Printable View
What's the advantage of having an illuminated reticle in a rifle scope? I've shot deer right on dark with a cheap Bushnell Trophy scope and never had (or even seen through) an illuminated reticled scope! What's the pros of such an instrument or is it just another fangled toy with something else to go wrong?
Have found it comes in handy now and again but it's not a deciding factor for scope choice to me.
I never use the illumination on my scope in a hunting situation, allthough a few weeks back we were heading out for a trip so on the friday beforehand I shot down the back of the farm to check my zero, shot 100m and it was fine, decided I should dial up one of the gongs just to be sure, by this stage it was getting pretty dark, the gong at 640yards is 10"x10" and I could see it through my scope fine but turned on illumination and found it was much easier to hold on the middle of the gong with it turned on. Thats the only time I have used it!
What scope have you got?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst
This is just pointing the rifle into a dark spot under the coffee table but it definitely is easier to pick the centre of the reticle with it turned on. As said though I have never felt that I HAD to use it, I actually forget that I even have it most of the time.
Attachment 52285
Attachment 52286
Vx6 3-18x44 Boone and Crocket reticle, illuminatedQuote:
Originally Posted by Remington 5R .300 Win Mag
Yeah, you can see the difference alright, thanks for that.
Right you two, thanks for your comments. Now, it doesn't actually do anything for contrasting your target against it's dark background, does it? I'm just trying to work out whether it's worth the extra $300 or not. It's been put to me like this, if you buy it you'll never use it, if you don't buy it, you'll pine for it on every hunting trip!
The only time illumination is needed on a scope is if it's a FFP with a fine reticle , it's a gimmick iv had NF for years and never once in a hunting /shooting situation needed or used it. If you have to have a scope with it don't get a low/mid range brand as the flare or illuminated bleeding is off putting and like having a fluro turd in the middle of your scope. Leica , SB , swarovski NF are where it's at . A fluro Xmas tree reticle what were you thinking?
Yeah, yeah look, the only guy I know with one gives the same testimony, he never uses it... I'm suspecting it's probably a gimmick and just another thing to go wrong. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by von tempsky fan
Your better off lighting up the target with a decent light then you can id it properly and see what's behind it
Nah, when the sun goes down, I go down, it's time to stop hunting and leave it till the morning. I think I'll be going for a 'non illuminated' scope!Quote:
Originally Posted by northdude
I have a couple of scopes with illum reticles - these are firedot type (VX-R and VX6 and the Trijicon tritium reticles), not the xmas tree. The illum centre dot is VERY good for low light shooting, especially in the bush. I also find the illum dot very helpful for longer range shots in full light because I find it really helps to focus my attention on the precise POA. Best option would be to go look thru a couple in the field and see what you eyes like or not. Plenty of good buggers on the forum that would help u out.
Main advantage is on high end glass that gathers more light so target is able to be seen but the cross hairs disappear in the darker colour of the deer/target. Have only used mine 3 times in a hunting situation but wouldn't have been able to shot a 29" sambar without it so reckon its paid for its self.
Yeah, I can actually imagine a red glowing dot helping to focus your attention to a certain point. You are correct about needing to look through in the field to see if it's likeable or not. I don't know anyone who can help with that though, I'd still like to find someone handy with a set of Leica Geovid 10x42 HD-b binoculars that I could look through, just to see if they're as crappy as my pair, before I send them back to the factory for repair!Quote:
Originally Posted by chainsaw
To be honest with you, it is high end optics for long range that I was thinking of, however, it's not just a matter of "paying for itself", you've then got the worry of it as being something else to 'clap out', something hanging off your ocular lens that's as ugly as sin and liable to get knocked, all for the notion that 'maybe I'll use it once in a lifetime' sort of thing... I don't know, I suppose there's always the angle of, if you've got it, you don't have to use it! If I could look through one I'd have a better idea if it's worth it or not. I mean, to you it is, having shot your Samba and all, and being convinced you wouldn't have otherwise. Thanks for your input.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ackley
Exactly. More useful on a decent 'scope than a shit one. I've got a 3-10 Nightforce with a MOA reticle without illumination. Quite often on dark I have seen the animal quite clearly and the reticle was lost. I pretty much mostly knew where the cross was but wasn't prepared to risk it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ackley
Von Temsky, I understand your opinion...but its all a bit difference when the combined age of your eyes is 136 years. :)
Your still a spring chicken Tahr plenty of years until you will need a off road mobility scooter. Yes your right everyone's eyes are different if it works for you don't change it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
I don't shoot that many animals on the last few minutes of light but when I do need the reticule illuminated it's handy. Here's one of two deer shot last week in the last minutes of light. We seen them 400m away on the Manuka skyline moving down onto a grassy clearing, had to wait 10 minutes until they got into shooting range and both clear of the bush.
