-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
- Thread starter thefiremeister
- Start date
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where ever that round hits in my scope is what I put on mr. 800? </div></div>
The answer is...it depends.
When you observed the 800 yard impact was it on the berm? Was it at the base of the target? Was it in the dirt 50 yards short?
Remember the angle that the round is coming in at. If it's WAY short you are going to have more trouble than if it's just a little short.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where ever that round hits in my scope is what I put on mr. 800? </div></div>
The answer is...it depends.
When you observed the 800 yard impact was it on the berm? Was it at the base of the target? Was it in the dirt 50 yards short?
Remember the angle that the round is coming in at. If it's WAY short you are going to have more trouble than if it's just a little short.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
yeah you know the more i read about mils and ranging the more i think i know. then i read some more and i know even less. then i try to get some info on what my scope is set up with and i am even more confused. i get the instructions out that came with the scope and read those and suddenly, i am retarded. anybody want to buy a new unfired rifle and scope
oh yeah
bronco
redhead
anything i can find in extra wide
yeah you know the more i read about mils and ranging the more i think i know. then i read some more and i know even less. then i try to get some info on what my scope is set up with and i am even more confused. i get the instructions out that came with the scope and read those and suddenly, i am retarded. anybody want to buy a new unfired rifle and scope
oh yeah
bronco
redhead
anything i can find in extra wide
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Actually, your confusion is a good sign. It shows that there are things you don't understand, and you realize that.
I know people who ought to feel confused about a lot of things, but they aren't self-aware enough to even recognize that.
Recognizing the limits of one's knowledge is a good thing.
Actually, your confusion is a good sign. It shows that there are things you don't understand, and you realize that.
I know people who ought to feel confused about a lot of things, but they aren't self-aware enough to even recognize that.
Recognizing the limits of one's knowledge is a good thing.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
ewaof, that miley thing kinda had me worried a little, lol
lindy, one source of confusion is my reference materials. i look online and my scope has 90 moa. the millet guy said in a thread here it was 100. i turn the turrets down to bottom and then to top and i only count 66 moa. the manual and website say 1/8" adjustment, the knobs say 1/4". the manual and website both say i have a choice of mil or moa, nobody ever mentioned that when i bought it or i would have learned the difference right then, cause i know moa, but would have wanted to know mil before i decided. the book says one revolution is 72 clicks, i do it and count 64. so without the proper info, i cant go any further. like programers say GIGO garbage in/ garbage out. i think ill look at some boobs, those i get
ewaof, that miley thing kinda had me worried a little, lol
lindy, one source of confusion is my reference materials. i look online and my scope has 90 moa. the millet guy said in a thread here it was 100. i turn the turrets down to bottom and then to top and i only count 66 moa. the manual and website say 1/8" adjustment, the knobs say 1/4". the manual and website both say i have a choice of mil or moa, nobody ever mentioned that when i bought it or i would have learned the difference right then, cause i know moa, but would have wanted to know mil before i decided. the book says one revolution is 72 clicks, i do it and count 64. so without the proper info, i cant go any further. like programers say GIGO garbage in/ garbage out. i think ill look at some boobs, those i get
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ewaof, that miley thing kinda had me worried a little, lol
lindy, one source of confusion is my reference materials. i look online and my scope has 90 moa. the millet guy said in a thread here it was 100. i turn the turrets down to bottom and then to top and i only count 66 moa. the manual and website say 1/8" adjustment, the knobs say 1/4". the manual and website both say i have a choice of mil or moa, nobody ever mentioned that when i bought it or i would have learned the difference right then, cause i know moa, but would have wanted to know mil before i decided. the book says one revolution is 72 clicks, i do it and count 64. so without the proper info, i cant go any further. like programers say GIGO garbage in/ garbage out. i think ill look at some boobs, those i get </div></div>
Axman, I feel the same way. Its overwhelming until you can filter out just the stuff you need and then its doable.
All those mismatched mils, MOAs, reticles, knobs, difference in Front focals and second focal planes, different uses and different sizes of mildots by different manufacturers have been driving me crazy.
One of the scopes I was looking at was the Millett and was getting the same info you mention. Nothing matched so I moved on. I have a friend that says the Millet is a great scope and recommended it to me but I'm going to pass.
My decision has come down to a Nightforce with mils,mils or moa moa. Now I have to figure out whats going to be "better" for me and that may still take a while.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ewaof, that miley thing kinda had me worried a little, lol
lindy, one source of confusion is my reference materials. i look online and my scope has 90 moa. the millet guy said in a thread here it was 100. i turn the turrets down to bottom and then to top and i only count 66 moa. the manual and website say 1/8" adjustment, the knobs say 1/4". the manual and website both say i have a choice of mil or moa, nobody ever mentioned that when i bought it or i would have learned the difference right then, cause i know moa, but would have wanted to know mil before i decided. the book says one revolution is 72 clicks, i do it and count 64. so without the proper info, i cant go any further. like programers say GIGO garbage in/ garbage out. i think ill look at some boobs, those i get </div></div>
Axman, I feel the same way. Its overwhelming until you can filter out just the stuff you need and then its doable.
All those mismatched mils, MOAs, reticles, knobs, difference in Front focals and second focal planes, different uses and different sizes of mildots by different manufacturers have been driving me crazy.
One of the scopes I was looking at was the Millett and was getting the same info you mention. Nothing matched so I moved on. I have a friend that says the Millet is a great scope and recommended it to me but I'm going to pass.
My decision has come down to a Nightforce with mils,mils or moa moa. Now I have to figure out whats going to be "better" for me and that may still take a while.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
If I were going with a nightforce it would be a NXS F1 MLR with mil knobs.
If I were going with a nightforce it would be a NXS F1 MLR with mil knobs.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
i sent a message to the millett guy from this site so you know it might work out, but all the inconsistency really makes me wonder WTF? mark a scope 1/4" and have a manual that says 1/8". it claims 90, but i can only get 64. now granted, its never been zeroed and the knobs were both turned all the way down/in to the bottom of their travel. ill get it out and center the windage and i may get more elevation. but wil i get 26 more moa? and it says with this model i have the choice of
"Windage and elevation adjustments change to º MOA and .1 Mil dot. You have a choice of a TRS in º inch clicks or .1 mil dot in 2009. At 100 yards it takes 4 clicks to make one inch of movement. With the TRS in Mils it takes 10 clicks to make 3.6 inches at 100 yards. Less turns and easier to figure for come ups with the new generation TRS. The TRS still has an ample 90 MOA of adjustment."
but when i bought it there was no such choice given by my seller. i should have researched and known to ask, but that was before i knew about this site. but i bought it, mounted it, and stuck it in the safe til i could get the reloading done. i found out even with 90 moa i should have just gone with the 20 moa base to give me more windage at long range. we shall see. i had to stop thinking and clear my head. so i looked at some boobs instead, lol
i sent a message to the millett guy from this site so you know it might work out, but all the inconsistency really makes me wonder WTF? mark a scope 1/4" and have a manual that says 1/8". it claims 90, but i can only get 64. now granted, its never been zeroed and the knobs were both turned all the way down/in to the bottom of their travel. ill get it out and center the windage and i may get more elevation. but wil i get 26 more moa? and it says with this model i have the choice of
"Windage and elevation adjustments change to º MOA and .1 Mil dot. You have a choice of a TRS in º inch clicks or .1 mil dot in 2009. At 100 yards it takes 4 clicks to make one inch of movement. With the TRS in Mils it takes 10 clicks to make 3.6 inches at 100 yards. Less turns and easier to figure for come ups with the new generation TRS. The TRS still has an ample 90 MOA of adjustment."
but when i bought it there was no such choice given by my seller. i should have researched and known to ask, but that was before i knew about this site. but i bought it, mounted it, and stuck it in the safe til i could get the reloading done. i found out even with 90 moa i should have just gone with the 20 moa base to give me more windage at long range. we shall see. i had to stop thinking and clear my head. so i looked at some boobs instead, lol
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
If you really want some light reading go here
us optics and read the pdf
Understanding MOa and MILs
and http://www.snipershide.com/node/1
Let me know how your FCP shoots. I just ordered a 10FP
I have been trying to research the MOA MIL thing and reading a shit load of scope spec sheets to avoid what happened to you.
I don't want to be "surprised" when I buy a scope this time. a lesser expensive surprise wouldn't be to bad but if I'm going to drop a grand or so on a scope I want to know what I'm getting before it gets here.
If you really want some light reading go here
us optics and read the pdf
Understanding MOa and MILs
and http://www.snipershide.com/node/1
Let me know how your FCP shoots. I just ordered a 10FP
I have been trying to research the MOA MIL thing and reading a shit load of scope spec sheets to avoid what happened to you.
