Design your own reticle thread...

[a0cake]

In this thread, design a reticle and post the picture. If you borrow from already existing designs, be sure to give credit to the company. Also, it would be helpful to explain in which sort of optic you envision the reticle being used, ie., in a low power variable or a long-range, high magnification optic. Additionally, it might be a good idea to explain what other features you'd like to see in an optic utilizing your reticle, so that we can get a clearer picture of what you're envisioning.

For whatever reason, optics manufacturers consistently fail to produce rifle-scopes with the most logical features. Things are getting better, but I'm still seeing large companies make really bad choices. Maybe if we put some good ideas down here, they will take a look.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is my design for a 1-6/8/10X variable optic (or even for a long-range optic, really). It's an adaptation of an already existing Bushnell reticle with some changes done by me. It's a Mil based reticle with wind-holds. I'd like to see all red portions, including the center dot, horse-shoe, and bottom leveling-line, placed in the rear focal plane so that they remain highly visible and bold at 1X magnification. These would also be the only illuminated portions of the reticle. The rest of the reticle would be paced in the first focal plane, and would practically disappear on 1X, leaving a clear and uncluttered sight-picture for rapid target acquisition. As magnification increases, the reticle would become visible and provide all the advantages of a FFP system.

Additionally, I'd like to see the optic have a 34 or 35 millimeter main tube. It should also have 0.1 Mil adjustments for windage and elevation as well as locking turrets. They should not have to be pulled up or down to release, but should have buttons that can be depressed and turned on the turret. Illumination should be daylight visible and turn off between each click of the illumination knob, which should be placed on the left side of the eye-piece at a 45 degree angle when the scope is leveled. This should be doable since only the rear focal plane portion of the reticle is illuminated. It should also have a side-parallax adjustment, even though it's a <10X optic.

[militarymoron]

i have a question - do reticles have to be centered in the scope? for a long range reticle, why not make the center of the crosshairs about 1/3 from the top of the scope, vs. in the center. then, it seems like you'd have more space for your holdover marks below it, and maybe make more use of the mechanical elevation travel in the scope.
am i making sense?

[Failure2Stop]

I'll throw some stuff in here, just a few notes I have picked up during my time talking to optics designers/engineers/geeks:

True .1 MRAD adjustments are hard to fit into the footprint that most users want in a low powered variable at a reasonable price-point. I can't sufficiently answer the "why" of how some do and others do not, or how certain IP/patents affect it.

Daytime bright illumination suffers the same problems. The more optics I am exposed to for decent amounts of time the less emphasis I place on brightness and the more I value a bold reticle that does not require illumination for daytime use throughout the magnification range.

1-8x is a lot harder to pull off than the market appreciates. Despite the huge demand and willingness to pay through the nose for them, there is only one viable option on the market, even though they were unveiled years ago.

Balancing reticle utility and the ability/desire to spin turrets needs to be carefully weighed against realistic use. How far and with what degree of precision does the user need to shoot? How much weight is acceptable?
What kind of waterproofing is needed? (one of the biggest hurdles and greatest expense is waterproofing/submersion depth capability).



Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

[FlyingHunter]

a0cake - cool design concept.

I'd love to see someone have a red dot that has a larger MOA at 1x power, say 6-8 MOA for close in and fast shooting and as the magnification is brought up the MOA goes down to 1-2MOA or perhaps even goes away at the highest setting 6,8,10 x power for the longer range precision shot.

[a0cake]

i have a question - do reticles have to be centered in the scope? for a long range reticle, why not make the center of the crosshairs about 1/3 from the top of the scope, vs. in the center. then, it seems like you'd have more space for your holdover marks below it, and maybe make more use of the mechanical elevation travel in the scope.
am i making sense?

Todd Hodnett, for example, does actually sometimes advocate and teach zeroing at the top Mil-Dot in the reticle, thereby creating what he calls a "Poor Man's Horus."

I see no reason why you couldn't design a reticle that's intended to be zeroed near the top of the optic's FOV. However, I have tried the Poor Man's Horus, which would be functionally very similar, and I really really don't like it.

[lethal dose]

My reticle -> .

[a0cake]

I'll throw some stuff in here, just a few notes I have picked up during my time talking to optics designers/engineers/geeks:

True .1 MRAD adjustments are hard to fit into the footprint that most users want in a low powered variable at a reasonable price-point. I can't sufficiently answer the "why" of how some do and others do not, or how certain IP/patents affect it.

Daytime bright illumination suffers the same problems. The more optics I am exposed to for decent amounts of time the less emphasis I place on brightness and the more I value a bold reticle that does not require illumination for daytime use throughout the magnification range.

1-8x is a lot harder to pull off than the market appreciates. Despite the huge demand and willingness to pay through the nose for them, there is only one viable option on the market, even though they were unveiled years ago.

Balancing reticle utility and the ability/desire to spin turrets needs to be carefully weighed against realistic use. How far and with what degree of precision does the user need to shoot? How much weight is acceptable?
What kind of waterproofing is needed? (one of the biggest hurdles and greatest expense is waterproofing/submersion depth capability).



Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

Yeah, a lot of that is very understandable.

I often find myself at odds with most people when it comes to optics. I personally wouldn't mind strapping on a massive, heavy, monster of an optic if it met the specs I outlined. Optics are the last place I'll compromise functionality for the sake of weight.

So I guess it's not surprising that the industry isn't putting out what I want to see, given how difficult it is and how such an optic would get skewered for being too heavy.

PS. I fully agree on reticle boldness being important so that it doesn't rely on illumination to work. The daylight bright illumination is just an added bonus for a perfect world.

[mkmckinley]

i have a question - do reticles have to be centered in the scope? for a long range reticle, why not make the center of the crosshairs about 1/3 from the top of the scope, vs. in the center. then, it seems like you'd have more space for your holdover marks below it, and maybe make more use of the mechanical elevation travel in the scope.
am i making sense?

I beleive one of the HORUS reticles does what you describe. There's also no reason you can't zero on the top mil dot or equivalent on a traditional scope.

[militarymoron]

However, I have tried the Poor Man's Horus, which would be functionally very similar, and I really really don't like it.

i can certainly see why using a standard mil-dot reticle and the top mil dot to zero would have its drawbacks. using the mil-dot reticle as an example, i'd get rid of the top post and move the horizontal line up 3 dots. i was just wondering what the potential cons are of the concept, using a properly designed reticle.

[steyrman13]

I beleive one of the HORUS reticles does what you describe. There's also no reason you can't zero on the top mil dot or equivalent on a traditional scope.

H37 reticle