I'd been assuming that I would zero my new mildot scope at the range I'm likely to shoot most at. Currently I have it zeroed at 100 yards with a view to working it back to 300. I typically shoot targets between 300 and 600 at the range.

However, a bit of surfing through several online reviews, at the likes of snipercountry, suggests that it's enough to leave it zeroed at 100 and simply wind the turret up/down and/or hold over. (My game and vermin rifle scopes are zeroed for point blank range and my normal killing distances.)

What do you guys do please?

------------------
tikka 3 barrels

My preference is to not have to adjust elevation,nor use reticle subtention,until the merits of the particular cartridge are negated.

That specific distance,will vary widely from cartridge to cartridge. As a rule,I don't like to be sighted higher than 3" at 100yds.

Why have a 6 speed transmission,that you don't shift past 3rd gear? Maximize the potential,before you dig deep into the equation.

Your mileage may vary.........

What caliber is this gun and what are you planning to shoot with it. That makes a difference. Personally I like to zero in at the range I will do most of the shooting then figure out holdover for distances longer than that, but it matters what the gun is and how you use it. I would be tempted to zero it at 300 yards, then figure out how many dots is 600 yards.

It's a Tasco Super Sniper 10 x 42-M, it's mounted on a Tikka .308 Supersporter (heavy barrel, adjustable stock etc).

Discounting occasional forays after red deer, it'll spend most of its time chasing paper and etr targets anywhere out to 1000 yards, for which I'm reloading 143, 167 and 180gn bullets.

The side turret parallax I've checked with a range finder and it appears to give identical results. Thus far, and only because I'd been able to zero at 100, I've been holding over as far out as 600 yards but, hey, those target turrets are just waiting to be used.

I suppose one other option is to zero it at a range which then gives me plenty of elevation out to 1000 yards, though this shouldn't in theory be a problem as it stands now.

------------------
tikka 3 barrels

So, the answer seems to be that even though the scope has enough edjustment to dial up to 1000 yards from a 100 yard zero, this needs to be done with the intended ammunition and the reality compared to the scope's markings.

------------------
tikka 3 barrels

My preferences run to the laser and turrets. You simply paste your crosshairs,where you wish the projectile to go. One mil subtends 18" at only 500yds. That obscures much target area and robs precision.

Turrets are without peer.............

For longer ranges I use the mil-dots or cross-hair subtention (sp?) to tell me the range and holdover. I keep a card taped to the stock, but I usually know what to do out to 300 yards. Past 300 yards I either have a minute to set up the shot -- or I pass.

Don

[This message has been edited by Don G (edited 03-10-2002).]

The Mildot reticle is intended to be used as a range estimation tool more than a hold-off tool. It works pretty well on human sized targets out to 1000 yards or so. It is not so great for tiny targets like rodents.

I've been using mils for 23 years in the adjustment of naval gunfire and artillery. It is a simple tool for calculating deviation corrections in the adjustment of supporting arms. The military decided to use it in sniping as well, I guess because it is a familiar unit of measure, but the math is complex enough in the sniping application that snipers carry a calculator in their kit.

With my scope (Leupold 3.5-10x40 LR M3, USMC Mil Dot) I have simplified the range estimating process to this:

1. What size is the target in inches?
2. how many mils does the target subtend at 1000 yards?
3. Adjust power ring until target corresponds to the 1000 yard subtension.
4. Magnification X 100 = Range in yards.

Using this formula, the 3.5-10 ranges targets from 350-1000 yards.

For example:

A 19" target(deer body) subtends approx 1/2 mil at 1000 yards. dial the power ring until the target subtends 1/2 mil. Look at the power setting. If it is 5x, range is approx 500 yards, and so on. If the target is within 350 yards, the estimation will be fairly easy, and trajectory flat enough to accept minor error. Keep in mind, this takes a lot of practice, and will never be nearly as accurate as a laser. At best, figure you will be maybe within 50 yards accuracy, maybe worse. That is a lot of drop at long range.

A mil subtends 18 inches at 500 yards, but a dot on a USMC mildot reticle is only 1/4 mil on the long axis, and subtends about 4.5" at 500 yards. Keep in mind on most variable power scopes, the milscale is calibrated with the scope at 10X.

A REAL GOOD tool for estimating range with a mildot reticle is called the MilDot Master, it is worth the money. check it out here:
http://www.swfa.com/riflescopes/mildotmaster/index.html

Here is another site where you can learn about mils and practice using them for simulated long range shooting, this is kinda cool:

http://www.shooterready.com/rangegame.html

Here is a good breakdown of the USMC mildot reticle and the math involved in using it:

http://www.swfa.com/mildot/index.html

Good Shooting! MM

[This message has been edited by MontanaMarine (edited 03-10-2002).]

[This message has been edited by MontanaMarine (edited 03-11-2002).]

[This message has been edited by MontanaMarine (edited 03-11-2002).]

I thought you used the metric system in the armed services... By using mildots and the metric system, a lot of the calculations become very easy, and calculators and slide rules are not necessary:

A mil is really a milliradian, the thousandth part of a Radian, which is the "natural" measure of an angle. Using the SAME measuring units, if some object of size x is at a distance d, it then subtends an angle of x/d Radians or, equivalently, of 1000 x/d milliradians or mils.

The fact that in the US you measure x in inches and d in yards, with a nondecimal factor of 36 inches to a yard relating both measurements, obscures the basic simplicity of the method.

If you use the metric system, the above equation can be written as:

a [mils] = 10x[cm] / d[m]

where a is the angle in mils, x is the size of the object in centimeters (1 inch = 2.54 cm) and d is the distance to the object x in meters. The multiplier of x is ten because 100 were "used up" to go from x in meters to x in cm...

The above basic equation can be used for range estimation with a mildot reticle by rewriting it in the following form using the above units:

d [m] = 10x [cm] / a [mils]

For example, if we use a a slightly fatter deer than yours with x = 50 cm (19.7"), if it subtends an angle of 0.5 mils (measured at maximum magnification of the scope!), then

d = 500 / 0.5 = 1000 meters

Using your example with 19" gives x = 48.26cm. If you read through your mil-scope that it subtends 0.5 mils then

d = 482.6 / 0.5 = 965.2 meters

If you need to have yards divide the above by 0.9144 to obtain 1051.18 yards.

In practice it is difficult to estimate angles smaller than say 0.25 mils in hunting situations. I use 50 cm for deer, 90 cm for buffalo, etc.

I also use the above equation to get my holdover in mils if you know its trajectory in cm. Suppose, for simplicity, that I know that my bullet is 40 cm down at 400m. That equals an angle = 400 / 400 = 1 mil and I hold over 1 mil. At 250 meters a mil is 25 cm, at 476.8 meters a mil is 47.68 cm (just divide by 10 and express it in cm...).

Now you realize that if they graduated the scope clicks in 1/10 mils instead of MOA life would be easier for the snipers.

1 MOA = 2000 pi /360/ 60 = 0.2909 mils
1 mil = 3.4377 MOA
so 1/10 mil = 0.34377 ca. a third of a MOA

Regards, Antonio

Range is measured via laser,trajectory is dealt with via an elevation turret. The end result is a dead on hold,with a reticle that subtends a fraction of the target area,as compared to the mil-dot reticle system.

The mil is a good invent,works better than simply guessing,but pales in a direct comparison to that means.

With a laser,there is no range "estimation". You simply know the EXACT distance to the target. You need not see the entire target,to get a reading(as opposed to a bedded animal,that you think MIGHT average 19" in chest depth. Though that dimension is obscured,due to his posture).

Further,you are not trying to discern a holdover guess,from the guess of the target's size,at the guessed range,from a guessed power setting upon your variable scope(see a trend there?).

You know the range,you dial in the elevation as per the atmospheric conditions and crank the shot. That only with the laser/turret combo.

Getting most cartridges to the 1000yd line,incorporates a power change of the scope,as it takes more than 5mils,to allow that much holdover(subtention). So that opens another can of fresh guesses. You must reduce power,to change subtention,to allow another guess,with diminished resolution capabilities that will add to the complexity of the situation. That especially compounded,with a mere 100yd zero.

So regardless of the formulae being dependant upon the metric system,mils,or MOA,you are still blindfolded and forced to venture multiple guesses.

Case in point: A Deer at extended range. Let's say you guess that all of them will be 18" in chest depth. If he subtends .71mils,he's 700yds away. If he subtends .63mils,he's 800yds away. I submit it takes a VERY devout shooter to discern that distance and mil reading capability and that ASSUMES that the Deer in question is in fact exactly 18" in depth,for the holdover to work. That is also known as wishfull thinking,or a crapshoot(at best). With my 30-8mmRemMag and 180gr BT's at 3350fps muzzle velocity,the trajectory difference at those two yardages is 40 inches. A lesser cartridge,is more seriously affected.

It is obvious that as distances become extended,one must know the exact distance to the target,to make consistent first round hits. No hidden hoopla there.

While I'm fair to middlin' with the mil-dot reticle,it is in the Stone Age,as compared to a laser and a scope with repeatable turrets. Simply because there is no guess work involved.

Of course,your mileage may vary............

------------------
NRA Life member

Thanks for the good gouge on metric use of the mil scale. It amazes me that the metric system of weights and measures is so well thought out. Everything correlating to each other by a value of 10. Makes me wonder why the english system is still around.

Good shooting, MM

[/QUOTE

Big Stick,

I agree with most of your post 100%. A Mildot reticle IS a range ESTIMATING device, nothing more, nothing less. There is no guessing or power changing, USMC snipers use a fixed 10X scope. Elevation turrets are the method of applying dope to the scope. The use of mildot reticle for holdoff aimimg points is a technique used by those who fail to understand the use of mils and are overwhelmed by the math involved, but want to use what the military uses.

A laser is a means of accurately measuring distance. only a fool would think he could even come close to laser accuracy with a range estimating reticle at extended range.

I have used the AN/GVS-5 and AN/PAQ-3 to lase targets out to nearly 10,000 meters with accuracy to within 10 meters for decades. Only recently has laser technology been available to the masses, but with far less capability. Before I "buy in" I am waiting for a reasonably sized and priced unit that will reach out to at least 2000 yards. Why, because that is farther than I will ever need to shoot. As you say, why have a six speed if you never get out of third?? Most civilian rangefinders only reach 800-1000 at the most. Even my antiquated 30-06 can sail 190gr SMKs supersonic to 1380 yards. So I will not pay for a laser that reaches 800-1000yards for a antique cartridge that can reach well past 1300 yards. Hell, If I were to go the LRB route, I could shoot supersonic past 2000 yards with the old '06.

The mildot reticle increases the probability of a first-round hit dramatically on a man sized target within the effective range of the .308 M118LR round, when used by a trained individual. It was not designed or intended for use by hunters. As typically happens (like lasers) military technology quickly finds its way into the civilian shooting world, wether it is the best for the job or not, for examlpe: 45-70, .30-06, lasers, aperture sights, sling techniques.... and on and on.

MM

[This message has been edited by MontanaMarine (edited 03-12-2002).]

Sorry guy...

MM

I savvy most of what you relate,but our opinions differ in a couple areas.

A $300 eye-safe laser will cover 99.99% of shots,one would remotely consider on Game,with an '06.

Further,it is cartridges such as the '06(you use the term "antique",but I'd say "modest velocity"),that require the most precision in regards to distance confirmation,to make a first round hit. Despite the help of projectiles with extreme BC's,cases of that intensity level,are not very forgiving in the regards of yardage errors. A modest miscalculation in yardage,will yield a drastic trajectory error.

Cartridges of that ilk,will perform very nicely with a "boring" civvie laser,that is available for only modest cash. In my opinion,it is the only way to extract the utmost potential,out of that class of cartridge.

With the inexpensive technology available,I'd much prefer to know the EXACT distance to targets. That as opposed to awaiting a device,that will exceed the supersonic capabilities of a given cartridge. The Lion's share of shot opportunities,will be within the far end of the transonic boundaries. I would rather KNOW the distance of 95% of the shots I'd ever aspire to take,as opposed to GUESSING on the full 100% of those opportunities.

Your mileage may vary.............

I am of the "get closer" school of hunting, but even so, sometimes you have to shoot game at long distances and it is good to know that there is a non-electronic method that can help you make intelligent decisions.

I have 7x50 Zeiss binoculars that have a vertical 40 mildot reticle and I use the same method to find out the approximate distance to check the zero of my rifle in the field. A friend of mine whose height is 175 cm goes with the target until he subtends an angle of 17.5 mils, that is a 100 m plus minus 1.5m distance, if I get the angle with +- 0.25 mils error...

To answer Pete�s original question and using my 416 Rem as an example, I sight in for a 150 meter zero (Barnes X 400 gr at 2,300 f/s). My trajectory table in meters and mils beyond 150m is:

200 -0.5
250 -1
300 -1.5
350 -2.25
400 -3
450 -3.75
500 -4.5

Notice that the first 3 numbers are 0.5 mil apart and the other 4 are 0.75 mil apart... easy to remember...

I have successfully tested this table up to 500 meters by shooting at silouettes at the range using a mildot Leupold vari X III 2.5-8x36. It is nice to know that if I see a previously wounded buffalo subtending 3 mils through my scope I can shoot it right away using a 1.5 mils of holdover with no laser-ranging or turret turning.

Just my 2 (decimal...) cents.

Antonio

I guess the difference in our focus is that your focus is more toward hunting, and I think more in terms of anti-personnel. I would not be bothered by gut-shooting a person at long range. I have more respect for game and doubt I would even attempt a shot beyond 500 yards under the best of conditions, I see where a laser would guarantee accurate elevation adjustment in that situation.

I understand the trajectory issues at long range. The .308 M118LR round is dropping an inch per yard between 900 and 1000 yards. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize a 30 yard error in range can cause a big miss. My '06 load is not significantly better

When I'm a civilian again, I like the idea of having a rifle for two-legged critters(should the need arise, I pray it does not). What can I say, I believe in the 2nd ammendment. In that scenario A laser would cetainly be useful. But at home I will know ranges to known points on my property like the back of my hand. The old home turf advantage. (40 acres of central Montana).

For now, A Rem 700 VS Left Hand .308 followed me home last week. I'm going to get another Leupold LR, either 4.5-14 or 6.5-20. Having a 3.5-10x I am leaning to the 6.5-20. That is a higher priority than a laser for now.

Good Shooting, MM

I apply the mil-reticle in much the same way. I also like it for holding wind.

I've found toting a laser very much increased the accuracy of my range estimation,via the naked eye. It also is a superb aid,when using the mil reticle,as you can quickly/precisely check your work. That very much speeds the learning curve and gives positive feedback.

I'll happily tote the extra 10 ounces my laser weighs,when I'm Hunting seriously. Those ounces do more to assure the outcome of a scenario,than anything else in my kit.

They are simply good enough and priced modestly,that it is difficult to fathom an excuse not to have one,should your terrain dictate shots beyond your rifle's zero range.

Guessing is a thing of yesteryear,in my opinion............

I do not understand why you refer to using the milscale as guessing. It actually is a mathematical formula based on relating mils to known size targets. Yes, it is an estimate, and not an accurate measure as in the case of a laser, but not a guess. MM

I understand your focus. An upright human is twice as easy to range with a mil reticle,as a Deer,in a worst case scenario. It's simply a taller target.

My focus is hitting what I aim at,with the highest degree of precision I can muster. I've yet to see a system that allows more precision than a known range and repeatable turrets. When something better comes along,I'll be the first in line!

As an aside,the VS is the most gun for the money,IMHO. I dote on a VSSF in 308,that I dumped into a McMillan stock. It wears a 3.5-10X and that suits me fine...............

I would equate "guessing",to be an unflattering term for an "estimate".

I have zero trouble with mathematical formulae,but reticle subtention isn't straight math. It assumes much,to render a good estimate.

My contention is that if you don't know for CERTAIN,it is a guess,despite nomenclature...........

A fellow shooter brought a Cabelas reloading catalog around the other day with a Bushnell Yardage Pro?? (I think) that was rated for 1000 yds on nonreflective and 1200 yards on reflective surfaces. This unit was under $400. It looks a bit plasticy. Do you have an opinion on the serviceability and weather resistance of these?? Or what would you recommend?

MM

Havent shot the VS yet, I have a couple of old tascos laying idle, but I will not mount them on this rifle. What kind of accuracy are you able to get from the factory barrel? I have heard that a bullet seated to the lands usually will not fit in the magazine. Any comments on that? Overall it seems like a nice rifle. The H-S Precision stock looks like an improvement over unbedded wood for stability, but it is a far cry from a McMillan. Would you believe there is a loose piece of something in the hollow of under the buttplate that rattles back and forth if I shake the rifle?? I am guessing it is the stock material displaced from drilling the hole for the rear swivel.

MM

1) Range estimation either via laser ranging(very precise) or optically via a mildot reticle (really measurement of an angle, imprecise vis-a-vis a laser).

2) Holdover for long range shots, either by turning the elevation knobs (accuracy question of mechanical calibration crops up here) or directly via a reticle that has ANGLES calibrated in either mils or MOA or any other angular measure (1 mil is ca. 3.4 MOA).

On a scope�s reticle you can only see angles. You infer absolute distances or sizes using info about the angle and the size of the object or its distance.

To determine holdover you need to translate your trajectory info into angles. The way to use an MOA holdover or mechanical turret adjustment is to compute how many MOAs correspond at a given distance to a given trajectory in units of length(" or cm), as I did above with the 416 Rem.

Mils and MOA are really the same thing, i.e. units for angle measurements. You are just used to MOA because most scope manufacturers calibrate their elevations in fractions of MOAs. There is really no conceptual difference in stating a bullet�s trajectory in MOAs or in mils, if you know one you can compute the other via 1 MOA = 0.29 mils.

Now suppose you had "clacks" (instead of 0.25 MOA clicks) of 0.1 mils (1 clack = 0.34 MOA) in your mil scope and you needed to hold-over 3.8 mils. Instead of "clacking" 38 times you only "clack" eight times and raise your scope 3 mils, i.e aim with the third mildot down from the cross. It would be a faster method to get to a shot. There is no magic involved, you are just using the same scale in the reticle and the mechanical adjustment steps in the scope.

Antonio

I've had 3 different lasers. A Tasco 800,a Leica 800 and a Bushnell Compact 600.

The Tasco was big and didn't work that well. It was fickle regarding surfaces it would reliably read upon. At the time,it was much better than nothing(by a large margin).

The Leica was a POS. 4 of us ordered them,before they were released. We waited in eager anticipation. Upon receipt,it was obvios they were sub par and all units were returned. To disceren their deficiency,we compared them to two other friends,Bushy 600's. The 600 Compact trounced the Leica,so we ordered them.

To date,I am delighted with that unit's performance. I've had mine for a couple years and it has always pleased me,in my hostile climate(wet,wet,wet). I tape an extra battery on the lanyard,so as to always have a spare. The thing is excellent.

Beings I am stubborn,I have a new Leica 1200 ordered,as they are yet to be released(April 1 hopefully). My hopes are that Leica learned some lessons,after their shoddy 800's release. I believe Leica to be an excellent company and I find it difficult to believe they's fumble twice. I ordered from a company that will grant me a return,should I be less than satisfied with the new unit. I'll comment upon it,upon receipt.

Every Remington 700 I have seen is throated long in 308. I can't engage the rifling,while maintaining ammo that will fit the magazine. I do load to mag box constraints and the accuracy is very good(shoots in the .4's on average),though I'm sure I could improve upon it by loading long.

I prefer a laminate,to an HS. I have little use for HS and generally sell them cheap,to get them out of my sight. I sold the last one NIB,for $110,on this site. It went quickly.

Pop your VS out of the stock,tweak the trigger,bed it and it will shoot very nicely for you. Dump it into an M40A1 McMillan and you'll really have something. You can sell your HS easily. Take that money and buy a McMillan from their Internet Specials site($300) and you will be in very good shape.............

quote:

---

Originally posted by MontanaMarine:
Antonio,

Thanks for the good gouge on metric use of the mil scale. It amazes me that the metric system of weights and measures is so well thought out. Everything correlating to each other by a value of 10. Makes me wonder why the english system is still around.

Good shooting, MM

---

MM

I often wonder the same thing myself. It amuses me that in this country we are torn between the two systems. The official system is now metric, but roads signs and speed limits are in the old Imperial system. I have just been reading a book about the WW2 European theatre in 1944/5 and the Brits there were working in metric.

From my service days I remember that one mil subtends one metre at 1000 meters. It makes for an easy systems and does away with the need to convert when adjusting indirect fire; the angle of a fist at arms length = say, 100 mils. Therefore �left 100� is two hand spans if the bad guys are 500 metres away.

How is Camp Lejeune? I was very impressed by the hunting department of the PX, easily bigger than the largest UK gun shop, and good prices too. I spent a couple of months at New River Marine Air Station where I learned to play �Ship, Captain, Crew� I wish I could remember the rules to that excellent dice game.

------------------
Regards

Richard

Camp Lejeune, "camp swampy" is probably about the same as you recall. Good gun shop, everything from AK-47s to M1a Super Match to Rem 700 375 UltraMag. Even a few rifles for southpaws like me.

The hunting around here pretty much sucks ass in my book. Sitting in a tree in tight woods where 40 yards is a long shot with a shotgun waiting for a (maybe)100 pound deer is not what I consider hunting. Like wise, driving deer with dogs and a bunch of drunks with shotguns and walmart rifles doesn't interest me either. I don't hunt here. Maybe being brought uo in central Montana has spoiled me a little.

So that pretty much sums up my assesment of Camp Lejeune. I'm not in love with it, but I'm making the most of it. Shooting paper.

Take care, MM