Quoted:
So murderman, it sounds like your pretty happy with your np-r2's. No complaints?

Quoted:


Yes, I am pretty happy with both of the compact NXS's overall, but my applications are slightly different from your indicated intended use.  

PROS:
Robust optic.
Positive and repeatable adjustments.
Good optical clarity.
Relatively small overall dimensions.

CONS:
Comparatively heavy for a hunting optic; this goes hand-in-hand with robustness.
Sub-optimal low light performance; small objective lenses quite simply cannot do what larger ones can, even with good glass.


Thanks for the reply murderman

Quoted:
Well I have to say. I spoke to a few more knowledgable people outside the forums that favor the v ret. What I seem to be noticing, if I'm not mistaken, is that people who have tried the v ret. are saying it's the one they favor. I don't believe I've heard anyone say "tried it but I prefer the others." I've had retailers tell me its what they recommend and the don't even have them to sell. Just an observation

I appreciate all the feed back from every one above

G

Quoted:
What I seem to be noticing, if I'm not mistaken, is that people who have tried the v ret. are saying it's the one they favor. I don't believe I've heard anyone say "tried it but I prefer the others."

G

Quoted:

Are you sure the Velocity reticles have been out long enough for folks to form that opinion?  I guess I'm more of a "stand the test of time" kinda guy.  That's why it is laughable to argue that one of the oldest ranging reticles in existence (Mil-Dot) is somehow a new Kool-Aid flavor.  Quite the opposite if you ask me.

I'll revisit this topic in a year, and then I'll know more about the opinion of the Velocity reticle.

Good luck with your decision.  At least you've researched it thoroughly, which is a good start

Quoted:


The fundamental difference is holding over versus dialing in [as well as estimating range, but that is what LRF's are for]; it sounds as though you fall into the latter category, as do I.  For those who choose to not do the math for each shot, it might not be that bad of an option.

Quoted:
Agreed murderman, I definitely dial for elevation if i have the time.  But one could also do the same with the Velocity reticle.

What I think people are missing the fact that there are 3 types of hold-overs;

1.  Elevation
2.  Wind
3.  Leads

Even if the Velocity reticle was better than a Mil-Dot for elevation, it is a flat failure in terms of wind and moving targets.

And the math on a Mil-Dot is overrated as well.  With the ease of today's ballistic calculators, obtaining good numbers consists of one day at the range with a chronograph and a few established target distances.

What I'd hate is for a misinformed person to choose the Velocity reticle and unknowningly put a ceiling a their growth potential as a shooter.  

A Mil-Dot can be used like a Velocity reticle, but not the other way around.

Just one man's opinion.  Your mileage may vary.

Quoted:
Agreed murderman, I definitely dial for elevation if i have the time.  But one could also do the same with the Velocity reticle.

What I think people are missing the fact that there are 3 types of hold-overs;

1.  Elevation
2.  Wind
3.  Leads

Even if the Velocity reticle was better than a Mil-Dot for elevation, it is a flat failure in terms of wind and moving targets.

Quoted:
I'm trying to keep up with you, except my comments are based on the facts of the situation, not character attacks.  It is also interesting that with all your "extensive knowledge" of the Velocity reticle, I have yet to hear anything from you that resembles an intelligent rebuttal to my arguements.  I'm all ears, really.  I've listed my perception of why the  Mil-Dot is better, so please tell me where I've gone wrong.

Typical ARFcom, the biggest jerk always has the last word.

Quoted:


This is the second time you've attacked someone for disagreeing with you and, ironically, you're the only one throwing "personal attacks" (ergo "jerk").

I've actually been following this thread with interest, as it's quite informational seeing the different uses and scenarios presented. That being said, all you've tried to do is sell the "superiority" of the mil-dot without taking into account the realistic scenarios it is used in. Don't get me wrong, I've got a mil-dot Nightforce and I'm in love with it, but I'm still open enough to others opinions and common sense to know it's not the end-all be-all of reticles.

Mil-dots are useful when you have time to calculate the range of the target and dial in the exact dope, i.e. "sniping." They're also good for ranging, however, ranging can be done quite easily for most avid hunters with the naked eye at decently short range distances (300yds and under).

