I have been on a multi-year search for the ideal LPVO - there are MANY scopes that get close to what I've outlined below, but none check all the boxes without missing a couple key capabilities that I view as important for fulfilling multiple roles (mil/leo/tactical, competition). From the folks I've shown this to, the feedback I've received is that they would put it on every 223/5.56 rifle they own.





Some scopes that come close include:

PA PLXc 1-8: Durability, Glass Quality, Very functional but busy reticle (ACSS Raptor), Weight. Tighter Eye Box, Not Daylight Bright (ACCS Raptor) or No wind holds/good BDC/quick height-based ranging (new PLXc Nova).
Vortex Razer 1-6 Gen IIe: Durability, Glass Quality, Best Eye Box on market, Daylight Bright Dot, Uncluttered reticle. Too heavy, No wind holds or easy/quick ranging capability for height and shoulder width.
Trijicon Credo 1-6 SFP Hunter BDC: Good durability, Good eye Box, uncluttered reticle, good glass quality, great BDC, daylight bright dot, good weight. No wind holds or easy/quick ranging capability for height and shoulder width.
Kahles, Leupold, and others all have the same mixed bag of pros and cons.

Is what I've proposed not possible due to technological or manufacturing limitations? This could easily be priced in PLXc territory and I believe would sell to a very wide audience - and it wouldn't have to be a compact assuming the compact design is causing too many compromises on eye box. As long as glass is great, 1-6 is also sufficient for this caliber - it's not meant to be a bench rest scope - I'm thinking about practical accuracy.

(I've cross posted this in PA's industry forum as well because I think they might be a company that would actually consider it - but I'm posting here for more discussion since many don't frequent their specific forum).

I dig it.

I would really dig it in the PLxC in FFP.

That way you could really use it in the 3 - 6 powers with the ranging and hold features remaining valid. Might need some design tweaks to the reticle.

Nova red dot on 1x and still have 8x for prone supported.

The best of the Nova reticle with more utility yet still simple.

Just my two cents, not an expert.

I think the main issue is that in order to have your ranging reticle in the top left and the wind hold dots, you'd have to have an etched reticle.  

The Razor, Delta Stryker, Nova, and Credo all have wire reticles in the SFP so it's actually a physical wire.  Some wire reticles can have wind holds like my Kahles but they're connected to the wire like this:

Could a reticle be etched and have a wire?

A hybrid of the two combined.

I honestly don’t know.

Needs moar donut!!  Or any donut at all!

That reticle would suck in FFP.  For it to be useful at 8x it would be so small on 1x that they would have to but 4 big ass bullets pointing to the middle like some other hemorrhage that was posted about a while back

You sure this is a wire reticle on the Khales? Shouldn't the wire extend to both of the red dots since that is carrying the light? (they are floating in space)

It’s a technical discussion in a technical forum, about all you ever add to any optical discussion is your hatred of all things chevron. We get it, PA lost a customer…

The bright ass Nova dot would be the 1x solution in FFP.

The discussion is how to make a better reticle. OP wants a SFP, all Im saying is what if you could have the bright dot and variable correct ranging / aim points.

GTFO

Agreed. The reticle I proposed would be ideal for SFP.

FFP design would need to go a different direction and I don't see the need for FFP in a 1-6. If we are talking 1-10 or maybe even 1-8, I can see more justification for mid-magnification ranging, but not 1-6.

Fair point, the dot would be great, but the size of the rest of the ranging stuff may be too small at mid magnification ranges, wouldn't it?

I have that reticle in my three 1-6.5 Bushnell scopes I have.  It is my favorite.

Interesting. Looking at specs, it checks the box on weight, mag range, seems like glass gets good reviews. Some people saying dot is not daylight/red dot bright like the Razor. And a big difference is no ranging info for shoulder width or height.




Still on the hunt!

The BDC in my GLx 2.5 - 10 (FFP) works really well in the in intermediate powers which the BDC looks similar to the reticle you posted, thats why I think ultimately if they could combine an etched reticle with a wire or some other way to get that bright dot you could have the best of both worlds.

I just don’t know if it’s possible. In other words how do you get a nuclear bright dot in a FFP?

Apologies, not looking to slide your thread.

I'm equally curious if they can combine etched + wire...

The precision that would be required for a wire etched combo reticle would be insanely complicated to attain. Someone has probably done it before I’m sure, but if it’s off even a fly’s pube the whole thing goes out the window.

Wire reticles can be made pretty wild these days, most just don’t do it. There’s this stupid default mindset that etched has to be flamboyantly tactical and wire has to be as Fudd as possible.

Exactly! Thanks for adding to the thread, I was hoping you would.

We need a tac-fudd reticle mash up!

So what you are saying is etched / wire reticles are up there with flying cars, medical scan holograms and other wizardry?
The year 2024 continues to disappoint.

The SMRS 1-6.5x is nowhere near daylight bright. It's not even close. That is its only real downside. Well, that and instead of BDC it should have been MRAD lines. Luckily, the 62gr Federal Fusion round lines up pretty well, my drops in Strelok are 306yd/405yd/505yd/611yd. Glass is fantastic, forgiving eye box, relatively light weight.

Who pissed in your Cherios this morning?  That bright ass Nova dot is great, and the wire needed to power it requires a pretty fat reticle to hide.  Now put that in FFP and essentially magnify it?

FFP reticles require designs that work well at both ends of the magnification.  This ain't it!

FFP in a 1-6 is pointless anyway.

My mistake, the K18i reticle is an etched reticle.

Check out the Hi Lux CMR 1-8x

It has alot of what you are looking for

If you have an expertvoice account, the price is right

It is nuclear bright.

How is the Chinese glass?

Its honestly pretty damn good

Pretty darn close to PSTii

Yes. You can have reticles that have first and second focal plane elements. It’s achieved by using a fiber/wire in the SFP and then your desired etched reticle coaligned in FFP.  Meaning at 1X the FFP stuff basically shrinks and disappears giving you a red dot, and at higher magnification the dot and thick crosshairs don’t grow or washout and stay crisp/bright but your FFP reticle comes into play as you dial up.

Unmagnified: SFP Red Dot


Magnified: SFP Red Dot + FFP Tree

Looks like the March 1-10 dual focal plane, which is a very nice looking scope. I've not handled one - how is the eyebox compared to razor? Is it daylight bright on a sunny day? It seems to check a lot of boxes but the reticle sure is busy and it's not quite as simple for ranging (but one could learn to estimate with all mils and some practice).

the reticle the op posted is basically the leupold mk6 5.56 cmr-w reticle, except not as good. the reticle is super good, it's so good vortex copied it in their razor 3 1-10x moa reticle (but stopped it at 600m/y) and sig copied it in their tango6.

the reticle the op posted doesn't seem like bdc subtensions as the subtensions are equidistant. i'm assuming the op just took the pa nova reticle and added wind holds to 15 mph. why not 20 like the cmr-w?

to me the 5.56 cmr-w reticle is the best thing going, especially with the glass quality in the mk6. if it had slightly better illumination and kahles glass it'd be perfect imo.

as to improvements to the reticle, a gripe i have with a lot of the bdc's is that they're not long enough. i know most people don't shoot past 5 or 600 but 5.56 ar's can get hits on dude-sized targets to 8 or 900y with match ammo in easy wind conditions. it'd be nice to have scopes reflect that capability (like the 5.56 cmr-w having a 900m hold). the big thing with a complex reticle in sfp scopes is that the reticle is always the same size, no matter the magnification. that's why complex reticles tend to be in ffp scopes so they "disappear" at 1x. so i definitely don't think people would want too crazy of a reticle in a sfp because it'd obscure a lot of the sight picture.

that being said, i don't think most people really care about reticle too much. i think the overwhelming majority of ar shooters care about illumination, price, and weight and maybe fov. most people probably shoot their 1nx scopes at 1x and out to 3 or 400y. this doesn't require a decent reticle at all, which is why something like jm-1 reticle in the razor 2/2e doesn't dissuade people at all. it's a fantastic scope at 1x but the reticle leaves a lot to be desired if you're shooting longer distances. out to 450y or so it's fine though. past 500y in challenging wind conditions it's not very efficient. the reticle is simple, but that's how people like it in a sfp.

