0.2 mrad dot is too fat for precision at 600?
Printable View
that's how I look at as well. My only complaint is the reticle could a little brighter but it's size, weight, and true 1x with full eyebox is great for 'red dot' type and if you need to open it up, the rt6 does that fine. I liked the older mtac 1-4s, truly built like tanks. I had 2 that I utterly destroyed (have pics somewhere) over the years they never faltered. I've one rt6 that I have beat up on a bit, not like the mtacs, and it's still trumping along. I don't think you get that until you pay much more, certainly not with the strike eagles, steiners etc. Burris makes them tough
Not sure about the center dot, but it's those goofy donut segments that occlude your view at distance. And when you come of a Mil B reticle in a ATACR scope, it's painful. I'm not pooping on the Scope. But when you're trying to hit a 6" flapper at 750 yards, the reticle is sub-optimal to say the least.
This is the current FC-DMx reticle, don't really see how it would be an issue:
https://cdn.nightforceoptics.com/wp-.../NF_FC-DMx.png
Beyond that, using an LPVO to hit 6" targets at 750 yards isn't really what I think most proponents of LPVOs would say is in an LPVO's wheelhouse.
Those donut chunks are nothing like the real sight picture on the 1-8s we run. They're black and 3 times as thick. I wish I had a real pic of the reticle against the 750 target. It's unpleasant.
Here's a real world (borrowed) snip of the pain of the reticle. (now picture trying a precise shot at even further)
https://i.imgur.com/KbHd3x4.jpg
Right, that's the old FC-DM reticle, which as been phased out for a couple of years now. Having of owned ATACRs with both, the FC-DM was certainly less than optimal for taking extremely precise shots, while the FC-DMx is better in that regard, while still retaining high usability at close range, particularly with illumination. That being said, at range, I didn't see the issue, as I'm not dialing, and I don't really think that's how most people would want to use an LPVO anyway, so I'm using the Christmas tree anyway.