Reticle Pros and Cons

[maverick]

OK gentlemen, what do you see as the pros and cons of your favorite reticle when it comes to shooting ground squirrels, rock chucks, and coyotes (assume 1 gun and scope combo for all 3…)??? Was intending to go with a mil dot reticle on the scope for my .204 (Ruger #1V -- just came in yesterday) as that’s what I’ve gone with for the last 2 scopes I’ve purchased and really like them. Was paging thru past threads in the Optics section, and see a lot of folks really like Leupold’s Varmint Hunter reticle, which seems to be very similar to Zeiss’ Rapid Z varmint. For those of you that shoot that particular reticle, is there anything you don’t like about it? Thought I’d pick your collective brains a bit before I ordered the scope within the next couple days. Scopes on the table for consideration at this time (in order of my current preferences) are the Bushnell Elite 6500 (2.5-16x42) with a mil-dot, Zeiss Conquest (4.5-14x44) with Rapid Z Varmint, and the Leupold VX-III (4.5-14x40) with Varmint Hunter. Not opposed to considering others, so thought I’d throw it on the table. Bang away!

[ah929rr]

I'm not going to be alot of help for you but in the near future I might be able to help out. I should have a new Leupold VX3 6.5-20-40 AO with the varmint reticle in about two weeks. I have a friend that is a gun dealer and is giving me a smokin deal on this and I just cannot pass it up. Mine is going to go onto a CZ Varmint with kevlar stock and I am going to use this gun for a praire dog hunt and also coyote hunting where there is some long shots. I will keep you posted and also would like to hear some feedback from others. If you are shopping for prices let me know and I will P.M. my friends website to you.

[Sagebrush Burns]

All of my dedicated varmint rifles now wear Leupolds with the varmint hunter reticle.

[Captqc]

Just picked up my new Leupold 6.5-20x40mm Varmint Hunters scope today! (my third with the VHR) She will rest atop my new Cooper and see her first action in a few short weeks. Get the VHR and be happy! Gary

[Rick in Oregon]

My shamless, completely biased opinion is go with a Lupy VX-3 with the VHR. My last five Lupy's have all been the LR model in either 6.5-20X and one 4.5-14X, all 40mm. All rifles so equipped are for the exact critters you mention. I'd not change a thing. The other scopes you mention are high quality, nice units too, but I'm just sort of a Lupy kinda guy.

My Kimber 84M in 204 with the 4.5-14X LR with the M1 elevation added.



I've got Lupy's with USMC mil-dots and virtually every other varmint-suitable reticle they offer, and for what I/you do, it's the VHR hands down. JMO

[Jim White]

I shoot mainly ground squirrels and I've often wondered how a mil-dot would work because the target is on the small size. I was going to get a couple of Leupold VX-3's with the Varmint Hunters Reticle but I fell into two Swarovski's with their BR reticle and I got some good deals on them that were tooooo good to pass up.

At the end of the day between the Zeiss and the Leupold I believe you'll be happy. Can't comment on the Bushnell because I've never looked thru one.

HTH,

[Clint E]

If it helps i have looked through bushnells elite scopes and they have pretty good glass .I own 2 lupys vx II 4x12x40 and wouldnt tradem. Yes i would own a bushnell elite scope but for a little more cash you can pic up a lupy.never looked through a ziess. If theres a sporting goods store close to you go and check them out before you by one.

[maverick]

I have had a Bushnell Elite (previous gun) and Zeiss Conquest (current gun) so am more than comfortable that they'd both meet (actually exceed) the optical quality I'd demand from them for how this rifle will get used. My question is more aimed at choice of reticles, as both of those scopes have/had mil dots. I'm wondering if the Varmint Hunter (Leupold) or Rapid Z Varmint (Zeiss) reticles would make it much simpler to do what I've grown accustomed to doing with a mil dot... The variable power range of the Bushnell is quite attractive, and I know I like the mil dot reticle, so I guess I'm looking for some concrete reasoning for me to stray from something I know I'd like. Have a local gun show to go to this weekend, so hope to look thru a number of scopes.

[Jim White]

Either one should work for you but some things to consider;

- Reticle thickness, particularly if you're shooting small critters at long distances
- Zeiss does have a program on their website that allows you to plug in your load data and it will tell you what power level the hold over lines will correspond to their advertised range points. I don't belive Leupold does that.
- In the event you don't like the reticle Leupold offers far more choices for replacement than Zeiss.
- I own both a Zeiss Conquest (4.5-14x50) and a Leupold VX3 (8.5-25x50) and for broad day light shooting they're both a wash. In low light conditions they're pretty close too.
- Leupold offers a lot more accessories than Zeiss.

