Will Nightforce Ever Offer A Hunter-Friendly Reticle Again?

[Cynoscion]

What point are you trying to make?

I think what he is getting at is that the Trijicon Tenmile HX is the answer to the riflescope you and a lot of folks are looking for. The 3-18x44 FFP model is the perfect riflescope for me. It is tough, reliable, has a very usable reticle at all distances and magnifications (I thought it was too busy at first but my eyes hardly notice the tree anymore) and the illumination is perfect for me at the lowest green setting although I rarely have to use it.
I sold off all of my Nightforce optics after using Tenmiles. For whatever reason, my eyes never could see their reticles in low light conditions against rocky/shale backgrounds.

 

[Smokinyotes]

I have 2 SHV 3-10x42 with the MOAR reticle Center illumination. 1 SHV 4.5-14x56 and a hand full of NXS 5.5-20x50. They all have the MOAR reticle. For all my hunting guns I shoot 5 shot groups from 300 to 600 yards and measure the drop in moa. Have a drop chart for each gun.

My 257 wby is zeroed at 300 yards. I hold 2 moa at 400, 4 moa at 500, and 6 moa at 600. Easy to remember and works great for hunting. I’m not sure what’s not to like about this reticle.

 

[SDHNTR]

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

Main complaint is that in FFP scopes it’s too hard to see until about 8X.

Only the center cross should be lit up.

There is no need for 20 moa of wind hold. And certainly no need for 30 moa holdover. 10 moa would suffice and make the reticle a lot easier to see at lower power.

 

[Chris in TN]

So here's a concept of how I see the 'ideal' hunting reticle. Understand that this is a MSPaint level rendition and might need a bit of tweaking and cleaning up, but this is what I'd like to see:



I think the concept would work well for 99% of hunting usage, and would be thick enough to be useful in FFP in low light at low powers. Uncluttered enough to not be overwhelming. Sufficient for any wind I'm actually going to shoot in. Enough elevation holdover for any 'quick' shot I'm going to actually take.

I could be wrong.

 

[SDHNTR]

That's a big reason I'm still hooked on the NXS 2.5-10. It checks a lot of boxes for a 20 oz package. I have 3 of them.

It’s the best overall hunting scope NF offers. Perhaps because MOAR works better in SFP, and 10x is acceptable in SFP.

 

[Chris in TN]

And certainly no need for 30 moa holdover. 10 moa would suffice and make the reticle a lot easier to see at lower power.

I generally agree but will concede - and this is apples to oranges - that I do have a .22lr that runs out of elevation and I'll often hold 20+MOA with the reticle to get out past 300 yards. But again, that's a .22lr, not a big game rifle.

 

[Dobeman887]

I buy nothing but simple Duplex reticles- I almost always go with Leupold for this reason.

 

[Nine Banger]

So here's a concept of how I see the 'ideal' hunting reticle. Understand that this is a MSPaint level rendition and might need a bit of tweaking and cleaning up, but this is what I'd like to see:

View attachment 941214

I think the concept would work well for 99% of hunting usage, and would be thick enough to be useful in FFP in low light at low powers. Uncluttered enough to not be overwhelming. Sufficient for any wind I'm actually going to shoot in. Enough elevation holdover for any 'quick' shot I'm going to actually take.

I could be wrong.

Works for me but I feel like I'd rather have the "hold under" bracket omitted and just do that in my head if I'm taking a close shot.

 

[Chris in TN]

Works for me but I feel like I'd rather have the "hold under" bracket omitted and just do that in my head if I'm taking a close shot.

I'd be 100% fine with that. There's certainly value in having the top uncluttered - like if you need to quickly make sure you're shooting at the correct critter by looking at his headgear before you shoot.

 

[SDHNTR]

Does nightforce even have any sort of understanding of how many customers actually use their scopes for hunting?

Do they even recognize hunters as a target market whatsoever? While us hunters who know and appreciate durability certainly use their scopes for that purpose, it doesn’t seem that the company recognizes us at all.