That being said, is the OP literally going to sneak up on a coyote, range him with the reticle, dial in the dope, take a shot and wait for the splash? That's not practical. Sure, he could do it and it might work (if the coyote is blind, deaf, and lame), but a more realistic scenario says he's also going to be taking quick holdover shots (what if the coyote bolts before you've had a chance to determine the range?). The Velocity reticle is better suited for that, no contest. Also remember that the .223 is relatively flat-shooting for 200yds and under. It's pretty safe to say that most shots on 'yotes would be that range and under. With that in mind, it makes more sense to use a scope with a short-range zero and use the BDC for those quick longer-range shots. Again, that points to the Velocity reticle.

And here's the funny thing: you keep forgetting that he can dial in his dope and be dead on at any range he wants. Sure, a mil-dot is better suited for that role, but in no way is a velocity reticle not usable for that application.

Also, I'd like to call you on some of your claims: You mentioned shooting on the run. Unless you're shooting a VERY long distances, a coyote isn't going to be running fast enough to need massive amounts of lead. If you are shooting at 4-500yds+, you need to rethink your ethics as a hunter and as a gun owner. You also mentioned 15mph crosswinds. How the heck would you possibly know BEFORE the bullet splash what the crosswind was? You aren't magically going to have wind markers out on the open plains and you sure as heck won't have time to dial in or lead an exact distance for the wind drift using mil-dots. You'll "eye" the distance and shoot again. You're trying to apply military sniper tactics against a wild animal that's simply going to run into a burrow and hide when you miss that first shot. You're arguing paper statistics vs common sense. If this a military operation against human targets and you had the role of a designated marksman or sniper, then the mil-dot would most definitely be better, but this is quite the opposite: quick, short-to-mid range shots needing split-second holdovers. Again, both are suited to the role, but the Velocity reticle does offer an edge with the BDC.

Let's also not forget that the Velocity reticle was designed specifically for hunters. Seeing as Nightforce makes some of the best scopes on the market, I'm inclined to follow their suggestions. If they state it's best used as a hunting reticle, they probably know something.

All of the fallacies and wrong conclusions aside, in this case, I think either reticle would serve the OP well. I also think the NP-R2 reticle would work just as well, if not better than the mil-dot, since it offers finer adjustments and the ranging requires simpler math operations.

Quoted:
Another thing to think about is what mag is the ret calibrated for?  Going to assume 10x  anything less and ????????????

Quoted:


Hmmm... that's a really good question. I do know that the mil-dot reticle is designed to work only at 10x, so either way, all of the ranging/bdc reticles are going to be limited at all but one magnification (not just the Velocity reticle).

Quoted:


But the mildot and the NPR2 can be used at other powers ie 5x 2.5x and still be useful.  while not ideal still usable.

Quoted:


No, not really. At any other power than 10x, they're simply a fancy crosshair. They're useless for any ranging, estimation, or holdovers (as is any SFP reticle) at any power other than the designated ranging power. Just ignore the BDC and focus on the main horizontal and vertical lines of the Velocity and it does the exact same thing as the mil-dot, NP-R2, and NP-1.

Quoted:

Aim points are clearly marked from 100 to 600 yards, plus five and ten mph windage compensation is also indicated
I cant see how you could feel mil dot hold overs is more accurate than actual MPH holds at individual distances. I have worked with/ met several military snipers from different countries over the past year and they all swear by the Horus recticle that uses individual distance/windage. I personally like to dial in but having the option not to is a selling point to me.

Quoted:


This is the second time you've attacked someone for disagreeing with you and, ironically, you're the only one throwing "personal attacks" (e.g. "jerk").

Come on, are you really trying to tell me that I was unprovoked?  Gimmie a break.

I've actually been following this thread with interest, as it's quite informational seeing the different uses and scenarios presented. That being said, all you've tried to do is sell the "superiority" of the mil-dot without taking into account the realistic scenarios it is used in. Don't get me wrong, I've got a mil-dot Nightforce and I'm in love with it, but I'm still open enough to others opinions and common sense to know it's not the end-all be-all of reticles.

I'm not selling anything.  I'm making an objective comparison between  the two reticles, just like the OP requested.  I happen to favor the Mil-Dot, and do not understand the advantages of the Velocity reticles.  To be honest with you, I prefer the MLR or any other type of enhanced Mil-Dot reticle.  Unfortunately the standard Mil-Dot is all we can get in the NF compact line



Mil-dots are useful when you have time to calculate the range of the target and dial in the exact dope, i.e. "sniping." They're also good for ranging, however, ranging can be done quite easily for most avid hunters with the naked eye at decently short range distances (300yds and under).

