Your favorite FFP hunting reticle that is great at lowest-magnification?

[Macintosh]

I'm wondering what peoples favorite mil-based FFP reticles are that offer good performance at lowest power, in addition to features for longer range holdovers and wind when dialing. I'm kind of toying with trading-in a higher-powered "PRS-only" scope and replacing it with a mid-powered (to me that's minimum 35' FOV up to 15-18x or so top end) "hunting scope that also works for long range holds" optic, but I'm having trouble finding reticles I like, or having trouble getting a sense of what various reticles look like at lowest power. (that every manufacturer doesn't publish both high and low-power images of their reticles as part of their little reticle manual baffles me).

I see some people post that they dont understand this fixation with lowest power, but since I mainly hunt in the east and shots are typically 50 yards and under and frequently on a moving critter, against an exceptionally busy background, this is probably the single most important element of a reticle to me and one I'm not willing to compromise on for a scope that isnt 100% a range-toy.

It seems very, very few ffp reticles are designed with low-power function as a primary concern, and even when they say they are I dont need or want 10 mils of wind-hold, nor do I need or want 20 mils of holdover--I need a big, fat, bold-as-sh$% reticle I can use in all light conditions against the busiest background at 3x, and I want all those hashmarks to be there but invisible and leave my field of view un-cluttered until needed...and then show up as I zoom in to where they will realistically be used.

I've seen some posts on the minox THLR reticle, and while I'm still not sold on it not having had a chance to look through one, it's a perfect example of a reticle designed from the ground-up to work well at low power, while still offering the holds and measuring ability for longer range work. I own a ffp mil-dot reticle scope that I like that simply looks like a duplex at low power, but while it works for its intended purpose it is limited for holds and only has 1mil marks.

So, what is your favorite FFP hunting reticle for a mid-power dialing scope that not only handles all of the stereotypical long range stuff, but works exceptionally well at lowest-magnification? Beer is on me if you have a photo through the reticle at lowest power.

 

[Formidilosus]

So, what is your favorite FFP hunting reticle for a mid-power dialing scope that not only handles all of the stereotypical long range stuff, but works exceptionally well at lowest-magnification? Beer is on me if you have a photo through the reticle at lowest power.

The THLR is the only one that was specifically designed for it. That it works on the highest powers better than most, only sweetness the pot.

However, when you say “long range holds”, I’m supposing you mean a tree reticle? If so, I’d ask where and when have you actually needed the tree?

 

[Macintosh]

When I first started shooting matches I borrowed a gun that had a razor g2 with a ebr-1c reticle--no tree. I actually rather liked it even though I dont think it's visible enough to be a good hunting reticle. If the 3-18 razor had been available with that reticle I would have bought it at that time. When I purchased a similar scope it had a christmas tree reticle, which was the only type available. I now have one on that centerfire rifle and another on a 22 I use for the same purpose. I dont use the tree points a ton, but sometimes they are handy for wind-calls in a stage where holdovers are faster (at least for me) than dialing. I find the horus reticles I've tried too noisy even for that use, but havent really minded my rather normal tree reticles on the range. But I'm really not set on a tree being a requirement, it's more that I find a tree reticle less of a liability in that application, and once in a while can come in handy, and I like the idea of taking a crossover hunting rifle in matches once in a while. Really I just want the option to use holdovers for elevation on part or all of a stage when there is a tight time limit and lots of different-range targets in succession, and having a wind-hold reference in those cases can be helpful, i.e. I'm looking for what I consider a hunting scope that can cross into PRS, rather than a PRS scope that crosses into hunting.

Also, I dont particularly care if a reticle was built for exactly my use-case, just hoping to make a short list of reticles that people like for this purpose to look at/for in case I actually follow through on this.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

the list is pretty short really.

THLR
Mil-Quad

some of the scope testing threads have some novel ideas people have put together, all of them are better than the standard offerings from most manufacturers.

 

[Macintosh]

Thanks. How different is the milquad from other mil-dot reticles that have .5mil hashes? by specs and interweb appearance it appears fairly standard. NF MilR-5mil, MilRf1, S&b P4, minox mr2 or mr5, etc? These are all likely on my list to get a better look at, just wondering about what prompted the suggestion of the one without the others.
March FML-1? I'm sure there are others as well. These all seem similar-ish, just trying to get some feedback from folks who have used them.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

the thickness of the posts, and how close the posts go to the center of the reticle, makes a bigger difference for close range, rapid aiming than the hash or dot system/spacing.

admitedly, I haven't looked through the other ones you mentioned. I do recall seeing a photo of one of the minox reticles and thinking it would probably be useable.

There's lots of photos and videos of the NF reticles here and other spots on the web, to my eye none of them look useable at low magnification, but some guys here really like the mil reticle in the SHV-F1. I looked through a mil-c reticle once, it was basically invisible below 8x indoors when looking at darker taxidermy pieces.

 

[Macintosh]

Yep, all of the above reticles I mentioned have a 10-12mil area (5-6mil to either side of center) of center hashes using a finer crosshair of .05-.07mil, with a thicker post outside of that. The NF reticles I've used seemed pretty noisy or too fine to me as well, but looking at the diagrams online there are several different versions of the mil-R reticle, and I'm not sure which I've actually used, and if I'm reading their info correctly they are different depending on the exact magnification of scope, so keeping my options open and interested in feedback.

 

[Formidilosus]

Thanks. How different is the milquad from other mil-dot reticles that have .5mil hashes? by specs and interweb appearance it appears fairly standard.

