Mil-Dot ranging Elk and Deer

For the users of Mil-Dot reticled scopes. What process do you use to range Elk and Deer?

I use a rangefinder but I would like to use Mil-Dot ranging just for the experience and as a back up in case the rangefinder malfunctions.

I was thinking of making up a referance chart that uses the height of the animals chest. It would include both male and female animals as they vary in size. Is this the way to go or should I be looking at another method.

I did basically the same thing using MOA instead of mil dot. Elk, brisket to top of back - 30", Buck deer -18", Buck antelope - 16" I actually used this method last fall on an antelope shot. Ranged it at 300 yds with the reticle. Bang-flop. Bullet struck precisely where intended.

I made a chart for side of body and outside of eyeball to outside of eyeball.

I think it's fairly accurate out to maybe 600 yds. A good way to test it would be to go find some said animals and range them with the reticle then check with the RF. A good way to practice would be to cut out some life size silouttes out of cardboard or plywood and randomly set up at unknown distances and shoot away. In this way you could figure what your limitations would be.

Cheers,

-MR

I started w/the mil dot thing.

Soon discovered I wasn't very good at it........after I bought the LRF.

I practiced on actual game. If I would have shot based on any of those estimates I would have regretted it in all cases beyond 200 yards

It seems that in most cases I have been able to range critters accurately enough for a ethical shot out to 600 yards. I have been able to consistently get within 25 yards out to 750 yards but IMHO 25 yards is too much a margin of error for most calibers at that range. Out to 600, the errors are less than that AND the trajectory is still flat enough to make an ethical shot with the errors.

The proccess is simple.

Target size in inches multiplied by 27.778 divided by the amount of mils the target takes up.

Example = an average buck deer in inches from back to belly = 18" you note that the buck takes up precisely 1.35 mils.

18 * 27.778 = 500 / 1.35 = 370 yards.

Hope that helps.

The key to ranging with a reticle is A LOT of practice, I have done it for many years until recent. It is a perishable skill so you have to stay on top of it. It is however really hard to do on a live target (especially animals) because they seem to never stop moving. Used to constantly range animals and check with a LRF while hunting, plus constantly checking the wind. It's better to do with a spotter present because I tend to have a one tracked mind and there is no telling how many bucks I noticed slipping away because my focus was elsewhere. As posted above by Michael, it has it's limitations (especially range) and a small miscalculation can cause a miss or worse. A cheat sheet like the one above by Diamondback makes life a whole lot easier, nothing like trying to do math when a target of opportunity is slipping away.

Edited to say: there are going to be a lot of people that are gonna say it doesn't work. Let me say that they are wrong and just because they can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done. Is it as fast as a range finder? No way! Would I prefer to do it? No way! Is it a good backup? Yes, as long as you know what you are doing and know the limitations!

While reticle ranging is better than just eyeballing the distance and SWAG-ing it, it is very difficult to do well. The rifle actually needs to be more stable to range than it does to shoot. If your Mildot pattern doesn't have small increments (some of the better ones now offer tenth-mill graduations) it is difficult to get a precise size estimate. Snipers are taught to break the dots (on the traditional round dot pattern) into whole mil, .8 mil, .6mil and .2 mil if I am remembering this right (I am an MOA guy). Unless the animal is bedded, they move around enough to keep throwing off your calls on the dots. Then you have to allow for body size variations. To see how this can mess you up, run two or three sets of calculations for your distance/mil conversion chart and change the body size by just one inch for each version. When you see how the ranges derived shift out past a couple hundred yards, you will probably, like me, take especially good care of that laser and pray for no fog or heavy falling snow....

I agree with some above posters, I am good to 4-600 yards depending on conditions, angle to target, etc. This works nicely because I don't worry about atmospheric conditions too much inside this range either so it makes for a real simple shooting method if needed.

One thing I did which helped my accuracy a lot is to create 3 sizes for each animal. There is a lot of variance in the size of animal you are shooting and/or practicing on so if you aren't careful your starting point of 36 inches for elk for instance is off and before you even get started estimating you are already in trouble. So I do a small, average, and trophy column for each animal. This does mean you have to be better at judging body size but in my experience this is pretty easy to do inside the ranges we are talking about. Realistically most of them will fall inside the average size but the trophy opportunities and the smaller animals will not. And it is these two options that I want to be more critical on anyways. The small ones are harder to hit and the big ones I don't want to mess up!

30-32 inches for a mature bull is a big bull in my experience. 28 inches is an average bull and 24 inches are spikes, cows, and even small raghorns.

Scot E.

Scot E said:

I agree with some above posters, I am good to 4-600 yards depending on conditions, angle to target, etc. This works nicely because I don't worry about atmospheric conditions too much inside this range either so it makes for a real simple shooting method if needed.

