The turrents aren't the dealbreaker with the Trij 1-8x, it's more the weight and poor illumination.

The Razor and NX-8 are like blinding illum on MAX. The PST Gen 2 is clearly visible, but not as bright (but certainly daylight sunny bright).

The Accupowers (1-4 & 1-8) are all overcast day bright, but when the sun's out, not illuminated.

quote:

Originally posted by Klusk2:
Which version should the reticle be in, MRAD or MOA?

This is a question that often generates a surprising amount of heat given that it pertains to a personal decision that does not affect the commentators.

My own thoughts, keeping in mind that I have many scopesights and a spotting scope that are all calibrated in milliradians:

At one time reticles calibrated in MOA were virtually unknown, and if one wanted such a reticle, it had to be in mils. That is rapidly changing, though, and the situation may actually reverse itself in time. To avoid possible confusion, the shooter should pick one calibration system and stick with it. I know from personal experience that mistakes in reading a calibrated reticle are possible even without the complication of trying to keep track of two different systems.

All the MOA windage and elevation adjustments I have looked at are calibrated in 1/4 or 1/2 MOA clicks, with most being 1/4. The 1/2 MOA clicks are evidently more common in lower power scopes like the 1-8× Nightforce. Mil-calibrated scopes usually change POI by 0.1 mil per click, but the Leupold 1-6× Mark 6 also doubles that to 0.2 mil per click.

When trying to mentally calculate and adjust a large elevation change I am more comfortable with thinking in base 10 rather than in base 4. That is, if my dope card says to adjust up 2.2 mils, I immediately think of 22 clicks. On the other hand if the chart is in minutes of angle, how many clicks is 3.25 MOA? “Lessee: three MOA is twelve clicks, and 0.25 is one, so twelve plus one … that’s thirteen clicks.” Some people will ask, “Why are you counting? Just look at the dial and use that.” And that’s usually true. Assuming we can see the dial. Many “tactical” scopes these days have “zero stops” for the specific reason that it’s not always possible to look at the dial and use its markings. There are reasonably possible situations in which counting clicks would be necessary, especially with a weapon that might be used for defensive purposes, and that’s one reason I prefer mil-based calibrations.

I also find that the MOA reticles I’ve looked at tend to be “busier” than mil reticles. That may not be a problem, but the most common complaint about calibrated reticles is that they’re already too cluttered. The one advantage, though, of the MOA system is that a 1/4 MOA click moves the point of impact a finer (smaller) distance than 0.1 mil. At 100 yards, the former changes the POI by about 0.25 inch; the 0.1 mil click moves it about 0.36 inch. The difference is usually of no practical importance, but it’s something that might matter to some shooters.

Then there’s the question of which is more useful to the shooter, MOA or MRAD calibrations. For the competitor who is engaging targets sized in even inches (6", 8", 12", etc.), MOA calibrations can be used for quick range estimates: If an 8 inch plate covers 2 MOA, we know without much thought that it’s at a distance of about 400 yards. On the other hand, the same thing is possible with a mil calibrated reticle, just a bit more complicated. If I know I’ll be shooting at specific-sized targets at specific ranges, I just make up another chart: an 8" plate at 400 yards will cover about 0.56 mils. If 8 inches covers 0.44 mils, it’s at 500 yards, and that’s not much harder to interpolate than 1.6 MOA. Similar charts can be made for other common objects for real world applications such as residential doors, traffic signs, etc.

All that gets into the subject of other types of range estimation with a calibrated reticle, and despite sneers to the contrary, it’s still something to consider. A competitor will never need to do that, but if we’re already considering a “DM” role for a weapon, it shouldn’t be dismissed as Internet “commandoism.” Laser rangefinders’ batteries die, the devices get forgotten or deliberately not carried, and sometimes they simply don’t work. I have a Laser Technology unit that was quite expensive when I bought it and gives very precise readings, but it doesn’t work in heavy snowfalls.

Much of the above commentary doesn’t have great relevance to a scopesight used on a DM-type rifle. When shooting at longer ranges with my precision rifles I usually dial the adjustments necessary, but the Mark 6 on the gun used for intermediate range shooting doesn’t get that workout. If it were the only scope I had with a calibrated reticle, it wouldn’t matter whether it was calibrated in MOA or mils. Because, however, I own many other mil-based sights, it also has a milling reticle.

As a final comment about scopesight calibrations, if you anticipate shooting with a spotter who will give you better feedback on impacts than trying to see them yourself, it is especially important that you both use the same calibrations. I once had a sniper show up at the range with a new scope to zero with the agency’s duty ammunition. He had not discussed or even mentioned his plans to me in advance, and when I asked how the sight was calibrated, it was “minutes of angle.”
“Oh, chit!” The advantages of being able to give corrections in mils with my Leupold spotting scope and Horus reticle just evaporated, and we would be back to the old vague, “It looks like you were about eight inches to the left.” So much for modern advancements.

you live in a place way sunnier than me! I've never had an issue with seeing my illuminated reticles in day light, but different parts of the country have different requirements obviously.

quote:

Originally posted by Klusk2:
Which version should the reticle be in, MRAD or MOA?

MRAD and MOA are both angular measurements, and they both work. It's really just the scale of the numerical values that are different. If you intend to shoot longer ranges, and with precision results, then a discussion here is worthwhile. I recommend that a gun owner goes one way for all scopes owned -- mils or MOA.

Reticle type is quite important for any type of rifle shooting where (1) accuracy is important and (2) distances to target vary. Some reticles for 1-6ish scopes have pre-calculated hold over points for the 223 cartridge. Such hold over points include assumptions about the bullet, the muzzle velocity, and the atmospheric conditions -- but the holdovers are generally pretty close for most people, with larger targets. These reticles are often called BDC reticles. They are generally not precision reticles, however IndianBoy's illustration shows that he put some effort into making the JM-1 reticle work well for his use.

The Nightforce NX-8 reticles are not BDC reticles. They require the shooter to select a target distance zero, then use ballistic tables to determine how much one holds over -- or dials up -- to attain correct impact at given distances. This can be a bit daunting for first time users of the scopes and tables, but honestly it's not all that bad.

Understand that a BDC reticle might be zeroed at 200 yards and have holdover subtentions on the reticle for targets at 300, 400, 500, and 600 yards. By comparison, I might have an NX-8 zeroed at 100 yards. I then must hold over or dial 1-1/2 MOA for 200 yard targets, 4-1/4 MOA for 300 yards, 7-3/4 MOA for 400 yards, and 11-1/2 MOA for 500 yards.

The reticle decision should depend on your expectations for target distances, target sizes, speed to engage multiple targets at multiple distances, and accuracy. And whether or not you want to carry holdover tables on you or your rifle.

Specifically for a DMR role, I think this is where a BDC shines. It allows for fast 1st or 2nd round hits out to any reasonable engagement distance with a 5.56 carbine. No dialing or math needed in a chaotic gunfight.

However, people throw that acronym around for any 5.56 AR with a magnified scope on it (and aren't getting into gunfights in Afghanistan). So, it depends on how you are actually going to use the rifle.

The BDC in my puny 3x ACOG was good enough for me to get 2nd rd hits at 500 yds in a 5-7mph wind with both 75g ammo then switching to 55s. The BDC was calibrated for 62g out of a 14.5 M4 and I was shooting a 14.5 barrel so at least that part was right!

Personally; I'd be fine with a BDC in a 1-6 or 1-8 LPV scope on a 5.56 or 7.62 AR, but would want a good mil reticle on a higher magnification scoped precision rifle.

It's kinda pick your poison. With Mil or MOA you get odd ranges to memorize for your hold point markings. With a BDC you get even numbers on the markings, but will need to hold off of them for your exact load.

I didn't quite realize the depth of the water I was wading into when I thought of a DMR scope purchase. As usual, you guys don't disappoint. Seems that I must better define of what I need the rifle and scope to do for me before purchasing just any scope. Being new to scopes, I had no idea of the complexity of how it all ties in together.

My daughter's boyfriend has offered me to try out this scope for a while until I make a decision.

quote:

Originally posted by Klusk2:
I didn't quite realize the depth of the water I was wading into when I thought of a DMR scope purchase. As usual, you guys don't disappoint. Seems that I must better define of what I need the rifle and scope to do for me before purchasing just any scope. Being new to scopes, I had no idea of the complexity of how it all ties in together.

My daughter's boyfriend has offered me to try out this scope for a while until I make a decision.

Now we're cookin' with gas. Few people have the option of trying something new before diving in and buying.

Holler back once you have some time with this scope, shooting at the various types & distances of targets you use, from your various shooting positions, and under time-to-shoot constraints.

If you are current or former LE or Military, most optics companies offer good pricing. Nightforce, Trijicon and Leupold included. Most are at least 30% off of MSRP, some are as high as 45%.

