Maven RS1.2 2.5-15x44 FFP with SHR-W MOA reticle Field Tested and Reviewed

[Flymost]

For hunting with this scope I would get the mils version because of the thicker crosshairs at lower magnification (I’m not sure why they made it thicker, but glad they did). If you haven’t looked through a ffp scope before I’d recommend finding one before buying this. The ffp reticle is considerably smaller than a sfp on lower power settings. As far as Moa vs mils for dialing they are both easy to use and actually moa is more precise (1/4 moa is approx .25” and .1 mil is approx .36” the smallest adjustment for each). It’s no easier or harder to dial 2 1/4 moa or 3.2 mils.

I just ordered one in mil and all my other scopes are moa because of the concern over the reticle size for hunting.

 

[SDHNTR]

So as someone who is looking to upgrade from a VX Freedom 3-9x on my Xbolt 6.5CM that is mainly used for hunting, would a mil or moa be easier for me to “learn”? I’m really looking at one of these hard as a replacement that should last me a long time. I’ve always used simple duplex reticles without holdover marks. Just sighted in at 200 yard zero and know what the drop is at 300 yards and called it a day. Set and forget.

Despite what some of the Rambo’s here want you to believe, either one works just fine. Yes, if starting from scratch mils is probably a better system given its base 10 function, but both are simply increments of measure and do the same thing ultimately.

With this particular scope, Mils is a better choice because the reticle is more visible in mils than MOA. No idea why Maven built them that way, simple oversight I assume as they have shown a somewhat questionable track record on understanding the marketplace.

 

[ropeup79]

I have the MOA-2 reticle in mine and find it totally usable at low power even with dim lighting or dark backgrounds. It has a thicker reticle than a lot of other FFP MOA scopes.

 

[EazyID]

Just played with their new 1-10 at NFR 24, hope to see a review on it soon

 

[@MBH]

Is the eye relief (2.3" - 3.2" stated) an issue or would it be an issue with a magnum caliber ?

 

[Cornbinder]

Great question!

My first impression is the reticle is pretty thin at 2.5x…

However, the center dot illumination is daylight visible and helps at 2.5x.

The real eye opener for me is the crosshairs improve in visibility a lot by turning up to as low as 3x. By 4x it is pretty bold.

I will have to spend some more time behind the scope to really narrow down the low magnification usability.

This is exactly the question I was wondering as well. How much does it need to be turned up until the crosshairs become noticeable. Thank you.

 

[Flymost]

I’m a die hard SFP MOA guy, but got caught up in the hype and ordered one with the MIL reticle as it was the most visible reticle. The scope came in yesterday and I must say I’m totally impressed! I agree that while the reticle is thin at 2.5x it’s totally useable and don’t think you’d need to turn up the magnification to see it. I think you would run out of legal light or the ability to identify your target about the time you lose the reticle. And with that you also have the illumination or turning it up even just slightly increases the reticle size quickly. I compared it side to side with a zeiss v4 SFP 4-16 and find the reticle to be equal at 4x, and much better at anything above 10x.

 

[Flymost]

Reticle pics never show an accurate representation, but perhaps I can explain them in a manner that helps. I’ve spent a couple hours now going back and forth between these two reticles and the more I do the more I like the maven. I determined that if reticle size was an issue, 3 3/4 power was more than enough to get a solid reticle and 6 power was plenty to easily use the reticle for holds. (I was pleasantly surprised how easily I could use the reticle for holds at 6x. I was expecting to need 8 or even 10x, but the reticle was plenty useable for holds, and actually even at 4x but not easily if that makes sense.)

Here are pics from 2.5, 4, 6, 10, and 15x along with the SFP MOA Zeiss for reference. I’d say to reference the next power up for a realistic eyeball view (the 4x pic is a good reference to what you see at 2.5x etc.)

 

[SDHNTR]

Reticle pics never show an accurate representation, but perhaps I can explain them in a manner that helps. I’ve spent a couple hours now going back and forth between these two reticles and the more I do the more I like the maven. I determined that if reticle size was an issue, 3 3/4 power was more than enough to get a solid reticle and 6 power was plenty to easily use the reticle for holds. (I was pleasantly surprised how easily I could use the reticle for holds at 6x. I was expecting to need 8 or even 10x, but the reticle was plenty useable for holds, and actually even at 4x but not easily if that makes sense.)

Here are pics from 2.5, 4, 6, 10, and 15x along with the SFP MOA Zeiss for reference. I’d say to reference the next power up for a realistic eyeball view (the 4x pic is a good reference to what you see at 2.5x etc.)

That is the mils Maven reticle. This post was about the moa version and is considerably less visible. Which is unfortunate for those who prefer moa.

 

[stevie]

Looks to be the Mils on the Maven

 

[Flymost]

Yes, it’s the mils version. Trying to give a comparison to a quality SFP. As stated by others earlier the reticle really starts to shine at about 4x and the midrange (8x or so) is surprisingly comfortable for long range use.