Significantly more visible on low powers.

NF MilR-5mil, MilRf1, S&b P4, minox mr2 or mr5, etc? These are all likely on my list to get a better look at, just wondering about what prompted the suggestion of the one without the others.
March FML-1? I'm sure there are others as well. These all seem similar-ish, just trying to get some feedback from folks who have used them.

Of those, only the Mil-R could be considered kind of acceptable for general hunting. And, it’s still about half what the MilQuad is.

 

[Formidilosus]

Also, I dont particularly care if a reticle was built for exactly my use-case, just hoping to make a short list of reticles that people like for this purpose to look at/for in case I actually follow through on this.

I’ve used every reticle you’ve mentioned- in order of suitability: THLR, then Milquad, then way down the Mil-R, than everything else way behind it. The THLR and MQ are the only FFP mil reticles that general hunters have been ok with in my experience. The G2H in the Bushnell LRHS scopes are ok if you can deal with a donut.

All the “tree” reticles are trash for general use at close ranges, broken terrain, and lower light.

 

[Macintosh]

OK, makes sense. Thank you both very much for the replies and picture, I'll make sure and check those out. The THLR is only available in a 5-25 scope though, correct? that would be a nonstarter for me.

Agree that the tree reticles I have used are trash for hunting, I guess I am just surprised no one makes a "tree" portion of a reticle fine-enough that it is only visible above a certain magnification (as they currently are or a little finer), while also using thicker posts closer to center and making the crosshair itself a bit heavier so it's usable at lower-power. I know these companies cant be everything to everyone, but it sure seems possible if they tried, and I can't see why there wouldn't be room for a company to distinguish themselves from the crowd of more or less identical tree reticles with something that is still useable for that purpose while also being better in the field. Some of these relatively small companies even offer multiple different tree reticles that are virtually indistinguishable from each other, so I have a hard time thinking that sells more scopes for them than offering two reticles that are actually different and would allow them to offer that scope to more people?

If anyone has other perspectives or ideas for reticles I should check out I'd also still like to hear from you.

 

[bobinmi]

I really like the reticle in my Meopta Optika6 4.5-27. I was using an athlon that lit up the entire christmas tree when illuminated. The meopta has a very fine crosshair and dot which is the only part that illuminates. On 4.5 power it feels like a 4x red dot.

 

[Formidilosus]

I know these companies cant be everything to everyone, but it sure seems possible if they tried, and I can't see why there wouldn't be room for a company to distinguish themselves from the crowd of more or less identical tree reticles with something that is still useable for that purpose while also being better in the field. Some of these relatively small companies even offer multiple different tree reticles that are virtually indistinguishable from each other, so I have a hard time thinking that sells more scopes for them than offering two reticles that are actually different and would allow them to offer that scope to more people?

They absolutely can make reticles that work correctly. The issue is that the vast majority of the companies have engineers, and product managers/whoever makes the decisions that don’t actually have much broad base experience in shooting and hunting and who don’t understand what they are making. Combine that with a general consumer market that is as ignorant or more so than them, where everything is designed by committee, and it’s not hard to see why all the reticles suck. It is truly the blind leading the blind.

 

[Thinkingman]

This is exactly why I would not want a FFP scope on a hunting rifle.

I'm not trying to change your mind but personally...No thanks.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

3-15 power with Gen 2 MilDot is on my current primary hunting rifle.

Handholding cell phone while supporting rear of rifle with shoulder. Scope on 3x (image & reticle much better in person)
View attachment 452512

Handholding cell phone with rear of stock supported by shoulder. 250 yards with scope on 5x (image & reticle much better in person)
View attachment 452522

Handholding cell with scope on 10x at 1,000 yards (image and reticle much better in person)
View attachment 452519

View attachment 452521

There’s no such thing as a do-everything scope. It’s all a compromise (including reticle). I've shot animals with a SKMR3 (0.035 mil thickness) on 5x during early morning light, didn't use illumination, and didn't have an issue.

On the 5x (or lower depending on scope), how does it look against a dark object (ex: black bear)? Am asking since I do not necessarily want to have to rely upon illumination.

Great photos BTW.

 

[JGRaider]

LRHSi, and the donut of death work great for me.

 

[Macintosh]

TK421, the g2 mil dot is tangent theta, correct? That looks identical to the s&b p4 reticle. If so I have a P3 reticle which is very similar (same dimensions just 1-mil rather than .5mil dots), and yes, while it’s fine-enough that I would not put it on a dedicated woods rifle for tracking around here, its pretty darn useable in general.

Thinkingman, I dont disagree necessarily, hunting where I do I would never get a ffp scope if this were my ONLY hunting rifle—but this is a different animal for a different purpose. Anyway, for any scope above 10x or so I dont like a graduated reticle in 2fp because I am not smart enough to use the reticle except at highest magnification.

 

[General RE LEE]

I owned a Leupold Mark 5 HD 3-18 and quickly sold it.

I primarily hunt but do shoot steel out to 1250 at my gun club. I don’t need a FFP reticle. I have a SFP Zeiss V6 3-18x50 and use the Z-MOA hash marks at 1000 yards and 18x

 

[SpringM1A]

Have you looked at Trijicon Credo or the slightly larger 3-18x44 Tenmile?

 

[BLJ]

Maybe the Athlon APLR4 is worth a look. I have a 2.5-15 Ares that i believe is quite usuable on the low power settings.

 

[Macintosh]

Thanks folks, keep it coming. I especially appreciate the first-hand experience people are relaying about what they have personally used and liked.