Hunting Retical: SWFA, NF, or Maven?

[Mike D Texas]

Second this. I love my 10x SS but the reticle is not a highlight.

Personally I like the NF MIL XT and MILC. I can't seem to find much affection towards the MILR.

If the Mil-R had a center dot instead of the cross hair it would be pretty dang good for me; as long as it was available in FFP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[deadwolf]

If the Mil-R had a center dot instead of the cross hair it would be pretty dang good for me; as long as it was available in FFP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The Mil-c reticle has the center dot, and it’s a very nice reticle, found in other NF scopes. The mil-r of course does not have that, but it would be nice if it did. The Mil-c came about for that very reason if I’m not mistaken.

But for my eye at least, the mil-r is equally as easy to use, and I’m surprised anyone has difficulty in centering a “plus” sign such as on the mil-r on a given target vs. the dot on the mil-c or maven shr-mil. What I prefer about the mil-r vs. the shr-mil, is the graduations in elevation to 10mils, as well as graduations above the centerline. The shr-mil doesn’t have that. The SWFA reticle is bare bones and less than impressive in my opinion.

The OP asked for recommendations, and I think we, in typical Rokslide fashion, provided enough opinions to educate and potentially confuse or complicate his decision : )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[deadwolf]

I’d also add that yes, the NXS is a SFP scope, and in the case of the 2.5-10, ffp for me is less of a concern, actually of no concern at all, as it would be unusual for my use case to need to use the reticle to measure on anything less than 10 power. If on 5 power you could double the values. SFP is very usable, but a lot of folks, hunters, seem to believe they HAVE to have an FFP scope. In full disclosure, I have both as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SDHNTR]

FYI, I have my NXS 2.5-10 on a braked .260 rem. I do not in any way see SFP as a hindrance in this case. Can easily spot hits.

 

[Mike D Texas]

I have a couple of MIL-C reticles and while they are functional, the the MIL-R with a fine center dot would be cleaner overall and for me at least quicker to resolve.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[J_Jacobson196]

If the Mil-R had a center dot instead of the cross hair it would be pretty dang good for me; as long as it was available in FFP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Center dot would improve it significantly! Still works well as a killing reticle

 

[Macintosh]

…What I prefer about the mil-r vs. the shr-mil, is the graduations in elevation to 10mils, as well as graduations above the centerline. The shr-mil doesn’t have that. The SWFA reticle is bare bones and less than impressive in my opinion.

What do you do with the 10 mils in the reticle?

I find the 5 mil (or even less) reticles to be far more useful for hunting because at lower magnification the heavier bar is actually visible further toward center and appears like a standard duplex, while at higher magnification it still leaves me plenty of graduated area to measure a miss or hold a bit over/under. 5 mills of elevation gets me to about 700 yards, and no way Im holding for that, Im dialing, so 10 is never going to get used. Thats the entire reason people like the mil quad, the maven reticle, p3l reticle, etc is they are visible at low magnification in large part BECAUSE they only have 5 mils of graduated fine reticle. (In addition to having a fine line that is heavy enough to see) Curious what your use is that you prefer it with more graduated area?

 

[ridgeline]

I'd like to see NF have their FC-DMx reticle available across the fleet !! but alas, NF will be sure to dictate to us what we want... grin

 

[ridgeline]

I can see me grabbing an RS1.2 Mil/Mil when they start shipping again... That itch needs scratching.

 

[atmat]

I can see me grabbing an RS1.2 Mil/Mil when they start shipping again... That itch needs scratching.

You’ll be happy. The reticle looks better in person than on photo.

 

[deadwolf]

What do you do with the 10 mils in the reticle?

I find the 5 mil (or even less) reticles to be far more useful for hunting because at lower magnification the heavier bar is actually visible further toward center and appears like a standard duplex, while at higher magnification it still leaves me plenty of graduated area to measure a miss or hold a bit over/under. 5 mills of elevation gets me to about 700 yards, and no way Im holding for that, Im dialing, so 10 is never going to get used. Thats the entire reason people like the mil quad, the maven reticle, p3l reticle, etc is they are visible at low magnification in large part BECAUSE they only have 5 mils of graduated fine reticle. (In addition to having a fine line that is heavy enough to see) Curious what your use is that you prefer it with more graduated area?

I would prefer to have enough in my reticle to cover my effective range in the event that there’s a problem with the turret, but I still have an intact reticle. Imagine you’re miles deep in on a sheep hunt, fall and jam up your turret, it’s non operable or you don’t trust it. At least you have every MIL available at your disposal. My 7 saum needs 7.5 mil to get to 1000 in the normal hunting enviornmentals I find myself in. Would I choose to use the reticle vs. dialing for elevation, no. But I would if I had no other choice, and have shot to 1000 at our “local” range to test it. There are still a lot of shooters out there who do not have elevation dials, but DO have bdc reticles only. It’s not common for them to shoot at extreme ranges, but many I’ve seen routinely shoot past 600 using just the reticle.

