Ok my peeps... school me a little...
Here is the story: Got a deal on a Leupold 6-18x Mark 2 Mil-dot scope. Bright and sharp image, I like it just fine. Was ranging with it at know distances to test my estimation accuracy and got some wild numbers... figured it out after a phone call to Leupold. They put a 14x mil-dot reticle in the scope. When i was ranging with it, it was cranked to 18x. Ok, at 18x, multiply the final range calculation by 18/14 and you get the corrected distance... not great, but not a problem
This scope lives at 18x. Some have told me to dial it in to 14x and stick a knife in it, but that offends my sensibilities. It also offends me that Leupold would put their name on this scope with its inherent flaw.
Anyway, on to my dilemma. Since it lives on 18x, I have corrected my cheat sheets for the 18/14 factor. But I have noticed something spooky.
When I am using the mil-dots for hold over at a given zero, there does not seem to be a need for the reverse correction factor, i.e. 14/18. That bakes my noodle. This is a second focal plane reticle, which may or may not explain this effect, but I cannot reason through it.
When i use the mil-dots to range, I need the 18/14 correction factor. But, when I use the mil-dots for hold over, I don't.
I noticed this when I corrected my mil-dot hold over by 14/18 and the results were way off... but when I use the generic Sierra V6 mil-dot table, it is spot on.
WTF am I missing?
Here is the story: Got a deal on a Leupold 6-18x Mark 2 Mil-dot scope. Bright and sharp image, I like it just fine. Was ranging with it at know distances to test my estimation accuracy and got some wild numbers... figured it out after a phone call to Leupold. They put a 14x mil-dot reticle in the scope. When i was ranging with it, it was cranked to 18x. Ok, at 18x, multiply the final range calculation by 18/14 and you get the corrected distance... not great, but not a problem
This scope lives at 18x. Some have told me to dial it in to 14x and stick a knife in it, but that offends my sensibilities. It also offends me that Leupold would put their name on this scope with its inherent flaw.
Anyway, on to my dilemma. Since it lives on 18x, I have corrected my cheat sheets for the 18/14 factor. But I have noticed something spooky.
When I am using the mil-dots for hold over at a given zero, there does not seem to be a need for the reverse correction factor, i.e. 14/18. That bakes my noodle. This is a second focal plane reticle, which may or may not explain this effect, but I cannot reason through it.
When i use the mil-dots to range, I need the 18/14 correction factor. But, when I use the mil-dots for hold over, I don't.
I noticed this when I corrected my mil-dot hold over by 14/18 and the results were way off... but when I use the generic Sierra V6 mil-dot table, it is spot on.
WTF am I missing?