Center fire scope. Reticles "fine" or "think" red dot

[CROWalYeLikUrDEAD]

I recently purchased a tikka t3 lite fully synthetic .22-250, yet to put a scope on it. My query is....fine reticles or thick? I seem to find more thicker reticles have better advantages.. That's my personally opinion tho. I have a "over the top" Schmidt and bender 6x42 fixed on my .17 HMR because if I aim at a target and miss, I know the blame lies with 99.9% me. At night does a fine reticle scope be hard to pin point a target with, or evening lamping for that matter, also a red dot scope, what does everyone think?

[moor man]

Each design has its merits, the traditional hunting reticule for deer is thick posts and reticule to allow for easy visability in low light..something like 6x42, as with all things, fashion dictates the choice available. These days 3-9x42 or 50 is popular but it all depends on the end use. A scope for lamping for example will benefit having an adjustable illuminated reticule or centre dot.

For 22-250 I would prefer a scope with a fine ill. dot ret. of 4-10 power and depending on quality of glass a 42/50mm obv lens. Have fun trying out the selection of glass available, MM

[fieldwanderer]

Good point about night time but I've always preferred the finest reticle possible as it doesn't obscure so much of the target and I've never had any trouble seeing it in low light - by the time that happens it's generally too dark to see your quarry too (through the scope). Lamping's equally never been a problem.

 

Perhaps what you could do with is a good quality scope with a fine reticle that can be illuminated?

 

Red or green dot "scopes" to me just means a very low (if any) magnification with a bright, fairly large dot of light in the centre of what you see. They were designed for assault rifles, for quickly aiming at a close target while still being able to see much of what's going on around it - IMHO, that's where they belong, not on a sporting rifle.

[Dougy]

My choice of scope was a Swarovski Z4i 3-12x50 for my 22.250 I found it brilliant for dusk with a low illuminated red dot and for later during the night whilst using a lamp, It now sits on a 30.06 for driven Boar and stalking, its great for driven with the red dot set allot brighter and on 3x mag.

Without the illumination its very fine but still visible whilst lamping but you struggle to see the x around dusk without a lamp.

Edited October 19, 2013 by Dougy

[Dekers]

Scopes, magnification and reticles get very personal.

 

Some will say fine, others heavy, illuminated, Mildot, Christmas trees, etc., etc.,

 

As long as you can place the round where you want, at the distances and in the circumstances you shoot the decision is yours.

 

ATB

[The Essex Hunter]

I have a a4 in my Kahles 3-12x56 and get on with it very well. My gun is set 30 mm high @ 200 yds off quad sticks, I use heavy black lines on the paper target as the a4 is not so fine and just match those with the target.

The gun is mainly used for foxes so quite a large target, dots, mill dots, extra lines etc only serve the people who sell them. You need a nice clear image of the target combined with lots of practice, a friend has the same gun as yours with an expensive scope and they still miss like us all.

 

TEH

[CROWalYeLikUrDEAD]

Cheers guys, the fine reticles doesn't seem to be as bad as I imagined. As dekkers said you still have to aim and kill it but I just wanted to make sure before I spent loads off money I a dear scope to make sure at dusk and dawn you would be struggling to see the target. Maybe a fine dot in the middle would help a lot. Great help lads, time to go look at more German scopes! Yeha!

[bullet boy]

I have a centre cross ret on my S&B 3-12x50 Klassik IR scope on my .22-250.This ret works well for me.

[Gimlet]

The finer the central cross hairs the better for me, with thick posts and no extraneous clutter for quick placement. The Duralyt reticle is one of my favourites in low light, and one of the finest. I've got a Nightforce with a cemtral dot reticle on my .222. Its excellent on the range but very poor in low light without illumination. The dot is lost as the light goes and there are no vertical stadia to locate it. Fortunately all NF scopes have adjustable illumination and lit up its an excellent low-light/night scope. But I wouldn't want a central dot reticle for hunting unless it was illuminated.

 

Edit: An S&B 6X42 isn't over the top on an HMR in my opinion. An HMR will napper shoot rabbits all day and all night at 150 yards, wind, skill (and optics) permitting. Thats a significantly smaller target than the 4" kill zone on a deer and a greater distance than that of the average deer kill. That kind of capability deserves decent glass even if it is "only a rimfire". And of course you've got yourself a perfect woodland stalking scope ready and waiting for when the time comes..

Edited October 19, 2013 by Gimlet

[Amazed]

I have found the leupold fx 111 very good for lamping on the rimfire and the hornet just not quite enough mag. The standard cross hair is just right to see it clearly under the lamp.

[welshwarrior]

S&B 6x42 on my 22lr .204 (was a 243 until the barrel changed) and one will go on my 17 HMR when I buy it

 

S&B 8x56 on my 308

[CROWalYeLikUrDEAD]

Nice one welsh. I wouldn't mind a zeiss duralyt variable, cheers everyone for you help

[henry931]

I have a Nightforce with the NPR2 reticle which is very thin. I have the illumination set very low so you can't see it in daylight but at night it's easily visible.

Very good and aim-able in low light. When it gets to the point at dusk when animals just look like black blobs moving about, you can clearly make them out in colour through the scope. When it's very bright moonlight no need for a lamp/NV.

 

I will say if you don't have illumination you need a pretty thick reticle for low light use.

[kent]

I haven't ever owned a scope were the reticule disappeared in the lamp beam, I have had a few fine reticules that got lost in dim woodland cover and disappeared over more open ground before the optic quality failed to gather enough light though (its very annoying to see you quarry clear enough but have no definite aim point).

Illuminated reticules I have found to only be of real use in real high quality scopes, the others are all to Bright and make the shooters eye close down in the bright light or become distracting (especially in Mil dot or ladder type reticules) If I bought another illuminated scope it would have to be a very simple dot or very centre cross type.

some dislike thick reticules on scopes without good reason, on a hunting rifle you don't need to be able to put bullet on bullet on paper and you have no tiny bulls eye to aim at on quarry like foxes and crows. I personally see no issue on using a std 4a S+Bender on crows and the like to around 350 yds, suppose if I had to head shoot smaller quarry at those ranges I might need a finer reticule but I don't and few will find that need with a gun such as you mention 22-250. if you do want a fine reticule then I suppose a quality illumination system might just be handy

[Blunderbust]

I prefer a fine ret but it has to be illum dot. If you have the money I would recommend the Z6i Swaro Gen 2. I have two, the 2 -12 x 50 BT on a .243 and the 2.5 - 15 x 56 BT on my 300 win mag. They are great at any range and light conditions.