I would not of taken the shots if I didn't have illumination.
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p...ps635hi0p0.jpg
Don't think there are any cons in good quality illum reticles as you can choose to have off. Think basically all will have in the future apart from target shooting when technology becomes cheaper. Very good on moving game in bush to get on target for a shot you would often not be able to take.
I love the red dot on my VXR bush scope, great for quick "up-on target-bang-flop" shooting, but for longer ranges I don't usually shoot at last light so never used the illumination on any of my other scopes like my NF ( but then it comes standard so not a biggie )
Comes down to what scope & application your using it for :)
I wouldn't shoot long range at night either, even with a luminous reticle, coz I'd never recover the quarry in time. Perhaps if I was doing open tops hunting and a deer walked out just on dark, 100m or so away, then I'd take a crack at it, and I suppose that's always possible.
I have a fire dot on my lupy 2-7 bush scope. Haven't needed it yet but glad I have it.
I have missed out on 2 trophy reds because of a dark background on last light.
I had my .223 on both occasions and was not confident of a decent shot. I could see the reflection of one of them in the river as he patrolled up and down growling at me 80 yards away on the opposite side. Not even sure I would have been able too get either of them if I had an illuminated reticle, but I remember wishing I had one.😆
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Doesn't have to be last light, illum reticle is for contrasting your reticle from the black target you're shooting or milling. Like shooting a black pig in the shade under a tree on a bright day.
I like them, but rarely use them, probably because I forget it's there.
I invariably hunt deer to dark, unless I get onto something earlier. What's the point of being out there if you don't? Todays torches and GPS make it relatively easy getting back to your vehicle. And if you are a trophy hunter, the big blokes are pretty damn cunning and they are lot smarter than the spikers you can nobble an hour before dark.
The same for recovering a deer shot on dark. Mostly, its not that hard with todays torches and stuff. Knowing the country you are in is useful, so that's where you need to put a bit of effort into. And a dog is handy-often worth their weight in gold. Mine is. In any event, getting out of the bush at midnight and home at 2am has never worried me and still doesn't. Nothing special about me, its what hunters do as far as I'm concerned.
So, given all of the above, I imagine having an illuminated reticle can just add that little bit extra advantage when the scope picture is a little marginal. I say imagine because i don't actually have an illuminated reticle, but I intend to get one. :) I can think of about 5 occasions over the last 2 years when I would have loved to have one.
As for the risk of wounding in bad light with an illuminated reticle, any hunter worth his salt simply wouldn't take the shot if he was uncertain about the outcome.
Got one on my vortex but never used it in anger. I can see it potentially being useful on a ffp scope like the pst though on a dark background in the bush as the crosshairs get very fine wound back. However a well designed reticle with heavy side posts is easy to see even in those conditions.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have two scopes, with illuminated reticle, a March and a Z6 swarvo, :)
Most certainly found the illumination on the march, useful shoot targets at the end of light, unable to clearly distinguish without.
Have done a bit of coyote hunting in Canada, one application I found the illumination very useful, esp during winter, a dog(coyote) against a white snow covered field, late and low enough light, the cross hairs, against his hide, disappeared, and unable to distinguish a precise point of aim. flick the Illumination on the Z6, and boom, another pelt for a trapper mate.
I think it has its uses, but has been said above, you need good optics, that are able to utilize the last bits of light.
another problem arises if you wind up the reticle brightness too far, your eye will accept it as the ambient light and constrict your pupil making the actual image seem darker