I disagree. Mil-Dots are also very useful for holding elevation, holding windage, and holding moving targets.  These are fundamental uses of any MOA or milliradian based reticle system.


Ask yourself this: is the OP literally going to sneak up on a coyote, range him with the reticle, dial in the dope, take a shot and wait for the splash? That's not practical. Sure, he could do it and it might work (if the coyote is blind, deaf, and lame), but a more realistic scenario says he's also going to be taking quick holdover shots (what if the coyote bolts before you've had a chance to determine the range?). The Velocity reticle is better suited for that, no contest. Also remember that the .223 is relatively flat-shooting out to 200yds. It's pretty safe to say that most shots on 'yotes would be that range and under. With that in mind, it makes more sense to use a scope with a short-range zero and use the BDC for those quick longer-range shots. Again, that points to the Velocity reticle.

I don't hunt coyotes, but your scenario isn't what I am trying to say.  More realistically;

1.  Range the coyote with a LRF or a Mil-Dot reticle.  At this point one can dial or hold for elevation with either reticle.  Advantage - none

2.  Remove a wind meter from your pocket and judge wind speed, or use natural indicators (trees, branches, grass, etc).  You need to guess the speed and direction.  Once found, hold either reticle to the appropriate wind speed.  The Mil-Dot is more useful because it can be used for any wind speed.  Advantage - Mil-Dot

3.  If the coyote is walking, trotting, or even running, the speed of the animal must be known.  I personally don't know, but it could be researched or measured directly.  Once known, hold the Mil-Dot reticle to the appropriate lead.  This is not possible with the Velocity reticle.  Advantage - Mil-Dot  

I understand and agree that the Velocity reticle is best suited for quick, snap-shooting, at close range.  Sounds good for a combat application on large targets (a.k.a. ACOG), but with its limited trajectory use, limited windage, and non-existent ability to lead targets, the Mil-Dot certainly seems more capable for a hunting application on small animals.


And here's the funny thing: you keep forgetting that he can dial in his dope and be dead on at any range he wants. Sure, a mil-dot is better suited for that role, but in no way is a velocity reticle not usable for that application.

Also, I'd like to call you on some of your claims: You mentioned shooting on the run. Unless you're shooting VERY long distances, a coyote isn't going to be running fast enough to need massive amounts of lead.

According to my notes, a target walking at 2.5 MPH needs a 1.5 mil lead at 200 meters.  Running at 6.0 MPH requires a 3.6 mil lead at the same distance.  How fast do coyotes run?  And where is either hash mark on the Velocity reticle?  

If you are shooting at 4-500yds+ at a coyote, you need to rethink your ethics as a hunter and as a gun owner. You also mentioned 15mph crosswinds. How the heck would you possibly know BEFORE the bullet splash what the crosswind was? You aren't magically going to have wind markers out on the open plains and you sure as heck won't have time to dial in or lead an exact distance for the wind drift using mil-dots. You'll "eye" the distance and shoot again. You're trying to apply military sniper tactics against a wild animal that's simply going to run into a burrow and hide when you miss that first shot. You're arguing paper statistics vs common sense. If this a military operation against human targets and you had the role of a designated marksman or sniper, then the mil-dot would most definitely be better, but this is quite the opposite: quick, short-to-mid range shots needing split-second holdovers. Again, both are suited to the role, but the Velocity reticle does offer an edge with the BDC.

Hunting ethics is high on my list, hence my disdain for the Velocity reticle.  Add up the error in elevation, windage, and lead, and the result is a wounded animal, or hopefully a clean miss.  With practice, a Mil-Dot is more accurate, hence my reasoning that the Velocity reticles limit the shooter's capability.  

Let's also not forget that the Velocity reticle was designed specifically for hunters. Seeing as Nightforce makes some of the best scopes on the market, I'm inclined to follow their suggestions. If they state it's best used as a hunting reticle, they probably know something.

All of the fallacies and wrong conclusions aside, in this case, I think either reticle would serve the OP well. I also think the NP-R2 reticle would work just as well, if not better than the mil-dot, since it offers finer adjustments and the ranging requires simpler math operations.

Quoted:
Your the best glock24....here is my personal fav.." Hunting ethics is high on my list, hence my disdain for the Velocity reticle. With practice, a Mil-Dot is more accurate in any wind and for leading moving targets."  

