Seriously what was Elcan thinking on this one? It looks completely non well thought out, in form and function.

Trijicon VCOG 1-6x24 Shot Show 2014 mini review.

I visited Trijicon twice this year:  first at media range day and later at their booth. I was primarily concerned with the VCOG this year as, though it was announced early last year, it did not make Shot Show 2013 and so I hadn't seen it. Before we get to the VCOG though, I'll mention that I did shoot the TARS at range day and it looked good and performed problem free. The monopod on the back of the rifle bit me, but that is not really an optics issue.


Shooting the Trijicon VCOG at range day

Along with the TARS, I also shot the VCOG at range day. Surprisingly, they had it out at the long distance range rather than in one of the close quarters lanes. An interesting choice, and they provided match grade 77 grain ammo as well. The VCOG's BDC went out to 800 and there just so happened to be a plate at about that range, so I thought why not give it a try. This was complicated a bit by the fact I had to shoot the thing from the left hand side of the bench, but simplified by the fact that the plate at 800 was freaking huge. That plate must have been 1.5 meters in diameter at least. I opted to wedge myself in rather than shoot weak side with the rationale that it seemed likely the folks intended to use this optic would be in combat and might not have the best possible shooting position available to them. That's good rationalization. Really, I just don't like to shoot weak side. What happened next surprised me a little. After the first shot blew 6" right of the plate, I adjusted and the next ten shots or so I fired were all hits. I didn't expect this. The wind was gusting and, I think, generally around about 5mph at this time. The target was huge, but I still expected some shots to blow right or be over-held and land left. Sitting here now, looking at the MK 262 ballistic table, I really shouldn't be surprised. The table shows 1.2 meters of drift at 800m in a 5 mph wind and that gong was at least 1.5m. By that math, the wind would have to be quite variable to result in misses. I guess my feelings about the reliability of any 5.56mm round when it comes to hitting a target at 800m need to be more substantially modulated to target size. Of course, it wasn't until I fired some of the mil-hash reticle scopes later on in the day that I calculated the target was as big as a hay bale. Anyhow, the bottom line is the BDC worked and the optics were clear enough and offered enough magnification to spot the miss and adjust in a desert where the dust from a miss gives a good signature.

It wasn't until the last day of Shot that I managed to get to the Trijicon booth on the show floor. This was just as well as the last day most of the buyers are done and booths start to have more staff than visitors. The result of this is that I got a good long time to sit down with the VCOG and my reference optics. Trijicon did well with the flatness of field:  both eyes merge well, even at close range. They also managed to provide a little larger field of view than the CQBSS, though its competition for military contracts will be the Mark 6 1-6x which has a substantially larger FOV. The VCOG and the Mark 6 1-6x will undoubtedly be two of the finalists should the rumors of a big Army FFP 1-6x contest prove true. As I mentioned in my reviews on them, the two Leupolds are virtually identical with respect to optical clarity and resolution. Given the price, I expected the VCOG to be close enough to on par with them that I would be unable to make a judgment in the conference setting. This was the case with many other high end scopes such as the S&B and Kahles. The VCOG does not keep this company though. Even in the conditions at the show, I was able to distinguish a difference in clarity between the CQBSS and VCOG in favor of the CQBSS. Furthermore, the VCOG example I had appeared to have more than a few specks of dust on the reticle. Hopefully this will turn out to be an early example that isn't quite up to production standard in these regards. It would not be the first time I encountered such a case.


Through the Trijicon VCOG at 1x. Very flat, and very bright illumination.


The Trijicon VCOG next to the reference CQBSS in Bobro cantilever 34mm mount

Lets talk about the VCOG illumination. Several recent scopes, including the VCOG, Mark 6 1-6x, CQBSS, and others have shown up with illumination that is daytime bright, sometimes first focal plane, and does not appear to be based on beam splitter technology. I am happy to report that I think I may have learned the secret of this new tech (not from Trijicon BTW). I called it "directed reflected" in my Leupold reviews. I suppose that's not the worst name for it, but it is more complicated than that and I expect I would have a better name for it had I taken a few high level physics of optics courses. The way this technology was explained to me, it involves etching the reticle in a precise way so that the engraving bears a precise relationship to the wavelength of light used in the illumination source. Light is then introduced from the side, through the glass upon which the reticle is etched, rather than from the direction of the viewer. When the light hits the precise engraving it bends 90 degrees, resulting in a bright reticle image to the user and a relatively small signature at the objective. This has the downside that the illumination itself can have a different exit pupil from the optic, as seen in the Leupold versions, but the upsides are that it is daytime bright, can illuminate floating elements, exists in the same focal plane as the reticle (either one), and, because it uses the reticle and is not a projection, it can easily illuminate complex shapes. The illumination on the VCOG also does not have a critical eyebox. Anyhow, it's daytime bright and that's what you are looking for. I could be way off base on who all exactly is using this technology, including Trijicon -  that's all hypothesis.


Though the Trijicon VCOG at 6x, notice the interesting illumination traces that I think are indicative of this new illumination tech.

Overall, the VCOG is a pretty complete package with some unique and compelling features. The ringless mounting, forged housing, and reticle designs are reminiscent of successful features in the ACOG. The VCOG adds AA battery daytime bright FFP illumination to this mix along with a healthy eye relief and diopter. The price, $2,800 retail, and weight, 23.2oz without base, will no doubt be the tough sells and I hope the examples shipped will offer better clarity and QC with regard to the dusty reticle than the one I observed.

Thanks for the down & dirty mini review on the VCOG.

Now... if you had to chose between the VCOG and the Leupold Mark 6 1-6x...

^
What he said. I'm saving shekels for one of those two optics, most likely, and reviews in this thread are likely to be a factor, so I'm definitely curious.

Is the Nikon m-223 the only 1" scope in this category or is there something else out there you haven't tested.

I have a unique situation where 30mm rings are going to be very expensive. Thanks.

Does anyone have anything to say about the Vortex crossfire ii 1-4?  I hadn't heard of it, and it looks to be in my price range.  How does it stack up against it's 'big brother' the vortex viper pst 1-4?

Shot Blog #7:  Kahles

Two years ago, in 2012, Kahles made its entry into the U.S. tactical market with a 6-24x scope called the K624i and a 1-6x scope called the K16i. I believe that this was also something of a reintroduction to the U.S. market of the brand in general and that this explains the still incredibly small booth (I think it's a double wide and it feels about like that.) Shot Show being what it now is, getting more booth space, especially in the desirable upstairs main room, is an exercise in frustration. That year my primary goal was to assemble information on the entire 1-(n)x and so I primarily focused on the 1-6x, noting only that the 6-24 was primarily touting 14mil per turn knobs and a parallax knob integrated around and below the elevation turret. In an unfortunate turn of events, the 1-6x late gen prototype that I viewed that year was not impressive. I wrote as much and then relegated them to low priority in 2013, resulting in my not getting around to them. Following the show that spring, Frank was invited to tour the new Kahles factory in Austria. His report on this experience bumped Kahles back up the list and so this year I re-examined them as both my experiences with their products and much of what I have heard going on behind the scenes have me interested.


Kahles K15i below the reference Leupold CQBSS in Bobro 34mm cantilevered mount.