I have a Raptor 1-6 sitting in my safe. I took it off a Weatherby DGR that's at Weatherby being fitted with a muzzle brake.
Wipe the blood and eye brow hair off it from making a bad impression on a buddy of mine ( the rifle not the scope, the scope did the rifles dirty work)and you can borrow it and try that scope out.
Your a NW sider as I remember, stop by anytime and pick it up. The Weatherby won't be back for at least a month, probably longer and even then, no rush.
Send me a email if your interested.

quote:

Originally posted by armored:
I have a Raptor 1-6 sitting in my safe. I took it off a Weatherby DGR that's at Weatherby being fitted with a muzzle brake.
Wipe the blood and eye brow hair off it from making a bad impression on a buddy of mine ( the rifle not the scope, the scope did the rifles dirty work)and you can borrow it and try that scope out.
Your a NW sider as I remember, stop by anytime and pick it up. The Weatherby won't be back for at least a month, probably longer and even then, no rush.
Send me a email if your interested.

Thank you for the offer, I'll keep that in mind. I was able to contact Nightforce and they do have a purchase program for LE and Military, so I'm looking at those options as well.

Somebody needs to try the Meopta Optika6 line. They have FFP 1-6. I took a higher power version outside and was pretty impressed with edge to edge clarity. It might be a nice budget option.

Speaking of the ACSS reticle, this is a great video review and demo of it being used as designed. Pretty impressive! He gets a fast 50yd zero then goes to 300yd headshots, 425yds on steel and then 650. All using the BDC, 77g ammo, BCM 16" barrel. Not a precision setup, but fast-accurate hits with no dialing out to at least 650, perfect for a true "DMR" role.

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:
Speaking of the ACSS reticle, this is a great video review and demo of it being used as designed. Pretty impressive! He gets a fast 50yd zero then goes to 300yd headshots, 425yds on steel and then 650. All using the BDC, 77g ammo, BCM 16" barrel. Not a precision setup, but fast-accurate hits with no dialing out to at least 650, perfect for a true "DMR" role.

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hGYOdabMrgI" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Good points and good video.


While I don't own one. The ACSS reticle is well thought out.


Many people eschew BDC type reticles because they don't line up perfectly with some types of ammunition, and go buy a MIL or MOA reticle that doesn't line up with any ammunition.


Having said that, MIL and MOA definitely have their place and either one can be used to good effect.

When it comes to the role of a Designated Marksman Rifle I typically think of a rifle and optic that will quickly allow for hits on torso size targets, quickly.


Having a ranging reticle is worthwhile for torso size targets. However ranging reticles are nearly useless when it comes to TRUE long range shooting because a very small percentage of error in estimation will result in a miss on small targets at long range.

I have a PA 1x6 ACSS on my AR15 and a 1x8 on my SR 762.
I like them and have tried them out to 300yds, pretty handy for 9" and 18" targets.

quote:

Originally posted by IndianaBoy:
[A] MIL or MOA reticle that doesn't line up with any ammunition.

Or is a reticle that lines up with any and all ammunition if the same principle of a specific holdoff for a specific target distance is used.
The obvious difference is that an MOA or milling reticle requires the extra step of knowing what the holdoff value is for the target distance rather than its being (sort of) apparent on the reticle.

The advantage of the MOA or mil reticle is of course that they permit more precise aiming adjustments than most BDC reticles. If we have a large, human-sized target, then not knowing exactly where to aim at distances between the BDC markings (e.g., at X + 50) doesn’t matter. If, however, it does matter, then we’re guessing to some degree (hint: the 550 yards holdoff isn’t half way between 500 and 600).

I absolutely understand the valid points you make, BTW, and don’t disagree with any. But I feel compelled to mention the rest of the story.

The simple fact is that a scopesight with either type of reticle will serve the skilled and knowledgeable shooter equally well in most situations. I have my preferences; other people have theirs.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by IndianaBoy:
[A] MIL or MOA reticle that doesn't line up with any ammunition.

Or is a reticle that lines up with any and all ammunition if the same principle of a specific holdoff for a specific target distance is used.
The obvious difference is that an MOA or milling reticle requires the extra step of knowing what the holdoff value is for the target distance rather than its being (sort of) apparent on the reticle.

The advantage of the MOA or mil reticle is of course that they permit more precise aiming adjustments than most BDC reticles. If we have a large, human-sized target, then not knowing exactly where to aim at distances between the BDC markings (e.g., at X + 50) doesn’t matter. If, however, it does matter, then we’re guessing to some degree (hint: the 550 yards holdoff isn’t half way between 500 and 600).

I absolutely understand the valid points you make, BTW, and don’t disagree with any. But I feel compelled to mention the rest of the story.

The simple fact is that a scopesight with either type of reticle will serve the skilled and knowledgeable shooter equally well in most situations. I have my preferences; other people have theirs.

Very true, and I have a mil reticle and mil adjustments on my precision rifle scope.