View Full Version : Leupold TMR reticle, any good for long range? (800-1000 yards)
Hammer_Man
05-23-20, 16:48
I'm looking for feedback on Leupold's TMR reticle. For those who have used it for long range shooting, what do you like about it? What do you not like about it? Lastly, given the choice would you recommend a Christmas tree style reticle like a Tremor 3 or EBR over the TMR? I'm trying to narrow down my scope choices for my 308 DMR build. So far I like the Leupold Mark 5, Vortex Razor AMG, and Vortex Razor HD.
Yes. It is basically what the military has been using for decades.
Hammer_Man
05-24-20, 08:13
Yes. It is basically what the military has been using for decades.
Have you used one?
Have you used one?
Yes. Not at 1000. I never fired on 1000 yard range.
Furbyballer
05-24-20, 08:44
Yes it works in the 3-18 variants, no it will not work in the mk6 1-6 variant if you decide to dial. I would 100% recommend the T3 to anyone looking to shoot the distances you are asking about. I have used the T3 past a mile and its by far the most functional long range reticle for my purposes.
One of the early and still one of the better MIL hash reticles in my opinion.
The Christmas tree question is too big and to too personal to really answer. As even among it's fans there are people who love and a hate different versions.
I'd say look for a used last gen scope that doesn't have as big a power range as the latest model, with a Christmas tree to try out. You can test drive it and then probably sell it without a loss.
Hammer_Man
05-24-20, 18:25
Yes it works in the 3-18 variants, no it will not work in the mk6 1-6 variant if you decide to dial. I would 100% recommend the T3 to anyone looking to shoot the distances you are asking about. I have used the T3 past a mile and its by far the most functional long range reticle for my purposes.
The Leupold Mark 5 I'm looking at is the 3-18 model. Both the TMR and Tremor 3 are available with illumination, and the ones I've handled at Sportsman's had excellent glass. So far it's my #1 pick. My local Sportsman's has one with the illuminated TMR, but the clerk informed me they can't get one with the Tremor 3, so instead of buying the TMR model right away, I decided to ask you guys for feedback
Hammer_Man
05-24-20, 18:29
One of the early and still one of the better MIL hash reticles in my opinion.
The Christmas tree question is too big and to too personal to really answer. As even among it's fans there are people who love and a hate different versions.
I'd say look for a used last gen scope that doesn't have as big a power range as the latest model, with a Christmas tree to try out. You can test drive it and then probably sell it without a loss.
I'm a novice when it comes to precision shooting, so to me the Christmas tree reticles look more user friendly. They seem like they would require less dialing. But I could be wrong... That's why I decided to put my questions to you guys
Regardless you have to know your range and verify the reticle if you use holdovers like the christmas trees. I would usually dial anyway.
SomeOtherGuy
05-26-20, 12:11
One of the early and still one of the better MIL hash reticles in my opinion.
Agree, it has the essentials you really need and not much else.
The Christmas tree question is too big and to too personal to really answer. As even among it's fans there are people who love and a hate different versions.
Strongly agree, and will add that there is a huge range of Xmas tree reticles. The Horus reticles are simply too busy for me. Some of the more basic Xmas trees, like the GAP/Bushnell G2 and G3, and the reticles in gen2 Vortex PSTs, are much more usable while still having tree features.
I personally like non-tree reticles better, but it is a personal decision based on a lot of factors.
OP: the Mark 5 looks like a solid scope and TMR is fine. I would look at some other options as well, including the Burris XTR-III (3!) models with SCR-MIL, which is a similar and really good reticle, or Nightforce options with Mil-R or Mil-C reticles. Reticle choice is important and worth spending time on.
Tremor 3 shines for its wind holds. Tree reticles are great, pending their design. especially if your planning on holding off for wind. Pretty hard to guess precise hold offs once your below the center horizontal line. In multiple target engagements and differing distances dialing isn't always an option based on time. You might consider the CCH reticle as well. Once you use and understand you will not find them as busy as they appear and the added ability you have to spot and call your impacts can be a plus.
I cant find really good pics of the TMR but after review it wouldn't be my first choice.
I also am looking at the Mark 5 3-18 for what I would call a "DMR" type application. I just bought the Nightforce NX8 2.5-20 and sold it before even mounting as I was disappointed with the eye box. I wish the Mark 5 wasnt a 35 mm tube but believe it may be the best all around value considering its feature set and glass.
pointblank4445
05-27-20, 10:40
Tremor 3 shines for its wind holds.
In multiple target engagements and differing distances dialing isn't always an option based on time.
I think people CONUS overestimate how often they're going to play rooftop whack-a-mole against scores of savages encroaching on their position. Plenty of gamer dudes dial that don't seem to have a problem with clearing stages in time.
Tremor 3 is what it is and is makes sense for where it is being fielded. It's a VERY environment/magnification dependent system. That said, it disturbs me how many people champion the wind hold thing that don't realize the same concepts can be applied to regular old mils without the need for extra clutter.
People going to like what they like; everything's got pro's and con's...despite what many say about the Tremor3.
