Just got a new IOR Valdada 4x scope today for my Colt 6400C mounted with ARMS #22 (high throw rings).

I have to say WOW! Excellent image quality, sturdy construction, easy to use controls, variable lighting control for targeting recticle. and EXCELLENT glass.

I ordered it through Cactus Tactical. Great, fast service.
www.cactustactical.com/index2.html

I can't wait to take it out to the range!

A picture of the current setup:

http://home.insightbb.com/~karlknapp2/IORWebPic.jpg

The Smith Tactical rings have a larger "see though" hole which may work for you.

Is that the IOR M2 ?

Yes, it is an IOR M2 with the Dragunov tactical ranging recticle. I plan to take it out today and see how it does.

Keep us informed on how it does. I am looking at getting the exact same scope.
Are they 1" or 30mm rings?

Yes, the ARMS #20 are 30mm. They also have inserts for 1", but obviously they aren't needed.

Very good quality scope, and for $320, great price. I just couldn't justify an ACOG for $800+ (although I wanted a TA31F). Maybe someday, but for the type of shooting I plan on doing (target shooting, usually 100 yards) this is perfect.

I do plan to add an ARMS #40 backup iron sight (BUIS) for just in case purposes.

My range is closed for a weekend trap tourney, so I won't get out with the scope until Monday (boooo). I'll post results then.

I took out my M2 mounted on a 14.5 inch Bushmaster M4 and did some testing yesterday.  I'm not a very experienced rifle shooter but I really enjoyed the scope.  The Nato reticle is less busy and easier to pick up but I got the Dragunov reticle because of the cool factor!  At 50 yds on sandbags (leaky and somewhat unsteady..yuk) and with 13 mph winds using Federal white box ammo, I averaged 1 inch 5 shot groups groups.  Some were all touching, some got out as far as 1.5 inches.  

You did good buying this scope.  For the money, I don't think it can be beat.  Let us know how it shoots!

alou, I'm glad to hear about your experience with the scope. I can wait to try it out. I'm anticipating shooting a lot of ragged, centered holes. Sounds like you are shooting several of these centered holes yourself.

Sounds like a good purchase, especially for the $. Maybe my neighbors in suburbia wouldn't mind if I tried it out in the backyard ... then again, maybe not. I'll wait till Monday.

I agree on the cool factor of the Dragonov recticle. I really like the ranging marks. I think for the type of target shooting I want to do, this will work well.

karlknapp, do you know how the vertical and horizontal ranging marks work?  I was told at one point but I forgot.  

Is there a way to get rid of rubber eye piece? I wear glasses.

Hope you enjoy the thing. I've been debating whether to get that one or not.

Yes, you can remove the eyepiece but I would keep it on.  I wear glasses too and I just press my lens against the eyepiece.  It's not uncomfortable at all.  The eyepiece serves as a eye relief guide.  If you want, the M2 has an adjustable diopter so you can change the focus (depending on how bad your eyesight is) so you can use it with out glasses.

The following is taken from the IOR Valdada M2 manual and from material on the Cactus Tactical web site [url]http://www.cactustactical.com/valdada/dragunovreticle.html[/url]

If you are interested in the zeroing procedures or other stuff the 'manual' is only two pages. I'd be glad to post.

[b]Valdada Dragunov Tactical Reticle[/b]
[img]http://home.insightbb.com/~karlknapp2/IOR4xanim.gif[/img]

Plotted to the left and to the right from the angle marks is the scale of deflection corrections. The height of each small division is 1 MILS. The horizontal distance between divisions is 1 MILS.

The values of deflection corrections 0-05 and 0-10 are marked out by an elongated dash line. The height of the tall divisions at 5 and 10 are 2 MILS.

The height of the chevrons is 1 MILS.

[b]Ranging with the Valdada Dragunov Tactical Reticle[/b]
[img]http://home.insightbb.com/~karlknapp2/dragunovranging.gif[/img]

The range-finding scale located from the left under the deflection correction scale serves for detecting the range up to the target. The upper (curve) line is calculated for a target 1.7 m (5'8") in height and is marked with digits 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10.

