20 or 40 MOA rail?

[Broz]

I have used a gen 2 xr, ffp in a 5-25 s&b... it was fine enough for elr work at 25x. However, it was not thick enough for any distance at lower power. Never seen mirage bad enough to dial down lower than 25x so I would recommend a sfp. Moa or mil is personal preference, but do yourself a favor, pick turrets/reticle that match. This way when you run her out of up, you can start bracketing without doing math. I prefer moa only because it's a finer adjustment, unless they're making .05mil clicks.

Tom

Plus one with this.

Jeff

 

[orkan]

Never seen mirage bad enough to dial down lower than 25x so I would recommend a sfp.

Wow... You guys must shoot in some pretty serene locations. You try that 25x around here and you'll wish you had FFP. I guarantee it. This explains to me why there are dissenting opinions regarding ffp though. I knew it wasn't that people advocating SFP were stupid. (well some probably are) but clearly you guys aren't. You guys just shoot in nicer locations than I do! You get to use max mag all the time. Well color me envious.

I'm down to 15x-17x on the bad days around here.

Yesterday the sun was beating on the snow covered black bean field I was shooting across. Target was a C-zone IPSC at 900yds. I had to get down to around 13x before I could really work with the target. Thankfully with FFP, I can set the magnification anywhere I please, and still have all of my holds. No math. No conversion. No half-magnification for easy math. Just hold, and fire.

While you guys might not agree with me due to what you've experienced, there are many situations in many areas of the country where a FFP optic is worth its weight in gold. Not to mention what they allow for regardless of where you shoot.

1) Do math in my head while being restricted to magnifications that make the math easy, and then fire.

2) Not have to do any math at any magnification, just hold and fire?

You'll find me at option 2, every time.

Also, I'll repeat my belief that if you expose yourself to more ffp optics, you'll very likely find one that is a fit for you.

 

[bigngreen]

The GenIIXR in the Premier light tactical is nice and thin, just like in the 5-25.

Have you ever looked through one?

In any event, I quite commonly come across people advocating SFP for the very reasons you state. They all have one thing in common:

They all need more exposure to FFP reticles in order to learn just what they are missing. In just about every case, they have only looked through a handful of FFP optics, and then form a summary judgement. Oddly enough, in most other area's of their life they require a higher sample size in order to make any claim.

In any situation of shooting you would encounter, I can show you a FFP optic that will not only get the job done, but excel at it.

I have not gotten my hands on the Premier optics unfortunately, but on reticle thickness if your saying they are the same between the 5-25 and 3-15 then the manual must be wrong cause it's saying .075 in/hundred for the 5-25 and .144 in/hundred for the 3-15.

The real issue is that I can choose an optic by it's fit and function for the purpose I'm using it, I don't need to by SFP or FFP based on that alone but by how they perform in my situation.
My situation has proven I have to use a lighted reticle to shoot up close early in the morning on dark game with a FFP where I have not with a SFP, and when it's light enough to ID game at long range I can center up on any animal I choose and pick my aim point better with an optic that has a reticle on the thin side which again favors the SFP more times that the FFP.
I shoot an optic a lot that has a .156 MOA thick reticle as a mid range scope, it suxs for shooting out at a mile but I can do fine by painting two colors on the target but on game it's different, antelope are a prefect example, my aim point on a goat is a small spot at the corner of the white behind the shoulder and I can't hold that point much past 800 yards because of the reticle thickness and I start having to compromise my aim point and use bracketing to try to make it happen. Coyotes is even worse, at a grand I'm basically whipping lead at something under the cross hair and not able to use a solid aim point. Same shooting with a NXS and a NP-R1 and it's soooo much easier to get a pin point aim point and I know this reticle will be there and usable at very low light and low magnification while hunting also.
What I'm saying is not everyone hunts or shoots the same conditions or has the same goals so to just choose an optic because it's FFP vs SFP is a small part of the equation to be basing the whole enchilada on.

 

[orkan]

What I'm saying is not everyone hunts or shoots the same conditions or has the same goals so to just choose an optic because it's FFP vs SFP is a small part of the equation to be basing the whole enchilada on.

