Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just measure with the reticle. No different than a MOA scope unless you don't know how to use that properly also. It is ok to admit if you don't know, as we all start somewhere.
@308pirate, that is the nicest comment I think I have seen you make on a
Moa at 100m was very simple , 1click 1/4 inchJust measure with the reticle. No different than a MOA scope unless you don't know how to use that properly also. It is ok to admit if you don't know, as we all start somewhere.
@308pirate, that is the nicest comment I think I have seen you make on a post like this.
Moa at 100m was very simple , 1click 1/4 inch
It is simple reticle, german #4 and if I'm wrong can we start by from beginning, which part is wrongFirst off, that's not correct.
Second, if you knew how to use MOA to shoot, you would easily be able to figure out how many inches, centimeters, yards, leagues, fathoms, kilometers 0.1 milliradians would span at any distance.
Third, I'll give you a bye assuming that the scope you're talking about has only a simple reticle with no subtensions. Because if not, may God have mercy on your soul here.
SFP, and thank you, that is all I needed to knowI wont assume what reticle you have or focal plane...
So my simple answer: Yes. .05 milliradian = .5cm (5mm) @ 100m and 1cm (10mm) @ 200m
Suggest you see what happens when you adjust your turrets and confirm
I'm absolutely sure,You sure it doesn't have 1cm torrent adjustments ot .1mil adjustments?
Yes, bought from Natchez shooters, I buy exclusively bushnell. It's a new bushnell forgeWow.
The way they’re written that is sure going to trigger some reactions...
’.05Mil @ 100m’
I have to ask - Is that a legit authentic scope?
It was very simple, aye? Too bad you were still off even with MOA. lol The idea of 1/4 moa click = 1/4" at 100 yards is close enough for the brain and capabilities of the average shooter at 100 YARDS, but 100 METERS is 109 yards. That 1/4 moa click is like 0.28" per click there. That variance stacks up stupid quick once you leave your 100 yard line.Moa at 100m was very simple , 1click 1/4 inch
Wow.
The way they’re written that is sure going to trigger some reactions...
’.05Mil @ 100m’
I have to ask - Is that a legit authentic scope?
That way of describing a milliradian scope is confusing to people who don't understand angular subtentions.Ok. The reason I’m surprised is that milliradian is a measure of angle, not distance.
So writing it as .05 milliradians at 100m seems bizarre and completely unhelpful - hence you being confused.
The part where you think 1 MOA is .25" at 100 meterswhich part is wrong
Thanks. Not many optics are like that now days and when I looked them up on bushnell they listed them at .1 mil.I'm absolutely sure, View attachment 7656090
I understand that you are experienced and I'm new but twisting my words is uncalled for. At 100m 1 moa theoretically should be 1" and 1/4 of moa is 1/4 of thatThe part where you think 1 MOA is .25" at 100 meters
Yes caught our range officer by surprise too todayThanks. Not many optics are like that now days and when I looked them up on bushnell they listed them at .1 mil.
Expressing the adjustment increment in terms of fractions of a milradian on ele/windOk. The reason I’m surprised is that milliradian is a measure of angle, not distance.
So writing it as .05 milliradians at 100m seems bizarre and completely unhelpful - hence you being confused.
He is correct, you are not.I understand that you are experienced and I'm new but twisting my words is uncalled for. At 100m 1 moa theoretically should be 1" and 1/4 of moa is 1/4 of that
I didn't twist your words. You were wrong before and you're still wrong in more ways than one.I understand that you are experienced and I'm new but twisting my words is uncalled for. At 100m 1 moa theoretically should be 1" and 1/4 of moa is 1/4 of that
It's a cheap, china-made Bushnell. I'm not surprised.So writing it as .05 milliradians at 100m seems bizarre and completely unhelpful - hence you being confused.
Actually it's made in Korea and clariry is great. It is very solid scopeIt's a cheap, china-made Bushnell. I'm not surprised.
Correct me if I’m wrong then, but .05Mil is .05Mil. At any distance. The Mil is the constant. The distance and length are the variables.That way of describing a milliradian scope is confusing to people who don't understand angular subtentions.
Like those who think that 1 MOA is 1/4" at 100 meters.
Thanks for the advice.Expressing the adjustment increment in terms of fractions of a milradian on ele/wind
turrets has been standard industry practice for quite some time, is very helpful and shouldn’t surprise anyone.
If you’re not sure why this is, perhaps it’s a good idea to brush up on rifle scope fundamentals in practical precision shooting applications.
Why are you surprised by this?Thanks for the advice.
To be clear, I’m not surprised at them expressing the milliradians per click.
What I’m surprised at is the reference to a distance in the same expression.
Explain to us how you think turrets should be marked and why.I’m obviously missing something.
How is the distance relevant?
‘1 click = .1Mil’
That’s it.
Why would I need any reference to distance? .1Mil is still .1 Mil regardless of if its @100m or 1000m
You just answered your own question. Lol.‘1 click = .1Mil’
That’s it.
Why would I need any reference to distance? .1Mil is still .1 Mil regardless of if its @100m or 1000m
Correct me if I’m wrong then, but .05Mil is .05Mil. At any distance. The Mil is the constant. The distance and length are the variables.
Scope makers don’t write it in terms of linear distance on turrets as much anymore (ie 1click=5mm or 1 click = 1cm at 100m, etc) as most folks think of and log dope using the unit of angular measurement not the actual drop value in mm, cm, inches, etc. As an example, Your rifle’s dope book (.308 win) prob reads something like 100m-0, 200m-.7mils, 300m-1.5mils - and so forth. It doesn’t express those drop values only in mm or cm (though you may keep that info in the dope book, it’s not what you’re reaching for first when tying to come up with a firing solution).If they had written ‘1 click = 5mm @ 100m’, that would make more sense. What am I missing?
Zero Index distance is my term describing the “100m” portion of the information on the turret. Most zero their rifles at 100m (or 100 yards) hence why the turret values are expressed using 100m as the reference distance for movement in terms of incremental adjustment size on the target for each click.First 2 paras - I’m in 100% agreement with.
But then you lose me in the third. What exactly do you mean by zero distance index?
If I’m ‘.5 mils right’ as you refer to in the second para - the distance is irrelevant. I adjust .5mils.
I dont think I’m hung up on anything. I just see no need for any ‘distance or length’ reference on the turrets whatsoever. It’s redundant information that is openly going to confuse people. I’ve never suggested there should be a linear unit expressed on the turret. I’m saying that adding the ‘@100m’ to the OPs turrets makes no sense. The only way that referencing @100m makes sense to me is if they ARE using a linear unit - but they aren’t!
Forge line was discontinued to its moot pointZero Index distance is my term describing the “100m” portion of the information on the turret. Most zero their rifles at 100m (or 100 yards) hence why the turret values are expressed using 100m as the reference distance for movement in terms of incremental adjustment size on the target for each click.
I think you should reach out to Bushnell and give them a piece of your mind on this issue, lol. Because you are clearly hung up on it. Maybe you will win some hearts and minds over there.
I’m out.
Hot stupid chicks are awsome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!