What is the minimum magnification you would require for ELR or PRS and what turrets do you prefer? (Mil or MOA)
Thanks, because I'm curious.
Migs
Thanks, because I'm curious.
Migs
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.
Sorry, it sounds like fun! A poll if you will. Speak up about the magnification tooNot another Mil vs MOA thread!!!
View attachment 7581227
Perfect answer. Thank you. An aside: Why would you not use 25x or 35x in ELR (and stay in the 20x range)?But on a serious note,
If you want to play in prs just go Mils. That’s the standard there and you’ll be happier being able to communicate with other shooters. Among other benefits
As far as optics go 5-25 or 7-35 will be adequate. The 7-35 ATACR is one of the more popular options. The ZCO 527 etc are another. Most times shooting ELR you’ll play in the 15-20x range. Also keep the scope internal adjustment range in mine for ELR when selecting an optic
I edited that. I stay in 15-20 for general shooting. The way out there ELR guys can add their suggestions. Mostly my magnification use comes down to,Perfect answer. Thank you. An aside: Why would you not use 25x or 35x in ELR (and stay in the 20x range)?
Mirage is more of a pain to deal with at high zoom.Perfect answer. Thank you. An aside: Why would you not use 25x or 35x in ELR (and stay in the 20x range)?
Can you put a shingle over your barrel to mitigate?Mirage is more of a pain to deal with at high zoom.
Unless you are shooting a rapid string of 15 to 20 rounds as in F class mirage shield is really not necessary. Personally I prefer mils and all of my precision rifles are mil. Shooting with a spotter its much easier to call corrections in mils v MOA IMHO. In shooting ELR rarely dialed up to max power either due to mirage or observing impacts.Can you put a shingle over your barrel to mitigate?
We use mirage shields for fclass but that only helps with the barrel heat that causes mirage from the 22+ strings of fireCan you put a shingle over your barrel to mitigate?
Mirage is more of a pain to deal with at high zoom.
My professional opinion is that everything is more of a pain to deal with in MOA, unless it’s both MOA and SFP at known distanceHi,
Mirage is more of a pain to deal with in MOA scopes or MIL scopes?
Sincerely,
Theis
Above what cross wind speed do you make a correction? What caliber are you shooting? What distance? - Thank you.We use mirage shields for fclass but that only helps with the barrel heat that causes mirage from the 22+ strings of fire
The mirage we’re referring to is coming off the earths surface the entire distance between you and the target
It’s a tool to read the wind and easier to do with high magnification but the target gets very distorted causing you to back off the magnification for the shot
One of the people here said most communication is easier in MILs in ELR or PRS competitionMy professional opinion is that everything is more of a pain to deal with in MOA, unless it’s both MOA and SFP at known distance![]()
This isn't a fight. Just friendly banter and advice from folks more experienced than I.@Dthomas3523 or @MarinePMI can we get this thread moved to the bear pit where it belongs?
jejeje Sounds like the infamous Micro Radian (microradian (μrad) is a millionth of a radian)120x an my scope has MIF (Minute of Frank) units.
They are very tiny units and you can fit a lot of them in every revolution.
Yes, this is accurate. The benchrest world is still using SFP/MOA for the most part - reticle subtensions don’t matter since you know exactly how much to dial based on where you are on paper, and it’s mostly “legacy shooters”.One of the people here said most communication is easier in MILs in ELR or PRS competition
F class is just a subset of NRA long range and mid range prone competition. A discipline that is over a century old. That's why MOA is used.i thought it was because f-class target markings were in moa, thats why moa optics were used. if the targets were marked in mil then mil optics would apply. is there another reason?
but its their targets that are measured in moa where by using any other measurement makes no sense to make corrections right?F class is just a subset of NRA long range and mid range prone competition. A discipline that is over a century old. That's why MOA is used.
My groups are small in MIL.Hi,
Mirage is more of a pain to deal with in MOA scopes or MIL scopes?
Sincerely,
Theis
Different uses...What is the minimum magnification you would require for ELR or PRS and what turrets do you prefer? (Mil or MOA)
Thanks, because I'm curious.
Migs
Yes the fclass target rings are based on MOAbut its their targets that are measured in moa where by using any other measurement makes no sense to make corrections right?
and just did a bit of reading about f-class, fuck that, too confusing. i don't like that game, i'm happy to stick with the game played in mils.
just did a bit of reading about f-class, fuck that, too confusing. i don't like that game, i'm happy to stick with the game played in mils.
FIFYFuddsPeoplethat shoot moa have this innate sense that it is their duty to make sure you do complicated math formulas to detect inches of drop at a known distance target all the while they spew words like “angular measurements”and degrees per hundred yards etc etc.
Good Summary -Thank youIt is truly amazing the amount people can over complicate this. At one point I owned and shot both MOA and MIL. I truly never felt like I couldn’t accomplish my task better with one or the other. I stuck with MOA for communication with other shooters
If your new to LR shooting and not currently sitting on a stash of MOA scopes then go MIL
Here’s why,
1) If you plan to shoot PRS they use MILS
2) If you plan to frequent SH most here use MILS. (Communication)
3) If you plan to attend one of Frank’s courses he suggests MILS and the wind etc they use read/teach is done in mils and converted to MOA if you need it
4) If you like a reticle better that is MILS than the MOA counterpart
5) The used options in the px here are heavy to the MIL side. So it’s easier to find used optics in MIL vs MOA. Likewise it seems MOA optics go a bit cheaper because they don’t seem to be as popular here
6) A system of 10 is easier to learn on. Your wind calls inside 600 will be easier to compute with mils
Good to know. Ever wanted more magnification? Say 35x?Elr matches are pretty split moa/mil. I run almost all the time at 25x even in heavy mirage.
Yes the fclass target rings are based on MOA
As @308pirate once said
“Neither system is better than the other. Milliradians are not metric and minutes of angle aren't imperial.
Use whichever you like. People who know how to shoot know how to use both.”
what i read was a few years old, but did i read the wrong rules as they're a little longer than your simplified reply?Finding any NRA rifle discipline confusing says nothing good about you.
That shit is about as simple as it gets: lay down and shoot the same fucking huge target 20 times over trying to keep all your shots in the center.
If that's difficult to understand, I can't imagine what it would take to make it easy for you.
what i read was a few years old, but did i read the wrong rules as they're a little longer than your simplified reply?
maybe ask if you can write the rules if all you do is lay down and shoot 20 times at a huge target?
would save so much time reading through 30 pages when one can just read one line.
Sorry brah, I don't have time to spoon feed anyone
Sports have rulebooks. Maybe PRS is more your speed.
Like my dad used to say "No fights boys!"Sorry brah, I don't have time to spoon feed anyone
Sports have rulebooks. Maybe PRS is more your speed.
Thank you Greg for the extensive answer. I agree that low cost does not indicate poor performance. I shoot my hunter rifle in benchrest with a Tasco scope because of the weight restriction. (Can't find a 6x scope that is "high end" while lite at the same time. It works fine. My Athlon scope is relatively inexpensive and works VERY well. On another note, if my target is small and beyond 500 m then high magnification is necessary. Thanks again! -MigsWhen you want it low, 3X-4X is a min, 6X is more common. When you want it long you want a reasonable max, consistent with mirage, which is generally around 18X. Coming in closer, splitting the hair, more is better, mine goes to 32X; those desiring no Mil-Dots can get this, even more is available. By comparison, 3-9x40 is the deer hunter's 'standard'.
I shot 1000yd F Open for years with an El Cheapo Tasco 6-24X42 Varmint/Target scope; never let me down (I now own 3)
Very long distance and very high powers can be frustrating as air clarity (dust - sub micron) can rob you of a lot of clarity. We get a lot of that here in the AZ high desert.
Bear fully in mind that that sometimes, neither the rifle nor the shooter can shoot to the resolution that the higher magnifications provide, and that once beyond 100yd, the wind dominates accuracy.
Obviously, none of these scopes get endorsed around here very much, mainly because they are "horse crap". This translates to "cheap".