The NF FC DMx is about as good as I can imagine for a 1-6 to 1-10.

A 6ft tall male is 20 mRad at 100yd, 10mRad at 200yd, 6.7mRad at 300yd, 5mRad at 400yd ... etc.

Now you can range with mRad

Also, March makes a more plain FFP reticle for their dual reticle scope.

Appreciate the input and have some questions/comments.

1. Agreed that people don't want a crazy reticle in SFP which is the reason the design I posted tries to balance just enough info to maximize capability quickly. Also for the same reason, didn't include 20mph holds.
2.  Leupold's site says that scope is discontinued - which kind of kills the point of a purchasable item to fill the need.
3. It's FFP, not SFP. I'm not totally opposed to FFP so long as there are no negative impacts to how forgiving the eyebox is (the "standard" is razor 1-6 genIIe).
4. Is it daylight bright like a razor or the nova?
5. This is not just a reticle design, it's a reticle for a reasonably lightweight, durable, SFP scope with great eye box and glass. All the things you listed in your last paragraph are precisely why I've not been able to find the right LPVO and suggesting that if the requirements of my first post are met, it would be a huge success.
6. I definitely used the Nova design as my basis for modification. This is just a concept, no measurements or precision were used which is why I just verbally indicated a BDC is desired, but mils could work.

It's clean. My opinion

1. BDC's are gross
2. No dots/hashmarks above the center aiming point.
3. Reticles have zero to do with eyebox/optical properties. I'll take ffp any day over sfp even in a 1-6 given the chance.

Number two is especially important. As an example: I've mentioned this before, but few people actually understand how to use the fc-dmx and the different points to actually zero, giving you better MPBR which detracts from using the scope at intermediate mag ranges

Amazing reticle and optic, no doubt. But doesn't hit the weight requirement.

Also, I didn't specify price, but I think someone like PA could get this done for $1K or Vortex for $1,300 (roughly Razor 1-6 money).

For#2 - I'd be willing to have the height-ranging info in lower left or lower right if all the other boxes were checked.
For #3 - I don't believe I've suggested that they do. I have commented that SFP vs FFP may impact optical properties and I have stated that SFP combined with this reticle would be my preference.

It's not about ranging. Perfect example of people not understanding

Op I would prefer thicker bars at 3 6 9 and a bit closer to the reticle.

These bars at low magnification give you more definition in foliage and when activating a weapon light. Even with no battery a german#4 is easy to grab when used with a WL to id target and bracket it quickly.

As you zoom of course it blows up the center reticle and the bars move to the edge of the glass and out of the way.

Quoting for emphasis

Didn't SAI do this?

Total shitbox afterthought FFP reticle.  I can hear the conversation.

TECH: Here is that new reticle for the LPVO

SUPER: Great, now make it FFP

TECH:  Huh?  Okay, whatever you say.

Next day:

TECH:  Here is that new LPVO in FFP

SUPER:  I can't see the reticle on 1x

TECH:  Well, you wanted FFP

SUPER:  Hmm.  How about we put 4 big ass bullets in there to point to the center?!?

TECH:  Huh?  Okay, whatever you say.

it's still available for mil/le i believe, but you can find them used on the ee or reddit gfas. i posted some through the scope videos with it if you want to see some shooting through it on reddit, you can just go through some of my posts. it's definitely not as bright as the razor, but it's still daytime bright. the main problem is that the illumination dies if you're off-axis, which sounds worse than it is in practice. at 1x it's more forgiving so the illumination tends to dim at 6x, but at 6x you're not really using the center of the scope very much and really not in a case that requires illumination. at 1x though, it's not as nice as a razor 2/e or kahles k16i since those have better fov and the scope tube basically disappears. but to be fair, i don't really think any of the 1-6/8/10x ffp scopes are as good as those scopes at 1x.

