Paper target grids

I’m looking to see if anyone has a grid system used for zeroing rifles but in a mil grid. Either .1 or .2 mil grid.

I have several in .25 inch etc... looking for something specifically in the metric system.

Thanks.
Mils and metric are two separate things. Just get that outta your head.

There are a ton of free ones available but I recommend the free ones at impact data books.
 
I use milrad scopes and constructed this correctly calibrated one for mil zeroing. Send me a PM and I will forward the Word document.

Screen Shot 2019-04-06 at 11.55.24 AM.png
 
There must be a whole cadre of super humans on this forum that have highly calibrated Mk 1 eyeballs. Eyeballs that can see through any atmospheric or environmental distortion, and accurately calculate the actual statistical center of a group from a 100 yards or more away.

The mantra of "use the reticle" is for calling corrections in a timely manner, and rightly so.

It is NOT for zeroing, unless you are just lazy or have an unnatural fear of actual measuring devices and simple math.
 
There must be a whole cadre of super humans on this forum that have highly calibrated Mk 1 eyeballs. Eyeballs that can see through any atmospheric or environmental distortion, and accurately calculate the actual statistical center of a group from a 100 yards or more away.

The mantra of "use the reticle" is for calling corrections in a timely manner, and rightly so.

It is NOT for zeroing, unless you are just lazy or have an unnatural fear of actual measuring devices and simple math.

With all due respect...I'm certainly NOT super-human but I've never used graph paper, simple math or "actual" measuring devices (other than the reticle) to zero a scope. The reticle IS a measuring device that can be used to measure and make adjustments. Think about ranging with a reticle BEFORE rangefinders were available. While this is now a legacy skill (Frank's term) some of the better shooters had the ability to read a reticle to the hundredth. i.e. two decimal places, when ranging.

Making corrections using POI usually references a spot on the reticle without concern to a value. Holding wind or elevation however requires the ability to read one's reticle and hold a specific value on the subtension.
 
With all due respect...I'm certainly NOT super-human but I've never used graph paper, simple math or "actual" measuring devices (other than the reticle) to zero a scope. The reticle IS a measuring device that can be used to measure and make adjustments. Think about ranging with a reticle BEFORE rangefinders were available. While this is now a legacy skill (Frank's term) some of the better shooters had the ability to read a reticle to the hundredth. i.e. two decimal places, when ranging.

Making corrections using POI usually references a spot on the reticle without concern to a value. Holding wind or elevation however requires the ability to read one's reticle and hold a specific value on the subtension.
I exaggerated the point slightly for effect....

The point being, reticles are handy, but they will never replace a dial caliper.

Using precise instrumentation is not illegal, nor immoral, and doing math is not an act of heresy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W54/XM-388
I exaggerated the point slightly for effect....

The point being, reticles are handy, but they will never replace a dial caliper.

Using precise instrumentation is not illegal, nor immoral, and doing math is not an act of heresy.
No it is not but it is competely unnecessary. Of course there is more than one way to skin a cat and neither way is wrong so carry on.
 
No it is not but it is competely unnecessary. Of course there is more than one way to skin a cat and neither way is wrong so carry on.

I just shot this group today. Since I had to make sight correction to center up the group, the first shot was .4 mils left of the group. In doing group analysis back at the house, how would you suggest I use the reticle to figure out exactly where that shot belongs in the group?

How would I use the reticle to figure out exactly how far away from the group center those flyers are?

If this was an ELR load I was trying to zero, how would I use the reticle to find the mathmatical center and exactly calculate what my remaining amount of zero offset was?

3265C60F-8125-49FE-AB9B-7EF236F43B19.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snuby642
I just shot this group today. Since I had to make sight correction to center up the group, the first shot was .4 mils left of the group. In doing group analysis back at the house, how would you suggest I use the reticle to figure out exactly where that shot belongs in the group?

How would I use the reticle to figure out exactly how far away from the group center those flyers are?

If this was an ELR load I was trying to zero, how would I use the reticle to find the mathmatical center and exactly calculate what my remaining amount of zero offset was?

View attachment 7057940
Eyeball it with the reticle. Think of it this way. You are using calipers that is accurate to the nearest thousandth of an inch and you are clicking a scope that is accurate to the nearest 1/4 of an inch at best. When shooting there are so many variables that you are never 100%. Even the grouping in the pic may not be accurate as there is a human on the other end of the gun. Shooting a larger group lessens that variable more but then the barrel is heating up which is another variable. Of course you could make a cold bore shot every hour until you have a 10-20 rd group and then use your calipers to get to the nearest ten thousandth of an inch and click your scope to the nearest 1/4” which makes the calipers pointless. Which is my point. As far as the ELR load is concerned, being a click off your “true zero” is much less of a error than misjudging the wind a fraction of 1mph. It’s much less of an error than the group size of your rifle. It’s much less of the error than the extreme spread of your Ammo. If you were centering a laser beam then your way would be the best as there would be very little variables.

Or you could shoot a few and dial the scope then shoot a few to confirm and bang targets as far as you care to shoot. That’s what I do. It’s quick. It’s easy. It works.

Neither is wrong. Do as you wish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeftSystems
Here is what is so hilarious... I'm saying both are appropriate within thier proper context. I use the reticle to measure every single time I go out to shoot.

It's the cool-aid drinkers repeating the mantra, that bend over backwards to avoid admitting that math might actually be beneficial or necessary in certain instances. It shows a real lack of critical thinking and a bent toward zealotry IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here are 8.5x11 pages I have made, each of them are in .1 mil. PDFs also attached. Note these are listed for yards or meters. Be sure to use the correct target at the correct range.

1mil = 1 cm = .393 inches at 100 meters
1mil at 100meters.jpg

1mil = .9144 cm = .360 inches at 100 Yards
1mil at 100Yards.jpg

Enjoy. Let me know if you think I could make these better? I can resize or add things as needed.

The last PDF is a bonus for ya if you can print 24x36 pages. Or staples will do it for you.
 

Attachments

  • 1mil at 100Yards.pdf
    13.6 KB · Views: 399
  • 1mil at 100meters.pdf
    13.6 KB · Views: 341
  • Tall Target Test MIL.pdf
    89.7 KB · Views: 378
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bevo and 2aBaC̶a̶
the same if i was shooting 100 yards and i adjusted .1 mil how many inches would that be? but to your question, the answer is potato.

If you bothered to work out the maths, and actually write down the resultant linear measurement on target (for both systems side by side if you want), and then push the results out in several additional 100 unit (Meters & Yards) increment steps on both systems, you'd notice an interesting pattern when using meters in steps of 100 with 0.1 mil adjustments.

I do understand however there are some folks for whom the idea of an actual linear measurement at the end result target is some kind of heresy.

Others find it useful to know how angular based measurements relate to fixed linear measurements at different distances & with different measuring systems.
 
If you bothered to work out the maths, and actually write down the resultant linear measurement on target (for both systems side by side if you want), and then push the results out in several additional 100 unit (Meters & Yards) increment steps on both systems, you'd notice an interesting pattern when using meters in steps of 100 with 0.1 mil adjustments.

I do understand however there are some folks for whom the idea of an actual linear measurement at the end result target is some kind of heresy.

Others find it useful to know how angular based measurements relate to fixed linear measurements at different distances & with different measuring systems.
i get what your saying and no doubt using metric is WAY easier. base 10 just computes so much faster. But, mils works with imperial the same way, its just not as fast. 1 mil at 100 yards is 3.6 inches and at 100 meters its actually 9.999 cm (but we just simplify it and call it 10 cm). at 100 yds, .1 mil is .36 inches or .9144 cm. whatever floats your boat. i wish we used metric, but we dont so i dont.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W54/XM-388
Let me play devils advocate for everyone here and see if I can alleviate some tension.

Sometimes people can forget that OP specifically asked for a gridded target, not for the best way to zero a rifle.

BUT sometimes people do not know of better ways of doing things when asking a question so it isn't always a bad thing to suggest a different way of doing something.

It is true that if you have a FFP scope with a hashed reticle then you can typically use it to zero with the same result as using a grid.

