Looks promising. I couldn't find a price though.
Sounds like the Schmidt GR2ID is the reticle for you You are not the only one who does hold unders, but most I think keep their zero at 100 and use the tree for holdovers out to 1000, anything under 100 isn't going to be more than a mil of holdover for centerfire. I would be curious to learn of the advantage of zeroing at 6-700 yards and how that has helped you.What is up with only having 1 mil of vertical stadia above the center point??? Same with the Minox MR4 and the ZCO MPCT3. Am I the only one that does hold-unders to save time at matches? I've also had "no scope touch" stages out to 1000, where it makes way more sense to dial 'zero' at 6 or 700 yards and do a mixture of hold-unders and hold-overs. I don't like to hold over out at 8 or 9 mils if I don't have to.
Also, when shooting a spinner, it's extremely useful to keep track of the axis of rotation with your reticle. Usually it's around 2 mils above the center of the spinner you're shooting. So this reticle would be completely useless for that...
All that said, I would like to see how their tool-less turrets work. That is my big ask for every company's next-gen scopes!
I agree, the numbers near the center are unnecessary and distractingI also don't understand the giant numbers on the centerline of the tree, in addition to having the numbers on both sides of the tree. Shoot holdovers with a Vortex EBR-2C and you'll see that those big numbers get in the way when you're holding over and don't need to hold wind.
Yeah lol, I deleted it though because I misread. He didnt want to hold 8-9 mils from a 100 yard zero, not his 6-700 yard "stage zero".Spife, your coconut launcher comment made me spit my water out of my mouth
That is interesting for sure, I'm going to have to think about that one a bit more, for me I'd be worried I forgot I changed zero for the next stage@wjm308 I'm referring to PRS stages where you can't touch your scope on the clock, but aren't required to keep it at a true zero. So you can dial the elevation for 700yds. Hold under for the 500 and 600 targets, dead on at 700, and hold over for 800, 900, 1000. You end up staying in the center of the reticle.
I also use it to save time on near-far stages. All of my club matches are 90 seconds. When we have a 300/600 stage (back and forth, 1 shot each) there is not enough time to dial each target. If there is no wind, I prefer to dial for the 600yd target for higher precision, and hold under for the 300yd target where I can get away with a worse wind call.
On a spinner it is seriously helpful to have at least 2 mils above horizontal to keep track of where you’re aiming.I think 1 mil over center on the vertical is more than enough for majority of shooters.
Only time I can recall using hold under was at the finale, dialing for the far mover and then holding under for the closer targets off the barricade. Worked fine but I don’t foresee ever needing more than a mil for that.
I understand what Sam is getting at, but remembering which targets to hold over/under and how much is too much for my small brain to handle under pressure.
You don't change your scope's zero...I'm talking about dialing for a distance, i.e. turning the elevation knob to 4.5 mils for your 700 yard target. It's no different than dialing for any other stage.That is interesting for sure, I'm going to have to think about that one a bit more, for me I'd be worried I forgot I changed zero for the next stage
They can't please everyone, now can they?I also don't understand the giant numbers on the centerline of the tree, in addition to having the numbers on both sides of the tree. Shoot holdovers with a Vortex EBR-2C and you'll see that those big numbers get in the way when you're holding over and don't need to hold wind.
Have you shot a spinner? It’s typically at 300yds. DIAL 1.0 mils elevation.I still dont get why you wouldnt just dial for the closer target and just hold over so you only have to work in one direction. And I dont get how elevation at 600 has anything to do with the windcall for 300. And I dont get why you are shooting a spinner by holding under 2 mils instead of just dialing for the distance its at.
Seems to me its not as complicated as its made out to be.
Ooooohhh, gotcha, I thought you were changing zero, that is where I was confused, but yes, dialing for a set distance and then using the holds to adjust, that makes a lot more senseYou don't change your scope's zero...I'm talking about dialing for a distance, i.e. turning the elevation knob to 4.5 mils for your 700 yard target. It's no different than dialing for any other stage.
If you read the article you can see the explanation from the reticle's designer himself. He left very little vertical stadia because he likes to use the top half of the scope for observation and wanted it free of any reticle marks.I’ll just say this:
We can argue til we’re blue in the face about what makes the “perfect” reticle. But can you (or someone at Leica) explain why there is only 1 mil of vertical stadia? Does it give some benefit or performance advantage?
I cant explain the why as its purely subjective and the creators preference, I just like the unbostructed view myself because I never use the top part shooting but when watching others shots downrange I do look above the tree features for a cleaner picture. I dont put the reticle eye piece in my spotter anymore for the same reason. Clean picture is just more pleasant to look at even if it does offer less information.But can you (or someone at Leica) explain why there is only 1 mil of vertical stadia? Does it give some benefit or performance advantage?
It's listed at 36.3 oz - not out of the ordinary for a FFP scope of this size and magnificationWas there a weight listed for this?
I am curious because I do rock a Magnus 2.4-16 56 on my hunting rifle and it's only 27 oz.
Of course, weight is usually the least of concern for the intended purpose here.
I am really impressed with the glass on the Magnus but have not compared to ZCO or TT.
I can tell you that the Magnus (bdc turret) has been mechanically perfect for me. However, it is a SFP scope.
Very interested in what Ilya has to say.
If you ask me, they share the exact same internals. Who knows though, I'm just saying based on what I see above.^^^ That is eerily similar skatz ILya has the inside scoop on the Delta Stryker’s so will be curious to get his thoughts, I believe he is visiting Leica on Thursday
Copied that nonsense that Nikon has been pushing for the last 20+ years.A big hard pass for me because of the reticule. Wtf with the 0.1 mil hollow dot in the center.