I don't want to be "surprised" when I buy a scope this time. a lesser expensive surprise wouldn't be to bad but if I'm going to drop a grand or so on a scope I want to know what I'm getting before it gets here.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where ever that round hits in my scope is what I put on mr. 800? </div></div>
The answer is...it depends.
When you observed the 800 yard impact was it on the berm? Was it at the base of the target? Was it in the dirt 50 yards short?
Remember the angle that the round is coming in at. If it's WAY short you are going to have more trouble than if it's just a little short.</div></div>
Shooting from the prone, across the flat, with no berm behind the target. 1-3 mph wind from 90* r. Remaining tactical until problem has been solved (target hit). So no getting up to see where the dust came from in front of (or behind) the target. In the problem, we did know the two targets are of the same size, B27(?) (half body silhouette). Any true hit counted on the 800 (no ricochets), as we had a kill zone colored on the 600.
How I "fast-solved" the problem is pretty much ranging the 600 and memorizing the size, then proportioning that to the 800. For this shooting I found my MOA reticle easier to hold over. But, it's the same principle. Have a point where you see impact and hold that over. If it's close. 3 shots on 800 MOA. 4 shots on 800 mil. One guy beat me out of 7. He was 3 and 3.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where ever that round hits in my scope is what I put on mr. 800? </div></div>
The answer is...it depends.
When you observed the 800 yard impact was it on the berm? Was it at the base of the target? Was it in the dirt 50 yards short?
Remember the angle that the round is coming in at. If it's WAY short you are going to have more trouble than if it's just a little short.</div></div>
Shooting from the prone, across the flat, with no berm behind the target. 1-3 mph wind from 90* r. Remaining tactical until problem has been solved (target hit). So no getting up to see where the dust came from in front of (or behind) the target. In the problem, we did know the two targets are of the same size, B27(?) (half body silhouette). Any true hit counted on the 800 (no ricochets), as we had a kill zone colored on the 600.
How I "fast-solved" the problem is pretty much ranging the 600 and memorizing the size, then proportioning that to the 800. For this shooting I found my MOA reticle easier to hold over. But, it's the same principle. Have a point where you see impact and hold that over. If it's close. 3 shots on 800 MOA. 4 shots on 800 mil. One guy beat me out of 7. He was 3 and 3.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where ever that round hits in my scope is what I put on mr. 800? </div></div>
The answer is...it depends.
When you observed the 800 yard impact was it on the berm? Was it at the base of the target? Was it in the dirt 50 yards short?
Remember the angle that the round is coming in at. If it's WAY short you are going to have more trouble than if it's just a little short.</div></div>
Shooting from the prone, across the flat, with no berm behind the target. 1-3 mph wind from 90* r. Remaining tactical until problem has been solved (target hit). So no getting up to see where the dust came from in front of (or behind) the target. In the problem, we did know the two targets are of the same size, B27(?) (half body silhouette). Any true hit counted on the 800 (no ricochets), as we had a kill zone colored on the 600.
How I "fast-solved" the problem is pretty much ranging the 600 and memorizing the size, then proportioning that to the 800. For this shooting I found my MOA reticle easier to hold over. But, it's the same principle. Have a point where you see impact and hold that over. If it's close. 3 shots on 800 MOA. 4 shots on 800 mil. One guy beat me out of 7. He was 3 and 3. </div></div>
You guys are killin me.
Earlier it was posted that MILS are the way yo go in a tactical environment and MOA for competition.
Was this problem a tactical competition?
What do you think is better for all around use? Mils or MOA
Apparently MOA does work ok in a tactical environment.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where ever that round hits in my scope is what I put on mr. 800? </div></div>
The answer is...it depends.
When you observed the 800 yard impact was it on the berm? Was it at the base of the target? Was it in the dirt 50 yards short?
Remember the angle that the round is coming in at. If it's WAY short you are going to have more trouble than if it's just a little short.</div></div>
Shooting from the prone, across the flat, with no berm behind the target. 1-3 mph wind from 90* r. Remaining tactical until problem has been solved (target hit). So no getting up to see where the dust came from in front of (or behind) the target. In the problem, we did know the two targets are of the same size, B27(?) (half body silhouette). Any true hit counted on the 800 (no ricochets), as we had a kill zone colored on the 600.
How I "fast-solved" the problem is pretty much ranging the 600 and memorizing the size, then proportioning that to the 800. For this shooting I found my MOA reticle easier to hold over. But, it's the same principle. Have a point where you see impact and hold that over. If it's close. 3 shots on 800 MOA. 4 shots on 800 mil. One guy beat me out of 7. He was 3 and 3. </div></div>
You guys are killin me.
Earlier it was posted that MILS are the way yo go in a tactical environment and MOA for competition.
Was this problem a tactical competition?
What do you think is better for all around use? Mils or MOA
Apparently MOA does work ok in a tactical environment.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you really want some light reading go here
us optics and read the pdf
Understanding MOa and MILs
and http://www.snipershide.com/node/1
Let me know how your FCP shoots. I just ordered a 10FP
I have been trying to research the MOA MIL thing and reading a shit load of scope spec sheets to avoid what happened to you.
I don't want to be "surprised" when I buy a scope this time. a lesser expensive surprise wouldn't be to bad but if I'm going to drop a grand or so on a scope I want to know what I'm getting before it gets here. </div></div>
Pyrolater,
I look at it as IPHY or inches per hundred yards. I know someone is 6' and he comes out 16 MOA then I know he's 600 yds.
If your scope adjusts in MOA then great. You dial that in. I don't worry about the .05" per hundred. That matters in benchrest. When you work it out, true MOA vs. IPHY comes to 1/2" difference at 1000 yds. No one has ever yet exceeded that accuracy at that range. Nor is it needed.
The guys that like mil, use it all the time. That's the biggest thing. Just like I think in inches, they think in mil's. The same 6' guy is about 3.7 Mil @ 600yds. But, when you change the whole thing to metric Mil makes more sense. As MOA has to be converted. The same 6' guy, 1.83 meters, is 20 mils now. Now do the same thing as MOA. Just divide mil@100m by mil measured. Your scope reads 3.3 mil divided into 20 and he's @ 600m. (hope I got the math right.
The whole thing hinges on having a scope that adjusts in mil, and has a mil reticle. Or, adjusts in MOA and has a MOA reticle. Of course, the knobs should match how the scope adjusts, mil/mil or moa/moa.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you really want some light reading go here
us optics and read the pdf
Understanding MOa and MILs
and http://www.snipershide.com/node/1
Let me know how your FCP shoots. I just ordered a 10FP
I have been trying to research the MOA MIL thing and reading a shit load of scope spec sheets to avoid what happened to you.
I don't want to be "surprised" when I buy a scope this time. a lesser expensive surprise wouldn't be to bad but if I'm going to drop a grand or so on a scope I want to know what I'm getting before it gets here. </div></div>
Pyrolater,
I look at it as IPHY or inches per hundred yards. I know someone is 6' and he comes out 16 MOA then I know he's 600 yds.
If your scope adjusts in MOA then great. You dial that in. I don't worry about the .05" per hundred. That matters in benchrest. When you work it out, true MOA vs. IPHY comes to 1/2" difference at 1000 yds. No one has ever yet exceeded that accuracy at that range. Nor is it needed.
The guys that like mil, use it all the time. That's the biggest thing. Just like I think in inches, they think in mil's. The same 6' guy is about 3.7 Mil @ 600yds. But, when you change the whole thing to metric Mil makes more sense. As MOA has to be converted. The same 6' guy, 1.83 meters, is 20 mils now. Now do the same thing as MOA. Just divide mil@100m by mil measured. Your scope reads 3.3 mil divided into 20 and he's @ 600m. (hope I got the math right.
The whole thing hinges on having a scope that adjusts in mil, and has a mil reticle. Or, adjusts in MOA and has a MOA reticle. Of course, the knobs should match how the scope adjusts, mil/mil or moa/moa.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Each person has their own solution to what ever problem faces them, trying to narrow something down individually and then saying that is the definitive answer is a bad way to look at something.
First off, he is stating he solved the problem with is MOA reticle, so he never tried the same problem with a mil reticle, where he could have easily gotten the same answer. If the target mil'd .5 for 600 and then .3 for 800, it's easy to simply hold over 3 mils and fire... as well many can see their own trace in the scope if you drive the rifle correctly. The 600 yard target would need 4.7 mils and the 800 would need 7.7, so the method is simply a matter of perspective.
Overall, the majority of people use a mil based reticle in tactical applications, and understanding and knowing the limitations, and value of having such a reticle, combined with knowing how to properly drive the rifle correctly, ensure a follow up hit.
Honestly, if you are sitting there launching rounds you can't see the results of - why waste the ammunition when you can take t he time to see, .3 in the scope, reach up grab your mil range card or mil dot master and actually range it, should only take a few seconds if you properly prepared yourself. I would use something similar to this:
Granted mine looks a bit different but this is what i have to demonstrate what I mean, then simply dummy cord it to the scope and be done with it. Problem solved.
Each person has their own solution to what ever problem faces them, trying to narrow something down individually and then saying that is the definitive answer is a bad way to look at something.
First off, he is stating he solved the problem with is MOA reticle, so he never tried the same problem with a mil reticle, where he could have easily gotten the same answer. If the target mil'd .5 for 600 and then .3 for 800, it's easy to simply hold over 3 mils and fire... as well many can see their own trace in the scope if you drive the rifle correctly. The 600 yard target would need 4.7 mils and the 800 would need 7.7, so the method is simply a matter of perspective.
Overall, the majority of people use a mil based reticle in tactical applications, and understanding and knowing the limitations, and value of having such a reticle, combined with knowing how to properly drive the rifle correctly, ensure a follow up hit.
Honestly, if you are sitting there launching rounds you can't see the results of - why waste the ammunition when you can take t he time to see, .3 in the scope, reach up grab your mil range card or mil dot master and actually range it, should only take a few seconds if you properly prepared yourself. I would use something similar to this:
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Hello
the debate of MOA or MIl and 1/8 in and 1/4 adjustments will go on for ever I think, But heres the dope on Millett TRS scopes
The first models had 1/8 in adjustments per click.
I got alot of flak on the adjusments so the later gens were 1/4 in.
Then I got into using MIl adjustments so the last gen, are availible in .1 mil clicks.
Heres the problem many of the dealers do not know the difference in the clicks and as the supply of TRS has been short, they will take what ever scope they can get.
So you have to do a little shopping to find the Mils if you want one of those.
The TRS should have over 90 inches of adjustment which if you have a good mount set up should be enough elevation. 20 MOA bases are a good way to go if you think you will need added elev.
Hope this helps clear up the info on the TRS
Steve
Millett Bushnell
Hello
the debate of MOA or MIl and 1/8 in and 1/4 adjustments will go on for ever I think, But heres the dope on Millett TRS scopes
The first models had 1/8 in adjustments per click.
I got alot of flak on the adjusments so the later gens were 1/4 in.
Then I got into using MIl adjustments so the last gen, are availible in .1 mil clicks.
Heres the problem many of the dealers do not know the difference in the clicks and as the supply of TRS has been short, they will take what ever scope they can get.
So you have to do a little shopping to find the Mils if you want one of those.
The TRS should have over 90 inches of adjustment which if you have a good mount set up should be enough elevation. 20 MOA bases are a good way to go if you think you will need added elev.
Hope this helps clear up the info on the TRS
Steve
Millett Bushnell
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys are killin me.
Earlier it was posted that MILS are the way yo go in a tactical environment and MOA for competition. </div></div>
You are going to need to just pick one and work with it.
I like Mils. I have used a Mil reticle since my initiation into long range shooting. I can do just fine if you handed me a MOA setup. Matching Reticle and Turrets are the key.
You will find a larger selection of scopes in varying price ranges if you stick with Mil/Mil. Trying to find an MOA reticle will narrow your choices considerably (especially in the Mid-price range).
If anyone in my area is in this conundrum and wants to give the Mil/Mil setup a try. Get ahold of me and I will let you test drive it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys are killin me.
Earlier it was posted that MILS are the way yo go in a tactical environment and MOA for competition. </div></div>
You are going to need to just pick one and work with it.
I like Mils. I have used a Mil reticle since my initiation into long range shooting. I can do just fine if you handed me a MOA setup. Matching Reticle and Turrets are the key.
You will find a larger selection of scopes in varying price ranges if you stick with Mil/Mil. Trying to find an MOA reticle will narrow your choices considerably (especially in the Mid-price range).
If anyone in my area is in this conundrum and wants to give the Mil/Mil setup a try. Get ahold of me and I will let you test drive it.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Our local guys are using a mil reticle and moa adjustments and they do pretty well with that set up but to me it does make sense to have mil mil or moa moa set up.
I was going to base my decision on what the locals were using but that didn't work.
I was looking at a US OPTICS SN 10 and it comes standard with mil and moa adjustments. I know you can change those but after reading all the feed back you would think there standard version would be one way or the other and not mixed.
I see after looking at some more "reference" material and reading the feed back here its definatly a personal preference. Math, cheat sheets and LRF all need to work together to get the proper range and make the necessary adjustments.
I'd still like to go with a Nightforce but its an extra 200 bucks or so to get the mil knobs on it.
Just out of curiosity what our, our guys in Iraq and Afganistan using. I read the new semi auto sniper rife comes standard with a Leupold M4
Our local guys are using a mil reticle and moa adjustments and they do pretty well with that set up but to me it does make sense to have mil mil or moa moa set up.
I was going to base my decision on what the locals were using but that didn't work.
I was looking at a US OPTICS SN 10 and it comes standard with mil and moa adjustments. I know you can change those but after reading all the feed back you would think there standard version would be one way or the other and not mixed.
I see after looking at some more "reference" material and reading the feed back here its definatly a personal preference. Math, cheat sheets and LRF all need to work together to get the proper range and make the necessary adjustments.
I'd still like to go with a Nightforce but its an extra 200 bucks or so to get the mil knobs on it.
Just out of curiosity what our, our guys in Iraq and Afganistan using. I read the new semi auto sniper rife comes standard with a Leupold M4
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Dude, you are completely barking up the wrong tree... if you honestly think the soldier on the ground can ask for a specific scope and receive it, you are highly mistaken. The Leupolds supplied are part of a "package" and their use has nothing to do with features or the end user, but a part of contracting.
The USMC uses Mil / Mil S&Bs, there are SOCOM units that use Horus Reticles, there are others that use NF with Mil / MOA and still even more using Leupolds that have been in service since the 80's... it's across the board and hardly makes sense or makes it right as to what is best for you.
Be your own man and make up your own mind and don't try to follow what Big Army is doing because the majority have no clue and just use what is handed to them or what has been around since 1982.
it's funny you can read articles about the USMC changing to the S&B and then quoting a SGT who is a Sniper about converting yards to meters because S&B scopes that adjust in Mil / Mil dont' work with yards...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
He said snipers in the Marine Corps had been asking for a variable scope for years, and the new scope was selected from a number of different models through field-testing by Marine sniper instructors in Quantico, Va., last summer.
Not every scout-sniper was initially impressed with the scope. Most of the shooters are tried-and-true gun nuts and convincing these Marines to part with proven products of the past was tough. Still, after seeing it in action, they have a new love.
“I was opposed to this scope for the simple fact that it’s metric and most Americans are used to yards,” Starner said. “But now that we’ve got it, launched it and used it, it’s an outstanding scope.”
He said snipers got around the difference in measurement standards by using a simple formula to convert yards to meters.
“I carry a calculator with me everywhere I go,” Starner said. “It’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks.”</div></div>
This proves right here you can't go by what the guy on the ground does because even they, being slotted as snipers don't understand it all. Now granted this was written in 2006, but it shows a clear lack of understanding among the military.
Dude, you are completely barking up the wrong tree... if you honestly think the soldier on the ground can ask for a specific scope and receive it, you are highly mistaken. The Leupolds supplied are part of a "package" and their use has nothing to do with features or the end user, but a part of contracting.
The USMC uses Mil / Mil S&Bs, there are SOCOM units that use Horus Reticles, there are others that use NF with Mil / MOA and still even more using Leupolds that have been in service since the 80's... it's across the board and hardly makes sense or makes it right as to what is best for you.
Be your own man and make up your own mind and don't try to follow what Big Army is doing because the majority have no clue and just use what is handed to them or what has been around since 1982.
it's funny you can read articles about the USMC changing to the S&B and then quoting a SGT who is a Sniper about converting yards to meters because S&B scopes that adjust in Mil / Mil dont' work with yards...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
He said snipers in the Marine Corps had been asking for a variable scope for years, and the new scope was selected from a number of different models through field-testing by Marine sniper instructors in Quantico, Va., last summer.
Not every scout-sniper was initially impressed with the scope. Most of the shooters are tried-and-true gun nuts and convincing these Marines to part with proven products of the past was tough. Still, after seeing it in action, they have a new love.
“I was opposed to this scope for the simple fact that it’s metric and most Americans are used to yards,” Starner said. “But now that we’ve got it, launched it and used it, it’s an outstanding scope.”
He said snipers got around the difference in measurement standards by using a simple formula to convert yards to meters.
