Less graph paper, more simple tree is what I'm wanting.
I'm hoping their Christmas post below was actually a hint of a future reticle offering and not just a funny post-- because I would buy that.
View attachment 8352585
I applaud whoever took the time to create that graphic, that's exactly how I feel with a lot of tree reticles, they try to pack too much information or make them too thick which just obscures the FOV IMO. I notice the name of the poster here is "schmidtandbender" is it possible that is someone from Schmidt & Bender and were they alluding to a new reticle coming out that actually looks like a normal tree, if that reticle is coming, that is definitely something worth waiting for...
Still use the Gen II XR frequently as I have several Premier 3-15s and 5-25s and Tangent 5-25s with it. Nice simple reticle, a bit fine under some situations at lower mag, and I wished it had 0.2 mil hash marks, but it gets the job done. Just barely enough "tree" so you can be a little more precise with holdovers as the target isn't floating out into a totally empty area of the reticle, but not so much tree it seems cluttered (looking at you, gr2id, and let's not even mention anything with Tremor in the name.)
For years I have been a big proponent of the .2 mil reticles but now not so much, the Gen2 XR is an excellent reticle and most of us can figure out everything in between .5 mil hash marks just fine, I would estimate that our ability (or inability) to guesstimate wind at distance will play a much bigger role than "guessing" where .3 is on a .5 mil reticle.
As far as affording a bunch of scopes... I thought everyone on this forum does it the same way: poor financial decisions, LOL.
My thoughts exactly
It would certainly be cheaper to have one switch barrel rifle and one really nice optic and multiple barrels... but I tried that several years ago and hated constantly changing barrels and rezeroing the scope, because it seemed like every time I wanted to go shooting the barrel I used the last time and was still on the rifle wasn't the one I needed this time. I tried the one gun / one scope / multiple barrel thing with an AIAT for 308/6.5CM/6 Dasher and a Sako Quad for .22LR and .17HMR, and constantly switching barrels and rezeroing irritated me so much I ended up with 2x AXs and 2x Quads (setup the exact same with the exception of caliber, and the barrel stays on until it's shot out) so they're always ready to go. It's certainly more convenient, but a hell of a lot more expensive.
I think a lot of people have tried this approach either through switch barrel rifles or trying to use one scope on multiple rifles but ultimately have been frustrated with all the switching and re-zeroing, etc. I think the TT toolless and Vortex RG3 clever design makes a more compelling argument for switch barrel as you can write down the difference and even mark the turret accordingly, but it's still not perfect.
Part of the reason I'm holding off trying an S&B 6-36 because if they're as good as everyone says they are it's going to get very, very expensive for me as I know I'm going to end up buying several of them after I use the first one and then sell some of my current scopes at a loss. That's how it was with my first S&B 5-25 back around 2011; I was happy with the Bushnells, Leupolds, and IORs I was using at the time, but decided "I'll just buy one used S&B 5-25 and put it on my most frequently used rifle to see if I like it, and if not I can sell it for what I bought it for." By the end of 2012 I had sold all my other scopes, sold all of my "back of the safe" rifles that never got shot, and kept only my 6 favorite frequently used rifles and put S&B 5-25s on each of them. It was a huge jump up in scope quality and made all those rifles much more pleasant to use.
Yep, Premier Reticles was the one that ruined me. I thought I knew what good glass was (Zeiss Diavari FL) until I looked through my first Premier Reticles LT 3-15 years ago, then I got a Schmidt 3-20 (non-ultra short) and was wowed by that one too. Surprisingly I did not get my first "real" hands on experience with a Schmidt 5-25 until two years ago, the tunneling in the scopes always turned me off, but if the tunneling doesn't bother you the design is still one of the best with regard to optical performance even after all these years.
Regarding tree reticles...
I shoot a lot of holdovers as I do a LOT of ground squirrel and varmint blasting. They pop up and down at all different ranges from 20Y to 600Y+ and often don't stay up long enough to dial as you scan around the field. For the ones 400Y-ish and in I'll just use holdovers, but for longer range ones I'll dial and wait for them to pop up and take the shot.
In the last couple months I swapped scopes on my 3 primary squirrel blasters from S&B 5-25s with H2CMR reticles to Razor G3s mostly to try something new, going to see how I like them this season. The H2CMR being a simple uncluttered reticle made it easy to see the little furry buggers popping up anywhere in the wide open scope FOV, but precise holdovers on little squirrels were always a little iffy on the H2CMR especially as you get further out and the wind picks up putting the target further away from the center of the reticle and hash marks. Much easier to do more accurate holdovers IMO on the Razor G3 tree reticle since you always have a nearby reference mark, but I'm also hoping the tree reticle in the Razor G3 won't obscure any squirrels as I'm scanning the fields. It's not a very cluttered reticle so I'm not expecting any issues.
If I was shooting exclusively known distance or ELR stuff I'd probably prefer an open, non-tree reticle to better spot misses and faint splash since I'd be dialing everything, just like you mentioned.
I could use the P5FL, but I'd prefer it to have 0.2 mil wind marks. I'm very used to those after using the H2CMR since 2011.
I've come to appreciate tree reticles that minimize the obscuration (a new word??) of the sight picture/FOV, I have found that "busy" tree reticles obscure too much and hinder the visibility of impact as well as small details, since I dial elevation about 98% of the time, if given the choice between a busy tree reticle and a non-tree reticle I'd choose the non-tree. The tree just gives me that 2% of confidence that I could use the reticle when I do not have time to dial or cannot dial through a mechanical failure. As such, my favorite tree reticles to date are:
- March FML-TR1 (ILya did an outstanding job designing this reticle)
- TT Gen3 XR
- Vortex EBR-7D (Mil)
- Nightforce Mil-XT
- Minox MR4
My least favorite reticles are Horus by far, then second least are the solid line tree reticles like SKMR and MPCT series, I also do not like circles in my reticle because my eye finds them distracting. As can be seen above, I much prefer dots in the tree. The Schmidt GR2ID falls somewhere in between, it is a bit busy but Schmidt did a good job of not making anything too thick as to look like a Horus reticle but I do not need all the vertical dots, it is a workable reticle...