THIS IS JUST CRAZY TALK.....i guess now you know even more the NF engineers who DESIGNED "V" RETICULES WITH HUNTING SPECIFICALLY HIGH ON THEIR MINDS.  I will bow out on that statement...i hope others read exactly what you said on your quote there.  WOW

The point is pal, you have ZERO exp. or obviously real knowledge with V reticules first hand........all of us have first hand knowledge of Mil Dots including you obviously, so where did miss you saying that you have tried BOTH......and this is WHY V reticules suck, don't worry i wont hold my breath for your response.

Quoted:
Wow, this interesting thread has really "heated up" while I was at work today.  For those so inclined, maybe an "adult relaxer" of choice might help folks agree-to-disagree, while continuing to share valuable technical insight w/o further personal attacks.  YMMV

I have zero firsthand experience with the V-ret, but I have been interested in it since its recent introduction.

What I think has been lost in the noise to some degree is the OP's intended application.  'Yotes don't stay still very long, if at all in my experience, so dialing-in is essentially non-applicable.  When I am out hunting, whether it be still or on the move, I LRF the surroundings so that range can be quickly estimated whenever a target presents itself within the "environment".

Personally, I wouldn't pick a compact NXS at all for 'yote hunting, because due to the small objective/EP, its low light performance is limited, and the required precise cheekweld is inconsistent with the "snap-shooting" concept.

When questing the day optic for my most recent build, a suppressed 6.8 SBR "hog rig", I opted for an ACOG TA11J.  The OP's intended application has some significant similarities, so a BDC-based device doesn't seem particularly unreasonable.

ETA:  BDC reticles are inherently limiting IMHO; whereas knowing the graduation between the reference points seems to be better than some "sliding scale" for some certain system combination as determined by the manufacturer.

Quoted:


Are you sure the Velocity reticles have been out long enough for folks to form that opinion?  I guess I'm more of a "stand the test of time" kinda guy.  That's why it is laughable to argue that one of the oldest ranging reticles in existence (Mil-Dot) is somehow a new Kool-Aid flavor.  Quite the opposite if you ask me.

I'll revisit this topic in a year, and then I'll know more about the opinion of the Velocity reticle.

Good luck with your decision.  At least you've researched it thoroughly, which is a good start

Quoted:
Wow, this interesting thread has really "heated up" while I was at work today.  For those so inclined, maybe an "adult relaxer" of choice might help folks agree-to-disagree, while continuing to share valuable technical insight w/o further personal attacks.  YMMV

I have zero firsthand experience with the V-ret, but I have been interested in it since its recent introduction.

What I think has been lost in the noise to some degree is the OP's intended application.  'Yotes don't stay still very long, if at all in my experience, so dialing-in is essentially non-applicable.  When I am out hunting, whether it be still or on the move, I LRF the surroundings so that range can be quickly estimated whenever a target presents itself within the "environment".

Personally, I wouldn't pick a compact NXS at all for 'yote hunting, because due to the small objective/EP, its low light performance is limited, and the required precise cheekweld is inconsistent with the "snap-shooting" concept.

When questing the day optic for my most recent build, a suppressed 6.8 SBR "hog rig", I opted for an ACOG TA11J.  The OP's intended application has some significant similarities, so a BDC-based device doesn't seem particularly unreasonable.


ETA:  BDC reticles are inherently limiting IMHO; whereas knowing the graduation between the reference points seems to be better than some "sliding scale" for some certain system combination as determined by the manufacturer.

Quoted:
The Velocity reticle is a well thought-out design.  It's simple, yet effective.  It combines useful features in  an uncluttered view.  One of the best features of the Velocity reticle is that the center of the reticle is the 50/200 yard zero (instead of 100 yards, like many other reticles.)

http://www.box.net/shared/static/hiy7u2n7vv.jpg



http://www.box.net/shared/static/kqu0sk43s3.jpg



http://www.box.net/shared/static/mla3p170ls.jpg

Quoted:
I'd suggest the Mil-Dot reticle.  I fail to understand how the "one size fits all" BDC style reticle is of any advantage. Unless you enjoy the phrases, "Almost got it." or "Dang it!  So close!".  

Get the Mil-Dot and learn how to use it with your specific ammo from your specific gun.

Quoted:


I just plugged in my load's specs into the NF velocity reticle online calculator.

It recommends the medium velocity reticle for my rifle.  That reticle will put my bullet just a bit over 3 inches low at 500 yards.  No thanks.