Will Nightforce Ever Offer A Hunter-Friendly Reticle Again?

bradmacmt

WKR
Joined
Nov 14, 2014
Messages
371
Location
Mont.
The old IFR reticle would be better than what’s currently offered.

On a scope designed for basic hunting w/ occasional dialing (NXS 2-10x42), I have zero interest in the reticle offered. It’s really out of place in that scope, and has kept me from buying one. I’d be happy with a simple duplex type reticle of decent thickness that doesn’t require illumination for most shots. I’m not saying I don’t want illumination, just saying I’d prefer a simpler, heavier reticle that doesn’t need the illumination to be seen in “normal” conditions.

What say you?
 
I'm with you.

Mil-C needs to be on 8-10x to work for my eyes in FFP.

I don't want to shoot SFP anymore, but it does work fine in Nightforce line.
 
I have had zero issues with the mil c now for years including predator shots after big game shooting hours. Iv got years on the scope now and have had zero issues with the reticle size.

Yea you can’t see the subtensions at 8x or below, but I really don’t need to be worried about holding for taking shots like that in low light.

Could it be a better reticle? Sure, I wish I only had 4-5mil for wind hold before some bigger posts, same could be said for the drop post. They could get rid of the measurement deal on the side too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Duh
I have had zero issues with the mil c now for years including predator shots after big game shooting hours. Iv got years on the scope now and have had zero issues with the reticle size.

Yea you can’t see the subtensions at 8x or below, but I really don’t need to be worried about holding for taking shots like that in low light.

Could it be a better reticle? Sure, I wish I only had 4-5mil for wind hold before some bigger posts, same could be said for the drop post. They could get rid of the measurement deal on the side too.
I use the measurement deal on the side sometimes, but for curiosity/arbitrary use not really important but the drop post always makes me want to ask their engineer what they were thinking...holding up 18 mil, etc?
 
I use the measurement deal on the side sometimes, but for curiosity/arbitrary use not really important but the drop post always makes me want to ask their engineer what they were thinking...holding up 18 mil, etc?
Even more so who needs 10 mils of wind.

I do occasionally use the side deal for measuring zero offset and such. I don’t know I really can’t complain about the mil c. I didn’t like it much when I started using it but I havnt hit a situation where it hurt me yet.
 
I actually really like the Mil R I just wish the center post went to the thick post at 1.5 mils instead of 10. Or even bring down a thick post from the top.
 
The old IFR reticle would be better than what’s currently offered.

On a scope designed for basic hunting w/ occasional dialing (NXS 2-10x42), I have zero interest in the reticle offered. It’s really out of place in that scope, and has kept me from buying one. I’d be happy with a simple duplex type reticle of decent thickness that doesn’t require illumination for most shots. I’m not saying I don’t want illumination, just saying I’d prefer a simpler, heavier reticle that doesn’t need the illumination to be seen in “normal” conditions.

What say you?

The 3-10x SHV has a duplex.
 
Very true. But has no zero stop, and has a capped elevation turret - I’m not a fan of either of those.


A zero stop is easy to make/get for them, and they can be left uncapped if desired- they dial well. They are a very good scope, and if I were looking for a duplex and MOA it would be the number 1 choice on the market.
 
I bought a used NF this summer to mount on my kids' rifle.

I don't care for their reticles at all. I also don't care for any of Trijicon's reticles, at all.

I'm a hunter who enjoys dabbling in long range shooting. My needs in a reticle are different than what most .mil or PRS type shooters need. But I fear that my needs aren't a large enough market segment for either of those companies to pay attention to.

If they did, I'd ask them to consider the following:

-There's a lot to be said for SFP scopes, and in my opinion they are actually superior up until you get to maybe 16x or higher. People who are really serious about spotting their shots will argue for less magnification; most hunters will lean in favor of clearly seeing and defining their target area and *making* their shots, often on animals that are partially obscured. So there'll always be a debate about the proper magnification range for a hunting optic but I think most of us will lean towards 12x to 16x on the upper end. I've shot to 500 yards and beyond on 4x but really think of 6x as an absolute minimum and absolutely do not subscribe to the notion that 6x is sufficient for everything. IMO, if a scope tops out at 16x, if I am perfectly fine with it being SFP because I won't be making huge wind corrections or quick elevation corrections based on the reticle unless I'm shooting to at least 300+ yards and then I won't be worried about needing to drop much below 16x or whatever. If I do it's easy enough to place a detent or mark at 8x and double everything.

-As a hunter, I do not need 10moa of windage hashmarks, much less 30moa or whatever silly number some scopes have. Six minutes is plenty. Beyond that I am not shooting. So let's compromise at maybe 10moa or 3mils of windage hashes. That's plenty.

-I really like the tapered crosshairs that Burris uses in some of their reticles.

Like this:

https://www.burrisoptics.com/reticles/ballistic-plex-e1-ffp-2-10x-and-3-15x

Imagine a reticle with taper like that, but perhaps 6-10moa or 3mils of windage in 1/2mil or 2moa increments. Plenty for hunters. Now imagine the windage hashes were sticking out of the top half of the horizontal crosshair, but the bottom half was still tapered for visibility in low light.

Also imagine that the BDC Christmas tree shown in the above reticle was in half-mils or 2moa increments for elevation and for every 2moa of elevation the 'branches' went out 1moa for windage, or for every 1/2mil of elevation, the branches went out 1/4mil for windage.

