PDA

View Full Version : Which reticle in S&B ShortDot?



Daniel-Mark
08-10-06, 02:48
Hello guys,
my name is Daniel and i´m from Germany, so please excuse my bad english.

I tested many, many scopes for my AR-15 and i came to the conclusion, that i want the S&B ShortDot.

But i´m not sure about the reticle. The Short Dot that i handled, had the CQB reticle. It was good at 1x but at 4x i found it a little bit busy. I don´t need Mil´s in a 4x scope.
But i have no chance to look at the ShortDot with the No.7 reticle.
http://www.schmidtbender.com/reticlesPM.htm

Please give me an advise about the reticle selection. :confused:

Thanks,
Daniel

CapnCrunch
08-10-06, 04:41
Daniel, I've used a few optics in my time, and I came to the same conclusion. I love mine, and it's definately a top quality piece of glass.

If you think the CQB reticle is too busy, the #7 is indeed a good choice. Since I use the 4X to identify things at close ranges more than I use it to range, the #7 would probably be a better choice for me. However, I do (personal preference) like the ability to range things further out in a pinch and the CQB reticle doesn't seem to slow me down any, so I'm going to stick with it for the time being.

By the way, your English is much better than my German ;)

VA_Dinger
08-10-06, 09:54
This is a tough question considering most of us only have actual experience with the reticle we own. I have only personally seen four Short Dots and all were CQB's. Any discussion on my part about the other reticle styles will be based on nothing more than checking them out on the Internet.

That being said, I really do not see any earth shattering difference between the CQB & No.7. The CQB has the Mil scale and the No.7 has a thicker black line.

CQB reticle:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/va_dinger/CQBdetail.gif

No.7 reticle:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/va_dinger/no7.gif


A lot of this is based on nothing tangible but it seems to me that if your finding the CQB “Busy” on 4x the No.7 isn’t really going to help all that much. The No.7’s duplex style lines are still going to be in your FOV and you gain nothing from having them. With the CQB reticle you at least still have the capability of ranging even though it’s not going to be used often. It’s just another plus that helps to make the Short Dot so versatile.

In short, I’m going to be sticking with the CQB reticle until I can discuss it in-depth with somebody who knows far more about it. I think I know two individuals who fit that description.

Over 75% of the guys who handled or shot my Short Dot usually came from two different sides of the fence. One was the Aimpoint/Eotech experienced guys who after shooting the short dot sometimes comment that the scope is “Busy” on 4x and that the Mil-scale cannot even be seen on 1x. I always tell them that is the point. On 1x your not suppose to be able to see the Mil scale. It was designed to mimic an Aimpoint on 1x. Are you going to be ranging anything on 1x anyway? On 2x-4x the Mil-scale gradually comes more and more into focus. You can choose to ignore it (Similar to using fixed rear sights with an Aimpoint – with time & practice it will not bother you) or you can simply switch off the red dot and the optic like you would any Mil-Dot scope on 4X. It’s all about versatility.

dubb-1
08-10-06, 10:19
You are not alone, by any stretch. I also intend to purchase a Short Dot (when finances allow), and am torn on reticle choices. Unfortunately, the obscurity of the Short dot (due, in no small way, to price) means we can't just go to the range and hope, let alone know, that we can stumble on one that we can peer through. Perhaps the only good news is that should you try one and not like the reticle, you'll have no problem selling it for a minimal loss (if any).

Daniel-Mark
08-11-06, 08:06
First, I will thank you for the answers.

I see the biggest advantage in the No.7 Reticle that, if the battery is dead and you need a sight for 1x
you will have bigger lines which (maybe) can bee better seen as the CQB reticle.

But another thing to think about. Now the ShortDot 2 is in the line.
It is a Zenith 1.1-4x24 with a second focal reticle and no blue tint on the glass. In the USA it is called Short Dot 2 for marketing purposes, here in Germany it is "only" a modfied Zenith.

Do you Pro´s think that this scope will be a progress or a backward step? For me, the loss of the blue tint is very good. This is a thing, that I don´t like about the ShortDot 1. But a second focal reticle?
For me the advantage of the ShortDot is, that the reticle is very small on 1x and the dot clearly visible (nearly an Aimpoint). And then you turn on 4x and you have a “normal” Scope.
But with the second focal reticle you have always a big reticle. I think for myself, that the view is to obstructed for fast aiming.
What is your opinion?

Thanks,
Daniel

USMC03
08-11-06, 08:36
Daniel,



A lot of this comes down to personal preferences and the type of shooting you will use the Short Dot for.

I actually like the CQB reticle. I use the Short Dot at work as a law enforcement officer and will also use it at monthly rifle matches, where we shoot at distances from 1 meter to over 400 meters. The hash marks and mil dots on the CQB reticle can be used for hold over and wind. I am in the process of (by trial and error) finding out what has marks work best at different distances. If I weren't shooting at longer distances, I may not have a preference toward the CQB reticle.

