Golden Eagle reticle picture through scope?
- Thread starter dc9mm
- Start date
group therapy
Gold $$ Contributor
I can't do video or pics but I can tell ya that things get a little dark at 60. 60 is really only usable on "just right" days. I have used it on relays right after an afternoon shower and such but thats about it. usually run in the 45 range. I know its not what you asked for but just in case you are looking for this kind of info. good luck sir
memilanuk
Gold $$ Contributor
FWIW...
I can see a NF 2DD reticle in a BR just fine. Won some bling using those.
After the first year, I thought "I'll get a CH-3", the whole 'aim-small-miss-small thing.
Worked great on light back grounds. On white paper with an orange target spot @ 600 yds, it was awesome. I was *so* going to kick everyone's behind!
1000yds on an overcast PNW day, on an F-class target... the damned thing just faded out. Crystal clear view of the target, but no crosshair. If I took my eye out of the scope, tried to 'relax', look at something close, don't strain the eye... I could get back in the glass, and see the crosshairs for oh... about 5-10 seconds before they faded out again. Try reading the wind like that. Try shooting for score like that. It doesn't end well, trust me.
Tried adjusting that scope every which way, and spent considerable time on the phone with NF. Finally got rid of the damned thing, and didn't look back.
The 2013 scopes we got from NF for the US team had kind of a weird cross between the CH-3 and the FCR-1. Guess what - couldn't see that worth a dang either.
Later, when NF came out with the new 'DDR-2' in the 2014 version of the 15-55x Comp scopes. A known high-level shooter who *also* liked the 2DD assured me they were the same reticle subtension, so I got that when they upgraded our team scopes to the new style. Nope, BS, not even close. I could see it 'better' than the previous reticle, but not anything like comfortable.
Much later, I got a Vortex Golden Eagle, and dithered over the reticle. I don't particularly like a plain crosshair, I'd rather have a 1/8 moa dot in the middle there but Vortex is a little stingy with the reticle options compared to what NF used to offer. I decided to try the ECR-1... and guess what, same thing. If I was shooting short or mid range, or on white-ish targets, great. Otherwise, a hard pass. Luckily, I was able to find another someone else on the team who had a NIB Vortex GE with the SCR-1 reticle that was willing to trade straight across, in time for me to take it to an upcoming match.
I might not 'like' the plain crosshairs, but I can at least see them.
I don't know if its something about the eye needing something to 'follow' in to the center so it doesn't lose that tiny dot - which is the same subtension as the line, IIRC, just not continuous. In some followup conversations with Ian Klemm about having these issues and others (even with the fine crosshairs, one line would appear more faint than the other, to my eye) he wondered if I had some astigmatism - which I do. My prescription has since been updated, and I can see both lines 'better' - but still not perfect.
Long story short, there *are* people who have issues seeing those tiny-a$$ center dots - they're not for everyone.
I can see a NF 2DD reticle in a BR just fine. Won some bling using those.
After the first year, I thought "I'll get a CH-3", the whole 'aim-small-miss-small thing.
Worked great on light back grounds. On white paper with an orange target spot @ 600 yds, it was awesome. I was *so* going to kick everyone's behind!
1000yds on an overcast PNW day, on an F-class target... the damned thing just faded out. Crystal clear view of the target, but no crosshair. If I took my eye out of the scope, tried to 'relax', look at something close, don't strain the eye... I could get back in the glass, and see the crosshairs for oh... about 5-10 seconds before they faded out again. Try reading the wind like that. Try shooting for score like that. It doesn't end well, trust me.
Tried adjusting that scope every which way, and spent considerable time on the phone with NF. Finally got rid of the damned thing, and didn't look back.
The 2013 scopes we got from NF for the US team had kind of a weird cross between the CH-3 and the FCR-1. Guess what - couldn't see that worth a dang either.
Later, when NF came out with the new 'DDR-2' in the 2014 version of the 15-55x Comp scopes. A known high-level shooter who *also* liked the 2DD assured me they were the same reticle subtension, so I got that when they upgraded our team scopes to the new style. Nope, BS, not even close. I could see it 'better' than the previous reticle, but not anything like comfortable.
