Rifle Scopes Nightforce vs. Leupold

[Lindy]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would suppose that any system would work just as well as the other as long as you practice with that system and know it like the back of your hand.</div></div>

Indeed.

Having a reticle matching the adjustments isn't a rule - it's just a suggestion to make life easier. If you are shooting a drill like Moving Chaos at Rifles Only, which involves shooting 5 targets at ranges from 200 yards to 545 yards, two of which are moving, in a total time limit of 60 seconds, then making life easier is a good thing.

By the way, the new record for that drill is 28 seconds total time.

"Successful application of the precision rifle is a lot more about thinking than shooting." -- Jacob Bynum, Rifles Only

Anything which makes thinking easier is a good thing.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would suppose that any system would work just as well as the other as long as you practice with that system and know it like the back of your hand.</div></div>

Indeed.

Having a reticle matching the adjustments isn't a rule - it's just a suggestion to make life easier. If you are shooting a drill like Moving Chaos at Rifles Only, which involves shooting 5 targets at ranges from 200 yards to 545 yards, two of which are moving, in a total time limit of 60 seconds, then making life easier is a good thing.

By the way, the new record for that drill is 28 seconds total time.

"Successful application of the precision rifle is a lot more about thinking than shooting." -- Jacob Bynum, Rifles Only

Anything which makes thinking easier is a good thing.


</div></div>

That's a pretty cool drill and a good dam time. Did he have to range too? If he did that time is DAM GOOD! even if he did not have to range and was informed of the distance ahead of time it's still pretty good as that is just over 5 seconds per target.

I think knowing your gun and your ammo is much more important than matching knobs. What do I mean by "knowing your gun"? Basically just know how fast the ammo is, so you can build a drop table, then memorize it.

For me all I remember is 15, 30, 45.. this gets me out to 600 yards.

with mismatch reticle (mildot and 1/4-MOA-reticle), shooting 175gr SMK at 2560fps:

100yards - holdever 1.5 mil high
200 - holdover 1 mil high
300 - zero
400 - 15 clicks up
500 - 30
600 - 45
700 - 65
800 - 85
900 - 110
1000 - 140

Therefore 545 yards will be about 37 clicks up. For 200 I just put her on zero and and holdover 1 mil high. For 330 it will be about 20 clicks up. Now I am on a keyboard, but in when I am at the range I just scream out the values while holding my fingers up. Then I can interpolate values between the main values.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Enmerdeur</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This thread has taken a turn to the surreal. I would suppose that any system would work just as well as the other as long as you practice with that system and know it like the back of your hand. </div></div>

This is what I believe too.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

The ranges are supplied to the shooter.

You'll be faster if you stop thinking in clicks. That 28 second time was shot using only reticle holds. If you have to dial, you won't even be close.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The ranges are supplied to the shooter.

You'll be faster if you stop thinking in clicks. That 28 second time was shot using only reticle holds. If you have to dial, you won't even be close.
</div></div>

Yeah you have to use all holdover, but problem with using holdover for 550 yards with windage is the wind makes a big difference at that distance. You cannot accurately holdover windage if you have to also holdover for elevation if you are using a standard mildot.

Now if you have a Horus Reticle you will be money! That's what I want to get one day, is a Horus reticle, for just that type of fast shooting.

I memorize the click values but once I get past 5 clicks, I don't actually count the clicks. Just have work on divide by 4 quickly. 45 clicks = 10 MOA + 5 clicks.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You cannot accurately holdover windage if you have to also holdover for elevation if you are using a standard mildot.</div></div>

I do that all the time. I shoot everything less than 700 yards - including movers - using holdovers from a 100 yard zero on a mildot reticle.

Takes practice. So, practice. I do. Can you say <span style="font-weight: bold">fast</span>?

 

[DaveV]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All these experts on SnipersHide act like it some kind or rocket science. Just like the whole thread where I said mildot might not be universal because the whole universe might not use a 10 base system and got banned for it.