I will first address the products starting with the new 1-5x and the now established 1-6x designs. The 1-5x design, dubbed, unsurprisingly, the K15i, will carry an MSRP of $1,900 and the K16i has a street price of $2,350:  making both rather high cost designs. I spent a good deal of time with the K15i and a bit with the K16i checking them out and comparing them to the Leupold CQBSS I brought as the high end reference scope. My experience this time was much better than last. Both designs were remarkably clear and bright. They held their own with the CQBSS, which is not easy to do and which is a feat I don't think can be bettered in the environment of a conference hall. In addition to this, both Kahles scopes sported significantly larger fields of view the CQBSS. This should be expected given the lower erector ratios and 2nd focal plane vs. first focal plane design. These designs also had flatter fields of view at 1x, a very important factor and not one that seems particularly focal plane dependent. The large, flat, clear, fields of view combined with the easily daytime bright dot illumination in both designs should make them quite fast up close. Kahles has added quite a few reticles to the K16i since I first saw it and now has four in the lineup. While none of these rock my world, several are open enough to be fast at close range and appear to offer a simple mil based drop section that is unobtrusive enough that the 3gunners will probably find it to the good. Following this second look, I am not surprised to have been hearing that these are making a splash in that discipline. I should also note that, like other European makers, Kahles is sensitive to weight in its designs. These scopes come in at 16.9oz, well toward the good end of that statistic. My take this time around is that these designs are probably amongst the fastest low power scopes up close. However, between the .15mil capped adjustments and fairly sparse range finding and drop compensating reticle features, they will be less effective doing varmint duty or any other extended range activity you might pursue with your AR.


The view through the K15i at 1x highlighting the bright illumination.

Now for the behind the scenes stuff that I found interesting. First off, if you have interest in Kahles and you haven't read Frank's post following his trip to visit the factory in the spring of 2013, you should view it. I could rehash the whole thing, but that would just be a waste of my time and yours as my rehash would no doubt somehow end up longer than the original. The other interesting thing that I learned is that Jeff Huber, who is the inventor of the Zero Stop system Nightforce uses and was instrumental in growing that company, now appears to be working with Kahles. This represents a significant transfer of talent and, perhaps even more important as European companies tend to lack it, insight into the American market. I will not be skipping the Kahles booth at future Shot Shows.

I this thread has sat stagnant for a while, but has anyone heard an y news on the release of the Optisan CX6 with the mudskipper reticle?

awesome thread will have to go thru all pages when I get a chance..........
Looking at reviews and comparisions of the Primary Arms 1-6X to other models.

Does the part above in bold exist? I would be interested in the link if it does and you have it.

TIA

I have seen pics and reviews on it all over the net but, no I have not seen one in person.......
Still waiting for Primary Arms to get em back in stock.

Somewhat off-topic, but are you guys able to spot .223 hits on paper at 100 yards? I am not at 6X using a SWFA SS 1-6X24. I've been able to spot the hits using much cheaper optics at slightly higher magnification, so I was wondering what other people's experience was. I'm not sure if it's an issue with the optic, or just the nature of slightly higher magnification. Targets are orange non shoot and see target spots.

Glad I found this thread. Except it makes me want to spend more money.

Put your shot targets 17yds (51ft) in front of you and look with your naked eye and tell me if you can see the hits.  If you can't, then you don't have good enough eyesight to see .223 targets at 100yds with ANY 6x scope.  If you can, then you may be seeing limitations in your SWFA SS in terms of light transmission and/or clarity.

Anyone had a chance to check out the Millet DMS 1-6?

I would love to see a column added to the spreadsheet to list which scopes are illuminated and which ones are daylight bright since those are two features I am sure most people are interested in knowing about and daylight bright is not something listed on a manufacturers specifications sheet but something you seem to be pretty familiar with.

AGREED!

Hi Jim,

i was wondering if you were able to any extensive field testing on the new Burris XTR II 1-5X and Primary Arms 1-6X variable scope?

Thanks!

I've been eagerly waiting for review on the XTR 1-5 as well. In my searching I found one review so far. The reviewer posted to Sniper's Hide originally but he provides additional thoughts on a 3-gun forum. His impressions were very good turrets, zero stop, great glass, reasonable price, clear useable reticle, and amazing illumination with complaints about edge distortion at 1x, a weird user interface for illumination, small eyebox on 5x, and weight. According to him Burris was wildly successful in making the illumination super bright for daytime use. I have this scope on my short list for a Recce. Burris has a mil/Leo discount that is 50% off msrp making this an even better bargain.

