Support for new Mueller Scope

MrFurious · Oct 22, 2004

I have been working on getting Rich at Mueller Optics to offer a scope featuring a reticle calibrated for the 17gr 17HMR ammo. The main focus of this scope would be for long range varmint hunting, NOT paper punching. Below is what I have suggested to Rich, and with enough interest we may be able to get him to commit to them.

Crosshair Zeroed for 100yds, with hash marks for distances out to 300yds
32 to 40mm Objective to keep the mounting height reasonable and weight down
Variable magnification not to exceed 16x
Fully Multi-coated Lenses
Finger adjustable or mini-target turrets
Adjustable objective
Fast Focus Eye Piece
Price not to exceed $200 MSRP

The ideal setup would be to have the reticle on the first focal plane to retain the accuracy of the hash marks at various power settings. If the first focal plane isn't an option (I'm not familiar with the major design differences needed to accomplish this), then it would better to have a 4x magnification lens so you could easily do the math. Lenses would have the same fully multi-coated lenses used in all the Mueller scopes. Illumination may or may not be available, as I'll leave that to Rich's discression.

As far as the reticle itself, I've drawn up one in PhotoShop as an example. I figure using an extra-fine crosshair similar to that in the Eraticator (w/o the dot), and hash marks of an equal thickness would be ideal to limit target obstruction. The long hash marks indicate 50 yard intervals from 100-300 yards. The two short hash marks indicate 25 yard intervals for 225 and 275 yards. Windage hashes have purposely been ommitted (and won't be added) to keep the reticle design simple and uncluttered.

My Preliminary Reticle Design

Spacing of the hash marks is as follows:
Crosshair = Zeroed at 100yds
Hash 1 = 150yds (-2.59" from zero)
Hash 2 = 200yds (-8.59" from zero)
Hash 3 = 225yds (-13.14" from zero)
Hash 4 = 250yds (-19.07" from zero)
Hash 5 = 275yds (-26.56" from zero)
Hash 6 = 300yds (-35.72" from zero)

Note: Data based on ballistic data for the 17gr Hornady 17HMR cartridge

I wanted to post this as a poll here as I did on my own site, but the option wasn't available. So, a simple Yay or Ney will suffice to indicate if you would be interested in a scope like this if it were offered.

SamSpade · Oct 22, 2004

quickdtoo · Oct 22, 2004

Yes, definitely!! thx!

Hoosier Daddy · Oct 22, 2004

Yes!
I think the hashmark lengths should have some type of use by possible making the ends so they could be used for some type of windage compinsation. The farther the shot the more the wind would effect the shot so maybe having them go from shorter to longer starting from the top would be ideal. This would at least give the lengths some type of additional use.

Just a thought
HD

OldSwede · Oct 22, 2004

Have y'all seen the Leupold "Varmint Hunter" reticle?
BTW, my answer is "Yes, please."

15232 · Oct 22, 2004

I think you have a good idea. Might i suggest making dots instead of hashes. A friend of mine had PREMIER RETICLES make a reticle close to the one you suggest but for a 22-250. The dots did not cover too much of the target. Kind of like using 1/8th inch dots. I think these dots would be easier to make then hashes. Just my .02 .

fullchoke · Oct 22, 2004

Yes,please

Macc · Oct 22, 2004

Yes! No wait, then I'd have to buy another 17...oh well, Yes, please!

MrFurious · Oct 23, 2004

Hoosier Daddy said:
Yes!
I think the hashmark lengths should have some type of use by possible making the ends so they could be used for some type of windage compinsation. The farther the shot the more the wind would effect the shot so maybe having them go from shorter to longer starting from the top would be ideal. This would at least give the lengths some type of additional use.

Just a thought
HD

I'd thought of that HoosierDaddy, but when I made a reticle like that I quickly realized it wouldn't be of much use for the distances it's needed most. With a 10mph crosswind, the HMR will drift 38 inches and some change at 300yds. This left only about 2-3 minutes between the end of the hash and the outter edge of the FOV, which often times can be a little fuzzy to begin with.