Do that mini-tree for perhaps 3mils or 10moa of elevation and no more than 1.5mils or 5moa of windage, and it would be quite functional as a quick and dirty reference for fast shots at intermediate ranges, without overly cluttering the scope. Leave that part of the reticle fairly thin, because I'm not making quick and dirty 500 yard shots unless the lighting conditions are pretty good.

Now make the lower vertical crosshair and both horizontal crosshairs a thicker taper, so that you can rapidly find the center of the scope in very low light conditions for 0-200 yard shots.

That would be about perfect, IMO.
 
Can someone articulate the downsides of the MOAR 30 as a hunting reticle for me? I've hunted with it exclusively for the past 5+ seasons and don't see a problem. I'm guessing this is a case of "I don't know what I don't know." It has a clear aim point, it has subtensions for wind, what am I missing? I would delete the the elevation subtensions above the crosshairs if I could, simply because I don't use them, but otherwise I find it pretty usable. Thoughts?

1758818681067.png
 
Can someone articulate the downsides of the MOAR 30 as a hunting reticle for me? I've hunted with it exclusively for the past 5+ seasons and don't see a problem. I'm guessing this is a case of "I don't know what I don't know." It has a clear aim point, it has subtensions for wind, what am I missing? I would delete the the elevation subtensions above the crosshairs if I could, simply because I don't use them, but otherwise I find it pretty usable. Thoughts?

View attachment 940769
I used that one in SFP and liked it but dumped it when I was trained for mils and dialing.

I have one gun with an ATACR 4-16x in Mil C and I leave it at 8x.
 
Can someone articulate the downsides of the MOAR 30 as a hunting reticle for me? I've hunted with it exclusively for the past 5+ seasons and don't see a problem. I'm guessing this is a case of "I don't know what I don't know." It has a clear aim point, it has subtensions for wind, what am I missing? I would delete the the elevation subtensions above the crosshairs if I could, simply because I don't use them, but otherwise I find it pretty usable. Thoughts?

View attachment 940769
Too much illumination. It's mechanically impossible to illuminate a reticle without obscuring part of the target behind it, and a reticle that large, with that much illumination, is going to illuminate too much, because nobody on earth is going to be using 20moa of windage or 30moa of elevation in the reticle at first/last light to make hunting shots.

Any illumination beyond the center 2-3moa or 1 mil, is excessive, IMO. Very few hunters would be taking shots when it's so dark that they need illumination and also so far that they need windage/elevation correction. That's a recipe for a lost animal.


I agree that I don't like the top half of the reticle and find it nearly useless, but I will concede that it could be useful if you had a 250 yard zero and needed to thread a needle at 125-175 yards, but that's a pretty narrow argument. Or if you dialed 10moa and as you started to squeeze the trigger you saw a bigger animal stand up to run at half the distance and you needed to quickly hold under by those 10MOA without time to un-dial. But again, very narrow use case.
 
I switched mine to green and had it at the lowest setting and it would transition naturally and worked great to 1/2 hour to 45 minutes after sunset.
I don't doubt that for a moment. I'll freely confess that I look at everything from a minimalist sort of standpoint here. What I'd really like to do is get to the point where reticle designs were so dialed in that the typical hunter in the typical '30 minute before/after sunrise/sunset' scenario had no need, ever, for any artificial illumination at all. I believe that some of the current illumination systems do a good job of making FFP usable in low light; I just think reticles could be improved so as to make illumination superfluous and thereby eliminate a minor failure point and cost.
 
Can someone articulate the downsides of the MOAR 30 as a hunting reticle for me? I've hunted with it exclusively for the past 5+ seasons and don't see a problem. I'm guessing this is a case of "I don't know what I don't know." It has a clear aim point, it has subtensions for wind, what am I missing? I would delete the the elevation subtensions above the crosshairs if I could, simply because I don't use them, but otherwise I find it pretty usable. Thoughts?

View attachment 940769

Trijicon Tenmile HX
click illumination levels

TMHX2550-C-3000020-reticle (Small).png
 
Too much illumination. It's mechanically impossible to illuminate a reticle without obscuring part of the target behind it, and a reticle that large, with that much illumination, is going to illuminate too much, because nobody on earth is going to be using 20moa of windage or 30moa of elevation in the reticle at first/last light to make hunting shots.

Any illumination beyond the center 2-3moa or 1 mil, is excessive, IMO. Very few hunters would be taking shots when it's so dark that they need illumination and also so far that they need windage/elevation correction. That's a recipe for a lost animal.


I agree that I don't like the top half of the reticle and find it nearly useless, but I will concede that it could be useful if you had a 250 yard zero and needed to thread a needle at 125-175 yards, but that's a pretty narrow argument. Or if you dialed 10moa and as you started to squeeze the trigger you saw a bigger animal stand up to run at half the distance and you needed to quickly hold under by those 10MOA without time to un-dial. But again, very narrow use case.

I agree with all that, but it's more commentary on the illumination than the reticle itself. I rarely use illumination and when I do I use the lowest, green setting as @Nine Banger suggests and find that pretty subtle and usable.

I used that one in SFP and liked it but dumped it when I was trained for mils and dialing.

I have one gun with an ATACR 4-16x in Mil C and I leave it at 8x.

Yeah, I haven't been able to tear the band-aid off yet and move to MIL. I'm too invested in MOA scopes, even though I hear the siren song of base-10 calling.
 
Back
Top