Hammer_Man
05-27-20, 15:08
Tremor 3 shines for its wind holds. Tree reticles are great, pending their design. especially if your planning on holding off for wind. Pretty hard to guess precise hold offs once your below the center horizontal line. In multiple target engagements and differing distances dialing isn't always an option based on time. You might consider the CCH reticle as well. Once you use and understand you will not find them as busy as they appear and the added ability you have to spot and call your impacts can be a plus.
I cant find really good pics of the TMR but after review it wouldn't be my first choice.
I also am looking at the Mark 5 3-18 for what I would call a "DMR" type application. I just bought the Nightforce NX8 2.5-20 and sold it before even mounting as I was disappointed with the eye box. I wish the Mark 5 wasnt a 35 mm tube but believe it may be the best all around value considering its feature set and glass.
After handling a Mark 5, it is definitely at the top of my list. The other scopes I'm considering are the NF ATACR, and Steiner M5xi.
I think people CONUS overestimate how often they're going to play rooftop whack-a-mole against scores of savages encroaching on their position. Plenty of gamer dudes dial that don't seem to have a problem with clearing stages in time.
Tremor 3 is what it is and is makes sense for where it is being fielded. It's a VERY environment/magnification dependent system. That said, it disturbs me how many people champion the wind hold thing that don't realize the same concepts can be applied to regular old mils without the need for extra clutter.
People going to like what they like; everything's got pro's and con's...despite what many say about the Tremor3.
You make valid points. My concern is spending over $2k for an optic with the TMR, and finding it not to my liking later on. I could just as easily spend over $2k on an optic with a Tremor 3, and find it not to my liking either. The draw toward the Tremor 3 for me, is that it seems like a reticle I can grow into as my skills progress.
I’ve had a Mark4 illuminated TMR for a few years which I’ve pushed to 1000 yards. I consider myself somewhat of a novice shooter but felt that it definitely got the job done and have no regrets whatsoever. However, after having experienced some of the challenges that go with longer distances (Mainly wind), I can see the attraction of a tree type reticle and have also been looking at the Mark 5 line. Personally, I would definitely like to try one first before making such a big purchase.
SomeOtherGuy
05-27-20, 15:50
You make valid points. My concern is spending over $2k for an optic with the TMR, and finding it not to my liking later on. I could just as easily spend over $2k on an optic with a Tremor 3, and find it not to my liking either. The draw toward the Tremor 3 for me, is that it seems like a reticle I can grow into as my skills progress.
People vary and there are some experienced shooters who like busy tree reticles - but not tons. I think you are more likely to grow OUT of the Tremor 3 as you gain experience. There will probably be good resale value for the scope, but don't get the impression that the Horus grid reticles are something favored by a majority of experienced shooters. They do two things reasonably well:
1) In very specific situations - timed competition on an uncluttered simple range - they allow fast and simple holdovers and/or spotting of hits.
2) They are good for training motivated beginners to do DMR style shooting under similar conditions.
There was a long article on this about 1-2 years ago on one of the precision shooting sites - can't remember if it was Sniper's Hide, Precision Rifle Blog, or where. It's worth searching for though.
Most experienced shooters will dial elevation and hold windage, and any mil-hash works well for this. It's also quite possible to hold both elevation and windage simultaneously on a mil-hash with practice. For me, it's easier to visualize an imaginary intersection between two single rulers, vs. counting hashes and dots to find the exact right dot or mini-cross in a cluttered grid.
Can't find the specific article I remember, but here is one detailed pro/con:
https://www.rexreviews.org/community/scope-questions/do-you-hate-horus-reticles-whats-the-deal-dm-vs-sniper
And a wide range of opinions between the H59 (not Tremor 3 but similar) and the G3 (a very simple tree):
https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/g3-or-h59-reticle.6869028/
pointblank4445
05-27-20, 15:58
You make valid points. My concern is spending over $2k for an optic with the TMR, and finding it not to my liking later on. I could just as easily spend over $2k on an optic with a Tremor 3, and find it not to my liking either. The draw toward the Tremor 3 for me, is that it seems like a reticle I can grow into as my skills progress.
Trust your own perceptions and be honest with what you see. If a reticle is too thick, too thin, too cluttered, too hard to see, you're probably right. Do you want an open center, floating dot, or hard crosshair?...what's pleasing to you? Dots or dashes in your Xmas tree? Is it easy to "get lost" or not be on the hold you thought you were. If you find yourself counting through dots to where you need to be...probably not as fast as one thinks.
I don't know if I'm unique in this, but as my skill grew, I found out I needed less from a reticle in many cases, not more. With the exception of competition rigs, I found that a limited reticle like the Gen 2 XR was more than sufficient with a minimalist tree and stadia at ever 0.5 mil or for lower magnification stuff, MSR2. That Gen 2 mildot/TMR/MSR reticle has plenty of love to give.
I'm not a great shooter and I can get to 1/2 mile with match 5.56 an an 8x mildot and 3/4 mile with a Gen 2 mildot at 16x with a 308, I'm confident in saying that 1000y would not be hard for a MK5 TMR scope. That said, I will contend that I desire MORE than a traditional Mildot, but I can make it work.