The Hide

Brian Enos

Any ideas when this scope is going to be more available?  The only retailer i've found is Trenier at cadwis.com.  Kind of hoping we might see SWFA stock it

I've been leaning towards the Burris MTAC, with the XTR II at the top of what i'm willing to pay. I'm also looking at the Primary Arms 1-6x but their warranty leaves something to be desired. Feature wise this CX6 seems like another one i should consider

I would like to hear more about the Kruger Tac Driver scope and the Bushnell 1-4x24mm.
How long are they?

I am looking for a good illuminated scope that is under 10.5 inches in length and under $350, are there any newer models out that might fit the bill?

I have a Gen 2 that I don't mind loaning to a local for reviewing. Or tell me what needs to me done/gone over.

I too would like to than Big Jim for the review.

I purchased the CX6 based on Big Jim's review, that was enough for me because Big Jim has the scope and has experience with it and seems to know what the hell he's talking about. That and I like the reticle and the 6X mag. These features seem to make it a pretty good value. The price stretched my budget a little but I'll try the scope and see what happens. I can post any good or bad about the scope AFTER I USE IT. ... I would refer certain other posters to RULE NUMBER 5 IN THE FORUM RULES.    

Thanks for taking the time Big Jim..

I have received some requests for a dimensioned MSK 3 reticle diagram and have been woefully dilatory in my response. Nevertheless, I did make one up today with big enough text to be readable so here it is:



In other news, I will be updating the table of optics for the year shortly. I will add whatever new scopes I can find, update the prices, gray out discontinued models, and, due to popular demand, change the battery column to include illumination tech. This is as close as I can get to a daytime bright rating. The illumination tech descriptors will be reflected (ref) beam splitter (beam), fiber (fiber), and other (other). Other should cover the new Leupold MK6 and mk8 as well as the new Burris xtr stuff. These, as well as beam splitter and fiber scopes, are typically perceived as daytime bright whereas scopes with reflected illumination are not. This is the best I can do to answer the "daytime bright" question as it a matter of perception.

The table (first post of the first page) has been updated to include new prices, 13 new scopes, illumination technology, and I added some text regarding all of the above. There are now 72 included scopes in this table which is pretty shocking to me because when I bought my first 1-(n)x scope there were only 3 models in existence.

enjoy

Awesome man! Keep up the good work!

+1  Thank you for all that you do!  

.
I may have skipped acidentaly while viewing all the (excelent) 30 pages on this topic... but I could not find the SS SWFA 1-6X review.  Is there one?  In which page?
Thanks for the work on the reviews!

LRCampos.

I don't believe that there is one. There is no review indexed for this scope. If you look in the last column to the right in the table that makes up most of of the first post in this thread, you will find an index of pages on which a review of a particular optic is found. You will find that index tremendously helpful in using this thread as its length has grown to the point that it would be very time consuming to have to look though the whole thread for reviews on any particular optic.

QFT

I can't tell you how many times I have come back to this post. I do have it book marked. Thanks BJF!!

after so many researches I think a good option will be the "Bushnell SMRS 1-6.5x 24mm", it seem to have a really good glass quality, and a very good value for money..... what do you think? anyone here use this optic?

I have a review of the Kahles K16i with some photos. But I can't post it because I have a 2,000-character limit on my account. If anybody else wants to post it, I can maybe PM it or something.

Use multiple posts to get your review up....
 

Great thread

I just read a new review on the Vortex Razor HD Gen 2 1-6x JM scope and it seemed like a good set-up; however, in looking through this thread I found the old review. While the scope does seem to have great glass, it's a heavy scope and the reticle, per BigJimFish, is somewhat limited.  What would make this scope better? Just a better reticle?

