At what distance do you stop being a threat?

As have already been depicted, there are many specialty reticles with quick reference ranging brackets. While extremely useful, they are not designed for precision ranging. But the basic Mil-Dot & Klein type reticles have a very limited amount of hold-over so reticles that allowed for more hold-over came along. ie P4 Schmidt & Bender - Riflescopes - Reticles - Police and Military Forces

Many of these started to incorporate indicators for known cross wind like the GEN II XR.

 

As SWFA has been mentioned by more than one person here, they have a very clean/uncluttered example of an extended hold over reticle. SWFA SS HD 5-20x50 Tactical 30mm Riflescope

 

I guess no conversation is complete without discussing the H37, H58, H59, & TReMo's. They all have proponents and usage, but they are overly complex and cluttered for all but the most consummately trained Professionals in my opinion. YMMV.
Schmidt & Bender - Riflescopes - Reticles - Police and Military Forces

 

It may sound sacrilegious, But I've found that the Steiner 5-25 has just as sharp/clear a glass and it doesn't tunnel at the lower magnifications like the S&B. At about 2.7K you may be able to save up a little faster. But S&B is still S&B.

Perhaps I should drop a few names along a sliding price point as to scopes I've found of value equal to their price?
In the lowest price point arena, I've got a couple of spare Bushnell Elite 3200 10x40's incase the Leupold MK4 LR/T's go Belly Up. Bushnell Elite 3200 Tactical Rifle Scope 10x 40mm 1/10 Mil Adjustments
WEAVER's Tactical 3-15's (800382 & 800363) can still be purchased for far less than their MSRP's. The glass quality is better than the current price point and they are FFP's, I've had no problems with tracking or repeatably. (not quite as tight as upper echelon) But I must forewarn that the Adj Turrets are unique in that they self lock and must be raised to make adjustments. (I've grown accustomed to this quirk, as the knobs are of a different feel than S&B-Steiner-Premier etc.)Weaver - Tactical Weapons
Of course the Leupold MK4 LR/T is the STANDARD BEARER in the fixed 10X line. While the S&B has clearer/sharper glass, it's cost outweighs what I want to pay for a fixed 10X. Leupold Optics Mark 4 LR/T 10x40mm -
In the 2.7 K bracket I've yet to find anything I prefer over the Steiners. But to my eye, the cross-hairs on the 3-15 are a bit thicker than they are on the 5-25. Military Scopes
Of course, when price no longer matters, I've got a few S&B's Mounted Up. It would be great if everyone got a chance to have an S&B all thier own, but I'm of the opinion that the optic shouldn't cost more than the firearm. So if the rifle won't outperform the scope, keep it frugal. JMHO.

 

I like having iron sights as well as scopes ,as much as possible .
In the event the scope is damaged , being able to remove the scope and rely on the iron is a sensible back up.
I've seen rifles with no iron sights ,and wondered how delicately one must travel to ensure the investment is not compromised.

 

There appears to be a $50 difference between the Second Focal Plane Vortex HST and the First Focal Plane Weaver at MIDWAY.
Variable Power | Centerfire Rifle Scopes | Rifle Scopes
On a 1K -1.5K off the rack the rifle, I'd take the FFP Variable Magnification Weaver. Sightron has fantastic innards, but very limited FFP Variable Scopes. Perhaps I'd elect the 10X Leupold as a perfect fit in this price range.
But yes, we can agree that there are many serviceable scopes in the 1K- 1.8K MSRP range, (even if they can be had below MSRP with frugal shopping)
Now a Second Focal Plane Reticle is the Cat's Meow on fixed magnification scopes, but it's going to take some serious glass quality to make me part with my Republic Credits on a Second Focal Plane Variable Power Scope. (Yes, I'm Spoiled. What I can use and what I choose to use are no longer dictated by the GI Supply System. But then again, the GI Supply System doled out rifles I couldn't afford equipped with Scopes equally valued, when I RXed only a Government Paycheck that couldn't net me either.) Please don't read me wrong, I'm not bashing Vortex! I'm just expending my Republic Credits in a manner I consider most cost effective.
There are High Quality Second Focal Plane fixed power scopes that are well worth the money spent on them, to squander that hard earned cash as a trade-off for Variable power, (just reflect that only one magnification setting is actually calibrated) isn't something that I'm willing to accept. JMHO.
Now me being me, I 'd probably mount a 10X Bushnell 3200 Elite with greater MOA Range (than the Vortex) with a 20 MOA Badger Base and Badger USMC Rings. But I'd be foregoing the Quasi Variable Power at half the cost. (yes, compromise is, will be, and has always been problematic.) But as only one magnification setting is calibrated for use, I feel that money is better spent getting a higher quality second focal plane fixed scope for the same price. Once again, JMHO.

 

BUIS isn't a requirement on the one-way range. It is suggested while hunting Dangerous Game. I'd consider it MANDATORY ON THE TWO WAY RANGE.

 

It is not a question of manufacturing quality, Vortex holds a great reputation.

It is the second focal plane reticle on a variable power scope that I find disconcerting. All things being at least near equal, I'll elect to purchase a first focal plane reticle on any variable power scope.
ie, you referenced me to the 4-16, but at which magnitude is the reticle calibrated? 16X? 12X? 10X? etc. Nikon calibrates their 6-18 at 12X, so the only magnification that you can use the scope to accurately range any target is 12X. Now on a 3-15 FFP Reticle, I can accurately range any target at any magnification from 3X to 15X, as conditions dictate. I feel that this capability carries greater weighting while all other things are nearly equal. That's my opinion. Hope I've conveyed this better this time.

I'm sure that Vortex makes quality products, but they don't offer many products that I lean heavily toward when purchasing.

 

For full disclosure, I'm writing this reply without having read all 6 pages because I'm a bit tired of the pseudo random questions and faux philosophical clarifications. There seem to be a lot of these threads and or responses that are geared towards self-congratulation and some supposed gracing of deep knowledge.

If I am behind the scope, you are not to know I am there or at least not where "there" is. If I am behind iron sights, maybe a different story. If I'm using a scope, I better be a damned sight off and very well camouflaged or hidden. If I'm using a scope, it's because I don't want to get close enough for you to know I'm there. So again, unless you are using infrared or thermal I'm not there as far as you know, or at least you don't know exactly where I am.

How far out am I a threat depends entirely on the platform, round and the conditions. AR15, AK, .308, .50 BMG, anything (else) in 7.62x54, something in 7.62x39, barrel type, twist. Round weight, round composition, powder load, even round age potentially. Wind speed and direction, temperature, uphill/downhill/flat, open "fields" or woods, humidity, rain/sun/fog/snow.

I have access to multiple platforms and load-outs, and no I'm not going into detail. I'm accurate to a fair distance but no I'm not going into detail. If I put a scope on it and get something in the cross-hairs, I'm not going to pull the trigger unless I'm pretty confident I will hit what I'm aiming at, and if I put a scope on it, it's sure as hell not to go across the street! I don't claim to be an ultra long distance, hyper accuracy, big bore champion, but I'd say if I can see you and the tool will deliver the package, I hit far more often than I miss.

Personally, and by now I've probably pissed you off, I'm one that doesn't consider IS to be a BU (Iron sights/back up). I learned on and grew up using them and am very comfortable using them for their intended purpose. Just as it isn't a "back up scope". Under the vast majority of circumstances, you aren't going to "back up" your optics for the ranges they are intended for with your iron sights, you just aren't. You also aren't going to be using your scope, most likely, for "short" range work.

 

For someone that merely hit's more often than they miss, perhaps we can converse once you actually read the discourse? You probably will never know when you PO an actual 8541 MOS in the field. JMHO.

 

Possibly, possibly not. And I didn't give you a ratio or % of the time. I'm not interested in getting into a pissing contest either. Since I posted I have read the first 3 pages (this is because I got notified of a quote). I may feel different once I finish the 6th page.

 

Are you quite sure that is your story and you are willing to stick to it?

 

Yup, later.

 

Are we reading the same posts?
I was under the impression that I responded quite mildly to posts 113 & 114.