Because obviously I debated with one of the cool kids. Can't debate with the cool kids now! </div></div>

You got banned because you were being a non stop dick. Not for the reason you stated. Please don't start again because it just makes you look like a troll

 

[splean]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

I have two Leupolds and one Nightforce. The Leupolds are nice enough but the NF is in another class. You can't go wrong with NF. Good luck, stay safe and thank you for your service.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave_</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
You got banned because you were being a non stop dick. Not for the reason you stated. Please don't start again because it just makes you look like a troll

</div></div>

Yes I was being a dick, but it's not my job to put out fires others started. I only pour gasoline on the fire

If you are polite I will be polite back. If you want me to play, then I will play.

 

[Swan]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

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

Please list your shooting accolades along with these claims of superiority. </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">I have no problem showing up to any competion and showing off. I will do it soon</span>. Seriously you can't see that a a mil is just 10 click if you have a 1/10-mil-turret and 14 clicks if you 1/4-MOA turret?

If you can't see this then it's time you show off your claims. </div></div>

We are all looking forward to this day.

That aside, you have every right to defend your purchase (in this case, mil/moa), almost everyone on this site falls prey to similar problems in one form or another. If your "system" works well for you, great. Bottom line: matching reticles and turrets are a vastly easier, therefore superior, shooting system. That is a fact.

But continue arguing with everyone, again, about nonsense. I find it all highly entertaining!

 

[monte flinn]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

love leupold but sold them and now have a few nightforce scopes and swarovski range finders and now im shooting 12" steels at a thousand yds shot 2 coyotes this year 1 a 750 1 at 764 love my nightforces

 

[Jon A]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How is that complicated? ....No real thinking involved. </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just have work on divide by 4 quickly. </div></div>

 

[monte flinn]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

not to say leupold is anyless i shot the 764 with it but the clicks are so true on the nightforce i have more confidence with it

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

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

We are all looking forward to this day.

That aside, you have every right to defend your purchase (in this case, mil/moa), almost everyone on this site falls prey to similar problems in one form or another. If your "system" works well for you, great. Bottom line: matching reticles and turrets are a vastly easier, therefore superior, shooting system. That is a fact.

But continue arguing with everyone, again, about nonsense. I find it all highly entertaining! </div></div>

You guys shoot like every weekend, so you should easily win. You better win too, because if I beat any of you operators you will not hear the end of it from me! hahaha

I have a Savage 10FCP with NF 3.5-15x MOA/MOA that is under half-MOA 5 shot groups. But I enjoy shooting my semi auto AR-10 more (Leupold mil/moa and about 1 MOA 5 shot group).

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How is that complicated? ....No real thinking involved. </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just have work on divide by 4 quickly. </div></div>
</div></div>

Keep in mind it's is because I remember the click values. To use the numbers on the turrets you have to divide by 4. Only thing you have to know is 40/4 = 10, and 20/4 = 5, and 10/4 = 2 + 2 clicks.

So say if you get something like 85 MOA that is just 10 MOA + 10 MOA + 5 clicks. You can scream it out loud while you are adjusting your turrets.

 

[Swan]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

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

We are all looking forward to this day.

That aside, you have every right to defend your purchase (in this case, mil/moa), almost everyone on this site falls prey to similar problems in one form or another. If your "system" works well for you, great. Bottom line: matching reticles and turrets are a vastly easier, therefore superior, shooting system. That is a fact.

But continue arguing with everyone, again, about nonsense. I find it all highly entertaining! </div></div>

You guys shoot like every weekend, so you should easily win. You better win too, because if I beat any of you <span style="color: #FF0000">operators</span> you will not hear the end of it from me! hahaha

I have a Savage 10FCP with NF 3.5-15x MOA/MOA that is under half-MOA 5 shot groups. But I enjoy shooting my semi auto AR-10 more (Leupold mil/moa and about 1 MOA 5 shot group). </div></div>

? wtf ?

