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
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Dialing or Hold Over?????
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="goodgrouper" data-source="post: 197080" data-attributes="member: 2852"><p>Kirby,</p><p>Sounds like the new reticles in FFP scopes coming out will be a good thing for you and others. And I agree with you on the Weavers. A few guys in our benchrest circuit around here use them for point blank range and I have overheard some of them commenting that they can't dial up to 200 yards from 100 reliably. That is REALLY not going to work for long range!</p><p></p><p></p><p>John,</p><p>Thanks for your response. </p><p>I was serious about the DCT method being like the reticle method. As I said earlier, they both rely on predetermined lines to represent yardages for certain trajectories. Only difference I see is that the one has the lines on the reticle and the other has the lines on a turret. </p><p>That being said, you have had success with them as has Kirby with the reticle system. I know I wouldn't want to be behind either of your guy's crosshairs. But for me, true calculation in MOA (or more correctly IPHY) for each shot is mechanically and physically the most precise method across all conditions, angles, locations, and circumstances. For example, you have a custom turret made for such and such ballistic coefficient at such and such speed at such and such elevation. Some guys do the same with custom reticles. Now, I have worn out enough barrels to know that the bc of a chosen bullet doesn't stay the same throughout the barrel's life. What starts out high ends up being less when the old dreaded dry lakebed takes over the barrel's throat. To make matters worse, conditions, wind direction, and varying lots of the same bullet also add to the bc of the bullet changing. An 850 yard line, subtend, or yardage marker on a turret will not ALWAYS and forever be the true 850 yard POI. However, throughout the life of the barrel, I can always re-measure bc with two chronographs, re-check drops to confirm my calculations, and factor these into my ballistic program on my PDA for a new, true, on the spot calculation in MOA for the very shot I am about to take.</p><p></p><p>Also, the DCT method gets further off when changing elevations. This can be solved with having multiple bodies made for the turret and attaching the one you need for the elevation you are at. But this becomes more of a hassle than any PDA in my opinion. Now, I know for those who hunt in the same place every year or for those who live in the East, elevation changes are not a consideration. But they are for me as I hunt from 2000 feet up to 12,000 feet. ANd I hunt everything from moose to ground mice so a slight difference in elevation change DOES matter. If all you hunt is deer, a 1000 foot elevation change for our 850 yard example isn't going to make you miss (although it will still hit higher or lower than wanted) so that argument is repetitive.</p><p></p><p>Next thing is angle. You have already told us how you compensate for this and I agree it can work and your method works better than the reticle compensating method for sure. However, when ranges start getting REALLY out there, the gap inbetween the lines becomes more crucial and there WONT be a line for it or a click for it all the time. But again, unless you are hunting past say 1300 yards or so, this is a small issue.</p><p></p><p>And the last thing is the speed issue. I admitted already that the reticle compensater method is faster. And I admit the DCT is also fast. However, as I already mentioned, once one gets used to dialing in MOA, it is only marginally slower than the reticle. The DCT is easier for beginners to pick up on I admit, but once they learn MOA, they can do it fast too. Afterall, it is still dialing to a number-it's just that the number represents something different. ANd once one learns how to dial in MOA instead of using a reticle or DCT, one can transfer that ability to all of his other scopes. No need to spend thousands of dollars retrofitting existing scopes or replacing them with scopes that have different reticles. The industry standard for calibration of scopes is MOA so that works out nice. We might as well use that as an advantage.</p><p></p><p>Again, it's good to see all the options available to the shooter typed here in this one thread. And it's good we can all choose a method without slandering each other like they do over on lesser sites. I can remember when a thread similiar to this one got started on accurate reloader awhile back and it turned into a nightmare. Just goes to show the quality of people we have here.</p><p></p><p>By the way, sorry to hear about the Best of the West shows. They were the only hunting show I could watch. It was nice to see someone in the industry filming things east of the Mississippi River and filming things that don't gobble or eat from a feeder. ANd to film the long range kills was icing on the cake. I swear if I watch one more dufus stick a gobbler at 15 yards in Tennessee, I'm gonna puke!