I have found that when shooting under stress that I find reticles to be a lot less busy, than what I initally thought. When I first got my US Optics SN3 with the Horus H-25 reticle, I thought the reticle was very busy. But when shooting in a match under stress I found that the reticle wasn't that busy because I was concentrated on the target, trying to figure out the distance in my mind, and putting the approiate hold over hash mark on the target.

I have heard many complaints about the blue tint, but I barely notice it unless I'm wearing sun glasses. As I stated above everyone's personal preferences are different and what may bother one shooter, may go unnoticed by another.



Take care and stay safe,
Jeff

VA_Dinger
08-11-06, 08:49
For me, the loss of the blue tint is very good. This is a thing, that I don´t like about the ShortDot 1.

I know we read allot about the "Blue tint", but I have never even noticed it myself. I would bet 99% of the guys who even mention it have never been within ten miles of an actual Short Dot. Trust me, the concern about it is over hyped beyond belief.

USMC03
08-11-06, 10:02
I know we read allot about the "Blue tint", but I have never even noticed it myself. I would bet 99% of the guys who even mention it have never been within ten miles of an actual Short Dot. Trust me, the concern about it is over hyped beyond belief.


I agree with this 100%. The only times I notice the blue tint is when I'm indoors or wearing sunglasses.

Erick Gelhaus
08-12-06, 09:43
I do not recall ever being aware of a tint on it until I started seeing it being mentioned. And even then, it was like "oh, ok."

Daniel-Mark
08-12-06, 13:54
I do not recall ever being aware of a tint on it until I started seeing it being mentioned. And even then, it was like "oh, ok."

Yes, you are right. If u don´t know it, you won´t see it.

VA_Dinger
08-17-06, 18:09
FYI - S&B is now quoting 24-26 weeks for any Short Dot. :(

VA_Dinger
08-18-06, 14:19
I see the biggest advantage in the No.7 Reticle that, if the battery is dead and you need a sight for 1x
you will have bigger lines which (maybe) can bee better seen as the CQB reticle.

Thanks,
Daniel

I think you have brought up a good point.

After talking to a few individuals who know far more about Short Dot's than I ever will, they agreed with your assessment on the #7 reticle. It does seem that the #7 offers a few advantages IF your battery was to go dead or you needed to take a quick shot when your scope is turned off. This would certainly be harder to accomplish with the CQB reticle. While the reticle is visible it is very faint. As a matter of fact I think it was designed to be faint on 1.1x. Some see this as an advantage (Uncluttered Aimpoint like FOV) while others want a more substantial reticle on 1.1x like the #7 for just such emergencies.

I guess it’s a good thing S&B did not put all of their eggs in one basket.

Daniel-Mark
08-25-06, 05:54
Thank you, Sirs!

One more time i have to warm up this thread in case of a question.

Which turrests do you prefer? The Gen I with the possibility to easy change the BDC, or the Gen II locking turrets?
How easy is it possible on the Gen I models to accidently turn the knobs?

Thanks,
Daniel

VA_Dinger
08-27-06, 10:30
Thank you, Sirs!

One more time i have to warm up this thread in case of a question.

Which turrests do you prefer? The Gen I with the possibility to easy change the BDC, or the Gen II locking turrets?
How easy is it possible on the Gen I models to accidently turn the knobs?

Thanks,
Daniel


I think both have their advantages and disadvantages. Obviously the GenII self locking turrets are a serious advantage if your doing vehicle ops, fast roping, or jumping out of airplanes. Apparently some of the Tier 1 guys were having a problem with the GenI’s moving on them. I have only owned a GenII so I have no personal experience on how easy it is bump them and lose your zero. I would assume though that it does take some serious effort considering I’ve known several GenI owners and never heard them complain about it. Of course none of them are jumping out of airplanes either, at least not anymore.

The GenI’s do offer a lot of versatility for the rest of us. Having BDC cams for M855, 75 Hornady, and M118LR for 16 and 20 inch barrel SR 25's all in one optic is a nice touch. Even though very few of us would actually use ¾ of them.

I guess it all comes down to each end user.

(1.) What is he using the optic for?
(2.) Does he really need all the BDC cams?
(3.) What’s available? S&B is now quoting 26 weeks for any Short Dot. It’s getting to the point were beggars are not choosers – Unless your willing to wait.

Colt6920
03-09-07, 13:41
Bringing back an old post I know but I would like to add some info.
Back a few months ago I purchased a Short Dot witht the #7 reticle and the dot on it was not very bright at all. It was sent back and another sent to me and it was the same way. I ended up sending it back to and went back to an ACOG.