“I carry a calculator with me everywhere I go,” Starner said. “It’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks.”</div></div>
This proves right here you can't go by what the guy on the ground does because even they, being slotted as snipers don't understand it all. Now granted this was written in 2006, but it shows a clear lack of understanding among the military.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Some HSLD military guys ordered S&Bs with Horus reticles, and 1/4 MOA adjustments, which shows a profound lack of understanding. It wasn't an awful choice with the Horus reticle, because normally you're going to zero those at short range and then never touch the adjustments, but still...
There's no point in being concerned with what the military is using, because the military is using <span style="font-style: italic">everything</span>.
My advice is find a reticle that you're happy with, and get it in a reliable scope with adjustments to match the reticle graduations.
Some HSLD military guys ordered S&Bs with Horus reticles, and 1/4 MOA adjustments, which shows a profound lack of understanding. It wasn't an awful choice with the Horus reticle, because normally you're going to zero those at short range and then never touch the adjustments, but still...
There's no point in being concerned with what the military is using, because the military is using <span style="font-style: italic">everything</span>.
My advice is find a reticle that you're happy with, and get it in a reliable scope with adjustments to match the reticle graduations.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i sent a message to the millett guy from this site so you know it might work out, but all the inconsistency really makes me wonder WTF? mark a scope 1/4" and have a manual that says 1/8". it claims 90, but i can only get 64. now granted, its never been zeroed and the knobs were both turned all the way down/in to the bottom of their travel. ill get it out and center the windage and i may get more elevation. but wil i get 26 more moa? and it says with this model i have the choice of
"Windage and elevation adjustments change to º MOA and .1 Mil dot. You have a choice of a TRS in º inch clicks or .1 mil dot in 2009. At 100 yards it takes 4 clicks to make one inch of movement. With the TRS in Mils it takes 10 clicks to make 3.6 inches at 100 yards. Less turns and easier to figure for come ups with the new generation TRS. The TRS still has an ample 90 MOA of adjustment."
but when i bought it there was no such choice given by my seller. i should have researched and known to ask, but that was before i knew about this site. but i bought it, mounted it, and stuck it in the safe til i could get the reloading done. i found out even with 90 moa i should have just gone with the 20 moa base to give me more windage at long range. we shall see. i had to stop thinking and clear my head. so i looked at some boobs instead, lol </div></div>
millett, did you get my PM on this? im still concerned about the stiffness in the turret and lack of adjustment i seem to have. i cant get to the range to test but i am hoping that if i have 1/4 knobs that i am moa/moa? at least i will know that much of the equation. can you post here or just reply to my PM. thanks
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i sent a message to the millett guy from this site so you know it might work out, but all the inconsistency really makes me wonder WTF? mark a scope 1/4" and have a manual that says 1/8". it claims 90, but i can only get 64. now granted, its never been zeroed and the knobs were both turned all the way down/in to the bottom of their travel. ill get it out and center the windage and i may get more elevation. but wil i get 26 more moa? and it says with this model i have the choice of
"Windage and elevation adjustments change to º MOA and .1 Mil dot. You have a choice of a TRS in º inch clicks or .1 mil dot in 2009. At 100 yards it takes 4 clicks to make one inch of movement. With the TRS in Mils it takes 10 clicks to make 3.6 inches at 100 yards. Less turns and easier to figure for come ups with the new generation TRS. The TRS still has an ample 90 MOA of adjustment."
but when i bought it there was no such choice given by my seller. i should have researched and known to ask, but that was before i knew about this site. but i bought it, mounted it, and stuck it in the safe til i could get the reloading done. i found out even with 90 moa i should have just gone with the 20 moa base to give me more windage at long range. we shall see. i had to stop thinking and clear my head. so i looked at some boobs instead, lol </div></div>
millett, did you get my PM on this? im still concerned about the stiffness in the turret and lack of adjustment i seem to have. i cant get to the range to test but i am hoping that if i have 1/4 knobs that i am moa/moa? at least i will know that much of the equation. can you post here or just reply to my PM. thanks
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
It sounds like you bought a scope without knowing what you were buying. If the scope is marked 1/4", that's probably what the adjustments are.
But there's no need to speculate. Go put up a ruler 100 yards away - it doesn't have to be on a shooting range, because you needn't shoot - and use the procedures in this link to determine what your reticle and adjustments are:
Optically Checking Rifle Scopes
It sounds like you bought a scope without knowing what you were buying. If the scope is marked 1/4", that's probably what the adjustments are.
But there's no need to speculate. Go put up a ruler 100 yards away - it doesn't have to be on a shooting range, because you needn't shoot - and use the procedures in this link to determine what your reticle and adjustments are:
Optically Checking Rifle Scopes
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
i knew what i bought, i just didnt know there was an option or the possibility of mil/moa. it was before i found this site. i imagine i have moa/moa. but my concern stems from the info included with the scope which contains many contradictions. i used the info provided by the maker, which after getting the scope, does not match what i am holding in my hands, to make my choice. when the book says 72 clicks per turn of and i only get 64 you start to doubt the things that you have read. they say 90
MOA adjustmet, i count 64. if they went from 1/8 to 1/4, no offense millett, but how hard is it to change your literature to reflect the changes? even the PDF is incorrect on the site. over all with the exception of the stiffness in a few knobs, i am happy with the scope. having not shot it yet cant say much else. here in my town we are limited in ranges. closest public is 80 miles away and only open 2nd and 4th sundays. and i am in the city so i cant just plop down and set a yard stick 100 yards out and start sighting without meeting the local area SWAT team. but i will check it all out, be sure
i will learn how to use it, no doubt there. i havent even fired the gun cause i am learning about reloading and the scope and range estimation and mils and moa and how to use all that stuff so when i do get started shooting, i will have a better command of the situation. i just have to know all the variables and my info is a little skewed. like i said, GIGO
i knew what i bought, i just didnt know there was an option or the possibility of mil/moa. it was before i found this site. i imagine i have moa/moa. but my concern stems from the info included with the scope which contains many contradictions. i used the info provided by the maker, which after getting the scope, does not match what i am holding in my hands, to make my choice. when the book says 72 clicks per turn of and i only get 64 you start to doubt the things that you have read. they say 90
MOA adjustmet, i count 64. if they went from 1/8 to 1/4, no offense millett, but how hard is it to change your literature to reflect the changes? even the PDF is incorrect on the site. over all with the exception of the stiffness in a few knobs, i am happy with the scope. having not shot it yet cant say much else. here in my town we are limited in ranges. closest public is 80 miles away and only open 2nd and 4th sundays. and i am in the city so i cant just plop down and set a yard stick 100 yards out and start sighting without meeting the local area SWAT team. but i will check it all out, be sure
i will learn how to use it, no doubt there. i havent even fired the gun cause i am learning about reloading and the scope and range estimation and mils and moa and how to use all that stuff so when i do get started shooting, i will have a better command of the situation. i just have to know all the variables and my info is a little skewed. like i said, GIGO
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Not better just easier to calc on a 1 to 10 ratio
Not better just easier to calc on a 1 to 10 ratio
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
This thread would be about 8 posts long if some people spent half the time shooting as they do analyzing self-created hypotheticals.
Oh, and if people realized that humor is 75% timing, 24% innovation, and only 1% being willing to open your big fat mouth and look like an idiot.
Seriously pyrolater, you're over thinking this. Either:
1) It will all be obvious to you if you just get out and shoot some
or
2) You are part of the population who is better off just taking what he is given and making the best of it, analyzing things will only get you in trouble.
Buy a scope used of the forums, try it out, and if you realize you picked the wrong one you can sell it and try a different one. That's the joy of buying used, very little depreciation in most cases.
Finally I would like to read the following obituary for the whole "pick a car, color, shoe" joke. It lived a good life, though a brief one. Like a shooting star it burned brightly for a few instants then fell lifelessly to earth. Let us honor it's legacy by never speaking of it again.
Oh, and if whomever I've insulted decides to take a stab at me over this post; all I can say is it better be good cause I really tee'd this one up for you. Any of you lazy bastards decide to bunt on this one and I'm going to be sorely disappointed. Something more than "I see you've got the 1% down, haven't you." Let's try for a little wordcraft before hitting 'submit' this time.
This thread would be about 8 posts long if some people spent half the time shooting as they do analyzing self-created hypotheticals.
Oh, and if people realized that humor is 75% timing, 24% innovation, and only 1% being willing to open your big fat mouth and look like an idiot.
Seriously pyrolater, you're over thinking this. Either:
1) It will all be obvious to you if you just get out and shoot some
or
2) You are part of the population who is better off just taking what he is given and making the best of it, analyzing things will only get you in trouble.
Buy a scope used of the forums, try it out, and if you realize you picked the wrong one you can sell it and try a different one. That's the joy of buying used, very little depreciation in most cases.
Finally I would like to read the following obituary for the whole "pick a car, color, shoe" joke. It lived a good life, though a brief one. Like a shooting star it burned brightly for a few instants then fell lifelessly to earth. Let us honor it's legacy by never speaking of it again.