</p><p>Good shooting.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="goodgrouper, post: 197080, member: 2852"] Kirby, Sounds like the new reticles in FFP scopes coming out will be a good thing for you and others. And I agree with you on the Weavers. A few guys in our benchrest circuit around here use them for point blank range and I have overheard some of them commenting that they can't dial up to 200 yards from 100 reliably. That is REALLY not going to work for long range! John, Thanks for your response. I was serious about the DCT method being like the reticle method. As I said earlier, they both rely on predetermined lines to represent yardages for certain trajectories. Only difference I see is that the one has the lines on the reticle and the other has the lines on a turret. That being said, you have had success with them as has Kirby with the reticle system. I know I wouldn't want to be behind either of your guy's crosshairs. But for me, true calculation in MOA (or more correctly IPHY) for each shot is mechanically and physically the most precise method across all conditions, angles, locations, and circumstances. For example, you have a custom turret made for such and such ballistic coefficient at such and such speed at such and such elevation. Some guys do the same with custom reticles. Now, I have worn out enough barrels to know that the bc of a chosen bullet doesn't stay the same throughout the barrel's life. What starts out high ends up being less when the old dreaded dry lakebed takes over the barrel's throat. To make matters worse, conditions, wind direction, and varying lots of the same bullet also add to the bc of the bullet changing. An 850 yard line, subtend, or yardage marker on a turret will not ALWAYS and forever be the true 850 yard POI. However, throughout the life of the barrel, I can always re-measure bc with two chronographs, re-check drops to confirm my calculations, and factor these into my ballistic program on my PDA for a new, true, on the spot calculation in MOA for the very shot I am about to take. Also, the DCT method gets further off when changing elevations. This can be solved with having multiple bodies made for the turret and attaching the one you need for the elevation you are at. But this becomes more of a hassle than any PDA in my opinion. Now, I know for those who hunt in the same place every year or for those who live in the East, elevation changes are not a consideration. But they are for me as I hunt from 2000 feet up to 12,000 feet. ANd I hunt everything from moose to ground mice so a slight difference in elevation change DOES matter. If all you hunt is deer, a 1000 foot elevation change for our 850 yard example isn't going to make you miss (although it will still hit higher or lower than wanted) so that argument is repetitive. Next thing is angle. You have already told us how you compensate for this and I agree it can work and your method works better than the reticle compensating method for sure. However, when ranges start getting REALLY out there, the gap inbetween the lines becomes more crucial and there WONT be a line for it or a click for it all the time. But again, unless you are hunting past say 1300 yards or so, this is a small issue. And the last thing is the speed issue. I admitted already that the reticle compensater method is faster. And I admit the DCT is also fast. However, as I already mentioned, once one gets used to dialing in MOA, it is only marginally slower than the reticle. The DCT is easier for beginners to pick up on I admit, but once they learn MOA, they can do it fast too. Afterall, it is still dialing to a number-it's just that the number represents something different. ANd once one learns how to dial in MOA instead of using a reticle or DCT, one can transfer that ability to all of his other scopes. No need to spend thousands of dollars retrofitting existing scopes or replacing them with scopes that have different reticles. The industry standard for calibration of scopes is MOA so that works out nice. We might as well use that as an advantage. Again, it's good to see all the options available to the shooter typed here in this one thread. And it's good we can all choose a method without slandering each other like they do over on lesser sites. I can remember when a thread similiar to this one got started on accurate reloader awhile back and it turned into a nightmare. Just goes to show the quality of people we have here. By the way, sorry to hear about the Best of the West shows. They were the only hunting show I could watch. It was nice to see someone in the industry filming things east of the Mississippi River and filming things that don't gobble or eat from a feeder. ANd to film the long range kills was icing on the cake. I swear if I watch one more dufus stick a gobbler at 15 yards in Tennessee, I'm gonna puke! Good shooting. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Dialing or Hold Over?????
Top