I think you have a good idea. Might i suggest making dots instead of hashes. A friend of mine had PREMIER RETICLES make a reticle close to the one you suggest but for a 22-250. The dots did not cover too much of the target. Kind of like using 1/8th inch dots. I think these dots would be easier to make then hashes. Just my .02 .

That's a possibility, but I'll leave that up to Rich if he goes forward with this. I personally have no real preference, though I do prefer not having a dot when punching paper as they block out the bullseye.

Illuminated Reticle and 40-42MM Obj, please, for us night varminters. And the first click should be very dim. Some reticles are just too bright at the lowest setting, and overpower the view.

Dennis

As noted before, whether it is illuminated or not will be up to Rich. If it is illuminated, I think you'll be happy with the lowest setting, as I typically have to set my Eraticator on #4 when coyoting by moonlite to be able to see it.

greentruck · Oct 23, 2004

Yes,Yes,Yes!!! And while we're asking, can we get one in a silver finish?

MrFurious · Oct 25, 2004

Keep the comments and ideas coming guys. Rich emailed me today and has seen the interest expressed here, so we're having an effect!

14386 · Oct 25, 2004

Not to highjack the idea or anything, but what about a mil-dot option while you're at it?

RonSC · Oct 25, 2004

Possibly offer the scope in 1" AND 30MM tube w/ side AO adjustment...since were talking features.

chuckkilla · Oct 26, 2004

yes definatley. I want the illuminated version for hunting coons. :Blasting_

MrFurious · Oct 26, 2004

Panophobic said:
Not to highjack the idea or anything, but what about a mil-dot option while you're at it?

Rich is already working on a Mil-Dot scope that should be available sometime early next year.

jrinfoley · Oct 27, 2004

Yes, I would like one, but with an illuminated reticle.

SharpShooter · Oct 28, 2004

Absolutely!!!!!!!!!!

I first saw this at SavageShooters and I got SO EXCITED that i came over here to see if you had posted anything (I haven't been here in a while). Pride & Fowler Co. has their new "Rapid Reticle" but i haven't seen one for the .17HMR, and they are pretty expensive!!! This sounds BETTER :t

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions & questions:

A little more than 16X magnification, maby a 6-18 or 6.5-20.

I too think that some vertical "wind marks" on the hash marks would be helpful, say, for 5-10mph winds.

I don't care much for illuminated reticles, because I have heard too many bad stories about them, but the Mueller scopes seem reliable :t Now, how much or what part of the reticle would be illuminated if any?

Also, the reticle doesn't change size as you raise the magnification does it? From what I can see it doesn't; just making sure.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't have a .17 yet but I should have one by summer

I have been looking for the "Ultimate 17HMR Scope" and this could be it!!!!!!!!!! Especially If it is only around $200.00!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry for all the mumbling and stuff, but it's your fault :1t your the one who got me all excited

MrFurious · Oct 29, 2004

In regards to the windage marks, how often in the field or at the range do you come across a steady, consistent 5 or 10mph 90 degree crosswind that would allow you to accurately use them? Your chances of getting those "perfect" conditions is about as slim as your chances of winning the lottery.

Given the above, I don't see why so many people are hung up on windage marks. I would prefer to have an uncluttered reticle that will not obstruct my view, rather than have one filled with hash marks or dots all over the place that I could only use once in a blue moon.

Of course that's just my take on the subject, and Rich will include or omit them as he see's fit based on design parameters and meeting a suitable price point should this come about.

-----------------------------------------

As for the reticle size changing, in all likely hood it will due to the reticle being mounted on the second focal plane. I to would prefer the reticle to be on the first focal plane (FFP) to have it remain true no matter the magnification, but doing so would drive up the price considerably. There's a reason the only variable power scopes on the market with the reticle on the FFP are VERY expensive.

