Originally Posted By bobapunk:
I certainly appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts and experience with low-mag/variable scopes. I can tell that you have put a lot of time and thought into developing your knowledge base on this subject. I really do like the Bushnell Elite ET1624J (1-6.5x24mm Tactical Rifle Scope, Matte Black, Illuminated BTR-2 FFP Reticle) however, I think I am liking the GRSC (1-6x24 FFP Horseshoe Reticle Combat Rifle Scope (CRS)) just a bit more because of the easy ranging features on the reticle.
Just a few questions to help me learn:
- When you say "matching turrets" do you mean that the turret adjustment is in mils (to match the reticle) instead of MOA?
- You mentioned that you appreciate the reduced Eye Box at higher magnification. I believe I will appreciate that too as it would help to ensure a consistent cheek weld and overall shooting position. However, you said that you appreciate it, "because helps to reduce parallax error since there is no parallax adjustment on this or any of the low mag variables that I'm aware of." Reading the description of the Bushnell Elite on Optics Planet, I came across this, "Side focus parallax adjustment on the riflescope allows you to make precise adjustments to your long range shots, ensuring optimum accuracy even at 6.5x." Maybe your scope has a feature on it that you didn't know about?
1. Yes, the turret adjustments are in mils to match the mil scale reticle.
2. I saw that on the bushnell website as well. The fact is, there is no parallax adjustment on their 1-6.5x scopes. The marketing "professional" who wrote that description made a blanket statement to cover the entire elite tactical line. To expand further, a consistent cheek weld and shooting position are obviously good practices no matter what you're shooting. But, when you're shooting at any substantial range, with any expectation of reasonable accuracy, with a scope that has no parallax adjustment, they become far more important. Parallax error can play nasty tricks on your eyes. Consistent cheek weld will help to reduce it.
I looked hard at the GRSC 1-6 as well. I didn't get to look at it in person but from what I can tell, the main differences are the 0.5x at the top end and the reticle design (I don't remember if the turrets are mils or moa). The only reason I ended up with a bushnell instead of a GRSC was because of the reticle. I like the BTR-2 better but if you like the GRSC reticle then, by all means, go that route. I don't think you'll be disappointed.
I also wanted to say something to people who argue that ffp reticles are useless on low mag variable scopes:
You all say, "using the reticle to range a target will only be done at the highest power, therefore it makes no difference whether or not the mil/moa scale is accurate at any given lower power". I agree with you to an extent. When I use the reticle in my scope to range a target, it will be set to 6.5x.
However, you fail to realize that having a correctly calibrated mil/moa scale at any power is not the only, or even the primary, benefit to an ffp reticle on a low mag variable optic. The primary benefit is that, on 1x, the entire reticle becomes your aiming reference, which means faster time on target because you have a larger reference point. On the other hand, a larger reference point means less precise fire. A reticle on the first focal plane will appear to shrink as the power decreases, although it actually is staying the same size it always is. Therefore, on 1x, the reticle will appear to you and me as a smaller reference point than it would be otherwise. Which in turn means more precise fire on 1x. As I said before, it's a balance between speed and precision.
I really only use my ARs to hunt and I'm gonna throw a scenario out here that might be food for thought.
Keep in mind this all happens inside of 5 seconds usually, and that I keep my scope set at 1x unless I have the need and
the time to crank it up.
So here we go. You spot your target. It's quartering away from you at 3/4 of full speed. Based on your experience, you guesstimate it's moving at 15-20mph. Also based on your experience, you guesstimate it is anywhere between 75 yards to 150 yards away. No time for an accurate range but you know it's inside point blank distance so no need to hold over. Not even enough time to crank up the power, this time all you have to work with is 1x. You're firing off-hand and unsupported, the vital zone is ~4"^2. While all this was racing through your head you shouldered your AR and picked up the target in your optic. Now you have 3-4 seconds to make an accurate shot (it usually takes at least 3 shots to score a hit for me in these circumstances).
Now tell me this, for this shot, would you rather have a reticle with a center dot diameter of 6.5 moa and a horseshoe diameter of 140 moa, as my reticle would be on 1x if it were on the second focal plane? Or, would you rather have a 1moa center dot with a 21.6 moa horseshoe, as it is on 1x on the first focal plane?
Do you see what I'm getting at? It's less about ranging and more about balancing speed and precision, as far as 1-nx scopes are concerned. Honestly, I probably would have bought the bushnell with a first focal plane reticle even if it didn't have the mil scale because the close-medium range benefits are what I like the most about the whole concept. Then again, the mil scale reticle and mil turrets let me stretch my legs out past 400 and why spend money on glass if it won't help you with that? You might as well spend your money on a red dot and be done with it.
To me the benefits are obvious and I was super jealous of those who could afford S&B short dots when I was running a K-dot. I like the BTR-2 reticle better than any of the reticles I've come across so at this point, I'm a happy camper!
Again, this is only my opinion. Sorry for the 'wot' but I hope it helps somebody to make a more informed decision before they drop a grand or more on glass.