Now in mils!



And this is the scope from US optics.

If you completed the circle by making the 4 a negative and the circle past that just the outline it would hlep reinforce the brain seeing a circle without making the reticle unusable.  You could go another 1/8 around with it and not even interfere with the 4 or hashes at all.  Will the whole reticle be illuminated?

I like the idea of having the man-sized (or 24" or whatever) markers on the reticle better.  That's the one thing I really like about the Leupold MR/T SPR reticle - it's VERY simple for ranging man-sized targets out to about 600m very quickly.  The best of both worlds might be to have target-height bracketing markers on the right and a mil scale on the left.  Then you just read a number on the reticle, dial that number on the BDC/elev and shoot... or if you are mathematically inclined and/or have some oddball sized object to range, you could use the mil scale.

Also, if you're going to chop the circle, I'd suggest chopping it evenly on both sides.  I know my little pea brain would handle that better for a fast close-in sight picture.

...or you could start the mil scale (or "man scale") at the bottom edge of a complete circle....?  maybe.

LHS is mil scale...RHS is a 6.8mm SPC BDC and not a RF scale.
You range by using the circle...neck-to-waist method

If it fills the 6 mil circle....its 100m
200m...is 3 mils or half circle
300m....2 mil hashes.
400m....1.5 mil hashes
600m....1 mil hash.....

Simple right? And you keep the SOB in the centre of FOV at all times.

This is designed to dovetail with USMC mil dot skillz but discarding the mil-MOA stuff.

Once you establish zero...there is no need to dial for the quick shot. Retaining the Mil scale on LHS means you CAN take the high accuracy shot if needed.

Simon

Ashooter...it started of as a horseshoe but I found it easier to range at mid powers as I shrunk the reticule if the arc met the vetical post. Trust me on this.... You'll get over the fact that it's not symmetrical the way most reticules tend to be.

Simon

Quoted: Ashooter...it started of as a horseshoe but I found it easier to range at mid powers as I shrunk the reticule if the arc met the vetical post. Trust me on this.... You'll get over the fact that it's not symmetrical the way most reticules tend to be. Simon

Okay Simon, I see how you're thinking on this...  and the mil-scale/BDC scale.  It doesn't limit a highly skilled shooter the way a purely size/caliber specific reticle would.  I can see a VERY strong possibility of me having one of these for the MRS I'm dreaming of in my future.  




Now if you can just get USO to come out of the dark ages with their reticle illumination, you'd really have something.  

It's simialr to the SPR reticule but I prefer to use neck-torso as discussed before. It works really very neatly on this.....if the neck-torso fills the 60mil circle...it's 100m. Just shoot. From bottom quadrant to centre, which is 3 mils...its 200m. 2 mil hashes...300m etc.  You range with the centre of the reticule then you just apply the correct holdover using the BDC of the right and go.
If you have an LRF and the time, you can use the mils.

Turrets are mainly there for zeroing but you CAN dial range....but then you are using it as a pure mil scale optic.

Simon

Hey Simon,

Any updates on this?

Regards,

Justin

Update: *NEW* US Optics SN-3 1.8-10x37mm Slimline [PICS] // USO

One of US Optics' newest offerings:

SN-3
1.8 - 10x
37mm objective (fixed)  :eek:  
1/4 MOA knobs (w/ covers)
Mil-Dot Reticle, Illuminated
Slimline Eyepiece (rapid focus)
30mm tube
1.5 lbs

Badger Ordnance ALLOY Rings, Mk14 mod 0 EBR Height 1.250"



Link to the rest of the pics

Thanks JBW3 and Marty!

Snipers Hide LINK

Quoted: Update: *NEW* US Optics SN-3 1.8-10x37mm Slimline [PICS] // USO One of US Optics' newest offerings: SN-3 1.8 - 10x 37mm objective (fixed)  :eek:   1/4 MOA knobs (w/ covers) Mil-Dot Reticle, Illuminated Slimline Eyepiece (rapid focus) 30mm tube 1.5 lbs Badger Ordnance ALLOY Rings, Mk14 mod 0 EBR Height 1.250" i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/blacksheep25/misc/uso-new/DSC01743.jpg Link to the rest of the pics Thanks JBW3 and Marty! Snipers Hide LINK

Can we get a shot of the sight picture with the illuminated reticle?  PLEEASE?