One thing I did which helped my accuracy a lot is to create 3 sizes for each animal. There is a lot of variance in the size of animal you are shooting and/or practicing on so if you aren't careful your starting point of 36 inches for elk for instance is off and before you even get started estimating you are already in trouble. So I do a small, average, and trophy column for each animal. This does mean you have to be better at judging body size but in my experience this is pretty easy to do inside the ranges we are talking about. Realistically most of them will fall inside the average size but the trophy opportunities and the smaller animals will not. And it is these two options that I want to be more critical on anyways. The small ones are harder to hit and the big ones I don't want to mess up!

30-32 inches for a mature bull is a big bull in my experience. 28 inches is an average bull and 24 inches are spikes, cows, and even small raghorns.

Scot E.

Click to expand...

Do you have a pdf or jpg of your chart that you can post?

7magcreedmoor said:

If your Mildot pattern doesn't have small increments (some of the better ones now offer tenth-mill graduations) it is difficult to get a precise size estimate. Snipers are taught to break the dots (on the traditional round dot pattern) into whole mil, .8 mil, .6mil and .2 mil if I am remembering this right (I am an MOA guy).

Click to expand...

I agree that a reticle with half or less mil marks makes it easier (especially for a beginner), but it isn't necessary. What it boils down to is knowing your equipment and how to use it. Since the 80's the standard issue Army Sniper rifle (at least till a few years back) was the M24 with the 10x Leupold Ultra (Mk4) with a standard mildot reticle. To be effective you need to be able to break it down to at least .1 mil. When you get good enough you can break it down even further and be really accurate, especially if you are accurate on the target size. What do you think we did for the past two decades? Yeah sometimes we would carry the big freaking range finders that were really meant for forward observers to call in artillery and mortars. However, those things are huge by comparison to the hand held range finders today and not what you want to have out while you are trying to blend in and keep your movements as small as possible. The army does funny things; they issue a Bushnell 1500 (or 1600, I forget) LRF to a fire team's grenadier that has a weapon with a maximum range of 400m but don't issue small hand held LRF to Sniper teams. I usually use my personal Swarovski.

ill try to find it. It's pretty basic but works.

Scot E.

This might be a little better. I designed it to fold in half for being laminated and the cut off is at 200yds.

This is because most high powered rifles are MPBR maximum point blank range past 200yds without adjusting anything.
Just point and shoot at anything larger than the cut off MIL-DOT with your high powered rifle.

I kept the other laminated and in my pack for Mr. Murphy.

This is one is a lot better thank you for the input to make me look at some factors.

Subtension rangefinding is a fascinating concept that can be applied with any 2 points at one distance relative to any 2 points at any other distance. It can be used with anything really from simple plex reticles to MD reticles to Ballistic Plex...even archery sight pins if one wished to. The limitations of the math cannot be denied though. Here is a post I put on Rimfirecentral recently. I like this equation though since it's the most basic relative to all the other permutations of it, and actually easily memorized--

The subtension (the milliradian or minute of angle being 2 such subtensions)rangefinding formula has 5 variables in it. Once you know 4 of them then you can calc the other as in all equations. Here it is in it's most basic form (inches to yards)--

tgt. size x range of reticle subtension measurement/reticle subtension/"mil-reading" = range

...i.e, suppose you want to range a 10" target that occupies 2.1 MOA in your 1 MOA hypothetical reticle, so here's the equation--

10" x 100/1.047/2.1 = X yds.

X= 455

Obviously the target size can also be calcd. from the same equation above, or any of the variables for that matter.

The application and adaptation of that equation has been responsible for a lot of fun for us in the field over the years we've been using it. All angular rangefinding is based on this equation, such as what Noremf describes above. I've even used it with archery sight pins. And interestingly enough it also defines the math behind downrange zeroing as well where the tgt. size becomes bullet drop at any particular range (so in this particular example if your bullet drop is 10" at 455 yds. you would need to aim 2.1 MOA high to hit it...can you see?). Play with it some, it's actually quite interesting...IMO.

Now here is the system using a 1/2 mil subtension unit for coyotes (back to brisket using an avg. 11" measurement)--



Now when it comes to various sizes of coyotes (in this case), I swag a closer range, if I think the coyote is a juvenile (the way to remember it is simple--smaller is closer and larger is further).

When it comes to subtension applications in the field (and on the range) the most important concept IS A THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING OF THE FOLLOWING--the memorization and application of the "mil-ranging" equation, and the ~inversely proportional relationship between subtension and scope magnification with 2nd focal plane reticles.

mildot ranging is very accurate and can be done at long distances and doesn't require expensive range finders that can be sometimes unreliable and limited by distance....BUT having said that ranging distance in your reticle takes a lot of practice and for longer distance you have to be very still and be able to tell the difference between .1 mil and .2 mil in your measurement. Being 1/10th of a mil off at long distance can mean a complete miss.
But after practice you can be extremely accurate at ranging.
When hunting thug its kinda hard because the animals won't stay still for you and the size of one deer will be slightly different than the next and will throw off your formula.
SO range finders are much quicker and handier for hunting, but its a very good idea to get proficient with ranging through your reticle, plus its fun and you feel more accomplished