for bdc vs mil, i know the conventional wisdom these days is to use mils but i really think it depends on your use case. if you're just trying to shoot 2-4 moa targets to 800y quickly i'd prefer a well-designed bdc like the 5.56 cmr-w. the cmr-w is not comparable to a basic bdc like a jm-1. for me, it's a lot easier to remember yardages (distance to targets) and mph cold and at speed than it is mil elevation and windage holds (where you might have to do a conversion from yardages to mils for distance and/or use a gun number/mph gun or a ballistics calculator to calculate wind hold).  one argument people use is that bdc holds are only accurate for one barrel length for one load in one atmospheric condition, which is true to an extent. if you're using an 11.5" barrel shooting bulk ammo your bdc almost certainly won't be close as they're generally for 16" guns. but we have 2 mk6's on 14.5 and 16" guns, shooting bulk to transonic and supers to 900 they're either on or close enough that a second round hit probability is reasonable when wind isn't crazy. sometimes i'll run the reticle in strelok to see what the exact yardages will be so i know where on the target to favor at longer distances. but people seem to forget that you have to re-run the numbers on a mil reticle too, if you want good hits. if you want more precision then a mil-reticle in the 1-8x+ scopes make sense, re-run the reticle for your accurate holds, with extra magnification, all that, it'll be more efficient. if you want to shoot < 2 moa targets, the extra magnification and more precise subtensions helps there too. it really comes down to use

Totally agree on the BDC vs Mils discussion. I really like what Trijicon did with their 223 Hunter BDC in their 1-6 Credo. Simply by adjusting zero distance, I can get that to line up with multiple cartridges (heavy 75/77gr and lighter 50/55grain) options. I think people get locked into the idea of zeroing at 25, 50, 100yd and many aren't taking the time to chrono and then run different scenarios in a ballistic calculator. Now if we could just convince Trij to add some wind holds and something to help with ranging, even just shoulder with stadia at 300/400/500/600, my search would be over.

The etched "fire dot" appears to be a unicorn at this point.  Wire is limited in design and etching can't carry the light to compete with an RDS.  If they could add a fiber dot to an etched reticle, as discussed, it would be a true technological coup in the LPVO arena.  The company would patent the tech, if possible, and sell them for whatever they wanted to charge!

Etching carries plenty of light.

Example is my atacr and nx8

While the reticles are Etched, they are not illuminated the same. Diffraction/diffusion/whatever it's called isn't the same as an illuminated Etched reticle. The only companies to use this are leupold (mk6hd1-6), nightforce (nx8, atacr 1-8), vortex (razor 1-10's), and s&b (sd cc 1-8) uses a version of it as well. All rds work like this.

The tl;dr version is
-Etched reticles run a current directly into the reticle
-Diffraction shines a light which reflects back on certain parts of the reticle

It's an over simplification but that's the gist

I have a number of the Bushnell Elite SMRS 1-6.5 model ET 71624. I found they do the job well. They don't make them anymore when they came out, they were around a $1,200.00 optic. You can find one now and then for sale for around $500.00 to $600.00. Worth looking into. Check you tube for videos on them. (don't confuse these with the entry grade Bushnell AR optics listed out there)

Appreciate the suggestion. The poster above said it's nowhere near daylight bright, so the hunt continues!

A bright fiber dot requires it to be SFP or it will suck at its intended role. Plenty of people combine etched and fiber reticles already.

The difficult part is dual focal plane putting the ranging elements in FFP and the fiber dot in SFP. This let's the main reticle stay the same while the ranging drop hashes grow and shrink with zoom. This is the future for the high magnification LPVO.

For low power LPVOs, combining mil hashes that correspond to shoulder widths for ranging at max power (like the PA Nova) and a locking BDC elevation turret for your custom load/rifle (Like Leupold Firedot) gives all the flexibility you need.

You only need FFP ranging elements when you won't be using max magnification all the time. For 4x, 5x, and 6x scopes you won't use less than full power at 200y and up distances.

With 6x I do.

Does it have to be dual focal plane like the March though?? The reticle I'm proposing is all SFP with the ranging elements to be used at 6x only (I don't want to range at 2,3,4x with a 1-6 as the information would be too small anyway with ffp). I'm also never dialing turrets on my LPVO's - they stay capped.

Here is a reticle apparently done by Vortex in the 1-6 Razor gen2e line, which proves something similar to what I've presented can be done (Thanks to Hoody2shoes for posting in another thread). No idea what the cost was though and it's unobtanium... it was done as a contract order.

Attached File