Rifle Scopes PR reticle opinions

[Flyingbullseye]

I'm currently putting some money away for a new scope for the next year and have decided to go with premier reticles 3-15. Problem is I'm stuck trying to decide which reticle I want to go with. Both have their advantages and disadvantages to each other.

I want to get some user opinions about the good and bad they have found strictly regarding the reticles (not the scope).

Flyingbullseye

 

[broke_again]

Re: PR reticle opinions

GEN II XR and don't look back. Although for a company that built their reputation on reticles, it would be nice to see some new offerings in reticles.

 

[Flyingbullseye]

Re: PR reticle opinions

Broke, got to ask why? As it stands for me I'm more familiar with the gen 2 mil dot type as my weaver has nearly the same reticle. But I like the wind tree type reticle on the XR better. I see the gen 2 mil dot subtensions are larger but has less illumination of the reticle if I need it. I could keep going but I think you or anyone else reading gets the point.

Flyingbullseye

 

[RollinCoal11]

Re: PR reticle opinions

I love the Gen 2. It's simple, clean and effective. I tried to get it in the S&B I ordered but they don't offer it in that model

 

[Alpine 338]

Re: PR reticle opinions

I prefer the Gen 2 MilDot in the 3-15 because the XR reticle is too fine at lower power to quickly aquire. I do have the XR in a 5-25 where I think it's a better suited reticle for the higher power. The one thing that bugs me about the XR reticle is the half-mil hash marks are larger then the MilDots, which in my mind is backwards, and messes with me because every other scope out there that has half-mil or half-moa hash marks, they are always smaller then the full value dot or mark.

Only if Premier could offer their scopes with the P4F reticle, and if that were so, in opinion it would be the perfect scope.

 

[Hookman]

Re: PR reticle opinions

I tried the XR reticle on the 3-15 but after looking through it, I sent it back for the Gen II MilDot. The MilDot was easier for me to see at all power settings.

If you have a change, the best way to decide which one to go with is to look through both of them before you decide.

 

[cjgemm]

Re: PR reticle opinions

Gen2 in the 3.5-15, I thought the XR was very hard to see under 8x.

 

[GMZ]

Re: PR reticle opinions

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Truckman11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I love the Gen 2. It's simple, clean and effective.</div></div>

Agreed, thats what I got in my PH 3-15.

 

[ronas]

Re: PR reticle opinions

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">GEN II XR and don't look back.</div></div>

I have this reticle in 5-25 and for me it's very easy and intuative to use. I like that the elevation subtensions have a dot every mil and a line every 1/2 mil. For some targets I dial up one mil and then use dot below crosshair as aiming point.

 

[Jon A]

Re: PR reticle opinions

I feel the Gen II is a great fit for the 3-15X. Unless you spend all you time on 15X shooting mostly paper and varmints (in which case you might be better off with the 5-25X) it'll do well.

 

[azimutha]

Re: PR reticle opinions

On the 3-15s I've been quite happy with the Gen II. One guy I know who got a non-illum LT with the XR was not as happy as he was with the illuminated Heritage he has.