Nomercy448

I'm just REALLY "ANALytical" when it comes to my rigs, so I take the extra time to save up for quality glass. My philosophy is what's the point of buying a rifle and cartridge that's capable of taking game out to 600-1000yrds if you don't respect it enough to put enough scope on it?

I figure even a heavy barrel factory bolt action will run $800+, and an accurized AR is going to run $1200, let alone if I'd admit to what I paid for the custom rigs we're running (luckily I've been able to build most of them myself). A $5 horse and a $40 saddle doesn't make much sense, but either does a $40 horse and a $5 saddle. I wouldn't put a Nightforce on an H&R Handi-rifle, so why would I put a Tasco on a custom AR-15 right? Same deal for ammo, I may not reload ammo to burn through an SKS, but I'm not going to feed Rem Corelokts to a $3000 rig.

I'm an engineer by trade, so frankly, I tend to look at EVERYTHING through my "engineer eyes". If the rifle is the operating equipment, then the scope is the control system. No matter how advanced the equipment is, if you can't control it precisely, it's just a fancy paperweight. They don't put stick tillers in combat helicopters for a reason.

I typically use Mil-dot reticles, even though I very rarely use them as they're intended. I don't believe in bullet drop compensating reticles, and actually find them to be a major downside for a scope. I do like your idea of using the same reticle on different scopes though. I really hadn't considered it before, I guess it hasn't been a major issue for me. Other than the Nightforce reticles, I use Mil-dot or Plex reticles. I rarely hold over on any shot, but rather use some reticles to validate my range estimations (backing up my "eyeball guess" and laser rangefinder).