Much later, I got a Vortex Golden Eagle, and dithered over the reticle. I don't particularly like a plain crosshair, I'd rather have a 1/8 moa dot in the middle there but Vortex is a little stingy with the reticle options compared to what NF used to offer. I decided to try the ECR-1... and guess what, same thing. If I was shooting short or mid range, or on white-ish targets, great. Otherwise, a hard pass. Luckily, I was able to find another someone else on the team who had a NIB Vortex GE with the SCR-1 reticle that was willing to trade straight across, in time for me to take it to an upcoming match.
I might not 'like' the plain crosshairs, but I can at least see them.
I don't know if its something about the eye needing something to 'follow' in to the center so it doesn't lose that tiny dot - which is the same subtension as the line, IIRC, just not continuous. In some followup conversations with Ian Klemm about having these issues and others (even with the fine crosshairs, one line would appear more faint than the other, to my eye) he wondered if I had some astigmatism - which I do. My prescription has since been updated, and I can see both lines 'better' - but still not perfect.
Long story short, there *are* people who have issues seeing those tiny-a$$ center dots - they're not for everyone.
I have the GE with the ECR-1 reticle and have had no issues on 60 power shooting F-Class targets here in the PNW where we don't have much sun and too often are shooting on a cloudy day in heavy rain.
I love this scope and would recommend it to anyone.
I love this scope and would recommend it to anyone.
That is my concern with the Golden Eagle reticle . I am also considering the Night Force 12-42 bench Rest with the NP-R2 reticle. Was hoping if I saw a picture looking through the scope of the Golden Eagle I could make a better decision . I would really like that extra power over the NF 12-42. Cant afford anything more pricey. Many say the Sightron BUT it's only good with the ED glass version which are over 2 grand.
Last edited by a moderator:
dcali
Bullet Maker
This isn't something a photograph can help you with. You've got to look through them when mounted on a rifle in position at a target to get a realistic feeling of how the reticle and image and your eyes work together. A photo is as likely to be misleading as it is to be helpful. A somewhat related, but not exactly the same example: When I look through a red dot sight, the dot is always fuzzy and distorted. Even if I'm wearing glasses that perfectly correct my moderate vision issues. If you take a photo through the sight in exactly the same situation, the dot always looks nice and round. Vision is a complicated thing.
JEFFPPC
Gold $$ Contributor
Dc9mm, I have shoot lots of the various top end scopes. I currently have a Vortex GE, Leupold Competition, and the ED Sightron with dual side focus on 3 different competition guns. The Sightron was a big purchase for me. I chose it after comparing the Sightron 10x50 without the ED sighting along side numerous other high end scopes. It compared better than all the others looking at 6mm bullet holes on a target at 500yds in a very bright sunny day with lots of mirage. So I am not sure why you think the non ED version is no good. Previous to this comparison I had never considered Sightron, found uut I was missing out.I am sure some are shaking their heads at the Leupold comp, have 2 both close 20 yrs old. Only scopes I have never sent back for problems. Loved my NF 12x42 but if it only held POA.Love the new Sightron, I find it worth the price.
Also FWIW....
The GE ECR-1 center dot is .095-MOA at 40X in size
The NF NP2DD center dot is .103-MOA at 40X in size (.1875-MOA at 22X)
While only .008-MOA indifference, it's enough (8.4%) to make some difference.
Philip
For my eyes, no, the GE is a much clearer scope.
Philip
It's a good scope, great bang for buck. I've got two of them, no complaints at all. I crank it up to 50 quite often, if it's a bright but clear day then 60x is ok but things definitely get dim on overcast days. I find it to be a very easy scope to get behind with generous eye relief. Haven't experienced any issues with tracking out to 1000 yards.
coldboreshot
Silver $$ Contributor
In my opinion, this is the most important factor for anyone selecting a riflescope..."For my eyes".
Thanks for the replies. I ended up buying a Golden Eagle ECR-1 reticle. Got it for 1304 shipped. Now that i have it I can see the reticle BUT boy that dot is tiny even at 300 yards. I would say its maybe a 1/8 inch on the target itself at 300 yards. I think it could be double in size. My Bushnell Forge 4.5-27 center dot is at least double in size maybe triple. Forget black targets as I lose the finer part of the reticle. But since I make my own targets not a problem.
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
Over time, I noticed that I would occasionally "lose" the aiming dot of the NP-2DD reticle of NF 12-42x56 NXS scopes against the target black. It was most noticeable in early AM low light or on very cloudy days. Fast forward a couple years and I'm looking into buying either an NF Competition or a Vortex Golden Eagle scope. I looked through both scopes, the NF having a DDR-2 reticle, the Golden Eagle having the ECR-1 reticle. To my surprise, I could barely see the dots on either scope at all.