To detect the range up to the target proceed as follows:
[list][*]Match the target image with the range-finding scale of the reticle so that the target base is on the horizontal line of the range-finding scale, and the target top point touches the upper (dotted) line of the scale without clearance.[/*]
[*]Take off the range-finding scale readings in the point of touching the target.[/*]
[*]A digit which happens to be in the point of touching determines the distance up to the target (in the figure above, the distance to the target is 400 m).[/*]

Once the range to target has been determined, click the bullet drop compensator (BDC) knob to the matching number (#4 in the above example) and you will be automatically compensated for that distance. No holdover necessary. The BDC is designed to compensate for the specific ballistic trajectory of .223 (62 GR.) (Also available in .308 (168 GR.)).

[b]MilDot Adjustments[/b]

You can use the markings to adjust targeting if you know the range to the target.

1 MILS/milliradian/mil-dot subtends 3.6 inches at 100 yards (36 inches at 1,000 yards). ([url]www.swfa.com/mildot/[/url])

You can also use the markings to determine range to target: the formula used for determining range to the target is (size of target x 1000 divided by number of mils the target covers). ([url]www.swfa.com/mildot/[/url])
 

Anyone have any pictures mounted on a A2 carry handle? If so, please post.

Just marking the thread.  The IOR line is nice.

When I was looking to buy I came across the following picture of the IOR Valdada M2 mounted on a carry handle: [url]www.impactguns.com/store/ior_223_m2.html[/url]

karlknap, so how do you use the angle marks?  Are they at 100 meter intervals?

I'm looking for a scope for my Bushy Flat-top it looks good on your gun let us know how it shoots please!!!! Also is your front site in the way?

[url=http://groups.msn.com/ThePennsylvaniaAR15ShootersSite/iorm2.msnw][b]IOR Valdada M2 4x-24mm illuminated tactical Scope Review[/b][/url]

[img]http://groups.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=MyPhotos_GetPubPhoto&PhotoID=nKwAAAPwNUQVtypOaQL30tEJIgRk1mD210gJAG1*rQ0obuO0x7xZoZ0g*C3VHxWdr30oljKFAPZFgxgTv9zbOiw[/img]

I too dumb to unnerstand the Dragonov reticle.  

I bought (also from Cactus Tactical) an IOR fixed 10x56 for my AR10A4-NICE GLASS ...built like Louisville Slugger (and almost a big).  

Anyone tried the M2 in 6X yet? How dose it compare to the 4X?

mag162, with the ARMS #22 high rings I can't see the front sight at all. Not even the ghosting effect that would occur if it was in the field of vision. Seems like the height of the rings takes care going over the front sight.

I'm taking it to the range tomorrow. I'll let you know how it does.

update?

[size=4][b]Range Results with IOR Valdada M2[/b][/size=4]

I finally got out to the range to finish zeroing the IOR Valdada M2. Please keep in mind that I am a very inexperienced shooter. This was only my fourth time shooting a rifle, EVER. That said, here are my impressions:

[size=3][b]Equipment, Ammunition and Environment[/b][/size=3]

[list][*]Gun: Colt MT6400C (M4) Flattop with 16.1" chrome lined barrel, 1/7 twist, smooth trigger[/*]
[*]Scope: IOR Valdada M2 4x, Dragunov reticle, $320 new from Cactus Tactical[/*]
[*]Mount: ARMS #22 High scope rings with throw levers mounted directly to the Flattop[/*]
[*]Ammo: Federal M193, 55 grain, Lot 6[/*]
[*]Weather: 62 degrees, little to no wind, partly sunny[/*]
[*]Procedure: Seated position, steadied by a table bolted into the ground, no range bag or other gun rest.[/*]
[*]Shooter: Not skilled, experienced, or any good (but fairly observant and learning quickly).[/*][/list]

[size=3][b]Zeroing and Adjustments[/b][/size=3]

[list][*]Zeroing the scope took a bit of work, but wasn't too bad. The procedure was fairly straightforward, but took a bit of trial and error. I had to start back at the 25-yard range and work my way up to the 100-yard targets. Zeroing is done by loosening two screws on each adjustment knob and turning the knob before tightening the screws back up.[/*]
[*]Because the scope has a bullet drop compensator (BDC) calibrated for the .223 round, the zeroing procedure in the manual sets the initial zero to 100 yards (1 on the elevation control). To shoot longer ranges you simply click the elevation control to the proper setting (2 = 200 yards, etc).[/*]
[*]The Windage control is zeroed in the same fashion, zeroed to the setting of 0 on the control. Windage controls can be set by half clicks left or right.[/*]
[*]The control knobs are well marked and provide an audible click when adjusted.[/*][/list]

