Horus Vision scopes


New Member
Jan 6, 2003
Wondering if anybody has any experience with the Horus Vision scopes and computer program.

This reticle and program come up every now and again, do a search on this site with the words "Horus Vision" there should be something in several forums here.
I have the program in the handheld and just used it for the fist time today at 1000yds. I was using my 300 Ultra and 180 Ballistic Silvertips at 3190 fps. Punched in the Nosler BC of .507, temp etc and came up with 26.2 moa. Well, a bit more than I had thought but I let her rip anyway and hit center mass, first one on the 13.5" x 18" steel plate!

John, I was using the True MOA setting too. It is working better than the SMOA, more on it later.

My wife and I were out shooting at 500 yards yesterday. We dialed in a good zero at 100 yds first and checked velocity on the 243win and 300 Ultra. Hers using 95gr BST and mine the 180gr BST. We went back to 500 and both were on the steel with our first shots. Mine took 7.5 moa and hers, 14.4 I think. The program was on the money each time with both guns.

Two in the middle are the 180's and one on the bottom just right of center too. The rest of them are my wifes first time out past 200 yds using the 243. No load development with these bullets yet just some random loads just so we could get out the door and clang some steel. Both loads all shot under 1.2moa at 100 yds with half of them just under .7moa.


This is at 1000 yards today with the Ultra and the same load. I had three rounds left from the day before. One missed the plate, the one that looks like a hit on the right is actually a 400gr 416 bullet, been forever stuck in the plate.


These are some 180 Scirocco's I had loaded. First group was high left and the second was a little right after adjusting it down and over. I think the 2mph wind at 2 O'clock just let up at the same time I moved her over to the right. I lost two shots off the plate on the rt group.


I'm really happy so far with the Horus program, it just works great in the field.

The Horus Vision did look interesting in their web site. Using their program on line was a good test also.

How are the optics in the scope and where are they made?

I have had some injuires on them and have not used one.

DC, I've spoke to the company several times and they keep giving me the sales pitch to buy one. I told them to send on to you to Demo. (I saw in another post you had asked them)

They just kept giving me the sales pitch.
Brent, I'm going to try mine as soon as the weather warms a bit. It's been near 0 almost everyday with the wind chills.

I have to put the guns down for awhile and get my skis on. It been great snow and I haven't got out once.

I keep trading one addiction for another.
Guess it could be worse!

By the way, did you dial your adjustments or holdover with the NP-R2 reticle?
I can provide some info on the scopes and reticles. Until last year the Horus multibar reticle was installed in Schmidt and Bender variables (I believe at the factory) and in some MK4's. I shot a pair or Schmidts for a couple of years and they were excellent scopes, but they had the metric turrets rather than 1/4 moa that we are used to. I got onto the reticle fairly well, made some pretty long shots on steel and rocks. It is very repeatable, you use bars and tick marks as aiming points and can make regimented corrections from your previous shot if you miss (and if the wind is constant).

Last year the owner began importing a 4-16 tactical style scope, built in Japan by one of the companies that makes scopes for many common brands. These scopes are pretty well made with nice optical qualities. About that time they also collaborated on the ballistic program which works for their reticle system and pretty nicely for any user - regardless of scope. Available in a palm-pilot unit that is handy and fairly easy to use, as long as the batteries don't die on you.

The reticle is available in a couple of configurations, you might say complex and ultra-complex looking. The bars pretty much dominate the sight picture. There is reason to the design and it does work, but most shooters have a difficult time overcoming the cluttered appearance of the sight picture.
I have a couple of the scopes now, swapped the Schmidts for the Japanese built variables. Have used these scopes on a fairly wide range of calibers but intend to shoot them extensively on someone's .50 and will draw some conclusions after that.
Could be a personal thing but I found the Schmidts to be quite soft (as in fuzzy) out at the outer edges, also color correction tended to be somewhat yellow. They worked very well and enabled me to shoot well, although I am pretty much brainwashed to cranking clicks for windage. If the spotter understands what the shooter has in his sightpicture two guys can do pretty well with this design.
Some of the company's literature and statements are a little much on the marketing side but the reticle does work if you make the effort to master it.

I have not used their scope, that one is WAY too much clutter for me and I'm sure most anyone. I haven't heard too much on them except when Dick told us they won a match using one, that's about it. It looks like I'll get dad to go shoot the steel with me today. He's watching the mercury pretty close and not liking the 15 degree temp but I sent him the pics from yesterday and it was just too much, pushed him over the edge with those. He'll be over in a hour and head down with me.
I think he's determined to out shoot me today.
We'll put the plywood backer up behind the steel to see where all of them go if we miss any.


I just used the TMOA setting on accident the first time at 500yds and when it was on the money I just tried it at 1000yds too and **** if it wasn't on there too! There was only 2 mph of wind and I wasn't real concerned with that much. If it gets worse I'll start paying attention to both settings predictions. It called for .8moa this last time but wasn't really needing more than .5moa, the wind was just very, very slight, almost unnoticable.
I got dad out to 500 yards today. We used hold over this time the others were clicked as I usually do. He was intent on figuring his drop out in relation to the mil-dot reticle in his Springfield Armory. I was on target instantly because I could see the exact moa point on the R2 reticle. He was having a hard time when we got to 500 yards. The program called for 8.6 moa and he didn't have to much experience with the reticle to find 8.6 moa. Well we went at it for a few minutes until we just ended up going down to the target to find he was hitting 18" high on the plywood backer. He was on after that holding just above the second dot a little. I figured it was shooting a lttle flatter than we'd figured. I havn't looked into it yet but will when we go to 1000 yards. He was having a blast after he got on the steel. We were using the 1/2" thick plate and didn't move off the targets to it until we got back to 500yds. It took quite a beating even at 500. 600 yds would be better to start with, it's pretty pock marked and warped now. I ended up using 1.5 tics at 300, 2.5 at 400 and 8 tics at 500 so far. I was dialed in at 7.5 moa yesterday for a perfect zero so I'll have to reconcile why I needed .5 moa more today. My Ballistic Tip loads were shooting over 10 inches higher with the same load, they might be hitting a little higher at 100 yards skewing it a little. I'll recheck, the BCs are real close between the BT, BST and the Scirocco. The BST and the Scirocco are working well at the same settings with the same load and OAL.

Here's a pic of the damage today... that bottom bunch is partly my 7.5 moa hold. The 8 moa line was just checked on paper next to it because dad had the steel pretty wasted and I couldn't pic em out no more. Dad had some iffy SMK loads he was gettin rid of here. All 10 of his 210 Bergers were low in the plywood.

Warning! This thread is more than 21 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.