There is a psychological virus rampant on gun sites that inexpensive translates to cheap, and that cheap translates to horse crap. This may be true, but most of those who make such pronouncements have never even seen the inside of the boxes that the scopes I suggest arrive in. I've been shooting them for years.
Greg
Yep. Couldn't agree more! Thank you.A lot of low cost scopes are indeed crap, much caution is necessary, and some investments never pan out.
Such is life.
I've been doing this stuff for going on 3 decades, getting started as a member of a Marine Corps League Detachment Pistol team, then moving up to start up and help coordinate 20+ such teams in NJ (in the 90's, it's a different state now). We introduced rifles and the programs took off like an interplanetary rocket. I had waited until my later 40's to get started, I had a family to raise first.
I did a lot of research in how to get the shooter onto the range and working on their skills for as small change as possible. A lot of mistakes got made (by one guy, this guy), and some gems were also unearthed. My post reflects both extremes. What flew got passed on up to the rest of the teams.
One often needs to walk into the wind, and catch some rain in the face. Such challenges draw benefit.
Unfortunately, the virus mentioned above has proven that the average competitive shooter cannot accept anything but the best, regardless of their personal skill levels, and they have demonstrated to the scope manufacturers and distributors that the low cost market really doesn't need to demand very much of their attention.
Are there lemons on the top shelf? Probably, but a lot less than on the lower shelf. But the trend is also to reduce the providers' interest in low shelf products, and they are drying up fast. Pretty soon there will only be junk on the low shelf, and the scopes I recommend will be history, many of them already are. The reps say there's little interest in the products, and they're right. The virus carriers have seen to that.
Nobody can tell you how to spend your money, and asking questions will get a lot of recommendations that favor the scope the poster owns themselves. Nothing wrong with that, it's exactly what I'm doing.
The only thing I'm doing differently is starting my searches on a lower shelf.
All I ask is that more folks try that, too.
Many will tell you that better shooting is expensive. It is, but is doesn't have to be that expensive, top shelf expensive.
There's a lot of gear out there that's top notch, champion shooter's expensive. A lot more than there are champions. Many of these folks will tell you that you're wasting your money on the lower shelf.
I'll tell you that some for them are wasting their money on the top shelf, and often a lot more money then you are. It takes more than money to win. Skills are also required, and they can't be bought. More expensive gear will help some, but only some.
I used to be a competitive shooter, but my competitive shooting is in the past. Age is the great equalizer, but it also the source of experience, and that can sometimes lead to wisdom.
Others will judge whether that's been my fate.
Greg
When you want it low, 3X-4X is a min, 6X is more common. When you want it long you want a reasonable max, consistent with mirage, which is generally around 18X. Coming in closer, splitting the hair, more is better, mine goes to 32X; those desiring no Mil-Dots can get this, even more is available. By comparison, 3-9x40 is the deer hunter's 'standard'.
I shot 1000yd F Open for years with an El Cheapo Tasco 6-24X42 Varmint/Target scope; never let me down (I now own 3)
Very long distance and very high powers can be frustrating as air clarity (dust - sub micron) can rob you of a lot of clarity. We get a lot of that here in the AZ high desert.
Bear fully in mind that that sometimes, neither the rifle nor the shooter can shoot to the resolution that the higher magnifications provide, and that once beyond 100yd, the wind dominates accuracy.
Obviously, none of these scopes get endorsed around here very much, mainly because they are "horse crap". This translates to "cheap".
There is a psychological virus rampant on gun sites that inexpensive translates to cheap, and that cheap translates to horse crap. This may be true, but most of those who make such pronouncements have never even seen the inside of the boxes that the scopes I suggest arrive in. I've been shooting them for years. They do what I need them to do.
Are the expensive scopes better? Undoubtedly so. In many cases, better than the user's skills can justify. Start with a reasonably priced scope. Then work up. The cheap scope will find an equally good home on a 22lr, a trainer rifle, or sit in a spares box as an emergency replacement scope that can save your match for you.
Greg