Rifle Scopes Two Completely Unrelated Scope Questions

[Center Mass]

Two questions I have had for a while now so I figured I would just post them up together to see what the experts have to say.

1) Do any other scope manufacturers have an MTC type turret like S&B? I'm getting to that age where my eyes aren't what they used to be and sometimes I have trouble seeing where I am on the turret. Mostly on ones that have markings jammed together like the S&B DT. The heavy detent on the MTC's give me that little extra that I really helps sometimes.

2) Why is Vortex and Nightforce the only optic manufacturers that have figured out how to make a FFP LPVO with nuclear bright illumination? I haven't had a chance to get behind a Gen III 1-10 yet but I have an NF 1-8 that I really like as an all around great optic on my Super Duty.

Thanks,
CM

 

[Birddog6424]

Two questions I have had for a while now so I figured I would just post them up together to see what the experts have to say.

1) Do any other scope manufacturers have an MTC type turret like S&B? I'm getting to that age where my eyes aren't what they used to be and sometimes I have trouble seeing where I am on the turret. Mostly on ones that have markings jammed together like the S&B DT. The heavy detent on the MTC's give me that little extra that I really helps sometimes.

2) Why is Vortex and Nightforce the only optic manufacturers that have figured out how to make a FFP LPVO with nuclear bright illumination? I haven't had a chance to get behind a Gen III 1-10 yet but I have an NF 1-8 that I really like as an all around great optic on my Super Duty.

Thanks,
CM

I'm not aware of anything similar to the MTC. Perhaps someone else may chime in on it.

I'm pretty sure every manufacturer knows how to make brighter illumination. Its not difficult. The question is more of "why would they".. daylight bright is a thing, and most LPVOs I've looked through manage it. Nuclear bright hardly seems necessary or widely requested. Seems like one of those things some people may like and some people simply don't care.

 

[marsh1]

The reticles mentioned are called refractive illuminated reticles. It is a very different and expensive way to make a reticle.

 

[Center Mass]

The reticles mentioned are called refractive illuminated reticles. It is a very different and expensive way to make a reticle.

Interesting. And that makes a lot of sense as it would likely make it cost prohibitive for a lot of manufacturers.

I'm not aware of anything similar to the MTC. Perhaps someone else may chime in on it.

I'm pretty sure every manufacturer knows how to make brighter illumination. Its not difficult. The question is more of "why would they".. daylight bright is a thing, and most LPVOs I've looked through manage it. Nuclear bright hardly seems necessary or widely requested. Seems like one of those things some people may like and some people simply don't care.

I get what you are saying somewhat. Seems to me one of the big reasons the Razor Gen II was so popular in part was because it could be used very much as a red dot because the Illum. was so bright. If the main reason is cost, I totally get that. But if others know how to do it, I would say why wouldn't you? You can always dial the illum. down but it can only go up so high.

I think I should narrow my focus to FFP optics primarily. i do not think that SFP LPVO's need nuclear bright illumination as the reticles are well proportioned across the magnification range. So many times I have picked up a FFP LPVO and was very disappointed by the uselessness of the reticle at 1x. However, if they had Razor bright illum. most of them would be much better suited for the entire magnification range.

CM