Burris M TAC

[Pardini]

I've had a Burris 1-4X 24mm with the Ballistic CQ reticle for several years. I've wanted a bit more power, but didn't want to give up the BCQ reticle get it. Last week I came across a Burris M TAC* 1.5-6X 42mm with the BQC reticle.* $299 shipped seemed a fair deal.



Got here today. Burris literature shows that the reticle and it's substentions are identical between the two. However, the reticle on the 1.5-6X model is visibly much larger than the 1-4X model even when set to the same power. I expected both of them to appear the same size and wonder why they don't.



The magnification is the same, is the difference due to objective size?

[God Bless America]

I've had a Burris 1-4X 24mm with the Ballistic CQ reticle for several years. I've wanted a bit more power, but didn't want to give up the BCQ reticle get it. Last week I came across a Burris M TAC* 1.5-6X 42mm with the BQC reticle.* $299 shipped seemed a fair deal.



Got here today. Burris literature shows that the reticle and it's substentions are identical between the two. However, the reticle on the 1.5-6X model is visibly much larger than the 1-4X model even when set to the same power. I expected both of them to appear the same size and wonder why they don't.



The magnification is the same, is the difference due to objective size?

Subtentions are for use at max power, so should look 50% bigger if SFP.