Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/8/2005 5:55:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 4:21:36 PM EDT by Matt_B]
I've been kicking around the idea of getting an Accupoint or 2 for my ARs so I've been delving into the ranging and BDC capabilities of their reticules. I'm going into uncharted territory (for me at least) so if my numbers are off, please let me. It will be easy to change.

If you know the drop data for your particular round and rifle, you can figure out how to use the reticule height for BDC. If you know the size of your target, you can use the height and/or width to determine the distance to the target.

For any one unfamiliar with the Accupoint optics, the TR20 is a 3x9 with a 6-2 MOA triangle reticule. The TR21 is a 1.25x4 with a 11-4 MOA triangle reticule. Anyway, here are the charts. Hope they help someone.





If anyone wants the source spreadsheets (XLS format) for easy color coding (mark the cells for your round and rifle combo), just drop me an e-mail.
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 6:49:33 PM EDT
AWESOME, THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!

John
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 7:29:07 AM EDT
You should get some kind of official gold star or something for this...great work!
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 7:41:09 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 8:12:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PaulE:
The reticles in the Accupoints I have are generally an equilateral triangle. (Some appear to be slightly higher than they are wide at some illuminations due to the dark corners, but are mostly symmetrical. All sides are the same length. For the TR21, at 4x magnification the triangle is 11 moa per side, and at 1.25x it is 4 moa per side. Here is where I lose you on the charts.

As I expected, you are absolutely correct Paul. I was referencing an archived post I started on Accupoints and recalled some information incorrectly. After looking at an image of the Accupoint reticule again, I do see that it's equilateral. I had it stuck in my head that the reticule was 2 MOA tall by 6 MOA wide at 9X. Thank you for pointing out my error.


Since MOA is not dependent on the range, it stays the same at all distances.
Right, because MOA is always figured at 100 yds.


Your numbers seem to be moa multiples based on the range. 100 yd = 11 moa, 200 yd = 22 moa, etc. (at 4x). This makes sense if you are converting moa to inches at a given range, but not moa values. Is this what you meant?
Yes, that is what I meant. I will redo the charts and convert convert all the values to inches. I was just trying to avoid going to that level of precision but I know it makes a slight difference at with lower magnification at longer ranges.

This is why I was sure to include a disclaimer that I was going into "uncharted terrirtory", for me at least. But hey, I exercised my brain a bit and learned something in the process. Thanks again for your help.
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 4:23:15 PM EDT
Bump. I changed the charts to show the height/width of the reticule in inches. The inches values have been rounded off to 2 decimal points but the calculations are done out to 4 decimal points, not that you really need that much precision.

Thanks to Paul for catching my error.
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 9:05:34 PM EDT
Thanks for the info/ effort. I have got a TR21, and I've been trying to determine the exact dimensions of the triangle for just this purpose.
Here's the thing: if the triangle is equilateral (same length on all sides), then a side length of 4 moa (or any unit) gives you a height of 3.464.
Frankly, my eyes aren't good enough to tell if the triangle is really equilateral or not.
But I'm still curious. Comment?
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 4:21:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 2hawk:
Thanks for the info/ effort. I have got a TR21, and I've been trying to determine the exact dimensions of the triangle for just this purpose.
Here's the thing: if the triangle is equilateral (same length on all sides), then a side length of 4 moa (or any unit) gives you a height of 3.464.
Frankly, my eyes aren't good enough to tell if the triangle is really equilateral or not.
But I'm still curious. Comment?

Well, the triangle is equilateral as far as I can tell. The TR-21's reticule is definitely 4 MOA tall @ 4x and 11 MOA tall at 1.25x (and 16 MOA tall unmagnified ) and I've been told it's width is equal to its height. I'm probably going to have to check with Trijicon to verify my data.
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 9:31:17 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 10:09:19 AM EDT
So Paul, what you're saying is my charts are pointless, right? Seriously though, I understand what you're saying. The Accupoint is not a precision optic which I would agree with. I thought about that when I was working up the charts but I figured I would at least learn something from the process and I did.

BTW, I'm curious to know what kind of ammo and bbl length you're using when you zero a TR21 at 300 yds to achieve the results you stated.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 11:11:26 AM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 8/15/2005 7:37:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 6:40:21 PM EDT
Okay, I need a hand with this. My experience is with mil-dots and a mil-dot master. However, not long ago, I got a TR21 and mounted it on one of my 16" AR's in a LaRue EER mount. I really like the scope so if I can use it to range and drop, I would probably like it even more. Can you describe and give examples of how I can use the reticule to range and estimate bullet drop.

Spell it out slowly...some days I'm pretty thick-headed (obviously).

Thanks.
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 7:26:37 PM EDT
Pale Rider, if someone doesn't reply to your post first, I will do so in the morning. Gotta hit the hay now.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 10:08:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Matt_B:
Pale Rider, if someone doesn't reply to your post first, I will do so in the morning. Gotta hit the hay now.



Two mornings later and inquiring minds want to know.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 6:00:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By alwaystryin:

Originally Posted By Matt_B:
Pale Rider, if someone doesn't reply to your post first, I will do so in the morning. Gotta hit the hay now.



Two mornings later and inquiring minds want to know.



I'm glad I'm not the only one...
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 7:44:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Matt_B:
Pale Rider, if someone doesn't reply to your post first, I will do so in the morning. Gotta hit the hay now.



Four days and counting...
Link Posted: 9/8/2005 7:43:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/10/2005 11:42:21 AM EDT
Thanks for answering the question Paul.

Sorry I didn't reply when I said I would but I had a family emergency come up and had to fly back East to take care of it. Life happens, even on the Internet.
Top Top