At that point, I went to the manufacturer's websites to look at the specific reticle information. As it turns out, the reticles for the Competition and Golden Eagle scopes are both calibrated at 40X and their aiming dots each subtend 0.095 MOA at that magnification. The 12-42x56 NXS NP-2DD reticle is calibrated at 22X, and its aiming dot subtends 0.1875 MOA at that magnification. I ended up buying the NF Competition scope with the CTR-2 (fine crosshair with dot) reticle. Although the dot is way too small for my eyes, I figured the fine crosshair extending all the way to either side would draw my eye in to the center and it has worked for the most part.
Fast forward a couple more years and I am looking at an IOR-Valdada fixed 36 BR scope that has a 0.125 MOA floating dot. Calculating the reticle aiming dot subtension for the above listed scopes at 36X magnification, I came up with the following:
1) IOR-Valdada fixed 36X: aiming dot = 0.125 MOA
2) Nightforce 12-42x56 NXS: aiming dot = 0.115 MOA
3) Nightforce Competition: aiming dot = 0.106 MOA
4) Vortex Golden Eagle: aiming dot = 0.106 MOA
It might seem though those are all so close it wouldn't make a difference. However, it absolutely makes a difference. With scopes #1 through #3 all set on ~36X, which is what I typically use in competition, I have no difficulty seeing the 0.125 MOA IOR-Valadada dot. I will occasionally lose the 0.115 MOA 12-42x56 NXS dot against the target black early in the AM or on dark cloudy days. I lose the 0.106 MOA dot of the Competition scope all the time, it's just way too small for my eyes. The good news is that the fine crosshairs did exactly what I had hoped so I can effectively use that reticle whether I can actually see the dot or not.
My point is this: there is NO substitute for actually looking through a scope with your own eyes. As noted above, my eyes (bad as they are) can discern a difference in the size of dots on the order of 0.01 MOA with sufficient use over time. The size of the aiming dot and/or stadia does make a difference and looking through the scope yourself is the only way you can be absolutely certain. A good photo can be helpful, but will generally not impart the same information as looking through the scope.
At that point, I went to the manufacturer's websites to look at the specific reticle information. As it turns out, the reticles for the Competition and Golden Eagle scopes are both calibrated at 40X and their aiming dots each subtend 0.095 MOA at that magnification. The 12-42x56 NXS NP-2DD reticle is calibrated at 22X, and its aiming dot subtends 0.1875 MOA at that magnification. I ended up buying the NF Competition scope with the CTR-2 (fine crosshair with dot) reticle. Although the dot is way too small for my eyes, I figured the fine crosshair extending all the way to either side would draw my eye in to the center and it has worked for the most part.
Fast forward a couple more years and I am looking at an IOR-Valdada fixed 36 BR scope that has a 0.125 MOA floating dot. Calculating the reticle aiming dot subtension for the above listed scopes at 36X magnification, I came up with the following:
1) IOR-Valdada fixed 36X: aiming dot = 0.125 MOA
2) Nightforce 12-42x56 NXS: aiming dot = 0.115 MOA
3) Nightforce Competition: aiming dot = 0.106 MOA
4) Vortex Golden Eagle: aiming dot = 0.106 MOA
It might seem though those are all so close it wouldn't make a difference. However, it absolutely makes a difference. With scopes #1 through #3 all set on ~36X, which is what I typically use in competition, I have no difficulty seeing the 0.125 MOA IOR-Valadada dot. I will occasionally lose the 0.115 MOA 12-42x56 NXS dot against the target black early in the AM or on dark cloudy days. I lose the 0.106 MOA dot of the Competition scope all the time, it's just way too small for my eyes. The good news is that the fine crosshairs did exactly what I had hoped so I can effectively use that reticle whether I can actually see the dot or not.
My point is this: there is NO substitute for actually looking through a scope with your own eyes. As noted above, my eyes (bad as they are) can discern a difference in the size of dots on the order of 0.01 MOA with sufficient use over time. The size of the aiming dot and/or stadia does make a difference and looking through the scope yourself is the only way you can be absolutely certain. A good photo can be helpful, but will generally not impart the same information as looking through the scope.
Last edited:
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.