So who all has experience with either of these reticles and what do you think of them. Thinkin of getting a new varmint scope this spring and am stuck on which way to go. I know the new ballistic reticles are designed to be easier to use and just as effective as a mil dot so does that make a mil dot outdated. Not looking for extra long range, max is probably only going to be 500-600. I know you can get really good with the mil dot but it takes a lot more practice. So which way would be better and more practical.
mil dot vs. Ballistic
- Thread starter JPaul17
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I have mildots, but now there are variations of them that I like better. There are hollow mils, and I like the TMR buy leupold, the middlle is open and it has 1mil and 1/2 mil and a section of 1/5 mil, one of my favs.I use the mildot in my 325 wsm and get right to 725 for holds and reference 1/2 mils also
i think that both have there advantage. the mill dot will be more versatile as ballistic reticles are set for specific velocities so your loads need to match the reticle. maybe not exactly but you still need to be close. on the other hand when shooting varmints you don't have allot of time to do math so using the mill dot to range find can be a pain. using the turrets to click in the appropriate bullet drop will be more precise but if pushed for time the hold over on the ballistic will be more accurate. not sure if that helps. good luck
Browninglover1
Well-Known Member
The ballistic mil dot from Burris can give you the best of both worlds. You could use the mil dots in the upper cross hair for range estimation if you really needed to and the ballistic lines in the bottom cross hair line up surprisingly well for many cartridges. I have the reticle in 3 of my scopes and it allows me to get to 700 yards in all of them.
The reticle is not too busy and is easily adapted to many cartridges. A simple ballistic reticle is not super precise when compared to dialing for your shots, but it's way faster then dialing and with a little practice it's precise enough for any hunting situation I've encountered.
The reticle is not too busy and is easily adapted to many cartridges. A simple ballistic reticle is not super precise when compared to dialing for your shots, but it's way faster then dialing and with a little practice it's precise enough for any hunting situation I've encountered.
I own both styles. I have used mil dots for several years and and use them for windage, leads, ranging, and POI correction. You will have to do some homework and apply some math to be proficient. I agree with prior posts that the TMR is more effective for use as a ballistic Reticle compared to standard dots. Once you figure out impact points, which you have to do with all of them, it works well.. I have a Mark 4, TMR on my coyote rig. If I have the time, especially on the longer shots, I prefer to dial in. It will be more precise. I also own a Leupold that has an Advanced Reticle Technology, reticle which is similar to the Burris described in a prior post, and a Leupold Varmint Reticle. The ART is a hybrid of both, but I didn't warm up to it. They are both pretty easy to set up and use. If you are just interested in using the scope for elevation and windage using basic MOA data, go with a ballistic Reticle. If you are committed to understanding and applying mil dot technology, go with the mil dot.IMO.
Thanks for all the input guys. Never thought about the ballistic mil dot, that really would be the best of both worlds. I noticed last night nikon has a new software called spot-on. Its made for people to be able to put their load data in and find out the exact hold over distances apposed to just a general 100, 200, 300 etc. I guess just like everything for guns there's more than one way to do it.
sscoyote
Well-Known Member
I'd take a really hard look at Leupold's Varmint Hunter's reticle. Dont worry about the rangefinding applications of any multi-stadia reticle (including BDC)--any of them can be applied for rangefinding once subtension is known, often more accurately than the std. mil-dot.
That reticle has good windage reference that's easily broken down, and the 3 1.77 MOA units either side of reticle axis are excellent for that application as well along with a tgt. elevation turret. It's a simple but adequate system, that works great in the field.
That reticle has good windage reference that's easily broken down, and the 3 1.77 MOA units either side of reticle axis are excellent for that application as well along with a tgt. elevation turret. It's a simple but adequate system, that works great in the field.
chucknbach
Well-Known Member
Yes Nikon does have the Spot on. It works great. When I got my first BDC from them I wasn't crazy about the circles. I wanted the cross hairs. I have found I like them alot. I'm now even thinking about a circle for my main cross.
I put my load data in spot on and it prints out this and attach it to my scope.