HTH,

[Rick in Oregon]

maverick: If you're used to the mil-dot, but want a better reticle for small varmints at extended ranges, and if Leupold gets the nod, then again, it's the VHR hands down. I normally use the "dial-a-rat" method of field shooting, but I find the VHR with the wind ticks indicated for various ranges worth the price of the reticle alone. (As mentioned, I have both reticles on varmint rifles....VHR all the way for what you want to do.)

For the record, the below pic was taken during an especially hot ground squirrel foray. The mound out in front of the rifle is 426 yards away. The mound was very active with ground squirrels.



Looking through my old VX-III 6.5-20X (M700 223 Ackley) set at 20X, you can easily see how big the mil-dot would be in relation to a rat at that range. You could easly obscure a PD or squirrel at even this range (you can see a rat standing in the foreground at about 375 yds). If you use a scope with the reticle in the first focal plane, forget any varmint shooting of small targets:



Now remember that the USMC mil-dot that Leupold and many other optics makers use, was developed to range a 6' man at 1,000 yards. Now consider the VHR and it's nice fine crosshairs at different ranges, plus the added benefit of wind ticks or has marks for 10 & 20 mph winds from 200 to 500 yards. If combat is your primary use, then the mil-dot is the answer. However if you shoot varmints (now) like the rest of us, then the choice is quite simple really. One was designed for people at long range, the other is for varmints.......

[maverick]

Jim and RIO: Thanks -- that's the type of feedback I was looking for. In your experience, is the 30 mm tube and side focus that comes with the "Long Range" version worth the extra money?

[Rick in Oregon]

maverick: Is it worth the extra bucks? To me, yes it is, as the 30mm LR versions are brighter than a 1" tube model of the same scope, has more available travel (not that a 204 needs it), but the convenience of the side focus is just about worth it alone after years of reaching to twiddle the adjustable objective of all my older varmint scopes.

Another factor to consider, is that the VX-3 LR scope tube itself is within only a few 'thou's of being the same material as in their vaulted MK-4 Military & Tactical scopes, and as a result are very, very robust and stout. Add the Lupy no-questions warranty, and to me, it's well worth the money spent.

Besides, IF you ever want to sell it, the LR version is much more desirable an offering and always commands a higher price.

[Jim White]

maverick: no problem, I was glad to help.

As far as the SF vs. AO, like anything else there are trade offs. Both of my Remington (heavy) 204's sport AO objectives. Since I'm shooting it from a bench I don't see where the AO objective is a nuisance. In general though, I do feel the AO has a finer (more precise) parallax adjustment than the SF. All of my SF scopes (Nikon, Zeiss, Leupold) the SF adjustment are far more coarse than my AO scopes (Burris, Nikon, Swarovski). If I were carrying it around then who knows. One thing for sure though, the SF scopes are more compact than their AO counterparts but they also have an additional lens which may or may-not reduce light gathering ability in low-light in comparison to the AO models (with all things being equal of course).

I'll echo what Rick stated about the resale of the hi-end scopes, your money isn't wasted. As far as 30mm vs. 1", it doesn't really matter as long as the internal adjustments are sufficient with the 1"scopes. The rings for the 30mm scopes tend to be quite spendy compared to their 1" counterparts, otherwise I don't see too much of a difference.

For the varmint reticle scopes, I would get the chronograph and ballistic calculators out and figure out what th actual distances are for you load at all zoom levels. The same for the windage marks too because typically (or so I've been told) they're only close at 1 zoom setting. Also, your preference of whether or not “you” like busy reticles. Some folks do and others don’t.

Rick:

Thanks for the picture of the mil-dot reticle in a sage-rate environment. I’ve often wondered how the mil-dots would stack up to the plain ole cross hairs.

HTH,

[maverick]

Thanks for the picture of the mil-dot reticle in a sage-rate environment. I’ve often wondered how the mil-dots would stack up to the plain ole cross hairs.

Ditto on the photo...

Also, your preference of whether or not “you” like busy reticles. Some folks do and others don’t.

Therein lies my concern. Have never liked scopes with anything more than the minimum in the field of view. Looks/sounds like the advantages they offer however, probably make it worthwhile for me to get used to it... Hope to look thru a bunch of different scopes this weekend. Being close to the home of NightForce, maybe I'll see something that someone is wanting to part with for less than an arm and a leg...

[Captqc]

I love the VHR! I don't consider it to be busy at all due in part to the fine lines. Gary