SharpShooter · Oct 29, 2004

MrFurious

As for the reticle size changing, in all likely hood it will due to the reticle being mounted on the second focal plane.

So, if it were in the SFP than would you just set the scope at a certain magnification for whatever range you were shooting and then use the hash marks? If so, could there be marks on the power ring (like on some burris scopes)?
Sorry if i'm asking too many questions

About the windage marks; I guess i've just seen a lot of reticles that were similar that had them. Yes they were the more expensive ones like Leupold, Swarovski, and the new Pride & Fowler scopes

Thanks for putting up with all of us. We can be pretty demanding when it comes to stuff like this

MrFurious · Oct 30, 2004

No problem SharpShooter, I welcome everyones questions as thats what is needed to gain input on what people are wanting in this scope. The more questions/feedback offered, the more Rich will have to draw from if/when he starts to develop the scope.

As to your question, with the SFP reticle the hash marks will be calibrated for the maximum magnification setting (i.e. 9 power on a 3-9x scope). You had also mentioned a higher magnification in a previous post, and I'd like to make a comment on that as well if I may...just as some insight into my train of thought on this.

The reason I was looking at a maximum magnification of 12x or 16x was because 1) I want to keep the objective diameter at 44mm or less, and 2) this is being geared towards hunting and not target shooting. Given the distance limitation of the caliber, I feel 16x is more than adequate for 300yd shooting (especially after witnessing a prairie dog taken at a verified 408yds with a 17HMR topped with a fixed 6x32mm scope).

Lesser quality manufacturers also have a tendancy of offering higher magnification than is actually needed, as it is needed to make up for the inferior clarity of their lenses. Mueller scopes have very good clarity, and thus don't necessitate the high magnification to compensate. Remember, the majority of 1000yd shooters use a fixed 10x scope.

Most target shooters (who are the ones who tend to prefer the high magnification) will want a 50mm objective and typically want nothing but a target dot or fine crosshair reticle. Those interested in this type of setup could easily step up to Mueller's Eraticator (target dot) or their Mil-Dot equivalent (basically the Eraticator with a mil-dot reticle) which should be ready after the first of the year.

SharpShooter · Oct 30, 2004

Thanks again!!!

The more I think about it the more I agree and the more would actually prefer a 16X scope. I think a 4-16X42 would work for just about everybody. I wouldn't go any lower than 16X though, because a lot of us here and at other places are long range target shooters, (as i'm sure you probably are) but also like to varmint/squirrel hunt as well. I think that the 4-16X gives you a lot of flexibility and would allow you to get the most out of your .17HMR.
I guess I should have put more thought into what I said earlier before I started blabering

Thanks again :t

15232 · Oct 30, 2004

SHARPSHOOTER, MR F,
In regards to sfp or ssp are you talking about the subtending of the reticle? If so then from what I remember about it the magnification will not matter when used in the proper plane. I can't remember if that is sfp or ssp.

SharpShooter · Oct 30, 2004

osok,
If the reticle is in the FFP than it will remain the same no matter what, but if it's in the second, it will change as does the magnification.

15232 · Oct 30, 2004

SHARPSHOOTER,
The short of it is "YES". The long of it on the ffp the reticle subtends the same no matter the mag. In the sfp the reticle subtends more or less as mag is changed. It all depends on where the maker puts the reticle as compared to the lens. The reticle itself does not change size but the way it appears on the target does.

15674 · Oct 31, 2004

make sure the tube is of 1 piece construction and not two.....all other reccomendations are great......and keep the price under $200......i really like a 42-44mm lens rather than 50 or 40.......Target turrents would be nice....

thats about all i can think of right now.....ill keep posting when i remember some others!!

gRRRRRRRReat POST

SharpShooter · Nov 1, 2004

Exactly

osok, were on the same page!!!!!

Support for new Mueller Scope

Our Vendors

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities