Advanced Marksmanship MOA adjust

[244083316]

Hello. Newbie here.

I have what is probably a basic question about moa adjustment.
My scope is a 1/4 moa and I know that 4 clicks moves the impact 1 inch at 100 yards, but is that true for, say 400 yards?

If I want to impact one inch higher at 400 yards is it still four clicks, or do I need to multiply yardage x 4 and adjust 16 clicks?

Thanks!

 

[buggsb]

Re: MOA adjust

MOA is an angular measurement therefore the distance the impact is moved by each 1/4 MOA "Click" increases in direct proportion to the distance.

At 400 yards each click will move the impact approximately 1 inch...at 800 yards each click will move the impact approximately 2 inches....and back at 200 yards, it will be approxiamtely 1/2"... etc., etc.

 

[Lefty06]

Re: MOA adjust

That pretty much explained it just remember 1 moa =1 inch at 100 yards and at 200 yards 1 moa = 2 inches and so on.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: MOA adjust

Here's a shocker, you may discover, at some point, when and if you learn enough about marksmanship to shoot a group with zero displacement, that the 1/4 minute value of your sight, assuming it is 1/4 minute value, is not going to get you a pinwheel X after you've adjusted it; but, instead overshoots the X. Won't you be pleased when that day comes.

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: MOA adjust

1 MOA is actually 1.047" at 100 yards. So, 1 MOA at 400 yards is exactly 4.188" at 400 yards. It's close enough to get you there at 400, but further out, you need to account for that extra .047 of an inch!

 

[Lindy]

Re: MOA adjust

To illustrate that point with numbers, assume that a load drops 380 inches at 1000 yards, a number that's not far off for a .308 Winchester.

That would be 38 clicks if each were 1.00 inches at 100 yards.

That would be be 36.29 clicks if each were 1.047 inches at 100 yards.

The difference in point of impact is about 17 inches if you think it's one, but it's really the other.

On many targets, that's a big miss.

So, it's a really good idea to know what the scope adjustments really are.

 

[kraigWY]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's close enough to get you there at 400, but further out, you need to account for that extra .047 of an inch!
</div></div>

So lets get picky and confuse new shooters. .047 is .47 at 1000 yards. Less then 1/2 an inch. When I get to where I can tell the differance of 1/2 inch with a .3 inch bullet at 1000 yards I'll worry about it. I don't see that happening.

Shooting is 90% + Menatal. The less we have to worry about the better shooter we are gonna be. So a new shooter comes along asking about MOA, we confus the matter by telling him "forget the inch at 100, its 1.047". Now he's got something else to worry about, "how to account for that extra .047 movement".

Not like we can tell the differance of .047 with a .3 or so bullet.

Let's not confuse the issue with nit picking.

 

[Lindy]

Re: MOA adjust

You might wish to read the post just previous to yours if you didn't - or read it again.

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: MOA adjust

I think it is important to inform someone the proper and correct way to calculate their drop. Of all people, you should know this.

Let's take my flat shooting 260 Rem shooting a 140 pointed VLD at 2840 fps. My scope in 1/4 MOA adjustments takes me 26.5 MOA to 1K yards. If my scope is 1/4" adjustment, or if my drop is calculated in inches or 1/4" increments, then I would assume a 27.75 drop. That is about a 13" difference at 1K, and that can mean a miss vs. a hit. <span style="font-weight: bold">So, yeah, I think it's important to "confuse" a new shooter, if that's what you call it.</span>

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

Course the .47 is moot IF as many have opined the MOA scopes are more like inch scopes so a 380" drop is 38 on your scope's dial. just saying

Boils down to its alot of talk until you shoot and record.

But talk keeps the interweb wheels turning.

 

[kraigWY]

Re: MOA adjust

OK maybe I'm getting this wrong, math isn't my strong suit.

Let's look at it this way.

I shoot a Super Match M1A in service rifle 1000 yard matches. I just checked my score books. My 100 yard zero is "9" up. My 1000 yard Zero is 46 down. (one "min" clicks with the hood knotch giving you 1/2 min changes). That is effectively 36 Min change. If I use 1 inch instead of 1.047 that would be a 1.692 differance on the target or would that be a 16.92 change??

Now think about this. I have a Mosin that shot 8 inches high. I did some figuring and came up with the ideal if I lowered the rear sight .0061 it would move the impact down one inch. OK, that means (10 * .0061) .061 at 1000 yards. If we replace the .0061 with .047, then we get .470 at 1000 yards. If we take that .47 and multiply it by 36 (each click being 1.047 instead of 1") that would be 16.92.

I'm not stating, I'm Asking. Is this a better way of looking at it?

 

[BobinNC]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Course the .47 is moot IF as many have opined the MOA scopes are more like inch scopes so a 380" drop is 38 on your scope's dial. just saying

Boils down to its alot of talk until you shoot and record.

But talk keeps the interweb wheels turning. </div></div>

notquiteright,

Let's test that theory that 0.047" is moot.

Take a 308 cal 175 gr SMK and launch it @ 2675 FPS.

Now calculate your drops as both MOA and IPHY @ 1000 yds
using a JBM table and G7 BC's for both:

1000 Yds Drop -38.1 MOA -39.9 IPHY. Total drop in inches is 399.4"

The difference between them is 1.8 IPHY or 18" @ 1000 yds. So just dialing 39.9 IPHY on an MOA adjusting scope will put you over your intended target by 18". Dialing 38.1 MOA on an IPHY adjusting scope will put you under your intended target by 18".

Still think 0.047" is MOOT?????

And that's why folks like MIL adjusting scopes vice MOA or IPHY one's. Because a MIL is always a MIL.......

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

Bob you twisted it-
The example cited listed a drop in inches and claimed dialing a MOA scope would have the shooter high by enough to miss.

Like I said, seems those on the interweb like to dance a bit. I was just recalling how many who use the inch drop dail on an MOA scope example have also said the scopes are more like inch per than MOA per. My drop tables are inches however my SHOT dope is in what I have actually done. (more to my point than the what ifs so popular to such interweb discussions)

Dance all you want, my comment applied DIRECTLY to previous examples.

 

[Sniper1*]

Re: MOA adjust

BobinNC - I agree with your fundamentals on a mil is a mil. I am an IPHY guy and still find it easier in my head to work with those numbers. I am not worried about a partner or a spotter to talk to me in mils either. If that were the case we would all be consistent, mils, moa, or IPHY.

But, even in MIL adjusting scopes I am sure that there is some error in each click. Just like my IPHY scopes are very close to being perfect, they are not. I also have not found many MOA scopes that track exactly 1.047" per 4 clicks at 100 yards. Most are a touch over or under. I think most MIL scopes will be the same.

That's why a guys needs to shoot a tracking drill and figure out his specific adjustments for his specific scope.

Just my .02!

 

[BobinNC]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sniper1*</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BobinNC - I agree with your fundamentals on a mil is a mil. I am an IPHY guy and still find it easier in my head to work with those numbers. I am not worried about a partner or a spotter to talk to me in mils either. If that were the case we would all be consistent, mils, moa, or IPHY.

But, even in MIL adjusting scopes I am sure that there is some error in each click. Just like my IPHY scopes are very close to being perfect, they are not. I also have not found many MOA scopes that track exactly 1.047" per 4 clicks at 100 yards. Most are a touch over or under. I think most MIL scopes will be the same.

That's why a guys needs to shoot a tracking drill and figure out his specific adjustments for his specific scope.

Just my .02! </div></div>

Sniper1*,

There's nothing you said I disagree with. Testing your scope to find out it's specific adjustment variables, and then confirming those variables on the range is the key. And test and verify you must, no matter how your scope adjusts: MILS, MOA, or IPHY.

But there is a common belief that exists, that says the difference between IPHY and MOA is so small (only a pesky 0.047") that one can interchange one for the other, and not worry whether one's scope actually moves 0.25" or 0.262" with each click of an elevation dial.

Just like there is a common belief, that a scope that adjusts 0.1 MILS per click @ 100 yds. is a MILS adjusting scope; and one that adjusts 1 CM per click @ 100 Meters is a metric adjusting scope; and that they are somehow vastly different.

Hint: they adjust the same.......

 

[BobinNC]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bob you twisted it-
The example cited listed a drop in inches and claimed dialing a MOA scope would have the shooter high by enough to miss.

Like I said, seems those on the interweb like to dance a bit. I was just recalling how many who use the inch drop dail on an MOA scope example have also said the scopes are more like inch per than MOA per. My drop tables are inches however my SHOT dope is in what I have actually done. (more to my point than the what ifs so popular to such interweb discussions)

Dance all you want, my comment applied DIRECTLY to previous examples. </div></div>

notquiteright,

I'm sorry that english is your second language. I was not aware that I twisted anything.

But just for your benefit, let me try again:

If your theoretical drop @ 1000 YDS is 400 inches. And you dial up 40 on a scope that adjusts precisely with clicks that are 0.262" per click: Then you will overshoot your target by 18.8" inches.

Test: 400 inches x 1.047" = 418.8" or 40.0 MOA

On the other hand, if you correctly convert your 400" drop to MOA: Thus

400/1.047"= 38.2 MOA

And then you dial 38.2 MOA on a scope that actually adjusts in IPHY (that is one click equals precisely 0.25"), you will under shoot your target by 18". Because you only dialed enough elevation to compensate for 382" of drop.

That's my dance, what yours?????

 

[ColoWyo]

Re: MOA adjust

My train of thought is. Or was, hell I don't know.

I think the confusion comes from this (me included). The difference at 100 yards is .047. So if we double that out to 200yards, it would seem that the difference would be .094 inches and

.141 @ 300 yards
.188 @ 400 yards
.235 @ 500 yards

and so on to 1000 yards which would be .47 inches.

Now I've also read that it's a 5% error which is obviously more that .047 inches at 1000 yards.

I all I know is that I put all my info into Loadbase, it gives me my dope and I usually hit the black. On the vertical anyways. Wind, not so often.

So frankly, I would love a good explanation of my confusion above.

 

[Lindy]

Re: MOA adjust

The POI error is the drop in inches multiplied by the error, as Bob shows above, and as I did above that.

And 0.047 rounds to 0.05, which is 5 percent of 1.0.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

Bob-
I suppose you can pretend, it is the interweb where personal attack is the best response.

My english is far above a great many posters online and yet you chose to comment on mine. More telling on you than me sir.

My ONLY point was that those who say there will be an large error if the shooter dialed the 380" inch listed bullet drop on their MOA scope as 38 showing on the dial have also declared most MOA scopes to be more like inch scopes so the error would be slight if apparent.

Nothing more, no classic interweb dance to another example. I have seen a multiude of bullet drop tables in inches. I suppose there are some in MOA or MIL but the example used was in inches.

Course out in the real world there are so many reasons why a first round hit was not going to happen that only a few very uninformed or arrogant would still expect a hit.

But again it is the interweb.

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: MOA adjust

My head feels like a pretzel! (Talladega nights)

You guys are actually funny. There's several different ways to calulate this, and get to the same answer. Here's as simple as I know how to put it.

My load chrono'd this weekend:
260 Rem, 140 pointed VLD at 2840 fps
The bullet drops a total of 277.76" at 1K
My confirmed drop (and calculated) to 1K is 26.5 MOA (277.76 / 10.47= 26.52 MOA)
277.76" of drop equates to 27.76 IPHY (inch per 100 yards, or 1/4" "clicks")
Now, both of these values stated above get you to the same point of impact (given your scope tracks 100% accurate)

So if you assume you have an MOA scope and dialed 26.5, but the scope adjustment is actually in 1/4", then you dialed 265", which makes you 12.76" low.

And the same thing, just backwards- if you think you have an IPHY scope and dial 27.76 IPHY, and the scope adjustment is actually in MOA, you really dialed 290" of elevation, which will put you 12+ inches over the target.
(27.76 x 10.47=290.64")

This is about as easy as I can make it. I hope this helps!

Chad

 

[Sniper1*]

Re: MOA adjust

BobinNC - I wasn't trying to disagree with you, I was trying to make the point that not matter what your scope adjusts there will likely be some error built into it.

Call it Mils, MOA, IPHY, or whatever, test your scope and shoot your rifle and figure out your adjustment for each given range.

Just like the Ballistic Programs, everybody else's data will get you close and if you are one of the lucky ones, it will be right on.

I agree with everyone on the numbers. Like Lindy says, "Believe the bullet". Well in this situation you can believe the numbers. The math doesn't lie. But, can you believe the bullet, Not unless you have shot it!

 

[maladat]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ColoWyo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
and so on to 1000 yards which would be .47 inches.</div></div>

You are right on so far. 1 MOA is .47" different from 1 IPHY at 1000 yards.

However, 40 MOA is 40*.47"=18.8" different from 40 IPHY at 1000 yards.

If you zero your scope at 100 yards, have 400" drop at 1000, and dial 40 MOA up you are aiming 18.8" high. Those half-inches add up when there are forty of them.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

The problem I have with such examples is they occur only online.

To try and make the point that using true MOA values is important an extreme example must be set up. Perhaps it appeals to the wonks and geeks out there but in real life?

Who here has taken a round they dont know, put it in a rifle rifle they apparently have not used before, mounting a scope they have dont know the specs of and after slipping the scales for a 100 yard zero has then used a bullet drop chart to ring steel at 1000 yards expecting a first round hit?

Most of us, who are not as ignorant or arrogant, run up the distances in increments to get from 100 to 1000 so the 'huge' difference just plain doesnt exist.

Now that the Mil/Mil scope was mentioned I suppose if the first round missed if you only used a bullet drop chart to set the dail that scope must be off? You used the wrong values?

Real world vs geek world gentlemen.

 

[maladat]

Re: MOA adjust

Accounting for sources of error won't hurt anything, and in some circumstances may help.

Insulting everyone who points out the error doesn't make it go away or help your credibility.

 

[Lindy]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Real world vs geek world gentlemen.</div></div>

Well, no.

I took a Leupold 3.5-10X40M3 off a rifle I had been shooting for some time, with a load I knew.

I put a Leupold 6.5-20X50M1 on it, and went shooting. When I got to 1000 yards, I found I needed 2 more MOA on that scope than on the previous one.

Which is how I discovered that the M1 dials on the second scope were IPHY, while the dial on the M3 were MOA - and also discovered that if you want to know what a scope is adjusting in, you better test it for yourself.

I used to be a computer geek, before I retired, and applied my geekness to shooting.

If you want to know something, ask a geek - or an arcanamaven.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

Accounting for sources of error that have an affect outside the interweb I am 125% behind.

I will make the point another way. Only on the internet in the deep layers of geekdom does such an example appear. If we were on a range I seriously doubt there would be a discussion because we wouldnt attempt the 100 then 1000 yard shot and ONLY if we attempt that would the 'huge' difference appear between 1" or 1.047" which was what another shooter tried to explain.

What I did was point out those who opined the greatness of the error if a shooter didnt convert inches to true MOA on a scope that they had earlier said was in Inches per not minutes per might want to rethink their stance.

What I got was a Coastie with 'tude being snide about my english.

Yet you choose me to claim as insulting.

Got you 5 by 5.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

Lindy-
Did you attempt to just go from a 100 yard zero to 1000 with no stops inbetween? Again I'll say it- on a range there is no huge surprize as we workup with intermediate distances.

That you had a 2 moa higher value with one scope vs another is interesting but if you use part of your geek-foo to RECORD that value where is the problem?

I have shot with many an engineer, computer nerd, doctor and I hate to admit it, a lawyer or two.

It is fun to keep track of them as they advance through the geek stages with meplat trimming, flash hole trimming, gadgets they bolt on, and such.

I do my best to look interested as they go on and on...and on about a new 'app' they use to compute firing solutions- as well as the tweeking they do to get the computer to get closer to real world, shot data.

I'm sure you are well known as a maven.

I just found the attempt to justify a .XXX valuer added to one inch interesting.

FYI I have owned 4 leupolds, NONE tracked true MOA. That included an old MK IV.

 

[Lindy]

Re: MOA adjust

If one shoots in one area, one may not need a ballistic program - or density altitude dope card - which allows one to go anywhere in the world, and get close to a first round hit at long distances in extreme conditions.

The people we train do. I've gotten emails and calls from satellite phones from a guy up the side of a mountain in southwest Asia who needed dope for a shot he had to make. And I've given it to him - and gotten a message back saying, "Yeah - that worked! Thanks!"

Do I love that? Bet your ass I do.

The people we train - and for whom I write the articles on my web site - appreciate what we do.

It would appear that you don't. I don't care.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

But yet you post again.

My point was in another thread you joined the attack leupold chorus with they are not true MOA, not all but one of mine.

NOW you have one that was MOA and one that wasnt.

Your statements have some spindrift.

Didnt say Geekness has no place, just was dribbling in a most unsightly way through this thread. I'll wager you a byte or two these men you speak to realtime on a sat phone have learned just how their scope adjusts so its a matter of applying different atmospheric conditions than a scope surprise.

Course you could define 'real close' as there are many ways to get real close.

Then again those canadiens hold the record without all the geek speak. old school, gotta love it.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But yet you post again.

My point was in another thread you joined the attack leupold chorus with they are not true MOA, not all but one of mine.

NOW you have one that was MOA and one that wasnt.

Your statements have some spindrift.

Didnt say Geekness has no place, just was dribbling in a most unsightly way through this thread. I'll wager you a byte or two these men you speak to realtime on a sat phone have learned just how their scope adjusts so its a matter of applying different atmospheric conditions than a scope surprise.

Course you could define 'real close' as there are many ways to get real close.

Then again those canadiens hold the record without all the geek speak. old school, gotta love it.</div></div>

You be surprised how much geek speak the Canadians engage in, and you'd even be more surprised if you asked them, not that they would tell YOU, who they have taken a class from, I will give you a hint, he posted above you.

Canadians are anal to fault, they doppler everything, in fact their Command Warrant Officer was just at SHOT having just returned from Doppler testing a b bunch of their sniper rifles. They record more points of contact than most would imagine. Geekdom rejoice, they have it in spades... these guys invest heavily in technology.

I would not evoke people and places you don't know anything about because you'd be extremely surprised where you find them.

 

[BobinNC]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Accounting for sources of error that have an affect outside the interweb I am 125% behind.

I will make the point another way. Only on the internet in the deep layers of geekdom does such an example appear. If we were on a range I seriously doubt there would be a discussion because we wouldnt attempt the 100 then 1000 yard shot and ONLY if we attempt that would the 'huge' difference appear between 1" or 1.047" which was what another shooter tried to explain.

What I did was point out those who opined the greatness of the error if a shooter didnt convert inches to true MOA on a scope that they had earlier said was in Inches per not minutes per might want to rethink their stance.

What I got was a Coastie with 'tude being snide about my english.

Yet you choose me to claim as insulting.

Got you 5 by 5. </div></div>

notquiteright,

I had some real world stuff to do, so I'm sorry I missed your charming repartee.

First, no one was being snide about your english. You have chosen not to list your location (city, state or country) on your profile. That's your right, however, we have many members of Sniper's Hide from non-english speaking counties. I thought, perhaps wrongly, that you did not fully understand me, and as I did not fully understand you.

However, upon further reflection I now understand you fully. Your a critic. You don't want to educate, and you don't want to provide any benefit to anyone but yourself. Range math, evaluating and indentify scope errors, differences between MOA, IPHY and MILS, are all elements that are learned first, then practiced in the field.

Concepts first, then those concepts are put in practice in the field. Snipers Hide members are here to learn and to educate. With your obvious disdain for anything "geeky" and those who opine on the interweb, why on earth did you join this board?

Buddy, I got you 5 by 5.

 

[elkhuntinguide]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I took a Leupold 3.5-10X40M3 off a rifle I had been shooting for some time, with a load I knew.

I put a Leupold 6.5-20X50M1 on it, and went shooting. When I got to 1000 yards, I found I needed 2 more MOA on that scope than on the previous one.

Which is how I discovered that the M1 dials on the second scope were IPHY, while the dial on the M3 were MOA - and also discovered that if you want to know what a scope is adjusting in, you better test it for yourself.
</div></div>

I found this to be true on MANY Leupolds as well... I currently have Leupys with M1's that are IPHY and some with TRUE MOA M1's...

The scopes I own with M3's all seem to be MOA...

Always best to verify your turrets...

That little .047 adds up quick at distance...Or so I've read anyways...

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

Interesting-
We were talking about a simple overstatement in a senseless 'example' of why .047" is so important.

I pointed out how the expert had in other posts claimed Leupold was in inches not MOA.

NOW he owns scopes in both and shifted the discussion to atmospheric conditions while wrapping himself in the Flag and thumping his mavenly chest!

Frank, are you saying the Canadiens who hold the long range record in Afganistan trained at RO? That they brought a Proving Ground's worth of gear to that mountain to make the shot? Did you say he trained those canadiens?

Have no fear or loathing of advances in equipt. I own a wind meter, cell phone and a simple balpro for getting 'very close' with a first round on ranges across the US.

If we could get back to the original topic I entered.

Does .047" make a difference?

My answer is NO

Bob-
I like long walks along the beach, beer, long warm showers, puppies, a young girl's smile, and women who laugh a little too loud after a few drinks.

That work for you sweet pea?

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: MOA adjust

.047 makes a difference when adjusting the sight from SR or LR. However, once adjusted for distance, and, let's say, the bullet hit paper, but is not yet in the X-ring, .047 is meaningless for futher adjustment, for multitude of reasons.

 

[Guest]

Re: MOA adjust

Fact,
Leupold has glass out there that adjusts both ways, I've owned them both, been issued both, an Uncle an LE still has both types.

Another fact, if you drop 0.47 that's your choice also. At about 750-775 yds your retical ranging for a first rd hit is over, because your out of the error range factor of a .308 win. Much less if your using the wrong math for the knob you have.


Yes a LRF is great, if it's working, if it's not foggy, if your not on a closer twig, ect, ect.

Any of the three systems will do the job, but trying to short cut any of them when the target is far and has the ability to make you pucker, is not a wise choice. Then again it all depends how you want to come home, a sender, or receiver.

 

[salty dog]

Re: MOA adjust


@ 100 yds 1 moa = 1.047" @ 1000yds 1 moa = 10.47"--- a.47" difference from using 1" for every moa on your scope........ dial up 30moa on your scope, your error of .47 x 30 becomes 14.1" every time you turn 1 moa on your scope @1000yds your compounding a .47" error

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: MOA adjust

In a real world case, such as shooting 175's from a 24 inch barreled .308, confusion over MOA or other could produce an 18 inch error when jumping from 100 to 1000 yards. Of course, this assumes ignorance about something important to good shooting, knowing how to adjust sights. Perhaps, such a shooter should consider another hobby, or some marksmanship training.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Interesting-

Frank, are you saying the Canadiens who hold the long range record in Afganistan trained at RO? That they brought a Proving Ground's worth of gear to that mountain to make the shot? Did you say he trained those canadiens?
</div></div>

I am saying the Canadians have been to RO, as well we have gone to Canada, and your representation of them being "old School" is beyond false, as they are highly technical and very well equipped to do their job.

All the teams carry Chronographs, something you don' t see in the US, they also are very versed in Ballistic calculators, being early adopters of the Chey Tac /ABC/ Fieldcraft Unit which costs about $5k. They also train and record to fault, as well as back their real world data up with doppler enhanced information. It wasn't an accident they got close to target, have the technical knowledge to do so, as well they are versed in exploiting the follow up shot... wonder who else preaches that.

And I will also say, that it was Lindy who found an error in their reticle subtension that explained to them their error in ranging. Which help lead them to replace their scopes with S&B 5-25Xs. Not all but their very best, I might add, because there are differences in the groups up there been regiment and SF, however they all do pool resources.

We weren't allowed any photographs, but I can tell you they brought armorers with them, who rebarreled & rebedded rifles on the fly, they also did some trick work on mine and Jacob's Sigs, not to mention the mountain of ammo... 52 cases of Lapua 338 if I recall correctly.

I will not say anyone of us actually met Rob, but that is not say the guys who where their weren't familiar, in Canada higher tier units train lower tiers, there were no Tiers higher.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

I beleive you are trying to move the discussion and put words in my mouth Commandant.