[size=3][b]Usage and Observations[/b][/size=3]

[list][*]The glass in the scope is [b]MAGNIFICENT[/b]. I could see the 100 yard targets as clear as day. Sight picture was perfect. I could see the bull's-eye very clearly (so much for my excuse for not hitting it).[/*]
[*]I was able to get a good cheek weld with the proper eye relief with the ARMS #22 high scope rings with throw levers. The rubber eyepiece was left mounted on the scope.[/*]
[*]My overall impression is that the scope is [b]VERY WELL MADE[/b] and is of extremely high quality. For the price it may be hard to beat. For mid- to longer distance shooting, this is a great scope. The ranging scale and MIL calibrated reticle is excellent sighting and ranging.[/*]
[*]One drawback may be for close quarters combat. It does take a second to locate the chevron and aiming point. If you need to swing on target quickly at close quarters, this may take some practice. I plan to work on the both eyes open, switching eye focus technique that I have read about on AR15.com. I was able to do this at home with a bit of practice, but was focused on the target today.[/*]
[*]The scope also offers six different lighting intensity settings for the reticle. All markings on the reticle are illuminated green by this feature. This is another aspect of the scope that I really like. The reticle can be used without lighting (or battery) or with illumination. The illumination was clear, even in direct sunlight (but certainly not needed).[/*][/list]

[size=3][b]Final Comments[/b][/size=3]

I am very pleased with the IOR Valdada M2. Very good quality, durable, very clear and functional.

Perhaps some day (when prices drop and/or supply rises) I may check out a TA31F ACOG. I would like to be able to do a direct comparison between these two 4x scopes before making any additional investment decisions.

Glad you like it!  I'm going to try some match grade ammo in my 14.5 inch M4 and perhaps a better bench rest to see what it can do at 100 yds.  Take care!

DOA - I got your email message, but the server had a problem with addressing the reply, so here it is.

Your question: What comes with the scope?

A: It comes in a fairly nice box, with a 'manual' (loose pages), and a lens cleaning cloth (I think, I lost mine promptly). Batteries are installed already. They put most of the money into the scope and certainly not into the 'manual'. Short and sweet, good enough, but it does not cover battery replacement.

You will need to purchase mounting rings. I played with the idea of the IOR Heavy Duty Picatinny rings for a while (it lets you mount lights and stuff on top of the rings) but decided to go with the ARMS #22 high rings with throw levers.

The zeroing procedure is straight forward, but you have to have a flat head screwdriver just the right size. You can't use a dime or wrong size, it just rips up the screw head a bit (I know because I tried).

If you use a different mounting option please let me know your experience.

Good shooting!

Karl

I just received my m2 yesterday. Interestingly, the illumination works fine, by the four click is dead, goes dark. Since it's already mounted, Cactus told me I have to return to Valdada. I 'll think that one over.

I agree that the scope is a beauty, but the documentation is from hunger.

Perhaps someone out there knows -- Why the rising chevrons? Are they part of the aiming system. Are they used like mildots on a mil dot reticle?

http://www.swfa.com/mildot/screview.html

In addition, Valdada talks about the scale of deflection correction, the horizontal line and marks on the reticle. What are they? How do you use them? ARe they for leading a target of a known distance?

Somehow, (and for some reason) I assume all these increments and measures fit together with the range finder. But how?

Have you checked out the "pocket mil range finder" Cactus sells for their scopes?

http://www.cactustactical.com/valdada/milrange.html

Finally, you didn't tell us what kind of groups you got when you finally sighted the M2 in. So, come on, we're all friends. No one's looking for bragging rights. How did you do?!

Cheers

SIG

Sorry to hear about the defect in the fourth illumination click. I'd try to call IOR and see what they say. I don't know much about Romanian business or their economy.

I assume that their 'scale of deflection correction' marks on the reticle does allow for leading a target of a known distance. Since you know the height of each division mark (1 MIL, 2 MILS for the 5 and 10 marks) and the distance between the marks (1 MIL), you can use them like the MILDOT reticle. If your target is at 100 yards, 1 mil-dot subtends 3.6 inches at that range. If you know the range to target, you know the distance left and right of the target by these marks.