Oh, and if whomever I've insulted decides to take a stab at me over this post; all I can say is it better be good cause I really tee'd this one up for you. Any of you lazy bastards decide to bunt on this one and I'm going to be sorely disappointed. Something more than "I see you've got the 1% down, haven't you." Let's try for a little wordcraft before hitting 'submit' this time.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Pyrolater,
The scenario I gave was a purposefully made difficult one. No competition or anything, just a bunch of us wannbe/ex's thinking we can still do something. As proved, not one of us got a second round hit with either set-up.
Like said, get a quality scope. Either of which you originally mentioned will do the job very well. since you are looking to get that dollar range do it. Get the less expensive one and start shooting. Once your see the inside of that scope enough you'll decide if it's going to serve your purpose as you go longer. Ratbert gave a very good idea in that if you buy used and don't smash it, it'll be worth roughly what you paid for it. Sell it if you don't like it. Try everything you can, before you buy another big purchase. Once you start shooting you'll start to see what make sense and what doesn't.
Ratbert,
I think you drove a Gremlin, wore bright yellow golf shirts, and your shoes...were special ordered.
Pyrolater,
The scenario I gave was a purposefully made difficult one. No competition or anything, just a bunch of us wannbe/ex's thinking we can still do something. As proved, not one of us got a second round hit with either set-up.
Like said, get a quality scope. Either of which you originally mentioned will do the job very well. since you are looking to get that dollar range do it. Get the less expensive one and start shooting. Once your see the inside of that scope enough you'll decide if it's going to serve your purpose as you go longer. Ratbert gave a very good idea in that if you buy used and don't smash it, it'll be worth roughly what you paid for it. Sell it if you don't like it. Try everything you can, before you buy another big purchase. Once you start shooting you'll start to see what make sense and what doesn't.
Ratbert,
I think you drove a Gremlin, wore bright yellow golf shirts, and your shoes...were special ordered.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
"don't try to follow what Big Army is doing"
Tasty. I love it.
"don't try to follow what Big Army is doing"
Tasty. I love it.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">i knew what i bought</span>, i just didnt know there was an option or the possibility of mil/moa. it was before i found this site. <span style="font-weight: bold">i imagine i have moa/moa</span>. </div></div>
You know what you bought, but you imagine you have an MOA reticle?
Buddy, you do an awful lot of typing and supposition for having an unfired rifle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">i knew what i bought</span>, i just didnt know there was an option or the possibility of mil/moa. it was before i found this site. <span style="font-weight: bold">i imagine i have moa/moa</span>. </div></div>
You know what you bought, but you imagine you have an MOA reticle?
Buddy, you do an awful lot of typing and supposition for having an unfired rifle.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dude, you are completely barking up the wrong tree... if you honestly think the soldier on the ground can ask for a specific scope and receive it, you are highly mistaken. The Leupolds supplied are part of a "package" and their use has nothing to do with features or the end user, but a part of contracting.
The USMC uses Mil / Mil S&Bs, there are SOCOM units that use Horus Reticles, there are others that use NF with Mil / MOA and still even more using Leupolds that have been in service since the 80's... it's across the board and hardly makes sense or makes it right as to what is best for you.
Be your own man and make up your own mind and don't try to follow what Big Army is doing because the majority have no clue and just use what is handed to them or what has been around since 1982.
it's funny you can read articles about the USMC changing to the S&B and then quoting a SGT who is a Sniper about converting yards to meters because S&B scopes that adjust in Mil / Mil dont' work with yards...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
He said snipers in the Marine Corps had been asking for a variable scope for years, and the new scope was selected from a number of different models through field-testing by Marine sniper instructors in Quantico, Va., last summer.
Not every scout-sniper was initially impressed with the scope. Most of the shooters are tried-and-true gun nuts and convincing these Marines to part with proven products of the past was tough. Still, after seeing it in action, they have a new love.
“I was opposed to this scope for the simple fact that it’s metric and most Americans are used to yards,” Starner said. “But now that we’ve got it, launched it and used it, it’s an outstanding scope.”
He said snipers got around the difference in measurement standards by using a simple formula to convert yards to meters.
“I carry a calculator with me everywhere I go,” Starner said. “It’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks.”</div></div>
This proves right here you can't go by what the guy on the ground does because even they, being slotted as snipers don't understand it all. Now granted this was written in 2006, but it shows a clear lack of understanding among the military. </div></div>
Not barking up the wrong tree. I was just curious. I work for a municipality so I know how government works. Usually not very well. Just curious.
I have not and never will snipe for a living. If I get out and do some serious practice one or twice a month I'll be happy with that. I'm still in the wanabe stage on long range shooting but you got to start some place.
It would seem the leupold package deal would be mils and MOAs unless it was a special order or run just for the military contract so if there are any ex military that used that system I was wondering how they liked it and if they knew there was anything different.
If I want to stay consistent with the guys around here I am going to have a mixed set up or I'm going to be the new guy telling everybody how they have been doing it all wrong for as long as they have been doing it and that never goes over real well.
If I can prove I can shoot before I piss every body off that might give me a little more credit when I show up with my fancy new scope that has matching reticle and adjustments.
Every one that has posted and told me to just go pick a set up and go shoot is right. I got a lot of info here and now I'll know what I'm getting when I make a pick.
I find this little discussion quite interesting but I can see how something like this can go on for ever and never get resolved if it did there would only be one reticle and one set up for turrets.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dude, you are completely barking up the wrong tree... if you honestly think the soldier on the ground can ask for a specific scope and receive it, you are highly mistaken. The Leupolds supplied are part of a "package" and their use has nothing to do with features or the end user, but a part of contracting.
The USMC uses Mil / Mil S&Bs, there are SOCOM units that use Horus Reticles, there are others that use NF with Mil / MOA and still even more using Leupolds that have been in service since the 80's... it's across the board and hardly makes sense or makes it right as to what is best for you.
Be your own man and make up your own mind and don't try to follow what Big Army is doing because the majority have no clue and just use what is handed to them or what has been around since 1982.
it's funny you can read articles about the USMC changing to the S&B and then quoting a SGT who is a Sniper about converting yards to meters because S&B scopes that adjust in Mil / Mil dont' work with yards...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
He said snipers in the Marine Corps had been asking for a variable scope for years, and the new scope was selected from a number of different models through field-testing by Marine sniper instructors in Quantico, Va., last summer.
Not every scout-sniper was initially impressed with the scope. Most of the shooters are tried-and-true gun nuts and convincing these Marines to part with proven products of the past was tough. Still, after seeing it in action, they have a new love.
“I was opposed to this scope for the simple fact that it’s metric and most Americans are used to yards,” Starner said. “But now that we’ve got it, launched it and used it, it’s an outstanding scope.”
He said snipers got around the difference in measurement standards by using a simple formula to convert yards to meters.
“I carry a calculator with me everywhere I go,” Starner said. “It’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks.”</div></div>
This proves right here you can't go by what the guy on the ground does because even they, being slotted as snipers don't understand it all. Now granted this was written in 2006, but it shows a clear lack of understanding among the military. </div></div>
Not barking up the wrong tree. I was just curious. I work for a municipality so I know how government works. Usually not very well. Just curious.
I have not and never will snipe for a living. If I get out and do some serious practice one or twice a month I'll be happy with that. I'm still in the wanabe stage on long range shooting but you got to start some place.
It would seem the leupold package deal would be mils and MOAs unless it was a special order or run just for the military contract so if there are any ex military that used that system I was wondering how they liked it and if they knew there was anything different.
If I want to stay consistent with the guys around here I am going to have a mixed set up or I'm going to be the new guy telling everybody how they have been doing it all wrong for as long as they have been doing it and that never goes over real well.
If I can prove I can shoot before I piss every body off that might give me a little more credit when I show up with my fancy new scope that has matching reticle and adjustments.
Every one that has posted and told me to just go pick a set up and go shoot is right. I got a lot of info here and now I'll know what I'm getting when I make a pick.
I find this little discussion quite interesting but I can see how something like this can go on for ever and never get resolved if it did there would only be one reticle and one set up for turrets.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">i knew what i bought</span>, i just didnt know there was an option or the possibility of mil/moa. it was before i found this site. <span style="font-weight: bold">i imagine i have moa/moa</span>. </div></div>
You know what you bought, but you imagine you have an MOA reticle?