I didnt say the Canadiens NEVER used a computer, or other trademark tools of Geekness.

What I said was on the mountaintop they didnt pick up a Sat phone and play dial a geek. they didnt use a hand held computer to attempt a firing solution to a distance they had never shot before. They didnt pull out a set of density cards.

They went old school, and played 'will adjust'.

Now I have not come to bury Geekness. This is a brave new world where operators half way around the world can pickle off a guided missle and take out a pick up truck. I listened to a drone rep go on and on about what a huge new frontier his system was. What wasnt so warm and fuzzy for me is several well heeled LE types were being briefed.

No geek is here to stay, i am not arguing against that.

Just the silliness that sometimes comes from online examples compared to actual situation.

I personally have no doubt Lindy is a great example of the level of expertise working RO.

Just the discussion on 1.047 vs 1" got a bit too surreal.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I beleive you are trying to move the discussion and put words in my mouth Commandant.

I didnt say the Canadiens NEVER used a computer, or other trademark tools of Geekness.

What I said was on the mountaintop they didnt pick up a Sat phone and play dial a geek. they didnt use a hand held computer to attempt a firing solution to a distance they had never shot before. They didnt pull out a set of density cards.

They went old school, and played 'will adjust'.

Now I have not come to bury Geekness. This is a brave new world where operators half way around the world can pickle off a guided missle and take out a pick up truck. I listened to a drone rep go on and on about what a huge new frontier his system was. What wasnt so warm and fuzzy for me is several well heeled LE types were being briefed.

No geek is here to stay, i am not arguing against that.

Just the silliness that sometimes comes from online examples compared to actual situation.

I personally have no doubt Lindy is a great example of the level of expertise working RO.

Just the discussion on 1.047 vs 1" got a bit too surreal. </div></div>

Okay, you believe that, they just winged it at 2400+ that is too funny... did you not see Mark Spicer and Ryan McMillan try to recreate that shot on tv... they absolutely carry computers on the mountains, as well a host of other equipment. The point of reference came from somewhere, if you think you can wing a shot at that distance and get within a corrections distance, you have no clue. When they are not actively working, they are crunching numbers... trust me on that, they are all about the little things, which is what gets you on target, especially at that distance.

You don't just go, well my dope at 1000 yards is 7 Mils, I'll hold 20 mils and think you are gonna come close to hitting something. You have to know, and I guarantee they ran the numbers ahead of time. Nobody is winging 2400+ without a crunching the numbers. They adjusted because that is what they are trained too do, but you can only adjust if you are close enough to see the impact... at that distance, seeing is not as easy as throwing the round out there and hoping.

What you hear on tv is not the whole story, trust me on that.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Lindy-
Did you attempt to just go from a 100 yard zero to 1000 with no stops inbetween? Again I'll say it- on a range there is no huge surprize as we workup with intermediate distances.

That you had a 2 moa higher value with one scope vs another is interesting but if you use part of your geek-foo to RECORD that value where is the problem?

I have shot with many an engineer, computer nerd, doctor and I hate to admit it, a lawyer or two.

It is fun to keep track of them as they advance through the geek stages with meplat trimming, flash hole trimming, gadgets they bolt on, and such.

I do my best to look interested as they go on and on...and on about a new 'app' they use to compute firing solutions- as well as the tweeking they do to get the computer to get closer to real world, shot data.

I'm sure you are well known as a maven.

I just found the attempt to justify a .XXX valuer added to one inch interesting.

FYI I have owned 4 leupolds, NONE tracked true MOA. That included an old MK IV.</div></div>

notquiteright,

For my convenience, in preparation for 1000 yard tournament shooting, I zero and practice at 100 yards, and then come up, while at 100 yards, the number of inches my ballistics chart suggests will be necessary for the bullet path and line of sight to intersect at 1000 yards. I cannot depend on click count initially,whether perceived as having true or simple value, to get the come up needed since, with my iron sight radius, the clicks do not have an exact 1/4 minute value, but something a little courser, between 1/4 and 1/3. With this hunt and peck adjustment procedure my knowledge regarding the distinction between true and simple MOA is not exercised. However...

Since understanding the adjustment necessary to counter for everything that effects the bullet: gravity, drag, wind, and temperature is important, learning as much as there is to know about MOA, BDC, BSZ, and sight adjustment in general is not moot.

Knowing the difference between what has become known as true MOA and simple MOA is important too since not having an understanding could produce shooter error when adjusting from one distance to another.

Another good reason to know all about MOA is that some sight manufacturer's lie about click value, or, as when using user attached iron sights, the click value produced by a user selected sight radius may not be what is suggested it will be by the sight's maker. This makes any misunderstanding a source of potential error.

BTW, at least one manufacturer today of match conditioned commercial equivalents of the M16A2, fits those rifles with a rear sight which is advertised as having a 1/4 minute value when it actually has a 1/3 minute value. A new shooter who accepts that the sight has a 1/4 minute value will eventually become somewhat perplexed, as well as have success stymied.