It sure seems like Nightforce could clean up if they marketed a scope specific to hunters. All they would need to do is make an NX5 3-15 and/or 4-20 where the reticle is actually visible on the low end. Or simply bring back the F1 version of the NXS 3-15. It would be that simple and it seems they would own the hardcore hunter market. I think serious hunters have gotten over the weight objection and understand it comes along with building a robust scope.

With all the Idaho folks here, someone has to know someone within the halls of NF’s marketing department. Why are they so apparently ambivalent towards hunters? Do they not like money?

 

[SDHNTR]

Hell, Maven nearly stumbled into success by accident with the 1.2. That scope has to be profitable. Yet they don’t even know why and still botched several important features.

If only one of the big guys with capital and distribution know how were intentional about it… why is it so hard?

 

[RWT]

Hell, Maven nearly stumbled into success by accident with the 1.2. That scope has to be profitable. Yet they don’t even know why and still botched several important features.

If only one of the big guys with capital and distribution know how were intentional about it… why is it so hard?

Because to many companies lack common sense or have a method to monetize it well.

My current company is a show in that regard. They are trying to break into B2B and Federal markets, while ONLY leveraging their existing sell to consumer processes. Their refusal to change will cause these verticals to fail or struggle until a finance person recommends they be killed or spun off.

 

[Southern Lights]

I think what he is getting at is that the Trijicon Tenmile HX is the answer to the riflescope you and a lot of folks are looking for. The 3-18x44 FFP model is the perfect riflescope for me. It is tough, reliable, has a very usable reticle at all distances and magnifications (I thought it was too busy at first but my eyes hardly notice the tree anymore) and the illumination is perfect for me at the lowest green setting although I rarely have to use it.
I sold off all of my Nightforce optics after using Tenmiles. For whatever reason, my eyes never could see their reticles in low light conditions against rocky/shale backgrounds.

This scope came so close to me. I got it in hand but they just blew the reticle.

- Stadia don't come out to edges at low power - Why not? Stadia are short and float in space making it harder to see and align at lower powers.

- Way too much wind hold vs. thick stadia. Who needs 12 mils of windage hold? Give us horizontal stadia that extends all the way at lower powers to see.

- Christmas tree - For hunting this is not useful. This is a target shooter feature. After the first shot on an animal if you miss they often start moving off. The splash reference on the tree is no longer useful for follow-ups and clutters up the view.

So I really liked everything else about this scope and build quality seemed excellent. Also the mag range and objective size are solid. But I had to send it back because the low power reticle was a deal breaker. Yes if they fix the reticle I'd probably replace my NF scopes with these.

 

[SDHNTR]

This scope came so close to me. I got it in hand but they just blew the reticle.

- Stadia don't come out to edges at low power - Why not? Stadia are short and float in space making it harder to see and align at lower powers.

- Way too much wind hold vs. thick stadia. Who needs 12 mils of windage hold? Give us horizontal stadia that extends all the way at lower powers to see.

- Christmas tree - For hunting this is not useful. This is a target shooter feature. After the first shot on an animal if you miss they often start moving off. The splash reference on the tree is no longer useful for follow-ups and clutters up the view.

So I really liked everything else about this scope and build quality seemed excellent. Also the mag range and objective size are solid. But I had to send it back because the low power reticle was a deal breaker. Yes if they fix the reticle I'd probably replace my NF scopes with these.

Agreed. I’d own several Tenmiles if it weren’t for that lousy reticle too!

 

[waspocrew]

So here's a concept of how I see the 'ideal' hunting reticle. Understand that this is a MSPaint level rendition and might need a bit of tweaking and cleaning up, but this is what I'd like to see:

View attachment 941214

I think the concept would work well for 99% of hunting usage, and would be thick enough to be useful in FFP in low light at low powers. Uncluttered enough to not be overwhelming. Sufficient for any wind I'm actually going to shoot in. Enough elevation holdover for any 'quick' shot I'm going to actually take.

I could be wrong.

Not too far off of the reticle Gunwerks offers in their Mark 5 scopes:

 

[Chris in TN]

- Christmas tree - For hunting this is not useful. This is a target shooter feature. After the first shot on an animal if you miss they often start moving off. The splash reference on the tree is no longer useful for follow-ups and clutters up the view.