Buddy, you do an awful lot of typing and supposition for having an unfired rifle. </div></div>
what i do is alot of reading before i go buy stuff. i only got back on the net three weeks ago, so before that i didnt know that there was a possibility of mil/mil or mil/moa or that there being a difference could cause a problem or be an issue that i would have to concern myself with. i didnt even know how to range, but im getting better at it. i have made no secret that this is my first bolt action or for that matter my first center fire rifle. with research i chose the savage and with a reccomendation i chose the millett. then i bought the press and dies, tumbler, trimmer, scale, measure and rest of the reloading stuff. then i bought the lake city match brass, bullets and some primers. then i lost my job. then i got DSL and found you guys. now sobrbiker this is where it gets good, so pay attention. the same manual that came with the scope and that says i have 90 MOA and 72 clicks per revolution and 1/8" adjustments, shows the mil-dotbar (thats what millett calls it) to be laid out in mils, but with corresponding equivalent values in MOA. now here is the good part, since i cant trust the three things from that book that i have found to be wrong, i am already guessing (imagining as you say) that i cant trust the fourth thing. hell either i am due for a break and i will have moa/moa or i am the unluckiest SOB on this site (except that kid with the questionable taste in girlfriends) and i have mil/moa. but until i can get 100 yards measured in an area where i can lay the gun out, i really wont know. i did PM the Millett guy but i have gotten no reply as of yet. but i have to know before i can make the right corrections dont i? hell it would be downright irresponsible to operate a weapon with out the proper education, dont you imagine?
so sobrbiker, and by the way, glad to hear your sobr while bikering, yes i do do (lol, he said do do) alot of typing for a guy with an unfired rifle. but im sitting on everything i need to start shooting except a range, and the correct info to make the proper corrections. see i just want to know before i squeeze the trigger so i can get it straight in my mind. and as soon as my unemployment kicks in i plan on taking care of that and spending as much time shooting as money will allow.
but i thank you for your time and concern for me.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AXEMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">i knew what i bought</span>, i just didnt know there was an option or the possibility of mil/moa. it was before i found this site. <span style="font-weight: bold">i imagine i have moa/moa</span>. </div></div>
You know what you bought, but you imagine you have an MOA reticle?
Buddy, you do an awful lot of typing and supposition for having an unfired rifle. </div></div>
what i do is alot of reading before i go buy stuff. i only got back on the net three weeks ago, so before that i didnt know that there was a possibility of mil/mil or mil/moa or that there being a difference could cause a problem or be an issue that i would have to concern myself with. i didnt even know how to range, but im getting better at it. i have made no secret that this is my first bolt action or for that matter my first center fire rifle. with research i chose the savage and with a reccomendation i chose the millett. then i bought the press and dies, tumbler, trimmer, scale, measure and rest of the reloading stuff. then i bought the lake city match brass, bullets and some primers. then i lost my job. then i got DSL and found you guys. now sobrbiker this is where it gets good, so pay attention. the same manual that came with the scope and that says i have 90 MOA and 72 clicks per revolution and 1/8" adjustments, shows the mil-dotbar (thats what millett calls it) to be laid out in mils, but with corresponding equivalent values in MOA. now here is the good part, since i cant trust the three things from that book that i have found to be wrong, i am already guessing (imagining as you say) that i cant trust the fourth thing. hell either i am due for a break and i will have moa/moa or i am the unluckiest SOB on this site (except that kid with the questionable taste in girlfriends) and i have mil/moa. but until i can get 100 yards measured in an area where i can lay the gun out, i really wont know. i did PM the Millett guy but i have gotten no reply as of yet. but i have to know before i can make the right corrections dont i? hell it would be downright irresponsible to operate a weapon with out the proper education, dont you imagine?
so sobrbiker, and by the way, glad to hear your sobr while bikering, yes i do do (lol, he said do do) alot of typing for a guy with an unfired rifle. but im sitting on everything i need to start shooting except a range, and the correct info to make the proper corrections. see i just want to know before i squeeze the trigger so i can get it straight in my mind. and as soon as my unemployment kicks in i plan on taking care of that and spending as much time shooting as money will allow.
but i thank you for your time and concern for me.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It will all be obvious to you if you just get out and shoot some
</div></div>
This is wisdom...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It will all be obvious to you if you just get out and shoot some
</div></div>
This is wisdom...
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ratbert,
I think you drove a Gremlin, wore bright yellow golf shirts, and your shoes...were special ordered.
</div></div>
That's cheating, because you obviously knew me in high-school. I told you then and I'll tell you now: the color is called "golden maize", not "yellow."
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ratbert,
I think you drove a Gremlin, wore bright yellow golf shirts, and your shoes...were special ordered.
That's cheating, because you obviously knew me in high-school. I told you then and I'll tell you now: the color is called "golden maize", not "yellow."
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
AXEMAN, your reticle if it's the mil-dotbar in the LRS manual <span style="text-decoration: underline">is </span>a mil reticle.
It is basically a version of PR's GenII mildot, and what you have (at 25X) is 1 mil/3.6" at 100yds/3.438 moa between dots center to center and 1/2 mil to the hash marks between the dots.
At 12.5X, it should be 1 mil from center to center of each mark (whether its a hash or a dot), beacuse the reticle is in the second focal plane and the subtension changes. You can hang a yardstick at a measured 100yards and verify/confirm what the manual says (good to do with any optic), heck you can even mark the power ring where the hash marks subtend 2moa and use the reticle as an moa reticle.
But what you have there is the classic mil reticle with moa adjustments.
As far as what your turrets adjust and how much travel you actually have (your reticle may stop moving well before you reach the end clicking turning the dial) you can find that out with the same yardstick at a measured 100yards, the scope needs to not move while you watch adjustments (a box test shooting would be preferable). If you fix the scope level and the yardstick plumb you can even check that the scope tracks vertically properly. Anyway, back to the yardstick, fix the scope and dial 20 moa (80 clicks if you have 1/4 markings)without moving the rifle/scope and see how much it moved down. If it moved closer to 21 inches you have actual 1/4 moa clicks, if it moved 20 inches you have 20 inches per hundred yards (IPHY or "shooter's moa"). If you leveled and plumbed the rifle/scope and yardstick the crosshairs should have not moved left/right in relation to the stick.
Testing all of the above is advised, no matter what email you get back from Millet, as its advised on any scope. You can never 100% trust your gear until its tested.
Don't be afraid to take it to the range and check such things if you are worried about having folks call the law on you for doing it elsewhere, you'll be ahead of the curve when you do get ammo.
AXEMAN, your reticle if it's the mil-dotbar in the LRS manual <span style="text-decoration: underline">is </span>a mil reticle.
It is basically a version of PR's GenII mildot, and what you have (at 25X) is 1 mil/3.6" at 100yds/3.438 moa between dots center to center and 1/2 mil to the hash marks between the dots.
At 12.5X, it should be 1 mil from center to center of each mark (whether its a hash or a dot), beacuse the reticle is in the second focal plane and the subtension changes. You can hang a yardstick at a measured 100yards and verify/confirm what the manual says (good to do with any optic), heck you can even mark the power ring where the hash marks subtend 2moa and use the reticle as an moa reticle.
But what you have there is the classic mil reticle with moa adjustments.
As far as what your turrets adjust and how much travel you actually have (your reticle may stop moving well before you reach the end clicking turning the dial) you can find that out with the same yardstick at a measured 100yards, the scope needs to not move while you watch adjustments (a box test shooting would be preferable). If you fix the scope level and the yardstick plumb you can even check that the scope tracks vertically properly. Anyway, back to the yardstick, fix the scope and dial 20 moa (80 clicks if you have 1/4 markings)without moving the rifle/scope and see how much it moved down. If it moved closer to 21 inches you have actual 1/4 moa clicks, if it moved 20 inches you have 20 inches per hundred yards (IPHY or "shooter's moa"). If you leveled and plumbed the rifle/scope and yardstick the crosshairs should have not moved left/right in relation to the stick.
Testing all of the above is advised, no matter what email you get back from Millet, as its advised on any scope. You can never 100% trust your gear until its tested.
Don't be afraid to take it to the range and check such things if you are worried about having folks call the law on you for doing it elsewhere, you'll be ahead of the curve when you do get ammo.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
The moa markings on the picture, btw are to tell you how thick or thin the lines are, and the .72moa on the dot is to let you know that the dot is .2mil, but really leads me to believe that the designer thinks in IPHY, because a .2mil dot is .72 IPHY.......
Good luck with the Millett and let us know what you find re: the adjustments and range of adjustment.
The moa markings on the picture, btw are to tell you how thick or thin the lines are, and the .72moa on the dot is to let you know that the dot is .2mil, but really leads me to believe that the designer thinks in IPHY, because a .2mil dot is .72 IPHY.......
Good luck with the Millett and let us know what you find re: the adjustments and range of adjustment.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I want to stay consistent with the guys around here I am going to have a mixed set up or I'm going to be the new guy telling everybody how they have been doing it all wrong for as long as they have been doing it and that never goes over real well.
If I can prove I can shoot before I piss every body off that might give me a little more credit when I show up with my fancy new scope that has matching reticle and adjustments.</div></div>
A better method is to just pick what you think will work for you based upon what you have read here or done on the shooting line.
Don't worry about convincing the crusty guys at the range. If what they are using is working for them that's all that matters. If they have the skill to use the gear then they will succeed. Most of those guys have been doing it their own way for a long time.
If you want to demonstrate the superiority of a different system, the best way to do it is with rounds downrange. Those who care will come and ask you what you are running. Those who don't wouldn't change anyway.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I want to stay consistent with the guys around here I am going to have a mixed set up or I'm going to be the new guy telling everybody how they have been doing it all wrong for as long as they have been doing it and that never goes over real well.
If I can prove I can shoot before I piss every body off that might give me a little more credit when I show up with my fancy new scope that has matching reticle and adjustments.</div></div>
A better method is to just pick what you think will work for you based upon what you have read here or done on the shooting line.
Don't worry about convincing the crusty guys at the range. If what they are using is working for them that's all that matters. If they have the skill to use the gear then they will succeed. Most of those guys have been doing it their own way for a long time.
If you want to demonstrate the superiority of a different system, the best way to do it is with rounds downrange. Those who care will come and ask you what you are running. Those who don't wouldn't change anyway.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
sobr i appreciate the advice. i didnt mean to sound like a dick, its just kind of maddening when you read and read and make your decision and then you find out what you read was wrong. kinda like those people that built with the chinese sheetrock must feel. and i believe you are right except that they have a detent on the zoom ring at 10x and thats where the mil-dotbar actually equals 3.6" @ 100y and honestly thats the first thing that has been right in the manual. trust me, this wasnt my first choice in optics, i just didnt have the extra $600 for a leupold MIV LRT and i needed to make sure i had a scope for this rifle.
id lay out in my yard, but this isnt the best neighborhood to try that. my neighbors are cool, even the guy that had a body dumped in his yard last year. but i dont have a clear line of sight out to 100 yards anywhere around my house. i really just want as much info packed in my head so that when i do get to start testing loads and sighting in, i am able to get the most out of my choice of equipment.
so i am mil/moa, 1/4" and still unsure of travel. like i said i observed that the turrets were turned all the way down to the bottom of their adjustment, but not til after i counted the moa and put the rifle backin the safe did it click that the windage being all the way to the end of the travel (left) would have an affect on my elevation travel. alot of what i am stating here is to give record to these issues so in case anyone does search, they will find this info and save themselves a few steps.
the picture says the dots are .72 moa. my reticle has alternating dots and bars. dot to dot or bar to bar is 2 mil and dot to bar is one mil, the posts at 12,3,6 and 9 are 1 moa so i have some reference points that i think i can trust. i will take it out of the safe again and turn the windage and elevation to the center of their adjustment. since there isnt a 1000 range anywhere close i really dont need a 20 moa base, but it would suck to get this all set up, get good at it and then have to add the 20 moa base to allow me to make an attempt 1000 and have to redo all my dope. i HATE to redo stuff. when i build my 4x4, i planned it all out so when i had it apart i could do everything that needed to be done. no since dropping an axle or pulling a motor twice.
so in summation, didnt mean to be a dick, thanks for the help and i will keep anybody interested posted. really man all i want to do is shoot. my ex job was always shakey and i knew it was gonna end one way or the other. this time i wanted to have something to do while i was unemployeed, so i bought this rig.
sobr i appreciate the advice. i didnt mean to sound like a dick, its just kind of maddening when you read and read and make your decision and then you find out what you read was wrong. kinda like those people that built with the chinese sheetrock must feel. and i believe you are right except that they have a detent on the zoom ring at 10x and thats where the mil-dotbar actually equals 3.6" @ 100y and honestly thats the first thing that has been right in the manual. trust me, this wasnt my first choice in optics, i just didnt have the extra $600 for a leupold MIV LRT and i needed to make sure i had a scope for this rifle.
id lay out in my yard, but this isnt the best neighborhood to try that. my neighbors are cool, even the guy that had a body dumped in his yard last year. but i dont have a clear line of sight out to 100 yards anywhere around my house. i really just want as much info packed in my head so that when i do get to start testing loads and sighting in, i am able to get the most out of my choice of equipment.
so i am mil/moa, 1/4" and still unsure of travel. like i said i observed that the turrets were turned all the way down to the bottom of their adjustment, but not til after i counted the moa and put the rifle backin the safe did it click that the windage being all the way to the end of the travel (left) would have an affect on my elevation travel. alot of what i am stating here is to give record to these issues so in case anyone does search, they will find this info and save themselves a few steps.
the picture says the dots are .72 moa. my reticle has alternating dots and bars. dot to dot or bar to bar is 2 mil and dot to bar is one mil, the posts at 12,3,6 and 9 are 1 moa so i have some reference points that i think i can trust. i will take it out of the safe again and turn the windage and elevation to the center of their adjustment. since there isnt a 1000 range anywhere close i really dont need a 20 moa base, but it would suck to get this all set up, get good at it and then have to add the 20 moa base to allow me to make an attempt 1000 and have to redo all my dope. i HATE to redo stuff. when i build my 4x4, i planned it all out so when i had it apart i could do everything that needed to be done. no since dropping an axle or pulling a motor twice.
so in summation, didnt mean to be a dick, thanks for the help and i will keep anybody interested posted. really man all i want to do is shoot. my ex job was always shakey and i knew it was gonna end one way or the other. this time i wanted to have something to do while i was unemployeed, so i bought this rig.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
A better method is to just pick what you think will work for you based upon what you have read here or done on the shooting line.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't worry about convincing the crusty guys at the range. If what they are using is working for them that's all that matters. If they have the skill to use the gear then they will succeed. Most of those guys have been doing it their own way for a long time.
If you want to demonstrate the superiority of a different system, the best way to do it is with rounds downrange. Those who care will come and ask you what you are running. Those who don't wouldn't change anyway.</div></div>
I don't really care about the crusty old guys at the range. I've been followed around a few times and pestered about what I was doing and I've done the same to others.
My concern is ( i hope the guys don't read this thread ) pissing off the Local LEO sniper types. When we get a new guy on our department ( fire) the last thing we want to hear is " Thats not how we did it at the academy" or "In Cali we do things this way"
After reading all everyone has written I believe mil mil or MOA Moa is defiantly the way to go. I just have to figure out how I'm going tell the guys that are doing it for a living that my way is better.
and, Its one of those thing when some one asks you for advice and you give what you feel is good sound advice they blow ya off. Thats basically what I'm going to be doing.
I just hate to do that first thing.
I'll have to find me my own spotter and out shoot the other guys.
A better method is to just pick what you think will work for you based upon what you have read here or done on the shooting line.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't worry about convincing the crusty guys at the range. If what they are using is working for them that's all that matters. If they have the skill to use the gear then they will succeed. Most of those guys have been doing it their own way for a long time.
If you want to demonstrate the superiority of a different system, the best way to do it is with rounds downrange. Those who care will come and ask you what you are running. Those who don't wouldn't change anyway.</div></div>
I don't really care about the crusty old guys at the range. I've been followed around a few times and pestered about what I was doing and I've done the same to others.
My concern is ( i hope the guys don't read this thread ) pissing off the Local LEO sniper types. When we get a new guy on our department ( fire) the last thing we want to hear is " Thats not how we did it at the academy" or "In Cali we do things this way"
After reading all everyone has written I believe mil mil or MOA Moa is defiantly the way to go. I just have to figure out how I'm going tell the guys that are doing it for a living that my way is better.
and, Its one of those thing when some one asks you for advice and you give what you feel is good sound advice they blow ya off. Thats basically what I'm going to be doing.
I just hate to do that first thing.
I'll have to find me my own spotter and out shoot the other guys.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Once upon a time long ago, I had a guy who claimed to be an LEO sniper at my local range near Houston watching me shoot my Accuracy International.
I was doing bolt manipulation drills under time constraints.
I was shooting 5 shots on one inch dots in 20 seconds.
I shot one group, and came back with a 0.5 MOA group. The guy said, "Betcha can't do <span style="font-style: italic">that</span> again.
I couldn't - the next group was 0.43 MOA. He wandered away...
Do what you need to do to improve your shooting. Don't worry about the dickheads at the local range.
Once upon a time long ago, I had a guy who claimed to be an LEO sniper at my local range near Houston watching me shoot my Accuracy International.
I was doing bolt manipulation drills under time constraints.
I was shooting 5 shots on one inch dots in 20 seconds.
I shot one group, and came back with a 0.5 MOA group. The guy said, "Betcha can't do <span style="font-style: italic">that</span> again.
I couldn't - the next group was 0.43 MOA. He wandered away...
Do what you need to do to improve your shooting. Don't worry about the dickheads at the local range.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
My concern is ( i hope the guys don't read this thread ) pissing off the Local LEO sniper types. When we get a new guy on our department ( fire) the last thing we want to hear is " Thats not how we did it at the academy" or "In Cali we do things this way"
After reading all everyone has written I believe mil mil or MOA Moa is defiantly the way to go. I just have to figure out how I'm going tell the guys that are doing it for a living that my way is better.
</div></div>
If they are doing it for a living and closed minded to imroving their chances of doing their job or surviving successfully then that's their problem.
I remember shooting my first "precision rifle" type match. Just a little local deal with 11 shooters adn I had my Choate stocked Salvage with my Bushnell 3200 10X. I placed solidly in the middle-6/11. I was very surprised that of the 5 below me 3 or 4 were LE shooters.
Quit worrying about having to explain yourself to folks on the range and figure out what's best for you. You should see the looks I get when I set my timer, fire a 5 shot string then hop up and jog 25yds out and back dropping behind my rifle for another 5 before the timer beeps. You should be interested in improving your skillset, not popularity.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pyrolater</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
My concern is ( i hope the guys don't read this thread ) pissing off the Local LEO sniper types. When we get a new guy on our department ( fire) the last thing we want to hear is " Thats not how we did it at the academy" or "In Cali we do things this way"
After reading all everyone has written I believe mil mil or MOA Moa is defiantly the way to go. I just have to figure out how I'm going tell the guys that are doing it for a living that my way is better.
</div></div>
If they are doing it for a living and closed minded to imroving their chances of doing their job or surviving successfully then that's their problem.
I remember shooting my first "precision rifle" type match. Just a little local deal with 11 shooters adn I had my Choate stocked Salvage with my Bushnell 3200 10X. I placed solidly in the middle-6/11. I was very surprised that of the 5 below me 3 or 4 were LE shooters.
Quit worrying about having to explain yourself to folks on the range and figure out what's best for you. You should see the looks I get when I set my timer, fire a 5 shot string then hop up and jog 25yds out and back dropping behind my rifle for another 5 before the timer beeps. You should be interested in improving your skillset, not popularity.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
You should talk to Rob01, he can share about a firefighter whipping cops asses in comps.......
You should talk to Rob01, he can share about a firefighter whipping cops asses in comps.......
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
That is the plan but I want to be kinda covert going in.
There is a lot I can learn from them and I'm looking forward to that.
That is the plan but I want to be kinda covert going in.
There is a lot I can learn from them and I'm looking forward to that.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You should talk to Rob01, he can share about a firefighter whipping cops asses in comps....... </div></div>
Amazingly enough there are lots of LE Snipers who don't compete because they are afraid of getting beaten.
I compete because it will show me where I am weak. If I get beaten then I know where to concentrate my efforts. I have no ego when I am on the firing line. There are no excuses. The bullet tells the truth.
Moreover I can learn from the other competitors. If I loose and I learn, I still win.
Now here is a real shocker.....many LE and Mil snipers only know what they have been taught. They don't seek training and knowledge outside of what has been provided for them.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You should talk to Rob01, he can share about a firefighter whipping cops asses in comps....... </div></div>
Amazingly enough there are lots of LE Snipers who don't compete because they are afraid of getting beaten.
I compete because it will show me where I am weak. If I get beaten then I know where to concentrate my efforts. I have no ego when I am on the firing line. There are no excuses. The bullet tells the truth.
Moreover I can learn from the other competitors. If I loose and I learn, I still win.
Now here is a real shocker.....many LE and Mil snipers only know what they have been taught. They don't seek training and knowledge outside of what has been provided for them.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Both military and L.E. snipers share a common trait - there's a lot more to being a sniper in either role than shooting.
Having said that, if I were going to be betting on human lives with my shooting, I'd work at being proficient at it.
Cops often have to fight - but you don't see many of them spending their own time and funds in martial arts training.
There are cops who are totally dedicated to being proficient at the tasks it takes to do the job. On this site, cowboy_bravo is one such. There are others.
And there are cops to whom being a cop is just a job.
Both military and L.E. snipers share a common trait - there's a lot more to being a sniper in either role than shooting.
Having said that, if I were going to be betting on human lives with my shooting, I'd work at being proficient at it.
Cops often have to fight - but you don't see many of them spending their own time and funds in martial arts training.
There are cops who are totally dedicated to being proficient at the tasks it takes to do the job. On this site, cowboy_bravo is one such. There are others.
And there are cops to whom being a cop is just a job.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
Axe-
I am in the same boat as you. I purchased my first centerfire on a budget and was given a scope recommendation (09' TRS-1) from the dealer after telling him what the gun was for. I read more as the deal was in the works and realized that I would like a Mil/Mil or Moa/Moa set up. So I asked to have the Mil turrets on the TRS-1 and was told the Mil turrets would not be available for several months. With more research and evaluation of my budget I decided to make it work. I was not real impressed with the outdated literature that arrived in the box and the same PDF on the website, oh well.
I've only been out a few times since I got the gun but I bring my dope in inches and moa and dial it. Corrections and holds can take a little math. A member of another forum was nice enough to provided me with the constants required for ranging on different magnifications since the TRS-1 is SFP. I would be happy to pass them on.
It works out pretty well on 16X mag with the TRS-1, 1 "apparent" Mil is equal to 2.5" @ 100 yds or 2.5 SMOA (IPHY). With 1/4 MOA turrets, it will take 10 clicks to shift the impact of the shot 1 apparent MIL. Much like having .1 Mil turrets. I know lots of people like to double check the manufactures numbers on a SFP scope, I have not got around to it.
Once I get some more trigger time (and my job back) I'll retire this scope onto a MK II trainer for a Mil/Mil FFP.
Axe-
I am in the same boat as you. I purchased my first centerfire on a budget and was given a scope recommendation (09' TRS-1) from the dealer after telling him what the gun was for. I read more as the deal was in the works and realized that I would like a Mil/Mil or Moa/Moa set up. So I asked to have the Mil turrets on the TRS-1 and was told the Mil turrets would not be available for several months. With more research and evaluation of my budget I decided to make it work. I was not real impressed with the outdated literature that arrived in the box and the same PDF on the website, oh well.
I've only been out a few times since I got the gun but I bring my dope in inches and moa and dial it. Corrections and holds can take a little math. A member of another forum was nice enough to provided me with the constants required for ranging on different magnifications since the TRS-1 is SFP. I would be happy to pass them on.
It works out pretty well on 16X mag with the TRS-1, 1 "apparent" Mil is equal to 2.5" @ 100 yds or 2.5 SMOA (IPHY). With 1/4 MOA turrets, it will take 10 clicks to shift the impact of the shot 1 apparent MIL. Much like having .1 Mil turrets. I know lots of people like to double check the manufactures numbers on a SFP scope, I have not got around to it.
Once I get some more trigger time (and my job back) I'll retire this scope onto a MK II trainer for a Mil/Mil FFP.
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
did you see how much travel you had in elevetion? i dont think the 90MOA claim is attainable, but i have to get it closer to zero. the booklet says that the reticle is true mil (3.6) at 10x and has a detent as well as a mark for reference. but like i said, nothing in that book has been correct so far, so i have my doubts. any info you can pass on would be great, post it here so everybody can benefit. lol provided they search. thanks
hey do you suppose that the moa knobs could just be replaced with mil knobs with no other modifications to the scope? i sent the Millett guy that visits this site a PM, but its a holiday weekend and i havent heard back from him yet. boy that would solve some issues huh?
did you see how much travel you had in elevetion? i dont think the 90MOA claim is attainable, but i have to get it closer to zero. the booklet says that the reticle is true mil (3.6) at 10x and has a detent as well as a mark for reference. but like i said, nothing in that book has been correct so far, so i have my doubts. any info you can pass on would be great, post it here so everybody can benefit. lol provided they search. thanks
hey do you suppose that the moa knobs could just be replaced with mil knobs with no other modifications to the scope? i sent the Millett guy that visits this site a PM, but its a holiday weekend and i havent heard back from him yet. boy that would solve some issues huh?
Re: Are milrad knobs really better than moa knobs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ratbert,
I think you drove a Gremlin, wore bright yellow golf shirts, and your shoes...were special ordered.
</div></div>
That's cheating, because you obviously knew me in high-school. I told you then and I'll tell you now: the color is called "golden maize", not "yellow." </div></div>
You're avatar reminds me of a guy I DID go to high school with...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ratbert,
I think you drove a Gremlin, wore bright yellow golf shirts, and your shoes...were special ordered.
That's cheating, because you obviously knew me in high-school. I told you then and I'll tell you now: the color is called "golden maize", not "yellow." </div></div>
You're avatar reminds me of a guy I DID go to high school with...
Similar threads
