Thoughts on new reticle design

[USSA-1]

Guys,

I've been working with a high end scope manufacturer to design a new reticle primarily for 3-gun competition, but I think it has applications across the entire spectrum of Civ, LEO, and MIL.

Because I'm not exactly sure about this site's advertising rules and I want to err on the side of caution, I am not devulging the manufacturer at this time unless a Mod gives me the green light. I will say the manufacturer is one of the big names in the industry and has a dealer network that precludes me from taking orders or being involved in any other way other than designing the reticle (and I don't want to be involved if it makes a difference.)

Since the reticle is still in the design phase, I can still make changes before production starts so I'd like any thoughts you guys have about the design.

Here are the specs on the scope,

Scope is a 1-4x design with a true one power on the bottom end
FOV at 100 yds is 116ft.
Reticle is in the rear focal plane
The entire reticle is illuminated, is daytime visible, and you have the option of either red or green illumination.
2 MOA Center dot
Calibrated drop reticle for a 69gr. at 2,850 fps, this also correlates to using 75/77 gr. loads at 2,700 fps
Reticle is designed to be zeroed at 200 yards in the center of the 2 MOA dot
Tip of center vertical post is 300 yard zero
The small hashmarks are the 350, 450, and 550 hold points
400, 500, and 600 stadia lines with 10 mph crosswind hold off points
Large outer circle for bracketing close run & gun targets is 55 MOA

Overall concept of the reticle was a CQB style reticle that could go long distance if needed. The idea being that once the reticle was zeroed with the proper ammunition, you could go from 0-600 yds with no adjustments in a simple, uncluttered design.

TIA,
USSA-1

Attachment 4399

[glockshooter]

This is a great idea, but I feel like you should consider a 55gr bullet. Nearly every scope out there that has a BDC has it calibrated for a round that is not widely used. Most seem to be done on 62gr bullets. That would be fine if there was a good supply of non-steel ammo available at a decent price. Now you want to design a reticle cal'ed for a 69gr bullet. That is great for the few people that shoot 69gr bullets, but truth be told unless you have a sponser or a lot of ammo money you aren't shooting 69gr bullets that cost nearly twice as much. You will limit this optic to a small niche market. I believe if you came up a BDC reticle cal'ed for 55gr bullets at about 3100FPS that was put in a quality optic you could sell tons. In the end if you are designing a scope specifically used for 3gun, then you will probably sell some. But if you designed it to the rounds and bullets most people shoot and use you will sell substanially more. I am a 3GUN shooter, but I would have no interest in a scope cal'ed for round that are not readily available all the time, and never at a good price. If you designed the reticle for 55s I would be beating your door down to get one.

Matt

[kmrtnsn]

I would rather see a donut or circle around the dot instead of just a dot. Not so sure about 69gr calibration.

[tracker722]

******

[USSA-1]

Yep, I agree with your assessments regarding the 55gr. loads. As this was designed initially for 3-gun competition, I decided to go with the heavier bullet ranges first. Working up another BDC for the 55's would take about 10 mins. to do so if the scope sells well in the 3-gun world it won't take much convincing to offer it for a 55 gr load. I know that seems like a backward model, but that's just how it came about.

I haven't done the math, but the reticle should be pretty close even with the 62's. You can still use 55's with this reticle though, you wouldn't see any practical differnences in the holdovers until you started pushing past 400. Even then, you know your trajectory would be a little flatter so you'd need to hold a bit low, but you could make it work.

I do envision doing a 55gr. model in the future.



My aplogies guys, I don't know how the pic got so large. It used to be a link to the pic. Somehow it morphed into this large imbedded pic.

USSA-1

[LettersFromEarth]

Me likes. IMO having the ability to turn off the illum for the ranging tree (while leaving the 2 MOA dot lit) would be nice. Good luck and keep us posted.

[USSA-1]

IMO having the ability to turn off the illum for the ranging tree (while leaving the 2 MOA dot lit) would be nice.

I agree. My original intent was to have something similar to the Elcan Specter D/R where you can illuminate the entire reticle turning the illumination one way or just the center dot by going to other way.

The problem is the scope body itself. It was never designed to house the correct electronics in the right places to have these features. It can be done, but it will require a completely new design and the company (at this point) was not willing to invest the capitol to redesign a whole new scope body on an untested market segment and reticle design. If things go well, I may be able to get a clean slate and specify every feature we could want in a scope and have it built directly to our specs.

USSA-1

[glockshooter]

I agree with you that is backwards to offer the small niche version and then IF it sells well (which is going to keep it from being a big seller) you would offer the 55gr version. Again I am a 3gun shooter and I run monthly matches at Blackwater, so understand your reasoning. The problem is just like burris making the XTR-14 with a cal for a 62gr at 2800fps at 2000 feet elevation it is not a load that is commonly used. Hell Burris' reticle they call 5.56 is really just their 7.62 reticle. If you look at the card they give you with the scope giving you the holds it becomes obvious they just lower velocity and increased elevation until they got some numbers line up. If you are going to start from scratch why not start out the right way. Give the people what they really want or make there an option for both. This is one of the reasons we seem to never get what we really want. Use this opportunity to get them both done.

I know you are a very talented shooter and instructor. I use the brake you designed. So I know you know what you are doing but what I would like you to consider is other than a small group of professional and or sponsered shooters how many competitors use 69,75, or 77 grain bullets. We both know that is a very small number. With that being said do you still think the right way to go is to the small niche market? Go with the larger market that will make it possible for the smaller to flourish.

I am a nobody but if you really think about what I am saying you will see the logic in my suggestion.

[LettersFromEarth]

I agree. My original intent was to have something similar to the Elcan Specter D/R where you can illuminate the entire reticle turning the illumination one way or just the center dot by going to other way.

The problem is the scope body itself. It was never designed to house the correct electronics in the right places to have these features. It can be done, but it will require a completely new design and the company (at this point) was not willing to invest the capitol to redesign a whole new scope body on an untested market segment and reticle design. If things go well, I may be able to get a clean slate and specify every feature we could want in a scope and have it built directly to our specs.

USSA-1

Outstanding! Hopefully it will be ready by the time my next deployment hits. A couple of questions:

1. What type of power cell will this optic be using (FYI--2032's can be found in many a PX/BX so if that's the batt of chioce... )?

2. What are the size / weight numbers for the host optic?

[Tuukka]

For IPSC rifle / 3 gun use, I'd say you're pretty spot on, however;

Front / 1st plane focal for the reticle

Rear / 2nd plane focal for the dot

So when powering down the reticle fades away from view, enabling a more "red dot" type focus on shooting and when powering up the reticle comes into view, but the dot stays small.

But barring that, the reticle you posted, just with horizontal reticle lines to aid in seeing canting at longer ranges.

For IPSC use, what I've experienced over the years;

- Simple reticle design, as uncluttered at the center as possible to place accurate shots in the A zone, what ever the distance.

No need for a type of reticle such as the S&B CQB, usually the distances are known and there is no need to estimate range

- Dot atleast in the 2nd focal plane, so it can be utilized to longer distances