New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Talk to me about Mil-Dot reticles
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Talk to me about Mil-Dot reticles

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2010 at 07:28
glock24 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
I understand the size and spacing of the dots on a Mil-Dot reticle is relatively standardized, but what about the thickness of the cross-hair lines?

In other words, does the thickness of the cross-hair lines differ between manufacturers?  If so, I'm looking for a line that is on the thinner side. For example, does the line thickness vary on any of the below Mil-Dot scopes?

Leupold ER/T 4.5-14x50mm 
Bushnelll 3-13x44mm
SWFA SS 3-9x42mm
 
 
Thanks
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2010 at 09:56
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4618
Aside from poor-quality reticles, mil-dot reticles are standard in terms of spacing between dots (although there can be a variation between the dot shapes because of differences between the USMC and Army specs). You will find a fair amount of variation in line thickness, even from the same manufacturer because of a scopes specs. For example, a second focal plane reticle in one scope might have thinner lines because the reticle never changes size. While a first focal plane scope may have a reticle with thicker lines and then outer lines that are much thicker so that at low magnification the scope will be similar to one with a duplex reticle.

I'd suggest checking out the manufacturer's websites. Most publish specs on their reticles. The SS 3-9X42 is an FFP scope so the reticle size will vary with magnification. I reviewed one and shot at diffferent ranges. To me, that reticle was well-designed and had the right thickness. Personally, I prefer them a little thicker because I don't mind obscuring the target. If I can't see it, I must be on it, right? Seems to work out pretty well. But then I'm used to shooting with iron sights too, such as those on the M1 Garand, where the focus is on the front sight post and the target is purposely blurred.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2010 at 10:00
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7703
Why is line thickness such an issue?

Of those you have listed, I'd take the 3-9 SS over the others, without question.

Any good scope maker will give you the reticle details; and although specs are very similar, most have minor variations on the theme.

What, specifically, do you need?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2010 at 17:54
glock24 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Specifically, I'm worried about the cross-hairs being too thick at maximum power due to the FFP design.

For example, I used to shoot a 4-16x50mm PST that had 0.06 mil thick cross-hairs.  When I switched to a 2.5-10x42mm FFP IOR, my center aiming point is now 0.10 mils.  My groups have gone to hell.  In other words, I have a much harder time shooting decent groups.

Whether it is the MP-8 reticle itself, or the larger aiming point, I'd rather have a smaller aiming point, and don't want to buy another scope with lines that are too thick.

I couldn't find cross-hair thickness measurements from Bushnell, Leupold, or SWFA on the internet.  I guess I'll pick up the phone.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2010 at 17:57
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Points: 9531
If you are after groups get a SFP target dot reticle.  That will help you out.  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2010 at 18:20
glock24 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
No, I'm not after groups per say, but during load development the ability to shoot a representative group is required.

Again, the 0.06 mil lines on my PST reticle did the trick for me, and I'm hoping to stay close to this thickness on my next scope.

Thanks
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 05:50
308 Sav View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: July/18/2010
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Originally posted by glock24 glock24 wrote:

Specifically, I'm worried about the cross-hairs being too thick at maximum power due to the FFP design.

For example, I used to shoot a 4-16x50mm PST that had 0.06 mil thick cross-hairs.  When I switched to a 2.5-10x42mm FFP IOR, my center aiming point is now 0.10 mils.  My groups have gone to hell.  In other words, I have a much harder time shooting decent groups.

Whether it is the MP-8 reticle itself, or the larger aiming point, I'd rather have a smaller aiming point, and don't want to buy another scope with lines that are too thick.

I couldn't find cross-hair thickness measurements from Bushnell, Leupold, or SWFA on the internet.  I guess I'll pick up the phone.

With your above example there is only about an 1/8 moa difference in your aiming point variable.If you groupings are increasing by more than that, it is something else not the thickness of the cross hairs. But then again "groups going to hell" is definable by only you. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 10:04
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7703
Originally posted by 308 Sav 308 Sav wrote:

Originally posted by glock24 glock24 wrote:

Specifically, I'm worried about the cross-hairs being too thick at maximum power due to the FFP design.

For example, I used to shoot a 4-16x50mm PST that had 0.06 mil thick cross-hairs.  When I switched to a 2.5-10x42mm FFP IOR, my center aiming point is now 0.10 mils.  My groups have gone to hell.  In other words, I have a much harder time shooting decent groups.

Whether it is the MP-8 reticle itself, or the larger aiming point, I'd rather have a smaller aiming point, and don't want to buy another scope with lines that are too thick.

I couldn't find cross-hair thickness measurements from Bushnell, Leupold, or SWFA on the internet.  I guess I'll pick up the phone.

With your above example there is only about an 1/8 moa difference in your aiming point variable.If you groupings are increasing by more than that, it is something else not the thickness of the cross hairs. But then again "groups going to hell" is definable by only you. 


That is precisely what I was going to say: a difference of 0.04 is all but irrelevant unless you are shooting very long range.

I have the same IOR 2.5-10FFP and like the reticle (except that, at 100 yards, bullet holes hide easily under that center 0.1mil dot.)

Define "groups going to hell" in terms of range, group size, and rounds in the group.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 10:18
glock24 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
My 0.3 MOA rifle went to a 0.5 and 0.6 MOA rifle with the scope change.  These are all 100 meter groups.  I was still able to squeeze out the occasional 0.3 MOA group, but I had to concentrate much harder than with the previous scope.
 
I know this sounds like I'm splitting hairs to some of you, but it bothers me because had I been using the IOR for load testing, I wouldn't have found my rifle's sweet spot.
 
