Pheasantpoint

Whats the deal with the reticle being in the 1st or 2nd plane useing the tds reticle?I am wanting a swrovski rifle scope after looking through one.What a mistake$$$.Any way I am cosidering a AV4 -12 -50 tds,reticle in 2nd plane or thePH3 -12 -50 tds reticle in 1st plane.Is one more accurate than the other?I know it has to do with the reticle size changing with the increase in power,but what are the benifits and disadvantages??It seems to me one would be accurate and the other would not.I have been going to Wyoming for 13 years,being a flat lander I want to set my rifle up with a Tds Reticle for the 400 -500 yard shots.I have passed up to many shots at that distance for the big big ones.I have to be 100 % sure before taking a shot.The tds and a range finder and knowing your gun and ranges would make the 100%.Could any one explane the planes with the variable scope?

Solitary Man

I've owned a Swaro PH 3-12x50 with a first plane duplex style reticle. I've got no experience with the TDS, though I'm thinking seriously about buying an AV with one of these when I get my rifle back from being rebarrelled. The first plane reticle was one of the reasons I got rid of that scope. After using 2nd plane reticles all my life, I just couldn't take a liking to it.

For long range shooting I think a second plane reticle is superior. This is because the reticle will not increase in size as you increase magnification and therefore, it's easier to precisely aim at small distant objects since the reticle does notobscure as much of the target.

So, if it were me I'd opt for a scope with a second plane reticle.

oldelkhunter

What he said..

I had a Kahles AH 3.5-10x50 with the TDS and it is a really nice reticle. You don't need a rangefinder in order to use it either. Just sight the bullet you will use for hunting at 200 yards. Then shoot at 300 yards and measure the drop from point of impact. You can then find the corresponding sticker and find out the values of each line at a certain yardage. When you use it a few times it will make the job of ranging and shooting animals at extended distance easier but you will still have to put in the range time and shoot a lot at long distance in order to be effective. That is assuming you have the right rifle,cartridge and shootingexperience to take advantage of it.

stubblejumper

You don't need a rangefinder,but the use of a rangefinder will provide much more accurate yardage estimates than the use of the retical.

trailer

My Swarovski scope with a TDS reticle comes with a booklet that has a good list of different game with body size and explains how to calculate distance. It might not be as good as a rangefinder but with some practice should work well...

stubblejumper

Great in theory,but even whitetailed deer range in size from 150lbs to over 300lbs,and elk from 400lbs to over 800lbs,so the system can never be nearly as accurate as a laser rangefinder.At 500 yards,it doesn't take much error to make the difference between a clean kill,and a wounded animal.

trailer

Very true...

oldelkhunter

Here is one time I wish I had kept that scope and compared it's readings with those of my LRF1200 which I purchased after the fact.I bought that scope thinking I might take a 300 yard shot with my 308 and never had a opportunity to use it at that range.

trailer

I have the opportunity on testing my scope with my LRF900 now being that I will have my own range in my back yard...

oldelkhunter

Let us know how that goes