So I got my Steiner 1-4X24 military scope in yesterday, and was able to look at it alongside my Bushnell Elite SMRS 1-8.5X24 today. I should note that my eyes are very good after lasik surgery last year, and I usually use less magnification than most people.

I'll start with the Bushnell which I've used for a few months now. I've had it mounted on an SPR because for whatever reason, I just can't give up 1x capability with this rifle. I use it on 8.5X if I'm shooting prone or from stable position, and usually 1X from unsupported positions or barricades I have used it at the range a few dozen times and shot a DMR match with it. I replaced a SWFA 1-6 with this, and was able to compare them side by side before selling the SWFA. The glass quality in the Bushnell was a bit better and when I turned the magnification down to 6X, I could resolve more than the SWFA. The Bushnell's glass, while good, is still not the best out there. I was able to compare it to a friend's March 1-10 and at 8x, the March had better resolution. I thought the contrast was slightly better with the Bushnell, but I preferred the March optically overall. At 1X the Bushnell is quite flat and with minimal distortion. I'd say the SWFA was a little better and I didn't not try the March. While the image at 1X with the bushnell is quite good, I will note it still seemed to have a "donut" effect. The image itself doesn't tunnel at 1X but I feel the FOV could be a little better.

BTR-2 Reticle:

The reticle does the job, but I feel like it can be improved upon. It is one of the better and more innovative FFP reticles, but it just needs a tad bit more refinement to be perfect. At 1X it does a good job working like a red dot. I used the semi-circle for fast shooting, and mostly ignore the center dot. I don't really have any complaints on the reticle at 1X. At high mag is where the reticle can be improved. The center dot at .3 mils is too big. Doing dot drills with 1" dots at 100 yards is very difficult because this. Shooting paper is not too bad as I choose a 3" sticky and the center dot covers about half that size. It's very easy to just align too circles. Shooting steel at distance is also difficult with this size dot. A 6" steel plate is almost completely covered by the dot. A .15 mil center dot would be more appropriate.This would be helped along with better hashes. The horizontal line uses hash spacings and sizes that are just retarded. The height of the vertical is supposed to be some sort of ranging reticle, but I don't find it particularly useful. The distance of the hashes from the center dot are somewhat better, but still not normal. I was able to use the 1.25 on moving targets at the DMR match, although I had to lead it a little more.
The scope itself is gigantic. I've read Bigjimfish's review of it and couldn't agree more. They could have very easily made it smaller, or if they were set on the size made the objective larger. Their listed 22-23 oz is BS and I would say it's a good bit more. Both the SWFA and Steiner are listed at 22-24oz and the Bushnell feels noticeably heavier than both. I've never been a fan of 10 mil turrets on 1-X scopes. I feel they aren't necessary, but YMMV. The illumination is decent, but not daylight bright. It does not function as a red dot on 1X outside during the day.


I've only messed with the steiner for a one day and my review of it will be limited. I put it on the carbine for the pictures and today's short range trip, but it's permanent home will be a 3-gun rifle currently under construction. The first thing I noticed was that it also, was larger than necessary. It's in fact, longer than the Bushnell and while it doesn't weigh as much, still seems to outweigh any other 1-4. Mounted on the carbine, it unbalanced the rifle considerably, luckily it was taken off right after the pictures and the Aimpoint went back.
The glass on it is excellent. I believe it is Schott glass so I wouldn't expect any less. I took it for a quick range trip today to 100 yards and the glass quality on 4X was very good. I didn't have any other scopes with me to compare so I can't really give a true review of the glass quality. At 1X I felt it was easier to use than the Bushnell. It actually had a little more distortion than the Bushnell when I moved my eye around the eyebox. However it has a significantly larger eyebox than the Bushnell, so this may be a result of going to those extremes that the Bushnell is not capable of. There is no "donut" effect and the FOV creates a "floating in air effect".
The reticle is simple to use and I have no complaints. I'm a fan of SFP like this one for a 1-4 as I only use the dot when on 1x and 4x for distance. I wouldn't use holdovers on 2-3(if I even use those ranges). The Illumination is excellent and easily daylight bright. Even though it's winter, it was a very bright day today, and I had no issues using the optic like a red dot.
The turrets are well designed and simple to use. The elevation turret is a single type with zero stop and 9.3 mils of travel from your zero. Once you set your zero, the zerostop automatically stops downward travel 2 clicks past zero. The illumination knob is a little funky as it is set at an angle. I don't really see any upsides or downsides to this. In the quick range session I had today, I was able to shoot an MOA 10 round group with it and 77grain match ammo. Overall I'm happy with the Steiner and look forward to testing it more in the future.

Big Jim -

any plans to review the Leupold 1.5-4x20 Mark AR MOD 1?  The "green dot" version of course to follow the spirit of the Thread.  Listed on SFWA for 499.95 -- for your list.

Review of K16i 1-6x from user: FourT6and2

Kahles K16i 1-6x. SM1 reticle. Compared it with a few other scopes: Schmidt Bender, Premier, Meopta (Meopta 1-4x ZD, SB 1.1-4x Zenith, and a few of other higher powered optics).

SM1 reticle in Kahles: Quick to pick up due to the circle around the center dot. But was busiest of the bunch. Illumination on Kahles was the best (but not the brightest!). Definitely bright enough in the day. I was outside at one point looking directly up into the blue sky, 1:00pm Northern Californian sun, and I could still pick up the illumination. The other scopes, not so much. EXCEPT for the Meopta. Which was actually MUCH brighter. But it was more like a RDS where you were almost looking directly into an LED. You could sort of see the shimmer of the light source. This wasn't bad. Just different. The Kahles' illumination was smoother. Didn't really look like it was "illuminated" per se. It was just like... a solid, glowing, red dot/circle. Looked almost like paint instead of light. Easy to pick up but not distracting.

Turrets on Kahles were softest of all the scopes I tried. Keep in mind this was the VERY FIRST TIME I have ever actually turned a turret on any kind of optic. But it was immediately obvious to me what a "good" turret click should feel like. The Premier and the SB were very nice. However, I do not believe the K16i is meant to be adjusted in the field like a long-range scope. Kahles has caps on turrets. So I assume they are for setting and forgetting. The other scopes had things like 2nd turn indicators and no caps on the turrets. So those brands put more effort into the "turret feel.". The clicks didn't feel bad. Just not super defined and audible like the others. For setting zero on the bench and forgetting about it, they will do just fine.

Meopta 1-4x was sharpest of the group. By far.

The SB scopes were sharp as well. But "eye box" was small. Had to be positioned perfectly.

Kahles was forgiving with eye box. However, I couldn't find a diopter setting which made the reticle and the image through the scope in focus at the same time throughout the entire zoom range. The other scopes... I had no problem with. Put it on 1x, everything was good. Put it on 3x, out of focus. Reset the diopter on 3x, go to 6x, out of focus. The other scopes didn't do this.

There wasn't a big difference between any of them really. I was surprised. There's only so much you can do with some lenses in a metal tube, unless you start adding fancy aspherical elements and modern lens designs like what you find in camera lenses.

K16i, 1x, full illum.:


K16i, 6x, full illum:


K16i, 6x, full illum:
http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2014/308/a/2/sm1_1_by_haftelm-d85ah7i.jpg

SB 1.1-4x Zenith:

Any chance of a Burris 1.5-8 XTR review soon.

How about a review of the new Leupold VX6 1-6x24 Multigun with CMR2 retical. Model# 120447

TIA
Cheers
Shannon

How is the venerable NSX 1-4 with the new F3CG reticle comparing, presuming the user is fine with a 4X instead of 6X? Does ANYONE have a picture of this reticle illuminated against a WML or anything?

