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
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
NightForce question....
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="MontanaRifleman" data-source="post: 268631" data-attributes="member: 11717"><p>What you say is true about using inches and MOA marks for estimating long shots because multiplying 20 MOA at longer ranges exagerates the slight difference.</p><p> </p><p>But, if your using a spoter, or even trying to spot yourself, IMO estimating a miss in MOA seems simpler and easier than Mils. As in 1 MOA high and 1/2 MOA left. But maybe that's just me? Also, I make and print my own targets using a 1" grid, When I'm shooting paper on the range, I can pretty much exactly estimated my windage and elevation corrections from the bench. The MOA scale makes it easier for me to make the mental calculations and dial in the correction.</p><p> </p><p>Another thing I like about the NP-R2 reticle is that it is clean and simple. That fits in my simple brain very well. No fuss no muss. Estimations and calcs are easy and it doesn't clutter my view or my mind.</p><p> </p><p>Now I am not saying that the MOA is necessarily better than the Mil. They both have their advantages IMO, and I think it boils down to personal preference and what works best and is more appealing to a particular shooter.</p><p> </p><p>It would be intersting to take a poll on this. I know there are a lot for MOA fans in this forum who we haven't heard from. Maybe I'll (or someone else could) start a "Which reticle?" poll? The results would be interesting and might learn a few things.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MontanaRifleman, post: 268631, member: 11717"] What you say is true about using inches and MOA marks for estimating long shots because multiplying 20 MOA at longer ranges exagerates the slight difference. But, if your using a spoter, or even trying to spot yourself, IMO estimating a miss in MOA seems simpler and easier than Mils. As in 1 MOA high and 1/2 MOA left. But maybe that's just me? Also, I make and print my own targets using a 1" grid, When I'm shooting paper on the range, I can pretty much exactly estimated my windage and elevation corrections from the bench. The MOA scale makes it easier for me to make the mental calculations and dial in the correction. Another thing I like about the NP-R2 reticle is that it is clean and simple. That fits in my simple brain very well. No fuss no muss. Estimations and calcs are easy and it doesn't clutter my view or my mind. Now I am not saying that the MOA is necessarily better than the Mil. They both have their advantages IMO, and I think it boils down to personal preference and what works best and is more appealing to a particular shooter. It would be intersting to take a poll on this. I know there are a lot for MOA fans in this forum who we haven't heard from. Maybe I'll (or someone else could) start a "Which reticle?" poll? The results would be interesting and might learn a few things. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
NightForce question....
Top