Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Specialty Handgun Hunting
Longest Handgun Kill
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sscoyote" data-source="post: 233897" data-attributes="member: 1133"><p>Rog, that's right. It's still in the VX-III's called the "Range Estimating System." </p><p></p><p>The neat thing about all this is it's based on a simple modification of the mil-ranging formula. I remember years ago playing around with this stuff. The problem was there are so many permutations of the mil-ranging formula that it sometimes gets confusing. All reticle-rangefinding has to be based on this formula (even the Leupold RES mentioned above). It took me forever to figure it out tho. I kept on seeing the factor of 27.8 in the MR formulas, and for the life of me i couldn't figure out what it was. Finally a buddy tol me it was the 3.6" dot to dot measurement at 100 yds. (100/3.6=27.8) So i thought why not punch in any subtension measurement, plex, ballistic reticles, custom reticles. It all works, sometimes better than the mil-dot it self, if the subtension is smaller. It was then that i realized that the mil-ranging formula is not specific to the mil-dot but is simply the geometric formula that defines angles.</p><p></p><p>It was sort of interesting but all the common mil-dot Internet references do not describe the derivation of the algebraic formula from the angular sine/cosine/tangent crap i don't know anything about. But there's one guy Robert Simeone that details it all, and it then becomes apparent on how the algebra's derived (always wanted to knwo how they did it and this math guy details it all). I'll have to dig up the link for u guys.</p><p></p><p>IMO, the significance of this simple modification of the mil-ranging formula is WAY more important than the mil-dot itself since it can be used with any reticle out there, even archery sight pins if somebody decided to try it. Once the modified mil-ranging formula is understood it's easily memorized too, and then it becomes easy to see how reverse milling works (calculating any of the other 4 variables in the equation, once the others are known). Combine this with understanding that second focal plane reticle subtensions is based on an inversely proportional formula and the sky's the limit really for rangefinding.</p><p></p><p>Funny thing about it is once the modified mil-ranging formula is understood it can also be used for downrange zeroing as well (bullet drop can be substituted for tgt. size in the formula)--amazing stuff, IMO.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Mike there was a mistake made in that article that u should know about. Something like the 3rd pg. or so they put the caption of the Burris Ballistic Mil-Dot rangefinding picture in the text. So there's a whole paragraph there that doesn't seem to fit. That's because it was misplaced in the article.</p><p></p><p>I am thinking of getting a HV system too after talking to Neal Cooper. There's also a great article on the HV system in 1 of the back issues of Precision Shooting. Let me know if u want i'll get u a copy of it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sscoyote, post: 233897, member: 1133"] Rog, that's right. It's still in the VX-III's called the "Range Estimating System." The neat thing about all this is it's based on a simple modification of the mil-ranging formula. I remember years ago playing around with this stuff. The problem was there are so many permutations of the mil-ranging formula that it sometimes gets confusing. All reticle-rangefinding has to be based on this formula (even the Leupold RES mentioned above). It took me forever to figure it out tho. I kept on seeing the factor of 27.8 in the MR formulas, and for the life of me i couldn't figure out what it was. Finally a buddy tol me it was the 3.6" dot to dot measurement at 100 yds. (100/3.6=27.8) So i thought why not punch in any subtension measurement, plex, ballistic reticles, custom reticles. It all works, sometimes better than the mil-dot it self, if the subtension is smaller. It was then that i realized that the mil-ranging formula is not specific to the mil-dot but is simply the geometric formula that defines angles. It was sort of interesting but all the common mil-dot Internet references do not describe the derivation of the algebraic formula from the angular sine/cosine/tangent crap i don't know anything about. But there's one guy Robert Simeone that details it all, and it then becomes apparent on how the algebra's derived (always wanted to knwo how they did it and this math guy details it all). I'll have to dig up the link for u guys. IMO, the significance of this simple modification of the mil-ranging formula is WAY more important than the mil-dot itself since it can be used with any reticle out there, even archery sight pins if somebody decided to try it. Once the modified mil-ranging formula is understood it's easily memorized too, and then it becomes easy to see how reverse milling works (calculating any of the other 4 variables in the equation, once the others are known). Combine this with understanding that second focal plane reticle subtensions is based on an inversely proportional formula and the sky's the limit really for rangefinding. Funny thing about it is once the modified mil-ranging formula is understood it can also be used for downrange zeroing as well (bullet drop can be substituted for tgt. size in the formula)--amazing stuff, IMO. Mike there was a mistake made in that article that u should know about. Something like the 3rd pg. or so they put the caption of the Burris Ballistic Mil-Dot rangefinding picture in the text. So there's a whole paragraph there that doesn't seem to fit. That's because it was misplaced in the article. I am thinking of getting a HV system too after talking to Neal Cooper. There's also a great article on the HV system in 1 of the back issues of Precision Shooting. Let me know if u want i'll get u a copy of it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Specialty Handgun Hunting
Longest Handgun Kill
Top