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
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Dialing vs. Holdover For Long Range Hunting
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="Litehiker" data-source="post: 1232251" data-attributes="member: 54178"><p>I'm really trying to understand WWB's idea that holding<em> on a step angle</em> with a good "Christmas tree" mil hash reticle like a TreMor 2 or 3 or a Horus H59 reticle will be any different than dialing at that same angle.</p><p></p><p>Most of us know that you must hold<u> low</u> for steep angle shooting, the hold being determined by a scope-mounted angle/cosine indicator and angle DOPE sheet or a hold-under readout on say, my Bushnell ARC 1 Mile LRF binoculars or other angle compensated LRFs. </p><p></p><p>SO... if we know the proper hold-under then a good scope with a good "Christmas tree" reticle will be just as accurate as proper dialing.</p><p></p><p>WWB you need to tell us WHY this is not so, WHY a "Christmas tree" reticle will fail where dialing will succeed. </p><p>We await your scientific detailed explanation, not anecdotal tales of your own experience. </p><p></p><p>->And, yes, I did read your "white paper" link on lens refraction. Are you of the opinion that top quality rifle scopes are not <em>phase corrected</em> with fully-multicoated lenses?</p><p>->Do you feel top quality scopes distort images at steep angles and not on the level? (This one really puzzles me.)</p><p>->Do you still think I am referring to fat MIL DOTS instead of discrete 1/10 mil hash marks?</p><p>->Are you not allowing for the use of hold-under devices like angle/cosine indicators or angle readout LRFs?</p><p></p><p>As I stated earlier in this thread, using a Xmas tree reticle to hold off-center will put you in the SAME optical area as you would be had you dialed that same correction. So, with good quality lenses and coatings, insignificant refraction aberrations due to holding are the same insignificant aberrations you get from dialing. And please remember that those of us who hold with an Xmas tree reticle are not using cruder "mil dots" (as your article refers to) but very distinct 1/10 mil hash marks for holding. And we are <em>holding under</em> based on our LRF readouts with angle compensation or a scope-mounted angle/cosine indicator.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Your paper does not take into account <em>any</em> of this and therefore cannot be valid in this discussion. The paper is actually outdated in terms of advanced reticles and angle determination devices.</strong></p><p></p><p>Eric B.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Litehiker, post: 1232251, member: 54178"] I'm really trying to understand WWB's idea that holding[I] on a step angle[/I] with a good "Christmas tree" mil hash reticle like a TreMor 2 or 3 or a Horus H59 reticle will be any different than dialing at that same angle. Most of us know that you must hold[U] low[/U] for steep angle shooting, the hold being determined by a scope-mounted angle/cosine indicator and angle DOPE sheet or a hold-under readout on say, my Bushnell ARC 1 Mile LRF binoculars or other angle compensated LRFs. SO... if we know the proper hold-under then a good scope with a good "Christmas tree" reticle will be just as accurate as proper dialing. WWB you need to tell us WHY this is not so, WHY a "Christmas tree" reticle will fail where dialing will succeed. We await your scientific detailed explanation, not anecdotal tales of your own experience. ->And, yes, I did read your "white paper" link on lens refraction. Are you of the opinion that top quality rifle scopes are not [I]phase corrected[/I] with fully-multicoated lenses? ->Do you feel top quality scopes distort images at steep angles and not on the level? (This one really puzzles me.) ->Do you still think I am referring to fat MIL DOTS instead of discrete 1/10 mil hash marks? ->Are you not allowing for the use of hold-under devices like angle/cosine indicators or angle readout LRFs? As I stated earlier in this thread, using a Xmas tree reticle to hold off-center will put you in the SAME optical area as you would be had you dialed that same correction. So, with good quality lenses and coatings, insignificant refraction aberrations due to holding are the same insignificant aberrations you get from dialing. And please remember that those of us who hold with an Xmas tree reticle are not using cruder "mil dots" (as your article refers to) but very distinct 1/10 mil hash marks for holding. And we are [I]holding under[/I] based on our LRF readouts with angle compensation or a scope-mounted angle/cosine indicator. [B]Your paper does not take into account [I]any[/I] of this and therefore cannot be valid in this discussion. The paper is actually outdated in terms of advanced reticles and angle determination devices.[/B] Eric B. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Dialing vs. Holdover For Long Range Hunting
Top