Ok buddy. Whatever you say.

 

[hypno02]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Keep in mind it's is because I remember the click values. To use the numbers on the turrets you have to divide by 4. Only thing you have to know is 40/4 = 10, and 20/4 = 5, and 10/4 = 2 + 2 clicks.

So say if you get something like 85 MOA that is just 10 MOA + 10 MOA + 5 clicks. You can scream it out loud while you are adjusting your turrets. </div></div>

You shouldn't even be allowed to discuss long range shooting if you ever use the word 'clicks.'

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Swan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
? wtf ?

Ok buddy. Whatever you say. </div></div>

Just saying, you guys are serious shooters right? You said you could not wait to see what I have right?

I myself advertise myself as a Hobbyist. I am not ashamed to be a hobbyist either. I know you guys are good shooters, and I don't mind losing either. Competition is fun! Talking smack is fun! If I lose, at the end of the day I will still shake your hand and say good job.

 

[ssgp2]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

You should change your name to Amish Shooter....

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hypno</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Keep in mind it's is because I remember the click values. To use the numbers on the turrets you have to divide by 4. Only thing you have to know is 40/4 = 10, and 20/4 = 5, and 10/4 = 2 + 2 clicks.

So say if you get something like 85 MOA that is just 10 MOA + 10 MOA + 5 clicks. You can scream it out loud while you are adjusting your turrets. </div></div>

You shouldn't even be allowed to discuss long range shooting if you ever use the word 'clicks.' </div></div>

It's how I remember my drop table. It is in numbers easy to remember. 15, 30, 45, 65, 85, 110, 140. I could memorize the MOA table, but I found the click table in numbers easier to remember. Maybe I am doing it all wrong, but that's how I do it.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The ranges are supplied to the shooter.

You'll be faster if you stop thinking in clicks. That 28 second time was shot using only reticle holds. If you have to dial, you won't even be close.
</div></div>

Yeah you have to use all holdover, but problem with using holdover for 550 yards with windage is the wind makes a big difference at that distance. You cannot accurately holdover windage if you have to also holdover for elevation if you are using a standard mildot.

Now if you have a Horus Reticle you will be money! That's what I want to get one day, is a Horus reticle, for just that type of fast shooting.

I memorize the click values but once I get past 5 clicks, I don't actually count the clicks. Just have work on divide by 4 quickly. 45 clicks = 10 MOA + 5 clicks.

</div></div>

The Moving Chaos targets were reduced size Larue targets, I believe only 5.75" wide... the dimensions I am not sure of because they were a special build/request, suffice to say we shoot 1 MOA sized targets at this range, using just a mil dot reticle in higher than most winds... in fact the match saw in some cases 18MPH winds and people had no trouble hitting a 1 MOA target using Holdovers for both elevation and windage.

Even a plain old mil dot reticle has value from top to bottom, right to left.. you simply have to look at it as having value. In some cases with the scopes we see come through more value than the turrets which don't seem to track as well in real life as they do on the internet.

Holding over in both planes is an essential skill... as Lindy wrote it takes practice, in which case one should strive to practice what they suck at and not just practice what makes them feel good.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

Actually, as Lowlight knows very well, with many scopes, using the reticle is more accurate than dialing, because of inaccuracies in the adjustment system.

In a sniper-on-sniper engagement where one has to dial and the other is holding, the second will kill the first while he is reaching for his elevation knob.

 

[Bruiser_Joe]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

i really like the NF mildot reticle, once you get used to it holds are easy. but yeah you really have to practice for it to become second nature

 

[Graham]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Holding over in both planes is an essential skill... as Lindy wrote it takes practice, in which case one should strive to practice what they suck at and not just practice what makes them feel good.</div></div>I used a 400 yard zero on that stage, holdovers/holdunders on an MLR reticle for both wind and elevation combined, and still what I missed is what I practice the least: the mover on the return pass (held too much wind and shot in front both times).