It is also possible the magnificaiton change (16x down to 10x) or the reticle design difference is playing a role.  The point being I have learned that I shoot better with certain types of reticle and line thicknesses, and I'd like to continue down that road is it is working for me.

I have another scope to buy soon, and I want to be aware of this minor reticle details as they seem to play a big role in my success.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 10:39
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7703
I'm not a good enough shot to claim reticle as the reason for a 0.5MOA vs. 0.3MOA group at 100 meters.

I am still not certain I understand how a 0.04 change in fineness of aiming point works out to a .2-.3MOA increase in group size. 

How many rounds constitute a "group"?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 10:44
Sparky View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire


Joined: July/15/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3194
Tagged for interest.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 14:48
glock24 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Sorry RC, that the reality of my situation.  Take it or leave it.  If you start from the beginning of this thread, you'll see the original question was that of line thickess specs, not an invitation to critique my shooting skills.
 
My normal testing consists of 5-shots at 100 meters.
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 15:02
SD Dog View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
OT Scratching Post

Joined: February/28/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 4176
Originally posted by glock24 glock24 wrote:

My 0.3 MOA rifle went to a 0.5 and 0.6 MOA rifle with the scope change.  These are all 100 meter groups.  I was still able to squeeze out the occasional 0.3 MOA group, but I had to concentrate much harder than with the previous scope.


Your statement here leads me to think that it is not the thickness of the reticle but something else like a scope not being focused properly.  Have you adjusted the scope or shot it right out of the box?  Little things can lead to eye strain which can have an adverse reaction to groups.


Edited by SD Dog - December/08/2010 at 15:04
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 15:18
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7703
Nothing about my posts was meant to criticize, I genuinely am not good enough to attribute cause to group variations that are smaller than the diameter of the bullet itself.

As SD said, it might be something other than the fineness or thickness of the aiming point.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 15:56
glock24 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Sorry RC, your last post read like you were being condesending.
 
Agreed. It may be something other than the reticle size.  Below are the list of the differences for whatever it is worth.  Nonetheless, the goal of my next scope purchase is to buy one closer to the 4-16x PST as that is what seemed to do better for me.
 
SD Dog - I adjusted the diopter on the IOR, but since there is no parallax adjustment that's all I could do.
 
Differences;  (Vortex to IOR)
 
EBR-1 0.06 mil cross-hair vs. MP-8 center dot (0.10 mil)
16x vs. 10x
50mm objective vs. 42mm objective
Parallax adjustment vs. none
 
I will say though that my sight picture on the IOR is good, and was always good while shooting these groups.  The center dot always appeared crisp and stable, just like my cross-hairs, but the results were different.  Maybe I'm just not as good holding a dot on a bullseye than I am a cross-hair.  Whatever the reason, I'm interested in staying with what works.
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 16:21
glock24 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: November/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Update:
 
I called Leupold.  I'm interested in the 4.5-14x50mm FFP ER/T.
 
Mil-Dot reticle = line thickness @ 14x is 0.15 mils.  (Wow that's big!)
TMR reticle = line thickness @ 14x is 0.04 mils. 
 
 
Also called Bushnell. I'm interested in the 3-12x44mm FFP Elite 4200
 
Mil-Dot reticle = line thickness @ 12x is 0.04 mils
 
 
I haven't called SWFA yet
 
 
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/08/2010 at 18:05
308 Sav View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: July/18/2010
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Originally posted by glock24 glock24 wrote:

Sorry RC, that the reality of my situation.  Take it or leave it.  If you start from the beginning of this thread, you'll see the original question was that of line thickess specs, not an invitation to critique my shooting skills.
 
My normal testing consists of 5-shots at 100 meters.
 
 

I do not think anyone was critiquing you or your shooting. Everyone on here was just trying to figure out what might be causing the change for you. It is after all a nice scope with a decent investment in money. We were trying to possibly save you any additional costs if it was not necessary. Good luck in your search.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/09/2010 at 17:37
billyburl2 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2009
Location: Cottonwood, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 3874
Originally posted by glock24 glock24 wrote:

Update:
 
I called Leupold.  I'm interested in the 4.5-14x50mm FFP ER/T.
 
Mil-Dot reticle = line thickness @ 14x is 0.15 mils.  (Wow that's big!)
TMR reticle = line thickness @ 14x is 0.04 mils. 
 
 
Also called Bushnell. I'm interested in the 3-12x44mm FFP Elite 4200
 
Mil-Dot reticle = line thickness @ 12x is 0.04 mils
 
 
I haven't called SWFA yet
 
 
 
 
 Just a reminder, on a FFP scope, the line thickness will stay the same relative to zoom. On a SFP scope it just stays the same no matter what the zoom is set on.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Talk to me about Mil-Dot reticles"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Mil-quad vs. Mil-dot onfinal Rifle Scopes 4
10x25 binos with Mil-Dot reticle armyproperty Binoculars 3
Mil-Dot reticle installation? tucansam Spotting Scopes 3
Millett TRS1 4-16x50 tactical Mil Dot reticle ilum hunting man Rifle Scopes 6
Mil Dot Reticle/parallax to 10yds tasmedic Rimfire / Airgun 4
Mil Quad or Mil Dot ? bcraig Rifle Scopes 3
What is a Mil Dot reticle ? Chris Farris Rifle Scopes 11 2/1/2006 6:32:36 PM
Super Sniper Mil Dot Reticle Specs wildcardjc Tactical Scopes 1 11/17/2005 3:51:04 PM
SS mil-dot reticle question .308 Tactical Scopes 4 6/9/2006 4:05:19 PM
Zeiss mil dot reticle pictures, help nope Tactical Scopes 3 1/23/2007 5:57:16 PM


This page was generated in 0.406 seconds.