Hey guys,

Just been pondering this. For long range shooting, is it absolutely necessary for a mildot or some kind of reticle like the Boone & Crockett, or satisfactory using a standard duplex reticle and then use a ballistics software program in conjunction with the windage and elevation turrets on the scope to dial in the range.

I'm talking about taking a 400-500 yard shot, where you can normally have enough time to use your laser rangefinder to range to the target then plug in the data into the ballistics program then make alterations to the elevation or windage.

Not an expert long range shooter by any means but, the longest shots on game I've taken have been around 600 yards with a regular duplex scope. Many rounds and hours of practice went in to learning how much hold-over to hit the target consistently.
Now, with my time more constrained, I'd either lean towards a mildot or other similar reticle and/or turrets for longer shots.
Thing is, both will take careful handloading AND much practice to get used to each caliber/rifle/optics combination.
Time well spent in my estimation simply for the joy of shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by kiwiwildcat:
Hey guys,

Just been pondering this. For long range shooting, is it absolutely necessary for a mildot or some kind of reticle like the Boone & Crockett, or satisfactory using a standard duplex reticle and then use a ballistics software program in conjunction with the windage and elevation turrets on the scope to dial in the range.

I'm talking about taking a 400-500 yard shot, where you can normally have enough time to use your laser rangefinder to range to the target then plug in the data into the ballistics program then make alterations to the elevation or windage.

I click for elevation and use hash marks for wind. I used to click for wind, but based on the advice of several shooters here, I switched to a reticle where I can hold off (mil-dot works but Nightforce has the best wind reticles IMO) and my results improved dramtically, once again demonstrating if you are talkin' your aren't learnin'.

I use the B&C reticle on my .338 Win Mag and it works great to about 450 yards. Past that you need a more accurate way to hold for the wind and the drop (animals don't stand at 450 yards exactly).

I click for elevation and hold off for wind.

I like Kenton Industries LR Hunter turrets on my guns, quick and easy.

400-500 yards is an easy shot with one of their turrets.

They are not absolutely necessary, we managed to stumble along without ballistic reticles or laser range finders for years. That doesn't mean I don't like them, dial yardage systems and target turrets.

The easiest way to make a 400 yard shot is to get an STW, .257 or .270 Weatherby, .300 Weatherby with the right bullet weights(and a few others);put the crosshairs in the center of the chest and pull the trigger. The next hundred can be taken care with a high shoulder hold, or using the typical 3 MOA spacing of a duplex reticle from center to post. Remember to pull the trigger, the system depends mostly on you doing that. Even with rifles that are "only" suitable for 300 yard MPBR the Duplex pin is good for the next 100.

I like the B&C reticle, CDS system (Which will be better with the new windplex reticle) and turrets for longer ranges, and for pinching down trajectories for shooting coyotes with BG rifles. I'll typically carry my turret rifles dialed for MPBR anyway, reasoning that there is little use in looking for a solution to a problem that was solved in the 40s.

Much past 500 and turrets rule.

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
They are not absolutely necessary, we managed to stumble along without ballistic reticles or laser range finders for years. That doesn't mean I don't like them, dial yardage systems and target turrets.

The easiest way to make a 400 yard shot is to get an STW, .257 or .270 Weatherby, .300 Weatherby with the right bullet weights(and a few others);put the crosshairs in the center of the chest and pull the trigger. The next hundred can be taken care with a high shoulder hold, or using the typical 3 MOA spacing of a duplex reticle from center to post. Remember to pull the trigger, the system depends mostly on you doing that. Even with rifles that are "only" suitable for 300 yard MPBR the Duplex pin is good for the next 100.

I like the B&C reticle, CDS system (Which will be better with the new windplex reticle) and turrets for longer ranges, and for pinching down trajectories for shooting coyotes with BG rifles. I'll typically carry my turret rifles dialed for MPBR anyway, reasoning that there is little use in looking for a solution to a problem that was solved in the 40s.

Much past 500 and turrets rule.

Dogleg:

One thing I have learned over the years is to zero at 200, even with flat shooting cartridges. The MPBR concept is flawed in that at some point less than the maximum range your bullets are striking four or five inches high, typically at ranges of 170 to 200 yards, where a lot of game is shot. But bullets don't travel in a straight line - there is both rifle (group) dispersion as well as shooter (wobble) dispersion, which means half the bullets you shoot at the point of maximum ordinate will be higher than four or five inches. The same math, incidentally, applies to wind drift and group size. If you can shoot a five inch group at 1000 yards, you only have 2.5 inches on either end of that group for wind error, which at 1000 yards means you have to guess its effects perfectly or you risk missing. (But the same statistics can also mean you can call the wind bad but have it "correct itself" because the round just happened to be one that hit way off center.)

I agree that the typical duplex spacing of 3 MOA is an easy way to add another 100 yards to your zero; I shot a ton of game that way with my .338 Win Mag when zeroed at 200 and faced with a 300 yard shot. But since a B&C reticle works so much better, why not go with it or facsimile?

I do use the B&C reticle more than any other, but the question was whether it is absolutely necessary. It is not absolutely necessary, because there are many ways to skin the proverbial cat.

Most of my favored open country rifles are sighted for 300 with the B&C, some are sighted 200. Its not that big of a trick to hold on the bottom half of the vitals at closer ranges; no harder than shading to the windy side of the vitals or remembering that there are even some extra crosshairs available. What you do when the actual distance is halfway between two crosshairs? Do you aim high with the short one or low with the long one? That's just another way of hedging your bets.

quote:

Originally posted by kiwiwildcat:
...in conjunction with the windage and elevation turrets on the scope to dial in the range.

Theoretically this would work fine, however many turrets are not very repeatable and/or are not linear or calibrated. So if you "click" 5MOA for example, you may or may not get it. The leopold and burris scopes I've used have this problem. These work best to set a zero then leave the knobs alone.

For a 400 yard hunting shot it should be close enough, but I'd suggest testing your particular scope before trying it for real.

The guy at www.precisionrifleblog.com has done an extensive test of scopes with turrets that are intended to make adjustments as you describe.

I use multiable reticle scopes a lot a really like them makes shooting known ranges out to 600 to 800 yards a lot easier.

those and a laser range finder take a lot of guess work out

At 400-500 yards, 90% of the chamberings out there are less than 1 spin from a 100 yard zero.

But I didn't see mention of what you are shooting.

For the ranges you're speaking of I'm a big fan of the TDS reticle. It is set up to do what your talking about. In FFP scopes magnification is not an issue in SFP scopes you must know the power and ranges.

But for instance in the 300 Win Mag a 200 yd zero on the x hair, then the lower stadia lines are 300, 400, 500, 600. This is with a 180gr of reasonable BC and a higher B.C or very fast 200grain bullet. This combo has worked wonderfully for me in Africa and here at home. Swaro hit the market first with the TDS, Kahles had some too and now it's back to Schmidt and Bender with whom the original development was done. TDS just seems to me to be the cats meow for a hunting reticle solution. There are similar ones such as the Zeiss 600, 800 and 1000 reticles and the Leupold B&C is essentially the same as well.

This is an older post, but I'll bite. What's really nice is having a single system on your scope dials, and on a spotting scope reticle (e.g. Vortex) with your buddy watching your shot. That way he can call the miss so you can correct.

Having the tick marks on the scope reticle I find I don't use in long range work, more for closer hold-overs

Jay

Yeah, i'll bite too, late though as it may be. One of the most difficult animate targets to get a bullet into has got to be the wiley coyote. Got a buddy who shoots a 243 AR-10/87 V-Max combination with just a bit better than avg. accuracy, and he's probably as successful a long-range field shooter as any I've ever known. His choice is Leupold's Varmint Hunters reticle. I also use it myself as much as any other and I love the ability to apply these ballistic reticles quickly. Though I also recalculate interpolative zeroing between stadia lines leaving as little to chance as possible. It's probably my favorite though I haven't used Zeiss's offerings yet.

Now a poster above is right on the nose as all long-range shooting is much more effectively accomplished as a 2-man team, sniper-like. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that my buddy would not have made those quick long-range coyote shots if we hadn't been working together.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by kiwiwildcat:
Hey guys,

Just been pondering this. For long range shooting, is it absolutely necessary for a mildot or some kind of reticle like the Boone & Crockett, or satisfactory using a standard duplex reticle and then use a ballistics software program in conjunction with the windage and elevation turrets on the scope to dial in the range.

I'm talking about taking a 400-500 yard shot, where you can normally have enough time to use your laser rangefinder to range to the target then plug in the data into the ballistics program then make alterations to the elevation or windage.

I click for elevation and use hash marks for wind. I used to click for wind, but based on the advice of several shooters here, I switched to a reticle where I can hold off (mil-dot works but Nightforce has the best wind reticles IMO) and my results improved dramtically, once again demonstrating if you are talkin' your aren't learnin'.

I use the B&C reticle on my .338 Win Mag and it works great to about 450 yards. Past that you need a more accurate way to hold for the wind and the drop (animals don't stand at 450 yards exactly).

Yes exactly! dial it up and kill them.

Kenton is probably the best $140 you can spend on your rifle. As long as your scope is a true tracker or close to true tracker the Kenton will save your bacon.

Kenton has gotten on the ball and now make them for damn near everything, so they are really idea.

About 1990 I sent a 6.5-20X Leupold off to Premier Reticle in Winchester, VA.

They boosted it to 18-42X converted to first focal plane reticle, and put dots 3/6/9moa high, none on the crosshair junction, and 3/6/9/12 moa low. They also put windage lines 5 moa left and right.

The dots, spaced 3moa apart were a primitive rangefinder, if you knew the target's height.
We did not have the Laser units back then.

It still worked well...