As for the chevrons, I'm not sure. It looks like they are evenly spaced. The height of the chevons looks to be about 1 MIL, but I don't know the spacing between them. Perhaps this is a good topic calling Cactus Tactical or IOR. I'll give that a try to see if I can get clarification.

As for range results, I had them posted, and then got embarrassed. I guess you have shamed me back into posting them. Below is a shot of my groupings at 100 yards (seated at a bench with no bench rest). Keep in mind I'm VERY inexperienced.

[img]http://home.insightbb.com/~karlknapp2/100_Yrds_4xScope.jpg[/img]

Karl,

Thanks for your comments. I may invest in that Valdada calculator to see if it contains any additional information on the reticle. When I get it, I'll fill you in.

It might be useful if we continue with this dialogue because there appears to be little information out there about the reticle. Believe me, I've been all over the Net searching for explanations.

One thought I have on the "deflection scale": once the scope is zeroed, a shot on target that falls left or right of the center chevron might indicate the number of clicks necessary to correct for windage.

However, if this is a sniper scope -- and in no way do I mean to imply I am a sniper or sniper wannabe -- then I wonder what good a second shot might be. Useless, I'd say.

(BTW - I got this scope because it was the best item for the best price out there. Also, I'm getting old and can barely use iron sites out to 25 yds.)

So, I am still curious about the actual use of what appears to be highly technical and carefully calculated markings on the reticle. BTW, Cactus doesn't know what the actual reticle marks represent, nor does Valdada.

Finally, I checked out your targets. I thought your groupings were great at 100yds. I'm as green as you are and hope I do half as well when I finally get a chance to take my A3 shorty out to the range in order to zero my Valdada

SIG

I used the ArmaLite 1 piece scope mount on my flat-top...

SIGnature,

If the Valdada calculator does fill in any additional info, PLEASE let me know. I'd also like to know how useful it is.

It appears that the scale of deflection correction marks can be very useful in targeting and leading moving targets because it is calibrated in the MILDOT scale. For example, if you know the range to a moving target and can estimate its speed (8 MPH running at 90 degrees at 100 yards, you need to lead the target 16.7 inches or 7 MIL) (these estimates were calculated using a ballistics calculation spreadsheet, and roughly match the numbers found in the FM3-22.9 field manual [url]http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/3-22.9/toc.htm[/url]).

To help my understanding of targeting and the Dragunov reticle, I have been working on a one-page summary of the reticle including scale measurements and trajectory, windage, and moving target tables (in inches and MILS). Please understand this is a work in progress and I would appreciate any input that would improve on this. My sources for the information include the IOR Valdada 'manual' (if you want to call it that), the Cactus Tactical website, the field manual, and a ballistics calculation spreadsheet (results are close to army tables and specs).

I still have two main questions:
[list][*]What is the size and distance between the vertical chevrons? (I have estimated them at about 1 MIL high and 2 MILS apart, but this is merely an estimate.)[/*]
[*]What distance does one mark on the windage scale relate to?[/*][/list]

This Dragunov summary can be found in PDF format by following this link: [url]http://home.insightbb.com/~karlknapp2/DragunovOverview.pdf[/url]

Here is a picture of what the current version looks like. Please feel free to recommend any corrections/changes or additions to the work in progress.

[img]http://home.insightbb.com/~karlknapp2/DragunovOverview.tiff[/img]

i have a pso scope for my AK with the drag reticle, if i recall right the 3 chevs are used for quick shots. the one at center is for 100 yards, the ones below it are foor 200 yards, 300 yards etc.

I was attempting to research the chevrons on the reticle, and found a link describing usage of a related AK scope. The manual for this scope said "After 850 meters you'll have to use the consequently following chevrons for each 100 m of the distance for up to 1200 meters."

Once you have dialed the BDC up to 800 yards, this would indicate that the following chevrons indicate aiming points for 900, 1000, 1100, and 1200.

The link I found was: [url]http://www.france-collection.com/manuals/ Lunettes/posp_6_8x42_manual.pdf[/url]

I did find a reference to another type of similar reticle that uses the following chevrons for aiming points at 100, 200, 300 and 400 meters, but this type of reticle seems to be associated with a scope that DOES NOT have a bullet drop compensator. See:[url]www.kalinkaoptics.com/Manuals/KOPOSP4x24UserManual.pdf[/url]

Can anyone verify or disprove this for the Dragunov reticle?

