Hey all, quick question for you guys and galls. I am finishing up my trainer build before I move onto my Remy .260 build, and the last stop on my list is my optic. I have decided on the falcon menace 4-14x44 ffp (it was between that and the viper pst, but I didn't want to spend $900 on a scope for a $500 rifle, and the menace was the next least expensive that I found with mil/mil ffp to emulate what will be on my big boy gun) but I can't decide on which reticle to get and was wondering if anyone had any experience with the two. The choices are the EMD & the ML16. I like the them both, but they both might have their drawbacks.
The EMD seems like it would be easier to see in the lower mag ranges because it's bolder, but I'm comserned that in the upper mag ranges, the extra bold lines outside the sub tensions looks like it might actually be too big an obscure some of the sight picture. The ML16 is completely opposite though. While it wouldn't interrupt the sight picture in the large mag, it all but disappears in the lower mags. Any input is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Taylor.
The EMD seems like it would be easier to see in the lower mag ranges because it's bolder, but I'm comserned that in the upper mag ranges, the extra bold lines outside the sub tensions looks like it might actually be too big an obscure some of the sight picture. The ML16 is completely opposite though. While it wouldn't interrupt the sight picture in the large mag, it all but disappears in the lower mags. Any input is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Taylor.