I kept asking others on their experience with the Short Dot reticle brightness and everyone I asked had the CQB reticle and claimed not to have the problems I was having with the #7 reticle.
After a while I figured what the hell, get another one this time with the CQB reticle. I ordered it yesterday and had it sent to me next day air. Got it out first thing and checked the brightness. This new one with the CQB reticle is bright as hell and I am happy as a pig in shit.
So I am going to guess there is some difference between the brightness levels of the 2 reticles. Since I have been within a mile of both:D I thought I would add that to this thread.

ashooter
03-09-07, 14:42
Wow, that is interesting. I'd not heard that there was any difference in the dot brightness between the different reticles.

FWIW, the "blue tint" of the CQB reticle was pretty annoying to me. The scope works as it should, but I always felt like the lense was fogged up or something. No way I could resolve small or distant targets as good as with my Nightforce 1-4. Even with that, I admit the Short Dot is the only truly do-it-all optic for an M4 type carbine.

Anybody here have any first-hand experience with the newest version? (the one with the spare battery compartment under the windage cap) I wonder if the dot brightness is comparable to the CQB reticle of the GenII Short Dot... If it is, and the blue tint is gone, I'm halfway saved up for a new one!

WillC
03-09-07, 15:21
I think that we are really getting down to the nuts and bolts talking about most of this stuff. Focusing on the advantages on the Short dot you have the BDC's, the aimpoint like 1x and the Acog 4x advantages and the long battery life. Those alone seperate this optic from any other, I don't blame anyone for nitpicking based on the price but many have done much more with much less... basically I don't think you will go wrong with any of the "gens" as long as you get the right cam (dinger ... :) )

Will

KevinB
03-25-07, 03:08
From what I have seen the #7 reticle is much less bright than the CQB reticle.

I have 3 SD's one gen 1 and 2 genII+ (battery compartment - I thought that was standard until someone pointed out mine where "special" :rolleyes:
ALL are CQB reticled -- I shot the #7 did not like it for me and that was it.

I found the Gen1 adjustment quite mushy - and its redeeming feature is that it is on a 16" SR25.

Honestly this blue tint issue is a non issue - I dont see it unless I go looking for it. I never noticed it until someone asked me questions about it...

WillC
03-25-07, 03:47
Again, blah, you are not going wrong with a Shortdot or a Nightforce, if you can afford this, then do it... otherwise, get an ACOG/Jpon combo, I can't personally thumbs up the Horus or other, but if you want a 1-4x, and you feel you need it, then drop cash, sorry to be blunt, but it is a specific need optic, look at the real deal that are using these... most can get by with an ACOG or AIMPOINT/EOTECH something. Please do not get into one of the "I spent money oin this, so it is the only way to go" arguments ... I have seen people do magic with irons at the same ranges, it is the user, not the equipment.

Will

WillC
03-25-07, 03:49
Sorry, but compare the battery life with some of the other optics out there, and it does okay.
Not trying to trump up the Shortdot to something it isn't.

Will

xenophobe
03-28-07, 04:54
I don't completely understand the whole short dot appeal. At it's time, it was one of only a few durable and high end optics available for CQB/intermediate range... It's expensive, has a cramped FOV, and is not true 1x, which made me feel a little awkward, as I'm left eye dominant but shoot right handed (and also why I prefer the PVS-7 over the PVS-14)...

I admit, I really liked the generous eye relief, but the reticle didn't do much for me... of course I still drooled over it, it IS a Schmidt & Bender, but I'm much happier with my Elcan Specter DR purchase. It's truly the ideal optic for me, though if I was a PVS-14 user it probably wouldn't be my optic of choice, but neither would the Short Dot.

EmanP
04-15-07, 16:37
Can anyone explain the 2nd focal plane reticle issue with POI changes? I'm not sure I understand it correctly and if it's a problem with the new S&B's or not.

KevinB
04-16-07, 04:34
In three units that I know of that tested the Spectre - all three noticed zero shift changed from 1x to 4x. This will likley not occur in a civilian use scope that is not fast roped or jumped -- but be aware that the NightForce and S&B held in a Larue mount are not having this issue.

I dont notice a difference in the 1.1x setting and using an Aimpoint -- with both eyes open the FOV issue to me is negligable.

But then I'm a S&B cool aid drinker :rolleyes:

ashooter
04-16-07, 06:27
...I dont notice a difference in the 1.1x setting and using an Aimpoint -- with both eyes open the FOV issue to me is negligable.

But then I'm a S&B cool aid drinker :rolleyes:


If anything, I felt like the FOV with the Short Dot at 1.1x was better than with an Aimpoint. With an Aimpoint, you get a definite "looking through a tunnel" feeling, but with the S&B, the scope just sort of seemed to disappear.

Everybody's eyeballs are different, I guess. I'm also the only person I've ever heard of that felt like the S&B's optics were pretty darned crappy for a $2k scope.