If you like/run the Tremor 3...great! But I feel that more than a few bought it for the perceived "easy button method" as described by shooters with limited scope (pardon the pun) ...especially the "wind holds" which are more or less a wind BDC based off of ballistics and mil scale.
One can just as easily use the following:
G1 BC of your round x 10 = #mph per 0.1 mil per 100y
Ball park that would equate to:
4mph of full value wind for 77smk (.224) per 0.1 mil at 100y (0.2 mils @ 200y, 0.3 mils @ 300y and so on)
5mph of full value wind for 175smk (.308) per 0.1 mil at 100y
6mph of full value wind for 140smk (.264) per 0.1 mil at 100y
8mph of full value wind for 300smk (.338) per 0.1 mil at 100y
The T3 isn't special...it just puts this extra crap up there for you and relieves one of simple math (and knowing the above concept)...which can be very effective if practiced.
Of course ALL are dependent upon proper data collection and accurate wind reading to make the proper shooting solution in the first place. If one can't do that, hold/dial is meaningless.
CHEERS
I think people CONUS overestimate how often they're going to play rooftop whack-a-mole against scores of savages encroaching on their position. .
Now that put a smile on my face :cool:
Guess my only point about the T3 and its wind dots was that really the only thing I believe it brings to the party vs any other MIL based tree reticle. Am I wrong? I can dial and hold off with the best of them in the gammer world but do prefer a uncluttered tree like the Vortex EBR-7C on my Razor. I just wish the Leupold had a slightly better reticle offering in the Mark 5 than the TMR and persoanlly cant wrap myself around their CCH reticle. As you mentioned its about what an individual likes and sees.
Be great for all of us if it was easier to get hands on vs buy and try but that's what it is.
pointblank4445
05-28-20, 10:14
Now that put a smile on my face :cool:
Be great for all of us if it was easier to get hands on vs buy and try but that's what it is.
That would put the optics trade to a grinding halt...lol.
Like I said above, the wind hold thing is fine but unless you're shooting the 175smk 308 that was used, you have to figure out your true wind holds for those wind values. Maybe they aren't a nice, round number anymore. As you noted, that clutter comes at a cost as well. And all this is assuming the individual has an accurate wind read to begin with... I think that's the main thing that irks me is a lot of guys have been trained up on T3 and push it on to newer shooters and they drink the koolaid without knowing any better and many in turn become parrots for a reticle/concept they don't truly understand.
Now that put a smile on my face :cool:
Guess my only point about the T3 and its wind dots was that really the only thing I believe it brings to the party vs any other MIL based tree reticle. Am I wrong? I can dial and hold off with the best of them in the gammer world but do prefer a uncluttered tree like the Vortex EBR-7C on my Razor. I just wish the Leupold had a slightly better reticle offering in the Mark 5 than the TMR and persoanlly cant wrap myself around their CCH reticle. As you mentioned its about what an individual likes and sees.
Be great for all of us if it was easier to get hands on vs buy and try but that's what it is.
Leupold supposedly has an improved PRS oriented reticle coming for the Mark 5 scopes.
Hammer_Man
05-28-20, 13:21
Leupold supposedly has an improved PRS oriented reticle coming for the Mark 5 scopes.
Any idea when that may be coming?
Any idea when that may be coming?
Nope. It was mentioned on a podcast by Jon Pynch, who's sponsored by Leupold. He mentioned helping to develop the reticle, but not a timeline on it's release.
Not going back to read all the new posts, but did I mention that Midway has the Mark 4 4.5-14 on sale.
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1362173644
Not going back to read all the new posts, but did I mention that Midway has the Mark 4 4.5-14 on sale.
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1362173644
Mil reticle, MOA turrets.
There is a reason they have been trying to blow them out for the past year.
Mil reticle, MOA turrets.
There is a reason they have been trying to blow them out for the past year.
I never understood what in hell they were thinking with the "MIL/MOA" thing.
I never understood what in hell they were thinking with the "MIL/MOA" thing.
It's Leupold, a lot of what they do mystifies me.... ;)
pointblank4445
06-11-20, 13:35
I never understood what in hell they were thinking with the "MIL/MOA" thing.
So...mils have long since been used in the military for artillery. But when the military went to spec out a scope, the standard for optics (hunting or competition) in the US was MOA adjustments. I'm not 100% sure whether this was a mere oversight on failure of requesting mil turrets or was a spec that couldn't be met by the mfg....or likely met in a timely fashion. Regardless...it was a mistake on somebody's part and not done purposefully (at least from a functional standpoint).
Once these things got delivered, they were stuck in the system.
"Adapt and overcome"... became "that's the way we've done it/teach it". Thus this mismatched abomination existed for far too long.
What's worse is the flawed logic that the military way is the best way and there must be some good reason to go this way...there isn't. However, people blindly follow this logic still. Thankfully, these things are harder to come by these days and people are starting to wise up...relatively speaking.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.