no1 reticle

[8x57]

Any chance I could get a copy of that publication?

You might have a problem with that as Marcbo last visited this site in April 2015.

 

[rem284]

They obscure too much of the target for my liking.

 

[Jelen]

They obscure too much of the target for my liking.

I have to disagree. If the scope is in the First Focal Plane the body of the vertical stadia does get thicker as you increase magnification, but the tip of the point of the stadia is always a sharp point. Unlike some of the S&B crosshairs that virtually cover a Fox cub at anything over 200m!

 

[rem284]

I have to disagree. If the scope is in the First Focal Plane the body of the vertical stadia does get thicker as you increase magnification, but the tip of the point of the stadia is always a sharp point. Unlike some of the S&B crosshairs that virtually cover a Fox cub at anything over 200m!

Yes you are right to disagree. However I did say for my liking. Thats why I prefer 2nd focal plane scopes with finer reticules

 

[The Singing Stalker]

I wouldn’t buy one. thin crosshairs with an illuminated dot does it for me.
but I’m not an old codger like you bunch.
I is hip and down with the kids.

 

[Jelen]

Yes you are right to disagree. However I did say for my liking. Thats why I prefer 2nd focal plane scopes with finer reticules

You did say "for my liking" and therefore I agree to not disagree
I also use 2nd Focal Plane 'scopes purely because A) I don't need hashes and dots to to correct POA when I can dial in the turret. B) The crosshairs stay nice and fine and don't blot out the target. But, no matter how small that little dot is it's bigger than the tip of a point.

 

[Heym SR20]

I have used a No 1 a few times, and think I actually quite like it. It is by no means a target shooting reticle, it is very much a hunting reticle and makes real sense if you grew up with open sights. As you breath out, come up the front leg with the point and as the horizontals get to a third way up squeeze the trigger. Perfectly able to take deer out to 150 to 200m that way with a 4x Scope.

It works well in the dark - just bracket the beast with the thick hairs.

And on running boar it is ideal - horizontal in line with snout through the bum and swing through.

I have a S&B with a single square topped post and fine horizontals and do like it. I did swap it out for single red dot reticle in a Docter scope. Possibly a bit nicer, but not sure about electronics on a rifle.

 

[Namman]

I have used a No 1 a few times, and think I actually quite like it. It is by no means a target shooting reticle, it is very much a hunting reticle and makes real sense if you grew up with open sights. As you breath out, come up the front leg with the point and as the horizontals get to a third way up squeeze the trigger. Perfectly able to take deer out to 150 to 200m that way with a 4x Scope.

It works well in the dark - just bracket the beast with the thick hairs.

And on running boar it is ideal - horizontal in line with snout through the bum and swing through.

I have a S&B with a single square topped post and fine horizontals and do like it. I did swap it out for single red dot reticle in a Docter scope. Possibly a bit nicer, but not sure about electronics on a rifle.

Nothing wrong with these reticules for hunting. They are not a target/ tactical reticule but like a lot of things they are also now out of fashion. Most younger stalkers who attend our range seem to use tactical type, heavy rifles with adjustments in their synthetic stocks and high power scopes with bullet drop turrets. Rifles weighing around 15 lbs. UGH!!!

 

[3.5mag]

Had one on my bleddy BSA meteor back in the late sixties for shooting dangerous spuggies!
( Sparrows, I cringe looking back at what I used to shoot as a lad!)