AR Sponsor
Posted: 4/23/2005 8:05:12 AM EDT
| I don't hear much about them. If you have used them, exactly how good do they perform at different ranges as far as poi. I'm wondering about the ones costing about 600 dollers or less. |
|
If you have a good Mil-Dot scope (which is what I've used) you can get a range to target within 10 % or less of actual, providing you get good instruction and practice now and then. Higher-end scopes, like those with the Premier Reticles Gen-2 Mil Dot, |
|
The reticles that are good for ranging are Mil-Dot, Mill-line, MOA reticles, and object sizing reticles. MIL-DOT  MLR  MOA  NP1-RR  www.csgunworks.com [email protected] Here’s some testimonials about CS GunWorks for AR15 Board Mike at CS Gunworks is... |
El Roto, You make a good point but I think you over-state your case. I think you'd have trouble doing better than 5%. In order to range something to within 1% you need to know its size to within 1% or less. That means knowing a man's height to within 3/4" for a guy about 6 foot tall. You also have to accurately read the mil dot scale/size of the object to within 1% (0.05 mil at 300 yards for a 6 foot object). To actually get within 1% overall you need to reduce the errors in both knowleddge of object size and error in reading the scale to less than 1% each. You'd have to know the object size to within +/-3/8" AND read the mil dot scale to within +/- 0.03 mil of actual. I don't think so, bro. Ratgravy, The modern way to range targets is with a quality laser rangefinder such as a Leica 1200. These give ranges to within 1 yard/meter at extreme distances (up to 1200 yards for the Leica 1200) and are not dependant upon foreknowledge of object size. Mildot reticles work reasonably well but they require training and practice you use effectively (accurately and quickly). Well, these are just my thoughts on the subject. I hope it helps. |
|
I think it would be very, very hard to measure to with 1% percent of range at all ranges. In training for artillery units when using the M2 aiming circle, you are limited to certain ranges to the point that an item is considered accurate, for example the M16 rifle you can accurate determine range to it to 125m's beyond that, even with a survey instrument like an aiming circle the measurement is considered unreliable, the 2 meter survey bar is measure accurate out to 225 m's, after that is starts getting to inaccurate to use to determine piece location. When you throw in things like Mike mentioned like not knowing true target height (think about a guy standing in the grass and loosing several inches of true height) and target aspect, you may throw of you mil relation formula. |
|
I agree, it would be hard to do that on average. I was basing that statement on a single ranging I made in the field with my equipment and that was wrong of me to do. A single event does not equal overall performance. I'll strike through that particular sentence. Thank you for pointing out my error. My apologies if this mistake caused anyone any harm in any way. |
|
I have a Loopy GR spotter from Premier with the Gen2 and a Lecia 1200 - I am never more than 3% off as long as the boil isn't bad. It is easier to MIL with higher mag power. I might be off as much as an additional 4% under the same conditions with my 10x rifle scope. Having spotters or binos with MIL scale and a laser is about the only real way to practice easily - every where. Take care |
|
3% accurate, with practice? Yeah, maybe. Not me, that's for sure. You? Okay, if you say so and back it up with laser rangefinding as the basis to train with. Without the laser, I bet your skills degrade over time - no benchmark reference. Do our servicemen in the field have laser rangefinding detectors (please DO NOT answer this question)? I would hope so. It would be easy to detect. They'd know they are being ranged that way. El Roto, I'm not meaning to take you to task, just don't want him to have unrealistic expectations. The thing is, if you know how accurate/inaccurate your estimates are, then, and only then, can you begin to know if the shot is too far. There comes a point where the inaccuracy of your ranging and wind calls, coupled with the ballistics of your round, leave you with no margin for error. That is when you know you need to get closer. You need to know your ballistics, too. You've got to be able to put it all together, too. And do it quickly, too. |
AR Sponsor