No doubt, there are shooters who contemplate equipment as their salvation to good shooting, rather than marksmanship knowledge. Those interested in knowing how their sights work are clearly pursuing marksmanship knowledge. For these folks, knowing the distinction between true and simple MOA is useful for for a multitude of reasons.

 

[SgtKope]

Re: MOA adjust

I think the OP gave up shooting and sold all of his guns. All he wanted to know is what MOA was at 400yds. LMAO! Someone explain coriolis and spin drift to him as well. $20 says his next post is "which is better, Rem 700 or Savage 10?"

 

[BaileyMoto]

Re: MOA adjust

I was having a discussion about this with friend elsewhere and started to google, thus finding this topic via a search.

Let's do this the easy way: using a tool all of you (should) have...a simple ballistics calculator. I happen to be using the "Ballistics FTE" app for the iPhone.

Using the .308 Black Hills 175gr SMK, I get the following results for 1000 yards:

IPHY = 40.1
MOA = 38.3
---- 1.8 difference.

I'll admit, it's late (3:18 here in Dubai), so my brain might be a little fuzzy at the moment....but what makes sense to me is this:

I need to decide what measurement I am dialing for, if I dial in 38.3, when I should be dialing in 40.1, I am going to be off by 1.8 MOA (or 1.8 IPHY)...either way, thats almost 20 inches, no?

The 'geeks' (and my calculator) seem to be right with the math.

EDIT - But, IPHY and MOA are 2 completely different measurements...might as well be comparing mil vs MOA, no? Apples and oranges.

So whats the debate? Knowing your reticle/turrets, or saying its not right to round an MOA?

However, if I hit low 10" at 1000 yards, I am going to come up 1MOA (4 clicks) - regardless if my scope tracks at 1" or 1.047".

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: MOA adjust

Your right. I can see, nevertheless, how folks can roast their brains about this, since some sight marketers do not come clean on the adjustment resolution of their products. I had an Armalite NM A2 sight advertised as having a 1/4 MOA elevation value. It was actually more like a 1/3 minute value. At the time, I was a somewhat ignorant shooter; and, I trusted the folks at Armalite. But, with zeroing problems, and other distractions, I called Armalite to tell them what I suspected. A technical representative confirmed I was right. He also told me there was not much difference, and that since folks wanted 1/4 minute they labeled it 1/4 minute. He said most folks would not understand the difference. I think he might be right about that. Most folks might not ever be aware of the mislabeling. But, for me, shooting from short range to extreme distance, mislabeling, for awhile, prevented proper analysis of shooter/target error. It was a setback, which cost me time and money. I will never do business with Armalite again.

On another note, as a marksmanship instructor, I see folks brand new to shooting take a proper sight adjustment with irons to refine their zero, and then overshoot it. I see this all the time. Although their sight resolves a 1/4 minute, the shooter resolves maybe a minute at best when just getting into it all. Eventually, even though the shooter may never realize the 1/4 minute resolution of his sight, he will, through its fine resolution, be able to refine the zero for better scores. This is not based on what the shooter can resolve while aiming but instead upon the effect of a particular sight graduation value for velocity/distance . For example...

Once, while shooting at an MR-31, I realized my right-in-there calls were striking the target at 9 o'clock just off the pinwheel X mark. When I put a 1/4 right on the sight, I built another group at 3 o'clock just off the pinwheel X mark. After an entire 20 round string of fire, I had two distinct groups and an X still hanging on by a thread. This all made me think maybe an 1/8th minute value could be useful.

BTW, I can't even resolve a 1/2 minute, so some would conclude what would be the point of an 1/8 minute sight? Apparently, what I can do is hold hard, as well as distinguish my 6 o'clock hold (the relationship between the sight and target) from shot to shot.

Interestingly, the average muzzle velocity of a rifle can complement or thwart sight adjustment too, at any given distance. My 24 inch barreled .308 producing about 2650fps shooting 175's can be zeroed for a pinwheel X at 100 yards; however, a come up for a pinwheel X at 300 yards is not possible, since 18 quarter minute clicks will put me right-in there at 297 yards, while 19 will put 'em right-in-there at 315 yards. Of course this stuff is only academic, and pretty much moot even for LR. However, with pinwheel X's being the goal, if I could adjust the velocity to get more of 'em I'd probably do it.

 

[1fstTA]

Re: MOA adjust

WOW my head hurts now. LOL

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1fstTA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WOW my head hurts now. LOL </div></div>

Knowledge of what's important to good shooting, it appears, is confused with being able to get good hits intuitively. Thing is, once the shooter looses control of target distance, and intuitive no longer works, things start to fall apart. Usually, the shooter thinks he needs some "long range" training, when what he really needs is just a little basic marksmanship knowledge. I submit my experiences on these matters as an aid to those shooters who are off track in their analysis of shooting errors.

This stuff is what it is though..very mental. Nevertheless, most folks can come to an understanding without their heads hurting. It's the practice thereafter that's most mentally and physically painful, when the desire is to become extraordinary. Discipline and the promise of reward will see these folks through.

 

[Tripwire]

Re: MOA adjust

Gave this thread a quick skim-over to see if anyone touched on this....I'm gonna kick 5 pages of "mental" to the curb with some real world mechanics of mechanical things.

Vertically affix a yard stick to a backstop at 100 yards. Bench up your rifle square and solid so that twisting turrets won't move the rifle. Record the measurement on the yard stick where your crosshairs interesect. Give 'er an "MOA" worth of clicks and record the intersection. Repeat the process, not moving the rifle, through enough revolutions to use up the yard stick, recording each intersection for each "MOA" adjusted.

Now analyze what you've recorded. I've had very good repeatable scopes give me WAY over 1 MOA per four clicks as in as much as 1.25" per "MOA", and some of the same tracking quality scopes give me WAY under 1 MOA per four clicks as in .750" per "MOA". Now factor that real world adjustment against your JBM perfect world dope sheet. I've only ever found one single scope with this test that ever gave me close enough to an accurate movement of 1 MOA and that's the Leupold that currently rides on my .243AI.

This proves one thing, at least to me....all this calculation bullshit is ONLY good enough to get a man close. To get a full grasp on precision hits, NOTHING can replace actual rounds down range to confirm dope.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

The only problem I see with that system is owning a vise setup that locks up that tightly. Well that and the variances in so small a measurement- it can and often does blur accuirate readings. One MOA adjustments and seeing the quarter inch variance mentioned above requires quite the scope.

I prefer to keep the crosshair on the same POA and run a series of bullet holes in a box test. I use big jumps so slight variances I might introduce get averaged out. 5MOA up twice then across then down and then back to the original POA.

This tests dail values and repeatability if done several times. Well that I like dont really like going to the range and concentrate that hard to NOT pull the trigger!

 

[Tripwire]

Re: MOA adjust

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: notquiteright</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The only problem I see with that system is owning a vise setup that locks up that tightly. Well that and the variances in so small a measurement- it can and often does blur accuirate readings. One MOA adjustments and seeing the quarter inch variance mentioned above requires quite the scope.

I prefer to keep the crosshair on the same POA and run a series of bullet holes in a box test. I use big jumps so slight variances I might introduce get averaged out. 5MOA up twice then across then down and then back to the original POA.

This tests dail values and repeatability if done several times. Well that I like dont really like going to the range and concentrate that hard to NOT pull the trigger!

</div></div>

So you can't bag a rifle up solid on a bench, and you're blind as a bat.

Thanks for that input.......

With most of the scopes I use I can see bullet holes at 100 yards, so reading numbers on a yardstick and seeing at least the 1/8" hash marks isn't all that tough. A 25 MOA adjustment on a ruler at 100 yards would, if the scope adjusted precise MOA, yeild just a hair under 26 3/16" movement of the crosswire. If the scope adjusts 1.25" per "MOA" it would read 31 1/4" worth of movement. Not too hard at all to see a 5 inch difference at 100 yards with just about ANY scope......

I can see YOUR point if you are suffering a misconception that what I've said is somehow advice on a method to quantify the accuracy of your scope turrets click by click in an anal retentive sort of way. If you use it to prove to yourself that one MOA worth of adjustment is NOT precisely one MOA worth of impact change, then you can start to see the point of at least trying it.

The flaw is that most folks assume that a scope's adjustments are precise and then expect them to corelate exactly with a calculated dope sheet. Arguing the difference between 1 inch and 1.047 inches as a matter of defining "MOA" is rediculous if you can't prove your scope to be that accurate in it's mechanical adjustments. The use of "MOA" in it's exact definition of 1.047" @ 100 yards is purely theoretical if the scope does not move the impact point exactly 1.047" @ 100 yards, and thus approaching useless when compounded exponentially at greater range. If you've assumed your calculated dope sheet is correct, and assumed that your scope adjusts a precise MOA, and you need 25 MOA of adjustment at 1K then you are gonna miss by 50" if your scope actually adjusts 1.25" per "MOA" @ 100 yards. 261.75" needed compensation vs. 312.5" of actual movement.

This isn't rocket science, and again, nothing can replace actual rounds down range to confirm/deny dope.......

 

[notquiteright]

Re: MOA adjust

Laughing-
Oh I guess I dont own a hubble telescope and frankly I dont own alot of benchie stuff. Come to think of it I own NO benchie stuff.

Doing it the way I outlined doesnt require heavy bags AND doesnt allow human error you cant be sure about because you have no constant POA to reference with each adjustment into the process.

Mine also runs a box test to see if the scope repeats the values.

But feel free to use a dry fire bagged in test if you want.

I was just offering a test that allows you to shoot, gives a hard copy of the test for your records and checks for repeatability.

Does more and gives you a whiff of powder and some recoil.

FYI, you are a bit snarky- everything ok at home/work/with your spousal equivelent?