Thanks.

Justin

I'll see if I can get that tomorrow, but wouldn't you rather see a picture of the:

New SN-4 & SN-12 BDC reticle (Codename: JPJ1)


(click on image for larger picture)

"This Sunday afternoon was spent pondering a question put to me by 48th Highlander of Grenadier Precision who is building a 6.8mmSPC Designated Marksman's Rifle. He asked what glass I would put on a DMR, and why?"

A buddy of mine- the guy I replaced had a lot of combat experience and success with an ACOG in .308 BDC with the fiber optic and the little holes in the reticle to shoot through at 700 and 800m.  He had kills on running terrorists at 800meters.  Two of them. I thijnk it was three rounds for one and two for the other.  

Judging from that I would think that the simplity of the ranging reticle aids in ranging moving oor short exposure targets at long range and engaging them quickly which is paramount-- QUICK KILL OR NO KILL is the combat game: I believe a Shepherd 3-10 power could only do a better job than the ACOG due to the more generous eye relief afforded by the more std optical design in combination with the larger objective for more light at night when used with nightvision.  

That's my advice.  If it isn't simple it isn't going to work fast enough.  I used a Leupold MRT 3-9x32 and liked it, but it doesn't have the speed of engagement of either of the above stated systems.

My two cents and you won't like it but it is true-- A milling reticle has no place on a DM rifle, or at least if it is on a DM rifle it will not be effectively used.  First round hits will drop off as DM's fire a round or two as "sighters" when they could just have put a round on the target subconsciously using an auto ranging system like the above described optics.  Sighters take valuable time and give the enemy a chance to seek cover.



That USO JPJ1 is right up the right tree.  Why the 55 grain compromise? why not a truer track with 62grain 16inch like an ACOG?  Or maybe different reticles by bullet weight and speed but that is probably asking way too much.

Quoted: "This Sunday afternoon was spent pondering a question put to me by 48th Highlander of Grenadier Precision who is building a 6.8mmSPC Designated Marksman's Rifle. He asked what glass I would put on a DMR, and why?" A buddy of mine- the guy I replaced had a lot of combat experience and success with an ACOG in .308 BDC with the fiber optic and the little holes in the reticle to shoot through at 700 and 800m.  He had kills on running terrorists at 800meters.  Two of them. I thijnk it was three rounds for one and two for the other.   Judging from that I would think that the simplity of the ranging reticle aids in ranging moving oor short exposure targets at long range and engaging them quickly which is paramount-- QUICK KILL OR NO KILL is the combat game: I believe a Shepherd 3-10 power could only do a better job than the ACOG due to the more generous eye relief afforded by the more std optical design in combination with the larger objective for more light at night when used with nightvision.   That's my advice.  If it isn't simple it isn't going to work fast enough.  I used a Leupold MRT 3-9x32 and liked it, but it doesn't have the speed of engagement of either of the above stated systems. My two cents and you won't like it but it is true-- A milling reticle has no place on a DM rifle, or at least if it is on a DM rifle it will not be effectively used.  First round hits will drop off as DM's fire a round or two as "sighters" when they could just have put a round on the target subconsciously using an auto ranging system like the above described optics.  Sighters take valuable time and give the enemy a chance to seek cover. That USO JPJ1 is right up the right tree.  Why the 55 grain compromise? why not a truer track with 62grain 16inch like an ACOG?  Or maybe different reticles by bullet weight and speed but that is probably asking way too much.

I too am a little disappointted with the Mil-Dot reticle but compromoses have to be made and this is something that can always be adjusted down the road.

