Opinions on Mil-dots and IL


Mar 11, 2002
The mil-dot reticle looks interesting but I've never used one. What do you guys think of it for use on big game? Also, is this something that would be better in an illuminated reticle?
It's the only reticle I use now days. I still carry a laser rangefinder while hunting but really like the MilDot. I rarely see the need for illuminated reticles.
I like it a lot and it has many useful features. For shorter ranges, it can be used as a rangefinder through subtension. Not much use after 600yds.

Excellent to aid in holdovers, windage adjustments, and size estimations.

For the most part, I use a laser rangefinder and adjust my elevation using the turrent. That is a much more precise way and the only reliable way at long ranges. I want to bullet to hit the kill zone, not somewhere on my target.

I really enjoy using it but it is not a substitute for a range finder and accurate drop tables.

Good luck...

Mil-dots give the shooter constant aiming points in his field of view so he can use hold-overs consistently - if he knows the relationship between his trajectory and the dots. You can vary the apparent location of these points by varying the magnification. Mil-dots are also capable of determining range, if the user knows how to operate the system. Industry folk estimate that less than 5% of sportsmen who buy mildots will ever learn to use them for ranging.

Like Dave, I wonder about the need for illumination - sort of temptation to push legal hunting time.

I believe that Mil-dots and illuminated reticles are pretty much advertising gimmicks as far as most hunters are concerned - they are tactical tools.
Warning! This thread is more than 22 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts