Forester
Well-Known Member
Is there anything out there in the $1,200 or less range with glass good enough for hunting to 1000yrds, exposed turrets and a mil reticle and mill adjustments?
mil/mil scope?
- Thread starter Forester
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
CS T
Official LRH Sponsor
If you are looking for a scope with the power range of 2.5-10x I know of one that is $1150.00. What power magnification are you looking for?
Mike @ CST
Mike @ CST
Forester
Well-Known Member
Something in the 14-16 range on the top end would be ideal. If the glass is really good I would go less.
jmden
Well-Known Member
The NF NXS 3.5 - 15 scopes aren't much more than that. You might call Leupold and see if they offer an mil turret for their Mark 4 scopes. I thought they did, but couldn't find it when looking--the 4.5 - 14 Mark 4 scopes should be just under your $1200 number. Good luck.
Forester
Well-Known Member
I do plan on calling Leupold about a Mil turret, but I don't think it is an option.
I would love to buy the Nightforce, but see, $1000 is the budget, $1200 is what I figure I can get away with, $1400 may mean moving to the dog pen.
Edited to add: If I have to sacrafice one of the original requirements it will be the mil/mil setup, it would be nice but but so would a lot of other things
.
Last edited:
jmden
Well-Known Member
I do plan on calling Leupold about a Mil turret, but I don't think it is an option.
I would love to buy the Nightforce, but see, $1000 is the budget, $1200 is what I figure I can get away with, $1400 may mean moving to the dog pen.
Edited to add: If I have to sacrafice one of the original requirements it will be the mil/mil setup, it would be nice but but so would a lot of other things
Yes, I've mentioned this before, but I sure wish Leup would get the matching reticle to turret thing figured out and offer both in mils and MOA. It seems like such an obvious thing to many of us, but it seems to escape them. I've talked to Ray Brock, Tactical Line Manager, a couple of times and it doesn't really seem to sink in--especially the a part about offering and NPR1 MOA type reticle. Instead he talks about offering several of the Horus 'reticles' here soon--talk about a scope full of reticle... The Horus 'reticles' seem to be a ranging reticle and while I'm sure they work well, you have to know the size of the target. That only works out accurately enought to shoot so far, as we know. What do I know, but I don't think reticle rangfinding is going to be accurate for solid, first round kills at much over several hundred yards for most of us. Why not just offer matching turrets and reticles in mils and MOA. Seems like a very simple concept. Geezz...I'd better stop my rant and get off my soapbox here. Sorry... Jon
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
For one, MILs are for ranging, and by far least desired for adjustment(hold off or dialing). MOAs are for adjustment with higher resolution, and IPHY is a tiny bit more defined still.
It's true that reticle bracketing with assumed target size provides nowhere near the accuracy of laser rangefinding.
And holding over instead of dialing just adds more error to it.
I really wish everyone would stop whinning to scope makers, before they get what they ask for,, -screwing the rest of us.
Jon A
Well-Known Member
The two new SS's, the 3-9 and 10X HD; also the IOR 2.5-10 FFP. Unfortunately I don't think you can find any higher power without stepping down in glass quality or stepping up in price. The next up would be IOR 3-18 FFP and NF SFP with MLR.
Unfortunately as far as I know Leupold still only offers .05 Mil clicks which are way too fine for a big game rifle IMHO.
That makes absolutely no sense.
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
3.437747MILs = 1MOA
1MOA = 1.047198 IPHY
1INCH = JUST THAT, EVERY HUNDRED YARDS
So
3.437747*1.047198= 3.6"/MIL/100yds
See any resolution loss here?
1MOA = 1.047198 IPHY
1INCH = JUST THAT, EVERY HUNDRED YARDS
So
3.437747*1.047198= 3.6"/MIL/100yds
See any resolution loss here?
Jon A
Well-Known Member
No.
Since only a couple scopes I know of adjust in full MOA increments and none I know of adjust in full Mil increments, their absolute size is meaningless. They can be divided up into as small increments as one desires.
As mentioned above, the problem with Leupold Mil adjustments is at .05 Mil they're TOO FINE for most of us. As are 1/8 MOA clicks. They may great for benchrest or extreme range varmints, but for big game once you get beyond a certain level of precision, smaller clicks just require more clicks and more turns of the knob for any given shot which only slows you down in getting the same result.
But again, from .05 Mil Leupold clicks to 1 MOA M3 Leupold clicks, either can be as fine or as coarse as one wants. Saying one "is for ranging" while the other "is for adjustments" is akin to saying Spanish is for speaking but English is for writing...it doesn't make much sense. Either can do either job well if used correctly.
Since only a couple scopes I know of adjust in full MOA increments and none I know of adjust in full Mil increments, their absolute size is meaningless. They can be divided up into as small increments as one desires.
As mentioned above, the problem with Leupold Mil adjustments is at .05 Mil they're TOO FINE for most of us. As are 1/8 MOA clicks. They may great for benchrest or extreme range varmints, but for big game once you get beyond a certain level of precision, smaller clicks just require more clicks and more turns of the knob for any given shot which only slows you down in getting the same result.
But again, from .05 Mil Leupold clicks to 1 MOA M3 Leupold clicks, either can be as fine or as coarse as one wants. Saying one "is for ranging" while the other "is for adjustments" is akin to saying Spanish is for speaking but English is for writing...it doesn't make much sense. Either can do either job well if used correctly.
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
Jon, I agree with you.
It isn't important that ranging and adjustment MATCH each other.
It truly doesn't matter which standard is used for ranging.
And it doesn't matter which standard is used for elevation adjustments.
Which leads to my position that with a LRF, the med-fine crosshair works as good as anything out there. As does 1/4 IPHY or 1/4 MOA for adjustment.
That is, until I'm convinced otherwise.
It isn't important that ranging and adjustment MATCH each other.
It truly doesn't matter which standard is used for ranging.
And it doesn't matter which standard is used for elevation adjustments.
Which leads to my position that with a LRF, the med-fine crosshair works as good as anything out there. As does 1/4 IPHY or 1/4 MOA for adjustment.
That is, until I'm convinced otherwise.
I think what Forester is looking for is a scope with turrets graduated in mils as opposed to inches or minutes. There is a company that makes custom turrets I'm sure they can or do make them like this. I can't remember the name of the company but a quick google search should provide you with it. I would recommend you find the company first since, as I recall they only made these turrets for certain brands of scopes. Be aware of making adjustments in mils. Unless your reticle is in the first focal plane you'll need to ensure you are on the correct magnification setting before making your adjustment. If not the one mil of drop you observed may actually be two mils, or only 1/2 a mil.
McTank
McTank
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
The scope magnification affects RANGING and HOLDOFF accuracy, but not adjustments from a turret.
Autorotate
Well-Known Member
Does anyone have any experience with Holland Reticle installed in a 1/4 MOA knob Luepy Mark 4?