Tagged

What about geting the Leupold SPR Reticle found in their MR/T 1.5-5x20 and putting it in the MR/T 3-9X36  or 3.5-10X40 LT/R for a DM optic?  Granted the 2.5 mil hash marks are a little large, but it does not sound like ranging will be done with those marks anyway?

Call me simple, but I think these reticle "solutions" will cause more problems than they solve, especially with Pvt. Snuffy Smith at the controls.  

Why not just use either a "point blank zero" or a "reverse image zero."  

For a target zone of thirty inches, point blank zero will get a 55 grain .224 bullet at 3100 fps out to 513 yards.  Any further than that, and some holdover would be required, but a simple MOA scale under the crosshair would help with that.  

Or, the maximum ordinate for the same load at 550 yards is about 27" (and only 36" for a 600 yard zero).  Pvt. Smith could hold just below the groin of the Tango and be fairly confident of a hit anywhere from 100 to 550 (or 600) yards.  

No ranging or fancy calculations are required for either method.  Some practice on the range with UKD targets would get Pvt. Smith confident with the system, and tell him when he needs to hold under or over just a bit for those closer or slightly longer shots.  

Obviously, a flatter shooting cartridge would improve these numbers even more.  I used 5.56 55 grain just because I had it ready to go in my ballistic software.  

I also like the idea of a simple MOA scale to the side for helping your buddies get on target or for calling in support fire more accurately.  

If you want more than minute of man, call a sniper.

Of course, this assumes that speed is very important.  

For shots with less target area, you are still likely to miss a few until you get onto target.  But that's the case when using any BZO.  

If you must have more precision, you simply have to properly range and dial up elevation.  

Then we are back to whether we need a sniper, or a better trained DMR that has sniper skill at ranging and using comeups, but maybe lacks the fieldcraft side.  

The idea of a 24" scale (brackets= 24" at 100 yards) for ranging is perhaps the best idea I've seen for shots out to 600M.  

Any updates on this Simon?

Thanks.

Justin

.

Tagged to follow to end of the road.

I know I am nowhere in the same league as some of you guys as far as experience and knowledge, but I had the same questions when I was building my rifle.  I am big on versatility and I wanted a rifle that would be able to do several things well.  When I got to the scope, I liked the Leupold 3.5x10 FFP and the IOR 2x12.  I opted for the IOR because of the range.  And at 2x it can be used inside.  So what I did is zeroed it in at 100 yards at 10x and I use the lines as BDC marks at different distances.  I then set the magnification to 2x and checked to see where I would be at 25, 50, and 100 yards, using the marks on the reticle.  It doesn't get much easier than that.  I would have prefered that the reticle be in the FFP, but it would not work with the MP8 reticle because at 2x magnification the reticle would be so thin.  Basically my point is that the IOR scope is an excellent scope and would make a great scope for the DMR.

Just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.  I am a DM currently serving in Iraq.  I've worked primarily in SW Baghdad (Abu Ghraib area), Fallujah, and Ramadi.

This is what I've found is important on a DMR optic:

1. Durability (obviously something that a major scope manufacturer can do...this is a solved problem, so I'll move on)
2. Close quarters engagement capability, meaning a low-power end (max 2x, preferably 1.1x or 1.5x) for those close-in shots that occur with surpising frequency.  Remember, a DM is a regular rifleman first, a DM second
3. RF in the reticle:  Everyone has a particular preference on this, but I will say that the mil-dot system is NOT the best solution.  Solutions that use quick-figuring based on head size, shoulder size, torso size, etc, are best and most easily used.  Man-height is not a good rangefinder, as targets are often not standing.
4. BDC: my preference is a cam, but in general a reticle-BDC is probably faster, so that wins IMHO.  I personally am faster with a cam, but I have the feeling that this is unusual.
5. Illumination: yes yes yes yes

I was issued an ACOG, but I also have an IOR M2 4x24 w/ CQB reticle and an IOR 1.1-4 CRT w/ the CQB reticle.  I love the BDC cam on the M2, and my personal favorite scope of the three is the IOR 1.1-4.   ACOGs just don't work for me, they aren't versatile enough.  Very "one-size-fits-all".  I would LOVE a 1.5-6x.  That would be perfect, as the 1.1-4x I am using doesn't quite reach far enough.