 

[sititunga]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gits</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just actually got back from the Leupold Factory picking up my MK4 with H58 today and got a chance finger a CQBSS, its definitely a well built scope. Nowhere will it be close to 4k price range. It will be around the 3kish range. Of course add the Horus and you're halfway there. </div></div>

SWFA and CSS have them listed $4k ($3999) on their websites. One site has them listed at $5,500!

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

I do agree with most here that holding over is much better than have to adjusting turrets all the time.

However, I would much rather hold over with a Horus Reticle than a Mildot. I am sure I can be decent with a mildot with practice, but with the Horus it is much easier to get pinpoint accuracy.

I think the Army agrees with you guys too with using mostly holdover, as they too are going Horus Reticle now.

I was lucky enough to demo a Horus one time, and it is well worth the hype. It is the best reticle bar none.

 

[ssgp2]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

Horus or Mil Dot, practice is essential.

Lots of guys who shot my rifle have a hard time getting use to the Xmas tree in the scope....

 

[Rob01]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It's how I remember my drop table. It is in numbers easy to remember. 15, 30, 45, 65, 85, 110, 140. I could memorize the MOA table, but I found the click table in numbers easier to remember. Maybe I am doing it all wrong, but that's how I do it.</div></div>

You will see the errors of your ways when you make your first match. Nice and easy with full hundred yard lines but try to get to 835 yards fast counting all those clicks if you can memorize what that range would be.

Some advice:

Get a log book and use it or use a good ballistic computer and run charts in both MOA and Mils so you can use them with both the reticle and knobs. No need to do a bunch of math. And use ranges atlesast to 25 yards. I use 10 yards when making my charts so it's more accurate. Ranges at matches aren't always 100, 200, 300 etc.

Stop thinking in clicks and write down the full MOA. When you have to dial fast trying to do division to find a number you should already have isn't the way to be faster.

Practice with your reticle, especially since it's in the SFP. Figure out how it breaks down when you need to use it at half power and where half power is. Also holding both elevation and windage is very doable. Just takes practice like anything we do.

Just some advice from one hobbyist to another.

 

[Chanonry]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, as Lowlight knows very well, with many scopes, using the reticle is more accurate than dialing, because of inaccuracies in the adjustment system.

In a sniper-on-sniper engagement where one has to dial and the other is holding, the second will kill the first while he is reaching for his elevation knob.
</div></div>

Interesting. Dumb questions time.

To be accurate, I need to check (calibrate?) my second focal plane variable scope reticle is actually at the magnification it says on the dial, then I am good to go?

Hold for wind then adjust for elevation or the other way round?

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It's how I remember my drop table. It is in numbers easy to remember. 15, 30, 45, 65, 85, 110, 140. I could memorize the MOA table, but I found the click table in numbers easier to remember. Maybe I am doing it all wrong, but that's how I do it.</div></div>

You will see the errors of your ways when you make your first match. Nice and easy with full hundred yard lines but try to get to 835 yards fast counting all those clicks if you can memorize what that range would be.

Some advice:

Get a log book and use it or use a good ballistic computer and run charts in both MOA and Mils so you can use them with both the reticle and knobs. No need to do a bunch of math. And use ranges atlesast to 25 yards. I use 10 yards when making my charts so it's more accurate. Ranges at matches aren't always 100, 200, 300 etc.

Stop thinking in clicks and write down the full MOA. When you have to dial fast trying to do division to find a number you should already have isn't the way to be faster.

Practice with your reticle, especially since it's in the SFP. Figure out how it breaks down when you need to use it at half power and where half power is. Also holding both elevation and windage is very doable. Just takes practice like anything we do.

Just some advice from one hobbyist to another. </div></div>

Well from one hobbyist to another...

1) First off, I guess you missed the part where I said I use the click values to memorize a drop table. I don't carry ballistic calculators with me, just a table I memorize in my head. Never did I say I actually count "85 clicks" on the turret.

2) I would never range something to be 835 yards using a standard mildot. Another table I have in my head is the mildot ranging table (based on 18" human silhouette). A mildot just does not have that much precision. At 800 yards the average human silhouette covers about .7 mils. At 900 it covers about .60 mils. Therefore .65 mils much be 850 yards. I figure if I can accurately range manually to within 50 yards I am doing pretty good.

3) If I don't have to range and am informed target is exactly 834 yards away. It takes a little calculation on my part but not much. 800 yards is 85 clicks, 900 is 110 clicks. Therefore I can interpolate, and every 25 yards between here between the 2 distances is about 6 clicks. That means 834 yards will be about 93 clicks.. which works out to be about 25 MOA minus 7 clicks. It's very natural for me to think in MOA even if I am memorizing the clicks and not the MOA value.

4) I find it harder to memorize an MOA table because I will then have to memorize in halves, and the increments are not numbers that are easy to remember. However, if I have a chart in front of me, then by all means, I will print out in increments of 10 yards, and look up the MOA value.

5) Windcalls will be a bigger factor in me getting one shot hits no matter how accurate my drop table is.

6) Agree with you about practice practice practice, and to learn the breakdown of the reticle at half power (have not even touch this yet).. but then again who does not know this???

Is there any other suggestions you have for me Einstein? Just kidding! hhaaha.. I do appreciate the input, even if I got nothing out of your post.

 

[maladat]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

Got to love people completely ignoring the advice of much more experienced shooters and being rude about it.

That aside:

An 18" target at 800 yards is .63 mils.
An 18" target at 850 yards is .59 mils.
An 18" target at 900 yards is .56 mils.

Might want to re-memorize that table. Or learn to do the math. Or get a mildot master. Or something.

 

[monte flinn]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

forget mildot its to complex for most especially when the target is geting away get good pair of range finders and u dont have to secound think it then, just dile up and shoot the bastard lol just sayin love my nxs npr2

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maladat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Got to love people completely ignoring the advice of much more experienced shooters and being rude about it.

That aside:

An 18" target at 800 yards is .63 mils.
An 18" target at 850 yards is .59 mils.
An 18" target at 900 yards is .56 mils.

Might want to re-memorize that table. Or learn to do the math. Or get a mildot master. Or something. </div></div>


Hell if you can accurately determine .63 mils with a mildot you are way ahead of the curve.

The value I was using was an estimation of 5.5 mils for a human silhouette at 100 yards. I was basing all my other measurements off that.

However, like I said, if I have a table in front of me I will gladly use that.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

By the way, I was not being rude, just keeping it real. I also appreciated your input too. Your post though was actually useful to me! It reminded me I was ranging on a 20" target on not a 18".

We can't always assume target will be 18" across unless the Rules Committee informs us target is exactly 18.000678" across. The ranging table I memorized is off the top of my head.
5.5
2.75
1.8
1.4
1.1
.9
.8
.7
.6
.55

 

[Rob01]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

1. I did see that part. That's why I gave you the advice I did.

2/3. You can range that accurately with practice. You can break a mil reticle to .05 mils but where did I say anything about ranging? They give you ranges at most matches and those ranges are not always even 100, 200, 300 etc yards. If you had a data book or ran your ballistic charts on a program like JBM and had them with you then you would just look down and see you need 25.5 MOA and dial it on. No math.

4. The point is you shouldn't memorize it as your only way to have data. When fatigue sets in motor skills and mental skills fade. Why do you think everyone has their stuff written down and stuck on the side of their rifles?

6. Saying 7.5 power on your power ring I half of 15x is an easy way to be off. This needs to be checked to make sure. That was my point.

Cartmann I really look forward to seeing you at a match. It will be fun to watch. The more you post the more it shows you don't know as much as you think. I tried to help. Won't happen again.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1. I did see that part. That's why I gave you the advice I did.

2/3. You can range that accurately with practice. You can break a mil reticle to .05 mils but where did I say anything about ranging? They give you ranges at most matches and those ranges are not always even 100, 200, 300 etc yards. If you had a data book or ran your ballistic charts on a program like JBM and had them with you then you would just look down and see you need 25.5 MOA and dial it on. No math.

4. The point is you shouldn't memorize it as your only way to have data. When fatigue sets in motor skills and mental skills fade. Why do you think everyone has their stuff written down and stuck on the side of their rifles?

6. Saying 7.5 power on your power ring I half of 15x is an easy way to be off. This needs to be checked to make sure. That was my point.

Cartmann I really look forward to seeing you at a match. It will be fun to watch. The more you post the more it shows you don't know as much as you think. I tried to help. Won't happen again. </div></div>


I am just saying I did not get anything useful out of your post. If you got hurt over that I apologize. I do appreciate the discussion though, and nothing you said was wrong. Just not the way I approach things (for now, but this may change and I'll keep your suggestions in mind). I have a friend who also tells me I should memorize the MOA values, but then this friend is also always looking at a chart ahhaha.

I don't know what I said was wrong for you to say "You don't know as much as you think you know". I will admit, I pretty much know nothing. So how can I know less than nothing??? woooo hoo!

I know the way I am doing things is different than all of you, but for now it works for me. this may change, as I am one the most flexible guy on this earth and open to change.

 

[rksimple]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


Cartmann I really look forward to seeing you at a match. It will be fun to watch. </div></div>

Retarded monkey humping a football comes to mind.

Cartmann-you're in Vegas right? Come out to Desert Sportsmans for the match in Feb. Love to see your abilities in the real world. Oh, and for what DA do you have you "click chart" memorized? Only shoot under one atmospheric condition? Or do you just not shoot past 100 yards? Maybe you just have a DA modifier equation memorized to quickly adjust your click chart.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

Takes more than that to hurt my feelings. As I said I really do look forward to shooting a match with you. Let me know what matches you are going to this next year and I will do my best to make atleast one of them. Hopefully the first.

Ok enough of this. Off to the range.

 

[BCP]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chanonry</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
To be accurate, I need to check (calibrate?) my second focal plane variable scope reticle is actually at the magnification it says on the dial, then I am good to go?

Hold for wind then adjust for elevation or the other way round?</div></div>

Makes sense to me.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rksimple</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


Cartmann I really look forward to seeing you at a match. It will be fun to watch. </div></div>

Retarded monkey humping a football comes to mind.

Cartmann-you're in Vegas right? Come out to Desert Sportsmans for the match in Feb. Love to see your abilities in the real world. Oh, and for what DA do you have you "click chart" memorized? Only shoot under one atmospheric condition? Or do you just not shoot past 100 yards? Maybe you just have a DA modifier equation memorized to quickly adjust your click chart. </div></div>

I'll be there. No Football in February. You guys shoot every week, so it should be easy for all you "Operators" to out shoot me. Please let me know the rules ahead of time though so I can prepare for it. Actually you know what? Don't even tell me the rules, let me learn on the fly.

1) I don't know what your point is? I never claimed to make one shot kills.

2) How do you measure atmospheric conditions?

3) I use my reticle to gauge my miss. I just have to hope the puff of dirt I see originated where I think it landed. If I am 1 mil off that means I am 14 clicks off, which is 3 MOA + 2 clicks.

4) Do you guys have moving targets? I never done that before and that would be dam fun. Looking forward to it!

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Takes more than that to hurt my feelings. As I said I really do look forward to shooting a match with you. Let me know what matches you are going to this next year and I will do my best to make atleast one of them. Hopefully the first.