I’m not trying to talk anyone into or out of any of the above reticle or scope choices. Well, actually I would try to talk people out of the mil quad reticle, ugh. Just providing some context as why I think the NF mil-r is a great reticle for me. There’s nothing technically wrong with the Maven reticle, it’s just not for me. Mostly because it’s not a NF ; )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atmat]

Imagine you’re miles deep in on a sheep hunt, fall and jam up your turret, it’s non operable or you don’t trust it. At least you have every MIL available at your disposal. My 7 saum needs 7.5 mil to get to 1000

Are you really trusting the scope reticle at 1000 yards if your scope has suddenly stopped its other basic functions?

 

[Macintosh]

OK, the rationale makes sense, I've just had different experience and I guess different priorities. Too bad you are a zillion miles away, as I'd love to do a range day to compare notes--personally I have tried doing this in practice and when I add field positions and any element of time-pressure I cannot be precise enough using reticle holds past very moderate range unless by some strange coincidence the target happens to be right on a mil or half-mil hash-mark. When I add this on top of my wobble and other error, with a 1-mil mil dot my precision opens up a lot past 400 yards or so, and with a half-mil mil dot I get maybe another 100-150 yards, and then I'm no longer capable of the precision to reliably hit deer-sized or smaller targets nearly as well. A .2mil hash is better, but those reticles are really limiting at lower magnification. I can hit targets a long way off too using those holds, I just cant do it first try every time, and I am measurably less reliable than when dialing, so I have written that off as a more or less unrealistic scenario in favor of using a reticle that works better for the large bulk of my shooting, which is under 300 yards.

Short story: 5 mils easily covers my effective range if I'm limited to using the reticle in a realistic hunting scenario. (and in most conditions even if I'm dialing)

 

[deadwolf]

Are you really trusting the scope reticle at 1000 yards if your scope has suddenly stopped its other basic functions?

I have done it and seen others do it. I wouldn’t choose to do it. Let me pose a question to you, why would a reticle with 10 mils exist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ElPollo]

I have done it and seen others do it. I wouldn’t choose to do it. Let me pose a question to you, why would a reticle with 10 mils exist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Generally because people who haven’t used one think they might need it.

 

[atmat]

Let me pose a question to you, why would a reticle with 10 mils exist?

@ElPollo is correct:

Generally because people who haven’t used one think they might need it.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

The SWFA MIL Quad is a very effective reticle. Lately, when I bounce back and forth between my rifles with MIL Quad reticles and Maven SHR-MIL reticles, I find myself really missing the center square and dot reticle of the SHR MIL when I don’t have it. Nothing detrimental to making shots or killing effectively at all, just a personal preference after using both reticles quite a bit.

 

[deadwolf]

@ElPollo is correct:

Interesting take, but I don’t believe that to be the reason.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ElPollo]

Generally because people who haven’t used one think they might need it.

@deadwolf

I wasn’t trying to be snarky with my comment and apologize if it came across that way. Everything is a compromise. The Mil-R is a very fine reticle that is hard to see in complex backgrounds and low magnification. Higher magnification and a finer reticle mean you are sacrificing time to get on target and your ability to spot shots in order to gain an extra 5-mils of drop and drift that you are unlikely to use.

In my lowest wind bracket gun, I need a full value 40 mph wind to even get to 5 Mils of drift at the gun’s max effective range. Frankly, if I’ve got anything remotely close those conditions, I’m not going to take that shot. The same gun does not hit 5 Mils of drop until about 150 yards past its max effective range.

And on the scenario of having a turret issue and still being able to hold for drop and drift. You are better off just putting your money towards a durable scope, I.e. Nightforce, SWFA, Trijicon, Maven RS 1.2, etc. and make sure it is well mounted. A pile of other things could go wrong before your scenario is likely to occur.

 

[deadwolf]

@deadwolf

I wasn’t trying to be snarky with my comment and apologize if it came across that way. Everything is a compromise. The Mil-R is a very fine reticle that is hard to see in complex backgrounds and low magnification. Higher magnification and a finer reticle mean you are sacrificing time to get on target and your ability to spot shots in order to gain an extra 5-mils of drop and drift that you are unlikely to use.

In my lowest wind bracket gun, I need a full value 40 mph wind to even get to 5 Mils of drift at the gun’s max effective range. Frankly, if I’ve got anything remotely close those conditions, I’m not going to take that shot. The same gun does not hit 5 Mils of drop until about 150 yards past its max effective range.

And on the scenario of having a turret issue and still being able to hold for drop and drift. You are better off just putting your money towards a durable scope, I.e. Nightforce, SWFA, Trijicon, Maven RS 1.2, etc. and make sure it is well mounted. A pile of other things could go wrong before your scenario is likely to occur.

No offense taken and no need to apologize! You are correct everything is a compromise, and we all make those decisions. I use NF because I don’t want to compromise one bit of durability. The are proven reliable and have never let me down. It may come at a very small compromise here and there as any optic could. The Mil-c reticle in my NX8 gives me more headache than the Mil-r in the nxs I have. The NX8 being ffp makes the thin reticle so hard to see at low power. I still have a few of them. The Mil-r in the NXS in SFP is easy to see for my eyes. And to reiterate, I wouldn’t choose to use the reticle for a long range shot, but it’s good to know you can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk