Swamp Donkey Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 With a FFP mil scope, you can directly measure the position of your fall of shot in milrads and directly apply it as a milrad correction on your turret as clicks With a FFP MOA scope, you can directly measure the position of your fall of shot in MOA and directly apply it as MOA correction on your turrets as clicks. I think the main point here is FFP is better than SFP. MOA or mils, it's what you are comfortable with Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 With a FFP MOA scope, you can directly measure the position of your fall of shot in MOA and directly apply it as MOA correction on your turrets as clicks. I think the main point here is FFP is better than SFP. MOA or mils, it's what you are comfortable with Pete Measure 6.4 MOA visually and apply as clicks on a 1/8 Moa scope........ ummm times tables and 'how many 1/8s in 0.4?' and adding... Measure 6.4mils visually and apply as clicks on a 0.1mRad scope, that'll be 64 clicks then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJR Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Gbal, please direct me to where I asserted laze and dial in moa cannot be used. I use that exact method but use mils instead. The reason mils/ffp are preferable, in my opinion, are as per BD's explanation. Try also ranging a target with a moa reticle and calculating the distance. Now compare that calculation with the one required if using mils. Which is easier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA, whatever floats your boat really, as long as the scope is FFP. Personally I find mils easier to use, e.g. 4.5 mils is a bit easier to memorise than 15 and a 1/4. Yep; matching turrets/ret and FFP. I prefer mils as I am used to them. Otherwise it doesn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunter87 Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 I have this steiner military arriving in two weeks, it has two full rotations and I dont think its possable to get lost with it. Steiner 5-25x56 Turrets: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Both can be used-that is not in question.FFP/mil users seem to be less tolerant: and seem reluctant to address questions directly-eg do you have to know size oftarget to range it_yes/no?,but that is maybe just me- Shuggy seems to encompass both,thanks,_I'll raide the specified mag use of mildot systems below... Swamp Donkey-neither is any good if you can't see fall of shot,by no means an unusual scenario on grass,heather ,bracken....probably the more 'tactical' you get,the less you can depend on splash. But if you can,both can be used about the same-eg on a ffp,with marked crosshairs-often 'mil dot'',or hatches,then you see the splash eg 21/2 dots right,1 low and just correct-21/2 dots left,1 dot up.... MJR - is not some of your dismissive language less that directly addressing my points "minutes of anarchy'- a bit dismissive,or "unnecessarily complicated'-but not addressed to the proceedure I detailed. BD- can you relate your comments to my description of the fire process with a laser...there is no need to count out 64 etc clicks- each moa has a major division on the turret, 1,2,3, etc as you must know-so 6.4 is 6 of these divisions,and .4 is ...ok not exactly half( but about 2 of the 4 -eg-small divisions marked between the large ones-given the accuarcy of the ranging,that will be better than a mil based on a lesser accuracy....and the point about mil ranging when the target size is unknown.... maybe I'm mistaken about this,but it seems to be a major point that mi men are reluctant to explain....I can see 'for govt wrk' we can assume a 'standard' man etc,but it's not very accurate,and most of us want to hit rather smaller targets,somewhere about the middle. If I place a white card disc somewhere out there,can you mil range it,if you don't know the disc size? More generally,I could deploy a laser scope that auto adjusts the aim dot for distance it lasers,(and also gives a guide to windage),and thereby remove all this demanding addition .Though I think we will all have to agree the wind is neutral wrt mil.moa It seems to me there are at least two alternate methods/gear(mil,moa).It is perhaps no coincidence that very long range military cannon men are familiar with the mil,whole precision target shooters,and most field hunters seem to find the moa preferable. Is anyone saying that the laser rangefinder is inferior to...anything!? as the accurate measure of target distance for rifle shooting. Where is the need for any arithmetic translation with range/scale/mil dot read out-other than being capable of moving 6 moa,if the scale says moa-ok i'll concede you may sometimes have to 'remember' that .4 and .6 are not exactly half......if you acre only 1/8(1 click) out,you are not doing too bad-it will usually be a hit. Of course if you have a scope that actual allows discrimination on the target beyond that,you could aim just an inch high/low...but reticule effects are for another rainy evening.... Sorry if I'm being thick,or slow,but I haven't yet seen a convincing point against the laser/chart/dial in the moas it says,as yet. I haven't raised either that many moas are direct rangers at a specified magnification-my NF has what I could easliy see as the height of men at determinable distances along the bottom.I just don't shoot at man sized targets at exactly hundren yard intervals very often. (do men vary?) As I have said several times,they are alternate systems,and there is probably a strong subjective element in one's preferences,and pros/cons-I would still like someone to explain how I get my shot to hit an unknown object at an unknown distance with the mil system.Then I could make a more informed choice......and like any good Libran get both! :-) Gbal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Can everyone just make sure they get that it doesn't matter? Mil or MOA, both measurments of angle, both can be used to range given a known target size, etc, etc. Really nothing in it beyond there being easier maths if you size in metric using mil, or size imperial using moa. Me personally I like to estimate sizes in mm. This means mil works for me as mm/mil = range in m. I also prefer decimals to fractions, hence my getting excel to remove the none base 10 .1's for me when splitting clicks into bigger chunks. Either way mils and moa's are the same. Just different values per unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 George, read what I wrote and not what you think I wrote - nowhere have I mentioned mils are useful for ranging in a sporting application. In fact, anyone who remotely thinks the utility of mils in sporting use has anything at all to do with 'ranging' is entirely missing the point - and with it, entirely missing the utility of mil scopes in a sporting application: With a FFP mil scope, you can directly measure the position of your fall of shot in milrads and directly apply it as a milrad correction on your turret as clicks ...and any maths is insanely easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Both can be used-that is not in question.FFP/mil users seem to be less tolerant: and seem reluctant to address questions directly-eg do you have to know size oftarget to range it_yes/no?,but that is maybe just me- Shuggy seems to encompass both,thanks,_I'll raide the specified mag use of mildot systems below... Swamp Donkey-neither is any good if you can't see fall of shot,by no means an unusual scenario on grass,heather ,bracken....probably the more 'tactical' you get,the less you can depend on splash. But if you can,both can be used about the same-eg on a ffp,with marked crosshairs-often 'mil dot'',or hatches,then you see the splash eg 21/2 dots right,1 low and just correct-21/2 dots left,1 dot up.... MJR - is not some of your dismissive language less that directly addressing my points "minutes of anarchy'- a bit dismissive,or "unnecessarily complicated'-but not addressed to the proceedure I detailed. BD- can you relate your comments to my description of the fire process with a laser...there is no need to count out 64 etc clicks- each moa has a major division on the turret, 1,2,3, etc as you must know-so 6.4 is 6 of these divisions,and .4 is ...ok not exactly half( but about 2 of the 4 -eg-small divisions marked between the large ones-given the accuarcy of the ranging,that will be better than a mil based on a lesser accuracy....and the point about mil ranging when the target size is unknown.... maybe I'm mistaken about this,but it seems to be a major point that mi men are reluctant to explain....I can see 'for govt wrk' we can assume a 'standard' man etc,but it's not very accurate,and most of us want to hit rather smaller targets,somewhere about the middle. If I place a white card disc somewhere out there,can you mil range it,if you don't know the disc size? More generally,I could deploy a laser scope that auto adjusts the aim dot for distance it lasers,(and also gives a guide to windage),and thereby remove all this demanding addition .Though I think we will all have to agree the wind is neutral wrt mil.moa It seems to me there are at least two alternate methods/gear(mil,moa).It is perhaps no coincidence that very long range military cannon men are familiar with the mil,whole precision target shooters,and most field hunters seem to find the moa preferable. Is anyone saying that the laser rangefinder is inferior to...anything!? as the accurate measure of target distance for rifle shooting. Where is the need for any arithmetic translation with range/scale/mil dot read out-other than being capable of moving 6 moa,if the scale says moa-ok i'll concede you may sometimes have to 'remember' that .4 and .6 are not exactly half......if you acre only 1/8(1 click) out,you are not doing too bad-it will usually be a hit. Of course if you have a scope that actual allows discrimination on the target beyond that,you could aim just an inch high/low...but reticule effects are for another rainy evening.... Sorry if I'm being thick,or slow,but I haven't yet seen a convincing point against the laser/chart/dial in the moas it says,as yet. I haven't raised either that many moas are direct rangers at a specified magnification-my NF has what I could easliy see as the height of men at determinable distances along the bottom.I just don't shoot at man sized targets at exactly hundren yard intervals very often. (do men vary?) As I have said several times,they are alternate systems,and there is probably a strong subjective element in one's preferences,and pros/cons-I would still like someone to explain how I get my shot to hit an unknown object at an unknown distance with the mil system.Then I could make a more informed choice......and like any good Libran get both! :-) Gbal Mils or MOA example... The other day I was looking out of the window at a nice big fat woodie sitting on the grass. Just behind there was a wooden fence. On the farm the fence posts are 150mm x150mm timber (or 6"x6"). The fence post was almost exactly 2 mil on my scope, so 150/2=75m away. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. Alternatively my MOA ret could have given me the size of the fence post in MOA, and I could have used (6/MOA)x100=range in yards. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. The key thing with any manual ranging is getting a good idea of the size of stuff. Lots of stuff. How long is a cow? How far apart are the cables on pylons? How wide are fence posts? 'On the hill' you're a bit more limited. Knowing the average size of your target obviously helps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Mils or MOA example... The other day I was looking out of the window at a nice big fat woodie sitting on the grass. Just behind there was a wooden fence. On the farm the fence posts are 150mm x150mm timber (or 6"x6"). The fence post was almost exactly 2 mil on my scope, so 150/2=75m away. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. Alternatively my MOA ret could have given me the size of the fence post in MOA, and I could have used (6/MOA)x100=range in yards. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. The key thing with any manual ranging is getting a good idea of the size of stuff. Lots of stuff. How long is a cow? How far apart are the cables on pylons? How wide are fence posts? 'On the hill' you're a bit more limited. Knowing the average size of your target obviously helps! I missed by the way on account of my click values not yet being known to be nothing like what they said on the tin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Mils or MOA example... The other day I was looking out of the window at a nice big fat woodie sitting on the grass. Just behind there was a wooden fence. On the farm the fence posts are 150mm x150mm timber (or 6"x6"). The fence post was almost exactly 2 mil on my scope, so 150/2=75m away. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. Alternatively my MOA ret could have given me the size of the fence post in MOA, and I could have used (6/MOA)x100=range in yards. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. The key thing with any manual ranging is getting a good idea of the size of stuff. Lots of stuff. How long is a cow? How far apart are the cables on pylons? How wide are fence posts? 'On the hill' you're a bit more limited. Knowing the average size of your target obviously helps! Buy a laser; this isn't combat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 George, read what I wrote and not what you think I wrote - nowhere have I mentioned mils are useful for ranging in a sporting application. In fact, anyone who remotely thinks the utility of mils in sporting use has anything at all to do with 'ranging' is entirely missing the point - and with it, entirely missing the utility of mil scopes in a sporting application: ...and any maths is insanely easier.[/quote OK-but 'Field' is wider than 'sporting'. Just for the fun of it,I want to shoot a 'stone' of unknown size,unknown distance (safe backstop,please no 'richochet' danger etc-I just use 'stone' as an example to set the 'rangeing' question,which is: Can the mil dot system range such an object of unknown size? yes or no? I trust we all agree the laser can...and that anyone with access to a laser would agree it's use is well,useful .(I would not be surprised that the mil scope could use the lasers reading.too,but please -answer the above first,then hit me). I'll seriously consider trying an ffp mil scope,if it can :-) g G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Buy a laser; this isn't combat. Who said anything about combat? Seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Can the mil dot system range such an object of unknown size? yes or no? Why are you asking me to support an argument I haven't put forward?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 George, read what I wrote and not what you think I wrote - nowhere have I mentioned mils are useful for ranging in a sporting application. In fact, anyone who remotely thinks the utility of mils in sporting use has anything at all to do with 'ranging' is entirely missing the point - and with it, entirely missing the utility of mil scopes in a sporting application: ...and any maths is insanely easier.[/quote OK-but 'Field' is wider than 'sporting'. Just for the fun of it,I want to shoot a 'stone' of unknown size,unknown distance (safe backstop,please no 'richochet' danger etc-I just use 'stone' as an example to set the 'rangeing' question,which is: Can the mil dot system range such an object of unknown size? yes or no? I trust we all agree the laser can...and that anyone with access to a laser would agree it's use is well,useful .