Hello all, I'm not familiar with low power scopes and was looking for some help. I'm looking for:
1. 30 mm tube, 24mm OBJ
2. No more than 4X magnification
3. A standard cross hair/duplex. Any sort of sub-tension is fine as long as it doesn't interfere with crosshair
4. Prefer to avoid illuminate reticle. A plain mildot would be high speed.

BigJimFish,

I really like the premise of the Optisan CX6 1-6 scope and Mudskipper 3 reticle.  I hope the execution lives up to the ideal.

One question for you regarding the reticle:
What is the center point of the reticle?  The top of the diamond, or the center of the diamond?

If it is the center of the diamond, I think that would help solve the Power Change POI shift, at least for my application.  If the center of the diamond is the center of the scope/reticle, then I would zero at 200, and at 6x everything should work fine.  The top of the diamond would be the 100 yard hold, and the rest of the holds should work fine.

If the center of the diamond is the center of the reticle, I will probably be purchasing one of these scopes for a 16" mid-length.

Thank you for your time invested in these great scope reviews.

NR

The center of the reticle is the diamond point. I had considered the diamond center or circle center (they are slightly different due to the requirements of feature size and required feature position.) I obsessed about it a while since the diamond tip is a precision feature and part of the BDC tree and the other two are CQB features and essentially constitute a second CQB zero as, when the scope is zeroed at 100 yds the impact point at CQB ranges will be lower due to bore optical axis offset (calibration is for 1.5" above the rail optical axis.) So you kinda have two zeros, one for precision distance work, and the other for CQB. The question was which to have shift when you change power as, on a 2fp scope, all features change relative position with power change except the very center. In the end I chose the precision feature for the middle as I expected CQB stuff to only be used at 1x ever.

As for using other zero's... You can't really do this on any 2fp BDC scope as the whole drop table changes with zero distance change because it changes the angle of the bore to the scope erector system axis. That being said, as I look at the table for 100yd vs 200yd zeros on a .223 cartridge were probably splitting hairs with all of this. There just isn't much difference relative to other uncertainties introduced into a long range shot by unknown range, wind, vagaries of less than great ammo, etc.  

So the answer to your question is the center of the reticle is the diamond tip but I'm not sure it matters much beyond the diamond tip being a really nice clean aiming point for zeroing and the center of the diamond being somewhat open and nebulous to zero with. As for the execution, I continue to be very gratified with the performance of my creation. It really is much better than I hoped as regards the speed and precision of the ranging function and also the quickness of the reticle at CQB.

Hope that helps,
Jim

Bushnell/Simmons has a new 30mm rifle scope on the market with their Strikezone .223 BDC reticle.

It has just come out and I can't find any reticle pics or reviews online.

Has anyone seen this yet or have a pic of the reticle?

Links below:

http://swfa.com/Simmons-1-6x24-Predator-Varmint-30mm-Rifle-Scope-Kit-P85595.aspx


http://media.vistaoutdoor.com/presskit/NPS/simmons/VarmintPredator_Scope/2015_NPS_Simmons_VarmintPredator_FNL.pdf

I'm interested in purchasing an SWFA SS 1-4x24 HD scope in the near future. There does not seem to be any officially published specs for the exit pupil on either the 1-4 or the 1-6. I emailed SWFA last night requesting this information. This was their reply:

I see that my images will only appear as links because I am a new member. Here are the stats on the exit pupil sizes:

SWFA SS 1-4x24 HD:
  At 1X: 17.5mm
  At 2X: 5.1mm

SWFA SS 1-6x24 HD:
  At 1X: 12mm
  At 2X: 4.1mm

Any chance you could review the new Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6x24? Seems to be pretty popular but I wonder how it compares to some of the higher-end offerings.

Maybe the new Trijicon Accupower would be a nice one to review, with so many reticle options for the 1x-4x 24mm?? I would love to see that reviewed.