I agree. However, to say that FFP doesn't work in a certain situation would be the same as saying SFP doesn't work in a certain situation.

As you said, there is much more to it.

There are poor SFP optics, and there are poor FFP optics.

However, SFP has been around forever, and everyone knows what to look for. With FFP, most people don't have enough experience with enough different models. So making a statement that there are situations where FFP doesn't work isn't entirely accurate. It's only accurate based on your experience.

The new dual focal plane (DFP) scopes are where it's at.

Things are thoroughly off topic now... so I'll leave it at that.

 

[bruce_ventura]

Orkan,

This is exactly the info I was looking for. Thank you.
I will be running a Nikon Monarch 6-24x50 on it until a Nightforce is ordered. I will have to see what the MOA range is in this scope.

You guys on this forum are top notch.
Thanks again.

Speedy.

This post took off in several directions. Getting back on topic, there is still hope for you to use the Monarch scope you have, and still get out to a decent range with the .338 RUM.

I recommend that you buy the 40 MOA Nightforce base, a set of Burris Zee Signature rings and two sets of 0.020" offset inserts. With that base and those offset inserts you can effectively dial in any base offset between about 5 MOA and 75 MOA.

If you set up the offset inserts for, say 18 MOA relative to the bore direction, that scope can get you to at least 33 MOA of bullet drop, which is equivalent to at least 1100 yds, depending on your altitude and load. That assumes a 200 yd zero at one end of adjustment, and max range at the other end.

My experience with the Monarchs is that they have more elevation adjustment than the specification says. You may find that scope has more like 35 MOA of adjustment. If so, you could push the range out to at least 1200 yds.

Your investment in rings for the Monarch would be about $75 or so, unless you already have them. The key to this scheme is knowing how to optimize the orientation of the offset inserts. If you want to go down this path, I can give you some pointers.

 

[Speedygoss]

This post took off in several directions. Getting back on topic, there is still hope for you to use the Monarch scope you have, and still get out to a decent range with the .338 RUM.

I recommend that you buy the 40 MOA Nightforce base, a set of Burris Zee Signature rings and two sets of 0.020" offset inserts. With that base and those offset inserts you can effectively dial in any base offset between about 5 MOA and 75 MOA.

If you set up the offset inserts for, say 18 MOA relative to the bore direction, that scope can get you to at least 33 MOA of bullet drop, which is equivalent to at least 1100 yds, depending on your altitude and load. That assumes a 200 yd zero at one end of adjustment, and max range at the other end.

My experience with the Monarchs is that they have more elevation adjustment than the specification says. You may find that scope has more like 35 MOA of adjustment. If so, you could push the range out to at least 1200 yds.

Your investment in rings for the Monarch would be about $75 or so, unless you already have them. The key to this scheme is knowing how to optimize the orientation of the offset inserts. If you want to go down this path, I can give you some pointers.

Thank you Bruce,

Like I said before. I just happen to have that scope not mounted on anything right now. I also have one mounted on my .257 Wby. It works well on the Wby. because its so flat shooting. I only need 21.4 MOA @ 1000 yds. and it gets there. Past about 750yds she's pretty much out of steam for any hunting purposes. I was surprised at how well that scope tracked to be honest with you. Since I have a monarch and a set of Talley one piece Ill be using this setup strictly for load development until I have the money for a more suitable optic.

Back to the pitched rail... So in a nutshell. I'm looking to pitch that rail weather it be 20MOA, 30MOA, 40MOA, shims etc. to get my 200 yard zero as close to the bottom of my turret travel as possible, allowing the majority of the travel to be up from there correct? (remember newbie at this.)

Speedy.

 

[orkan]

Back to the pitched rail... So in a nutshell. I'm looking to pitch that rail weather it be 20MOA, 30MOA, 40MOA, shims etc. to get my 200 yard zero as close to the bottom of my turret travel as possible, allowing the majority of the travel to be up from there correct? (remember newbie at this.)

Speedy.

Yes.

 

[Speedygoss]

I will be mounting the monarch to the 338 RUM tonight so I can start some load development. For an FYI, I decided to check the actual MOA travel in elevation. She comes in at 39 total. not enough but more than I thought.