After I saw your last post I did an internet search on the Dragunov reticle. I have not found the answers to your questions yet, but can verify that you are correct on the chevron distances for BDC. I found the same websites as well.

I went to work with the ballistics calculator to attempt to disprove each hypothesis regarding the following chevrons.

On the reticle the chevrons appear to be about equally spaced. Given this, the number of MILS between aiming points should be about the same for targets at the various ranges.

If the following chevrons were aiming points at 200, 300, and 400 yards, by my calculations the trajectory of the M193 round zeroed at 100 yards would be at -3.0", -12.7", and -29.9" (at 200, 300, and 400 yards). This means that the distance between the chevrons should be .42, .90 and 1.19 MILS (at 200, 300, and 400 yards).

If the following chevrons were aiming points at 900, 1000, and 1100 yards, the trajectories would be at -402.4", -566.5", and -772.8". This means that the distance between the chevrons should be 4.00, 4.56, and 5.21 MILS (at 900, 1000, and 1100 yards).

Given the observation that the chevrons are about the same distance apart, I think that we can disprove the hypothesis that they are aiming points at 200, 300, and 400 yards because the distance between these aiming points is not nearly equadistant.

While the aiming points for 900, 1000, and 1100 yards are also not equadistant, they are much more so that the other alternative. UPDATE: measuring with a digital camera, a close estimate between the chevrons is 2.5, 3.0, and 3.2 MILS (from center chevron downward). These measurements do not correspond with my calculations, but are similar in scale. It may very well be that my calculations are off.

[b]Two conclusions[/b]

1) I think that the following chevrons are aiming points for 900, 1000, and 1100 yards once the BDC is set to its max at 8, but I can't prove it. I don't have time to do any more digging for a couple of days and request help!
2) It is pathetic that we have to resort to this type of search and calculation just to learn how to use a scope. All they had to do was note what the hell these were on the pathetic manual. Given the quality of the scope I am willing to forgive their omission.

Karl,

You've been an absolute monster; you've done a sensational job! Unfortunately I've been too busy to get up to speed, but I did go ahead and order the Valdada calculator, which should come next week.

I the mean time, I'm going to send the URL for this thread to Cactus. They're the people who are making money on these scopes and have the leverage (and obligation) to get IOR or IOR's importer to cough up some information. Maybe that way, they would sell more scopes. So it's to their advantage to help folks like us on AR15.com and Maryland AR15 shooters -- http://groups.msn.com/TheMarylandAR15ShootersSite/_whatsnew.msnw

Let's keep at this and slay this dragon.

SIG / Jeff

Karl,

I meant to ask you. When you mounted your scope, what steps did you take to ensure the level of your reticle?

Jeff / SIG

Jeff,

I'm actually one step ahead of you. I wrote to Cactus Tactical last week and they pointed me to their web site describing the reticle. (They missed my specific questions about the chevrons and windage knob that are not covered on their web site.)

I just sent back a VERY SPECIFIC and clear request for info on these two points, letting them know that I was fully familiar with their web site and the small 'manual' with the scope. I also included a link to this thread.

I'll keep you updated when I get a response. They seem to have been very responsive to my email messages.

EDITED to answer your question: Actually I didn't do squat to ensure the level of the reticle. I just slapped that baby on the flattop and started shooting. Couldn't hit paper at 100 or 50, so I had to back down to 25 yards to begin the zeroing process. Now I think it is dialed in at 100 yards (I think it should be 100 meters, but my range doesn't go that deep).

Karl

well my theory is correct for my drag style scope for 7.62x39, i thought it might be the same for the 5.56 round, that im not sure of.

right out of my scopes russian manual

"9.2 Aiming Chevrons
The chevrons are designed for aiming at 100, 200, and 300 meters for the 1st 2nd and the 3rd chevron accordingly."

again this is for the 7.62x 39 rnd.
for the 7.62x54r they are for 1000, 1100, and 1200 meters so this is probably what they are for the 5.56

I did find an error in my calculations. The IOR Valdada is callibrated for a 62 gr bullet. My earlier calculations were based on the 55 gr round I've been using. This increases the ballistics coefficient and bullet trajectory. Recalculation actually made the results even weirder, but farther from the 200, 300, 400 chevron theory.

