I'm hoping some guys can give me a little help here. I am in the process of buying a new scope for a .243 win. There is so much info on the site that I'm just confused about it all. I would like to learn how to use the mildot or MOA system on this rifle and out to 1000yds on paper, and under 400 for deer, but I'm not sure which way to go.
I currently have a Zeiss Conquest 4.5X14X44 rapid Z 800 which I really like on a 300 RUM, but I feel it has some limitations. I have been doing alot of reading here about the different reticles available and there are so many I'm totally confused about each one. I do like the conquest scopes. Once I figure out and feel comfortable with using mildot or MOA I want to put the scope on my 300RUM so I would like to get something beefy enough for the 300.
Unfortunately, I do not have anyone that I know who shoots with either reticle or is interested in getting to 1000yds. So this is the main place to ask questions.
Should I stick with the rapid z reticles or go with something I can dial? Moderately priced under $800.
If there is anything I left out please let me know and I'll try to answer those questions
We had two different shooters with the Rapid-Z reticle in Zeiss scopes at the match we had back in September... they both had a lot of trouble hitting the plates beyond 800 yards, and these plates are just over 2 MOA in size...
You'll be better off dialing for your shots. With a hold-based reticle, temperatures will change your POI enough at long ranges to more than throw you off target center (if you hit your target at all)...
So go with either a mildot or an MOA reticle, and begin dialing for your dead center zero based on location and conditions... it's the only way to truly be precise.
If you're lucky enough to have a trajectory match the rapidZ at all ranges, then no problem, but everytime we change elevation by a few thousand feet or temp changes by 30° then it is no longer the same match to the reticle as previously shot.
If we're only shooting to 600 or 700 yds at the same elevation all the time, with a decent BC bullet (.5 or better) the BDC reticles can be very convenient and quick to use. But beyond 700, or even closer with things like a 223; dialing for drops based on the current conditions is the more precise way of doing things.
I've used both Mil and Moa reticles, and my preference is toward the moa versions. Polls taken here on this site confirm most shooters prefer moa also.
Only negative people seem to have about the moa that seems legit is that they can appear cluttered when we're using 15X optics or lower. NOT an issue IMO when we're using 20X or more.
For around $800 or less, Sightron SIII has a 6-24X50 with moa type reticle.
There are probably others by now, but I am unaware of them. I feel Zeiss has better optics and glass than sightron, but I've only used one of each.
Nightforce has lots of options in reticles and is a major front runner IMO on reticle designs. Downside is expense and weight, they're about 2 lbs. and twice the $$$ amount you listed.
Thanks for the advice. What do you guys think about the zeiss Mil dot reticle? It is a SFP not ffp. I like Zeiss glass and I have an opportunity to get one at a huge discount. I could also just get a turret installed on the Zeiss that I have now and dial it. It may be kinda akward though.
Guess I'd be more apt to get a turret on the rapid Z, but either way works for sure. Depends moreso on the type of hunting you're doing I guess. 90% of my hunting is medium range and can be relatively quick shots. Usually only get one shot.
Here's why I'd prefer to keep the reticle you've got. You would still be able to use the BDC for quick shots out to 400 or 500 yds without having to look at a dope card to remember how many mils to hold over. I've got too many rifles to remember with each one what the holdover is at 425 yds and 475 yds. But with the Z, it's already in the scope.
There's nothin simpler for that "stop and look back one more time" buck than a quick reference for holdover in the scope.
If you shoot alot of steel and need to call shots/misses by using your reticle, then the mil dot or MOA is better for that purpose. Additionally, if your rangefinder quits in the field, you can use the mil dots with a mil dot master and range things, to an extent anyway. It's more accurate on game to just carry an extra rangefinder and leave it at camp. Shootin steel or anything of absolute known size is where ranging with the reticle is a legitimate quick alternative to rangefinders.
SBruce's advice is good. So is the scope recommendation.
I use both MOA and MIL DOT reticles.
My recommendation is towards MOA and then mostly because the reticle is MOA AND the turrets are MOA.
MIL - MIL reticle and turrets would be great especially w/0.1 MIL clicks
Z-Plex, MIL DOT and other similar reticles are set for only the sight-in elevation and atmospheric conditions. To make it work where I hunt, from 3000' to 10000' elevation ya gotta carry nearly a dictionary of charts or something like Shooter.
For flexibility I find the First Focal Plan MIL reticle the better choice.
I may be the slowest guy on the mountain . . . . but . . . . I'm on the mountain!
Location: SOCIALIST CONTROLLED TERRITORY OF NEW YORK
Re: Mildot vs MOA vs Rapid Z
I had a lot of trouble dialing my scopes when I first got into this stuff, That all stopped with my adoption of 2 systems. The first was when I switch to a mil/mil ffp optic, in my case a leupold mk4 m5 with 1/10 mill adj and a tmr rectical.
The second case was when I switch to the Horus system, it also employs a mill based system, you just don't have to dial it. I have 27 mils of elevation at my disposal at a moments notice, there are holds for wind as well. Once you have you firing solution just line up the grids and send it easy day.
Its a no brainier for me mil/mil, FFP all the way, or at least until I get my mk1 eyeball installed and blue toothed to my shoulder mounted rail gun.