Could the new Burris 1.5X-6X40MM XTR scope be used as a starting ? It has illumination and 1/2" click adjustments on its turrets.

Quoted: Just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.  I am a DM currently serving in Iraq.  I've worked primarily in SW Baghdad (Abu Ghraib area), Fallujah, and Ramadi. This is what I've found is important on a DMR optic: 1. Durability (obviously something that a major scope manufacturer can do...this is a solved problem, so I'll move on) 2. Close quarters engagement capability, meaning a low-power end (max 2x, preferably 1.1x or 1.5x) for those close-in shots that occur with surpising frequency.  Remember, a DM is a regular rifleman first, a DM second 3. RF in the reticle:  Everyone has a particular preference on this, but I will say that the mil-dot system is NOT the best solution.  Solutions that use quick-figuring based on head size, shoulder size, torso size, etc, are best and most easily used.  Man-height is not a good rangefinder, as targets are often not standing. 4. BDC: my preference is a cam, but in general a reticle-BDC is probably faster, so that wins IMHO.  I personally am faster with a cam, but I have the feeling that this is unusual. 5. Illumination: yes yes yes yes I was issued an ACOG, but I also have an IOR M2 4x24 w/ CQB reticle and an IOR 1.1-4 CRT w/ the CQB reticle.  I love the BDC cam on the M2, and my personal favorite scope of the three is the IOR 1.1-4.   ACOGs just don't work for me, they aren't versatile enough.  Very "one-size-fits-all".  I would LOVE a 1.5-6x.  That would be perfect, as the 1.1-4x I am using doesn't quite reach far enough.

Really good food for thought, thanks for sharing.  #3 really makes my thought of the necessity of the Mil-dot reticle askew.

Quoted: Call me simple, but I think these reticle "solutions" will cause more problems than they solve, especially with Pvt. Snuffy Smith at the controls.   Why not just use either a "point blank zero" or a "reverse image zero."   For a target zone of thirty inches, point blank zero will get a 55 grain .224 bullet at 3100 fps out to 513 yards.  Any further than that, and some holdover would be required, but a simple MOA scale under the crosshair would help with that.   Or, the maximum ordinate for the same load at 550 yards is about 27" (and only 36" for a 600 yard zero).  Pvt. Smith could hold just below the groin of the Tango and be fairly confident of a hit anywhere from 100 to 550 (or 600) yards.   No ranging or fancy calculations are required for either method.  Some practice on the range with UKD targets would get Pvt. Smith confident with the system, and tell him when he needs to hold under or over just a bit for those closer or slightly longer shots.   Obviously, a flatter shooting cartridge would improve these numbers even more.  I used 5.56 55 grain just because I had it ready to go in my ballistic software.   I also like the idea of a simple MOA scale to the side for helping your buddies get on target or for calling in support fire more accurately.   If you want more than minute of man, call a sniper. Of course, this assumes that speed is very important.   For shots with less target area, you are still likely to miss a few until you get onto target.  But that's the case when using any BZO.   If you must have more precision, you simply have to properly range and dial up elevation.   Then we are back to whether we need a sniper, or a better trained DMR that has sniper skill at ranging and using comeups, but maybe lacks the fieldcraft side.   The idea of a 24" scale (brackets= 24" at 100 yards) for ranging is perhaps the best idea I've seen for shots out to 600M.

I totally agree.  Keep it Simple Stupid (K.I.S.S.).  The ideal scope for a DMR would be a reticle like the ACOG with the bullet drops, but also have a variable range from 2X12 or 1.5X6 Mag.  The new Leupold CQT is a great example, if only it was a higher magnification.

Tag.

I have heard that USO is working with Surefire on a new illumination system for the reticle to replace the junk glued on rheostat with 12 hour battery life they are currently using.  Any truth to that rumor or hard plans to improve the illumination system in the near future?

Tag