My russian 8x56 sniper scope has this reticle.I have a 100 yard zero and the 2nd chevron down is the impact point at 500 yards with 55 gr. bullets

karlknapp,

Nice scope choice...that is probably what I would have chosen for my flat-top.

I know you said that you were just starting to shoot, but I wanted to give you a warning about the ARMS #22 rings.

As you get more range time and find that you cannot tighten up your groups, you may find yourself in my shoes.  Let me describe my ARMS #22 experience.

Last year, I put together a bolt action.
Remington 700P LTR .308
Badger base
ARMS #22 rings
leupold 4.5-14x50mm Long range tactical

I have some decent range time with rifles, so I had high expectations for my setup.  Check out one of my first handfull of targets @ 100 yards:

[img]http://urbansniper.150m.com/armory/arms22stray.JPG[/img]

The point of inpact was walking up and to the right.  The first shot being on the lower left.  I checked my setup, and the rings had shifted on the base.  Now, I don't know if the .223 will cause enough recoil to shift your scope rings on your flat top...but it sure did on my .308.  In any case, I just wanted to give you a warning!

Re-read my post, and I thought I should have gave it a happier ending.

After the ARMS #22, I switched over to some more solid/rigid rings.
Leupold mark 4 immdiately solved my problem.  Since then, I have tuned the trigger to less than 2 pounds, and produced a decent target the week before last.
3 shots @ 100 yards with the .308, I have some .223 spray there also, ignore those...heh heh.

[img]http://urbansniper.150m.com/armory/us023.JPG[/img]

[img]http://urbansniper.150m.com/armory/us021.JPG[/img]

Just got my M2 today after chasing down the mailman. Seems pretty rugged. Now I understand what everyone was saying about the "manual". Couple of looseleaf pages. Picked up some cheap rings to try until I can afford better ones. My illumination works at all the detents.
I would like to find out if I can add Butler Creek flip-ups to the front as the rubber one leaves alot to be desired. Will post again after some range time.
Thanx Karl for all your advice/posts about this scope. It has helped lots.[:)]

Just received a prompt reply from Cactus Tactical regarding the other aiming chevrons on the IOR Valdada M2:

"This reticle was originally developed for the 7.62 x 54 R bullet. This bullet was capable of traveling, with the proper load, over 1000 meters. The BDC's limitation is 1000 meters, so the chevrons were added to give additional distance to the scope. The upper point of the 2nd chevron was used for 1100 meters, the 3rd for 1200 and the 4th for 1300 meters. Since the effective controllable distance of a .223 is substantially less than 1000 meters, the chevrons are there if needed, but in reality, the usage will be almost non existent."

Customer Service - Cactus Tactical

This gives creedance to the hypothesis that the other chevrons are aiming points for ranges outside of the BDC settings. [b]Bottom line - they are not functional for the .223 round.[/b]

Glad to have that mystery solved.

Unicron - is that big hole near the center your three shot 'grouping'. Wow, I've got a long way to go.

I am concerned about the ARMS #22 rings now. They publish a return to zero guarantee. Anyone else have trouble with these rings? If so, I'll take them back and find something better. I thought $100 was a lot to pay for rings and I want something of high quality. Suggestions?

Thanks,

Karl

Karl,

Yep...the big hole is 3 shots of .308 win. @ 100 yards. After a couple warm ups...I usually get a mickey mouse looking group at best:

[img]http://urbansniper.150m.com/armory/us018.JPG[/img]

But I must have been lucky or real still that day...heh heh.  Well, I have recently employed better bore cleaning practice.

The IOR M2 is not a featherweight scope...there could be some movment of the rings on the base bud.

If you don't plan to take the scope off and on your flat-top...I would definately go with regular rings.  For ~ $100, you could get the Mark 4 Leupold rings.  I torqued the Mark 4 rings to 65 inch/lb. on my base with a inch/lb. torque wrench.

Mark 4 Rings:
[url]http://store.yahoo.com/botach/leupmar4rin1.html[/url]

Karl, funny that you just got your responce because as I was looking at the "manual" it stated:
hight of small divisions 1 mil.
hight of tall div 2 mils
distance between two vert div 1 mil
thickness of thin lines .05 mil

I believe that the divisions referenced in the manual are specs for the horizontal measurements. The vertical chevrons are not mentioned as far as I could tell. My measurements with the digital camera seem to confirm these specs.

The manual is certainly not very clear. I may submit my one-page dragunov summary as a proposed replacement for their 'manual'.

Karl,

I got a reply from Cactus...

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Cactus Tactical [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 1:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Order

Jeff, this reticle was originally developed for the 7.62 x 54 R bullet.    This bullet was capable of traveling, with the proper load,  over 1000 meters. The BDC's limitation is 1000 meters, so the chevrons were added to give additional distance to the scope.    The upper point of the 2nd chevron was used for 1100 meters, the 3rd for 1200 and the 4th for 1300 meters.   Since the effective controllable distance of a .223 is substantially less than 1000 meters, the chevrons are there if needed, but in reality, the usage will be almost non existent.

Customer Service - Cactus Tactical

Let me know how you're doning. Keep up the great work.

Jeff / SIG

Karl and Friends,

I am now totally confused. The BDC on my scope is 1 through 8... Unless, because I am a newbie I'm not understanding something... That is, I'm assuming elevation and BDC are the same, because once the scope is zeroed the only use for the elevation would be to compensate for distance. Or am I wrong.

That said, I still don't understand the "deflection correction" hatch marks. Does anyone with a Russian manual have an explanation?

Finally, the arrow markings for windage and elevation are a joke. The give no indication of up or down or left of right; they just point in the opposite direction. No wonder those guys lost the Cold War!

SIGnature

SIGnature,

You are correct, the BDC is the elevation/range control that maxs out at 8 (800 meters). We have established that along the vertical axis, the other chevrons were for longer range weapons, enabling aiming points beyond 800 meters. For the .223 round, they are probably not usable.

The scale of deflection correction (horizontal axis) is delineated by hash marks that are scaled in MILS. Because MILS are of a known size you can use them in two ways:

1) You can estimate range to targets of KNOWN SIZE. For example, 1 MIL covers about 3.6" at 100 yards. If you have a target that is 36" high, if they cover 2 MILS, you can estimate the range to target as 500 yards.
2) You can estimate size of targets at KNOWN RANGE in the same way. With known range you can also make quick adjustments for moving targets by leading a certain distance with the MIL scale (for example, if a target at 100 yards is moving 8 MPH, you will have to lead them about 16.7", or 4.6 MILS. The horizontal axis enables you to quickly sight in on 4.6 MILS ahead of the target and fire).

I have attempted to capture the formulas for these estimates on the one-page Dragunov summary posted above.

Clear as mud?

Thanks, Karl. Your explanation is actually crystal clear. The source of my confusion came from an earlier post you made on 0509 at 1726 hrs. You wrote:  "The BDC's limitation is 1000 meters, so the chevrons were added to give additional distance to the scope. The upper point of the 2nd chevron was used for 1100 meters, the 3rd for 1200 and the 4th for 1300 meters."

I assume now that you meant that the BDC is 800 m and chevrons go to 900m, 1000m, etc. Of course the point is moot for .223/5.56.

Re: the horizontal hatches. Since it is difficult or nearly impossible to determine speeds (that are likely to vary) by doing computations using the mils scale, could the "deflection correction" scale be used in a different way?  For example, you target a deer in the woods. By using the "DC" scale you determined BDC. However, rather than using DC scale for the difficult or impossible task of determining speed, you do this: Assumethe deer is moving left to right; you sight on the far left DC hatch (10) and fire on the middle hatch (05). Here's what happens: Assuming the target is moving at a relatively constant speed from hatch 10 through hatch 05, you squeeze off the shot at 05, assuming the shot will arrive at the target just as it reaches the center-zero  chevron. Or am I wrong? Perhaps just unclear! It seems to me that in real life there's too little time and too many variables to make adjustments in your head, on the fly. Instead, the DC acts like a analog computer and makes the assumption of where the moving target will be after following it from 10 mils to 05mils along the DC scale. Thus, when you fire at 05 mils on the DC scale (after tracking it from 10 to 05), the target should arrive at 0 at the same rate it moved from left to right -- 10 to 05. Bang, you hit the deer. The DC scale is a rough analog computer. 'Makes sense to me: No calculations, no adjustments, no taking your eye off the target and, most important of all, no need to move the gun to track the target.

SIG