(I would not be surprised that the mil scope could use the lasers reading.too,but please -answer the above first,then hit me). I'll seriously consider trying an ffp mil scope,if it can :-) g G No it can't, and you know it can't. Probably why no one is answering. You have a laser, use it. Happy days. No one is trying to sell you anything either, so whether or not you buy an FFP scope or not, really doesn't matter I don't, so I make do. And on a more general point, the thread was about using Excel to give integers and remainders for clicks against non-base 10 scales, not who does/doesn't like moa/mil and whether or not people agree on why other people do things the way they do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Can the mil dot system range such an object of unknown size? yes or no? Why are you asking me to support an argument I haven't put forward?! Who said anything about combat? Seriously? If you're applying fire to animals at distances sufficiently great that you need to adjust your scope; and basing your firing solution on a range estimation technique with which you are unlikely to be within 20 or 30% of being correct, then you are being reckless. When people use such ranging techniques they do so because they have to (combat - and even then as a reversionary technique when other much more accurate options have failed) and not because they want to play sniper on a sensate animal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Why are you asking me to support an argument I haven't put forward?! If you're applying fire to animals at distances sufficiently great that you need to adjust your scope; and basing your firing solution on a range estimation technique that is unlikely to be within 20 or 30% of being correct, then you are being reckless. When people use such ranging techniques they do so because they have to (combat - and even then as a reversionary technique when other much more accurate options have failed) and not because they want to play sniper on a sensate animal. You seem to have something in your mind about me in relation to playing sniper/pretending to be all military/etc. I am assuming that it is something that annoys you generally, but I can assure you that you are way off the mark. I range steels at the moment as a hobby. It's good fun shooting steels, and most importantly so pay attention, I do not own a laser range finder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 um, OK. Apologies. I obviously misunderstood all this (not helped by the fact that 'on the hill' means shooting deer in my lexicon): Mils or MOA example... The other day I was looking out of the window at a nice big fat woodie sitting on the grass. Just behind there was a wooden fence. On the farm the fence posts are 150mm x150mm timber (or 6"x6"). The fence post was almost exactly 2 mil on my scope, so 150/2=75m away. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. Alternatively my MOA ret could have given me the size of the fence post in MOA, and I could have used (6/MOA)x100=range in yards. Look at drop chart, etc, etc, etc, take shot. The key thing with any manual ranging is getting a good idea of the size of stuff. Lots of stuff. How long is a cow? How far apart are the cables on pylons? How wide are fence posts? 'On the hill' you're a bit more limited. Knowing the average size of your target obviously helps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 Thanks-I'll see if I can get a ffp/mil and try it out. Gosh,that pint lasted well! My round-do you like opera? G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRb Posted May 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 um, OK. Apologies. I obviously misunderstood all this (not helped by the fact that 'on the hill' means shooting deer in my lexicon): Part of the problem with the whole thread is the 'all of this' bit - I've no idea what it is all about anyway, it honestly was just about =INT and +MOD and making light of large click values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swamp Donkey Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 This thread has gone seriously off-topic. Why has it not been locked yet ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunter87 Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 http://www.advrider.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=227656&d=1268998832 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swamp Donkey Posted May 10, 2014 Report Share Posted May 10, 2014 http://www.advrider.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=227656&d=1268998832lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcampbellsmith Posted May 12, 2014 Report Share Posted May 12, 2014 Minutes of anarchy are fine if you are shooting at fixed distances and known targets. A lot of target shooters use MOA to very good effect and many argue that they offer a finer adjustment - I can't comment on that as i'm not a long range guru and can't shoot better than 1/8moa anyway. Other than that they are just an unnecessary complication compared to mils/ffp and metric distances where everything tallies nicely. Mike The only point I would add to this, is that the MOA folk who let me shoot with them yesterday have their target rings set up in MOA too. Regards JCS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.0972b4e2bdf0b5a4109eb96f2b1b62ad.jpg)
(200x135).jpg.0fd0a94f065c6cb243fdff1b40e0819a.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.