Ok enough of this. Off to the range. </div></div>

Well I am in the Vegas area and I don't mind one bit you showing off your skills to me.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
4. The point is you shouldn't memorize it as your only way to have data. When fatigue sets in motor skills and mental skills fade. Why do you think everyone has their stuff written down and stuck on the side of their rifles?
</div></div>

Well only one I am competing with is myself so memorizing is part of the fun. Why would fatique set in? When I am at the range I am well rested, my belly full, and I have had 2 cups of coffee already. I know all you "operators" don't drink coffee, makes you too jittery.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

Cartmann stop calling me an operator. I do this for fun. Not as a job. I am a hobbyist like you. I am also not looking to "show off my skills" to you or anyone else. I want to watch as the light bulbs start going off over your head as you start realizing all the stuff you didn't think was useful in my posts starts becoming useful.

And stop being a wise ass. "Why would fatigue set in"? Really? If that is a serious question then you really have alot to learn. But I don't think it is. I think it's another wise ass comment. You were bumped before off the board, although I didn't do it, but it can happen again. Don't be a troll.

Also at most matches no one knows the course of fire before the match. Part of the fun of going in and thinking on your feet. Also a reason to write everything down as there is alot to think about.

 

[BOLTRIPPER]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

....hello...operator..................

 

[blklabs]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">....when I am at the range I just scream out the values while holding my fingers up.....</div></div>

I would love to watch you shoot moving chaos and do this ..... can I youtube it?

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cartmann stop calling me an operator. I do this for fun. Not as a job. I am a hobbyist like you. I am also not looking to "show off my skills" to you or anyone else. I want to watch as the light bulbs start going off over your head as you start realizing all the stuff you didn't think was useful in my posts starts becoming useful.

And stop being a wise ass. "Why would fatigue set in"? Really? If that is a serious question then you really have alot to learn. But I don't think it is. I think it's another wise ass comment. You were bumped before off the board, although I didn't do it, but it can happen again. Don't be a troll.

Also at most matches no one knows the course of fire before the match. Part of the fun of going in and thinking on your feet. Also a reason to write everything down as there is alot to think about. </div></div>


I'll concede that too you. Keeping cool under duress is something I have NOT worked on yet. For the most part, I am adjusting my turrets while sipping coffee at the same time.

I would rather take it slow and get it right, then not get it at all. As you said, practice practice practice right?

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

Can't argue with a man with a plan... unless you subscribe to the idea that no plan survives first contact.

I suspect your system will carry you far in competition, sounds like you have it all worked out.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't argue with a man with a plan... unless you subscribe to the idea that no plan survives first contact.

I suspect your system will carry you far in competition, sounds like you have it all worked out. </div></div>

Best not to have plan. Just use what you are comfortable with until you find out it no longer works.

Seriously, I have never been so fatigued at the range before where I could not do simple math. Most of the time I get my friends wanting to leave the place before me.

 

[enmerdeur]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

In perhaps a feeble attempt to steer this thread back on track.

I prefer Nightforce over Leupold...

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Nightforce vs. Leupold

It is not about fatigue it is about time, you have to race the clock figuring doesn't come into it.

We ran 92 shooters in 4 days 2 weeks ago, we see it all... all of which you haven't, not to mention SH has been putting on matches since 2004...

You have to move, consider position, then engage, thinking is not something you can do, you don't have time to "think" about the math, there are other things to consider. You are under the misconception that you can just lay in and shoot, that is not how it works.

Walk up to a line, 30 seconds prep time, which includes loading your rifle, then anything from 30 seconds to 1 minute to engage... you have no idea where the time goes and we see people who dont' even get shots off because they "thinking"... fatigue, who cares, not an issue... Time is.

As well we even had a 835 yard UKD on steel, only 3 people hit it... minute to range, stand up, off glass, 30 seconds to hit it. Good luck with your "System" it's why a bunch of people who do fine on their own with one thing realize under their clock the world is right, under someone else's clock not so good.