BUT if you do not have enough magnification in the scope to easily see the group at the distance you are zeroing. Or not enough clarity. Or you have a 1/8 MOA turret. Or the hash marks are in 1 MIL. Or you have a SFP scope and don't want to have to do conversions (ex. the scope is accurate at 10x but you can only see the group at 25x). Or you have a fixed power scope with a fine duplex reticle, etc... then it would be beneficial to have a gridded target.

Based on the OPs other replies it seems like he may be an instructor or is just trying to introduce a new shooter to shooting and would like to be prepared for someone with either a MOA or a MIL scope. Being prepared for both situations is never a bad thing. It also is not a bad idea to keep in mind that it could be beneficial to start them using their reticle immediately if they have sufficient magnification, FFP and a sufficient reticle to measure it that way. Also if someone is having trouble with that concept it may be better to have the target handy to make it easier to zero in their scope before trying to hit them with more complicated concepts (if you are low of the aim point then dial up 1 click for each box that the bullet missed by is a much easier thing to comprehend then vomiting angles, FFP, hash marks, mils, moa etc at a brand new shooter you are trying to get hooked by getting them a ding at 1000 yards).

I just shot this group today. Since I had to make sight correction to center up the group, the first shot was .4 mils left of the group. In doing group analysis back at the house, how would you suggest I use the reticle to figure out exactly where that shot belongs in the group?

How would I use the reticle to figure out exactly how far away from the group center those flyers are?

If this was an ELR load I was trying to zero, how would I use the reticle to find the mathmatical center and exactly calculate what my remaining amount of zero offset was?
This is a valid point. Using calipers would be a fine way to get the info you want but might I suggest an alternative. There is a phone app called rangebuddy(android) / submoa(apple) that will allow you to easily get the center of the group without having to eyeball it as long as you have a reference point to give it (such as the width of the orange dot). The app can be challenging to get used to but once you do it is quite nice to use without having to measure everything by hand. Here is an example of some subpar shooting but it shows the app in use (I use the calipers to calibrate the reference):

Note: I did not set the aim point in the app even though I should have but you can see the yellow cross as the center of the group. You manually place the rings on the bullet holes so you can ignore the fliers if you like. There is a deskstop app (IIRC it is called on target) but I have never used it and I find the phone apps sufficient.
 
Let me play devils advocate for everyone here and see if I can alleviate some tension.

Sometimes people can forget that OP specifically asked for a gridded target, not for the best way to zero a rifle.

BUT sometimes people do not know of better ways of doing things when asking a question so it isn't always a bad thing to suggest a different way of doing something.

It is true that if you have a FFP scope with a hashed reticle then you can typically use it to zero with the same result as using a grid.

BUT if you do not have enough magnification in the scope to easily see the group at the distance you are zeroing. Or not enough clarity. Or you have a 1/8 MOA turret. Or the hash marks are in 1 MIL. Or you have a SFP scope and don't want to have to do conversions (ex. the scope is accurate at 10x but you can only see the group at 25x). Or you have a fixed power scope with a fine duplex reticle, etc... then it would be beneficial to have a gridded target.

Based on the OPs other replies it seems like he may be an instructor or is just trying to introduce a new shooter to shooting and would like to be prepared for someone with either a MOA or a MIL scope. Being prepared for both situations is never a bad thing. It also is not a bad idea to keep in mind that it could be beneficial to start them using their reticle immediately if they have sufficient magnification, FFP and a sufficient reticle to measure it that way. Also if someone is having trouble with that concept it may be better to have the target handy to make it easier to zero in their scope before trying to hit them with more complicated concepts (if you are low of the aim point then dial up 1 click for each box that the bullet missed by is a much easier thing to comprehend then vomiting angles, FFP, hash marks, mils, moa etc at a brand new shooter you are trying to get hooked by getting them a ding at 1000 yards).


This is a valid point. Using calipers would be a fine way to get the info you want but might I suggest an alternative. There is a phone app called rangebuddy(android) / submoa(apple) that will allow you to easily get the center of the group without having to eyeball it as long as you have a reference point to give it (such as the width of the orange dot). The app can be challenging to get used to but once you do it is quite nice to use without having to measure everything by hand. Here is an example of some subpar shooting but it shows the app in use (I use the calipers to calibrate the reference):

Note: I did not set the aim point in the app even though I should have but you can see the yellow cross as the center of the group. You manually place the rings on the bullet holes so you can ignore the fliers if you like. There is a deskstop app (IIRC it is called on target) but I have never used it and I find the phone apps sufficient.

I've actually been meaning to take a serious look at that app. I just haven't gotten around to it yet.
 
Thanks Frank, I forgot about your tall targets,

Everyone who provided targets awesome thanks!

The purpose of these targets are not to show "sub MOA" groups, or anything like that at all. Its to get students to stop thinking in inches. The targets are just to force them to start using mils. I'm sure all trainers out there have experienced the veteran hunter who thinks in inches no matter what you tell them.
 
Let me play devils advocate for everyone here and see if I can alleviate some tension.

Sometimes people can forget that OP specifically asked for a gridded target, not for the best way to zero a rifle.

BUT sometimes people do not know of better ways of doing things when asking a question so it isn't always a bad thing to suggest a different way of doing something.

It is true that if you have a FFP scope with a hashed reticle then you can typically use it to zero with the same result as using a grid.

BUT if you do not have enough magnification in the scope to easily see the group at the distance you are zeroing. Or not enough clarity. Or you have a 1/8 MOA turret. Or the hash marks are in 1 MIL. Or you have a SFP scope and don't want to have to do conversions (ex. the scope is accurate at 10x but you can only see the group at 25x). Or you have a fixed power scope with a fine duplex reticle, etc... then it would be beneficial to have a gridded target.

Based on the OPs other replies it seems like he may be an instructor or is just trying to introduce a new shooter to shooting and would like to be prepared for someone with either a MOA or a MIL scope. Being prepared for both situations is never a bad thing. It also is not a bad idea to keep in mind that it could be beneficial to start them using their reticle immediately if they have sufficient magnification, FFP and a sufficient reticle to measure it that way. Also if someone is having trouble with that concept it may be better to have the target handy to make it easier to zero in their scope before trying to hit them with more complicated concepts (if you are low of the aim point then dial up 1 click for each box that the bullet missed by is a much easier thing to comprehend then vomiting angles, FFP, hash marks, mils, moa etc at a brand new shooter you are trying to get hooked by getting them a ding at 1000 yards).


This is a valid point. Using calipers would be a fine way to get the info you want but might I suggest an alternative. There is a phone app called rangebuddy(android) / submoa(apple) that will allow you to easily get the center of the group without having to eyeball it as long as you have a reference point to give it (such as the width of the orange dot). The app can be challenging to get used to but once you do it is quite nice to use without having to measure everything by hand. Here is an example of some subpar shooting but it shows the app in use (I use the calipers to calibrate the reference):

Note: I did not set the aim point in the app even though I should have but you can see the yellow cross as the center of the group. You manually place the rings on the bullet holes so you can ignore the fliers if you like. There is a deskstop app (IIRC it is called on target) but I have never used it and I find the phone apps sufficient.





Oh man, you get it. I do a lot of LE and Civilian Training. We recently had a few LE guys at a training who have used MOA for the past 10 years. Thats what they knew, that's what they were comfortable with. Its easy math at 100 yards to dial in your scope etc..etc.. We all know that. You can use a MOA reticle or a mil reticle to measure your "shot" compared to where you want to ZERO your gun. Simple.

99.9% of targets are in .25 grids, which is great or shooter MOA but not real MOA.

I just simply wanted a legit MIL grid to get peeps to think in MILS who are shooting them.

When they are doing their cold bores, or zeroing their rifles.

I see alot of students that use .25 grids do the following:

They shoot, They need to re-zero. Rather than using the reticle and measuring, they will count the .25 boxes and then reply, i need to move xx inches left, right, whatever.

I want them to start thinking in mils.

I need to dial 1.5 mils right.

Perfect.


Thanks Everyone!