One reason I like a basic, smaller, minimal 'Christmas tree' is because several years ago my dad and I shot a double on cow elk. We dialed for his, he dropped her, they ran, we swapped positions then when they stopped a single cow stepped out to the side of the herd and I held more elevation in the reticle and shot her. Having the Christmas tree helped a lot there, though in hindsight I oculd have probably handled it some other way. I just didn't know how much time I had and took the fastest decent route I knew to get a bullet in her.

Not too far off of the reticle Gunwerks offers in their Mark 5 scopes:

View attachment 941412

I'd really like that if they'd cut the windage in half (honestly I'd prefer no more than 6-8moa or 1.5-2mil of windage) so the horizontal stadia could come in far enough to be useful as an aiming point.

I need that more than I need 17moa of windage marks. I can understand why you might find that useful in a wartime scenario where you absolutely have to attempt a shot, but none of us are ever holding 17moa of wind on a game animal. Or even half that.

But, honestly, I want to see this as a first-choice offering from a major maker, not a special extra charge from a maker on one particular model I wouldn't buy anyway.

Burris has a similar reticle on their plain (non electric) Veracity 3-15x. It isn't perfect but it's enough to make me think that whoever designed it was a thinker who understands the problem.

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

 

[Stinky Coyote]

love the dmx mil reticle on my nightforce 1-8 capped, they just need to put that in a new body with .1/clicks and a bit more top end mag and bit more objective diameter to perfect the mpvo and cross over to the hunters perfectly, 1.5-12x42, heck nx6 it and go 2-12x42, keep it around 20oz while at it

 

[SDHNTR]

Honestly, the Maven reticle was close. In concept it’s probably the best out there for hunting. All they had to do was pay attention and they would’ve nailed it. They stopped at a B when an achieving an A would’ve been so easy.

For those who care, the MOA version isn’t usable in the low powers, but mils was, for the most part (just the dot was too small). I get it, this place prefers mils, but that’s still a minority. In true Maven fashion, they blew it and alienated a larger market (those who prefer moa) audience. All they had to do was make the reticle stadia dimensions effectively the same on both versions and they could’ve pleased both camps. Additionally, I prefer a center cross over a floating dot, but that’s admittedly subjective. Nonetheless, for anyone without perfect vision, the floating dot was too small for hunting purposes, imo.

And that illumination was just a fail. They just plain mailed it in. Again, a lil more effort here would’ve gone a long way!

With a lil better execution, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.

 

[Chris in TN]

Honestly, the Maven reticle was close. In concept it’s probably the best out there for hunting. All they had to do was pay attention and they would’ve nailed it. They stopped at a B when an achieving an A would’ve been so easy.

For those who care, the MOA version isn’t usable in the low powers, but mils was, for the most part (just the dot was too small). I get it, this place prefers mils, but that’s still a minority. In true Maven fashion, they blew it and alienated a larger market (those who prefer moa) audience. All they had to do was make the effective reticle stadia dimensions the same on both versions and they could’ve pleased both camps. Additionally, I prefer a center cross over a floating dot, but that’s admittedly subjective. Nonetheless, for anyone without perfect vision, the floating dot was too small for hunting purposes, imo.

And that illumination was just a fail. They just plain mailed it in. Again, a lil more effort here would’ve gone a long way!

With a lil better execution, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.

I'm a 100% dedicated moa guy (as far as buying new goes; I still use various .mil stuff that I already own. I can do math). I think the Maven MOA-2 reticle looks decent but I've never actually used one.

I hope one day some NF guy gets bored and reads these discussions and says 'hey, we could do better, let's draw up a new reticle'.
Then actually go hunt with it a few evenings before putting it into production. I have been saying this for the better part of a decade and have even reached out to at least one scope company about reticle designs. Nope. Crickets.



*shrug*

ETA: And I understand that manufacturers get all sorts of retarded 'good ideas' from customers that are, well, retarded. So I understand being ignored.