mildots appeared so large, hashes make it a bunch of little crosshairs on all sides of the center cross hair.
Click to expand...

And I find if the hashes are say 0.5 mil or 1 mil wide you can use that as good reference for a wind hold versus a 0.2 mil wide dot.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom