NightForce question....

[joel0407]

Sounds like some good points, but in my brain MOA still fits better. I am wondering why you dont have cramk as much with the mil turrets... what increments are the clicks?

0.1 mil is more than 1/4 moa that why you dont have to crank as much. The down side is it's not as fine. Shame they dont have 0.05 mil turrets.

As for MOA fitting your brain, I dont know how you do it. I have grown up using both and always go toward the way of Metric if I can. Decimal money, Decimal counting, decimal years, Decimal money, Decimal everything but time.

The mil system will work with any measurement except the non decimal stuff. For example 1 mil = 1" at 1000", 1' at 1000', 1 yard at 1000 yards the problem comes when there is 12" to 1', 3' to 1 yard and 1760 yards to the mile.

 

[AtownBcat]

So if i were to choose a Mil Dot Rec and didn't like it will nightforce change it like Leupold will?(for a fee)

Also are all NSX reticles illuminated?

 

[AtownBcat]

Nevermind went to their web sight the answer is yes and yes.....

 

[joel0407]

IMO I would never cross a Mil reticle with MOA turrets. There is plenty of info for using mil dots for range finding but if you start to use the mil dots for hold over and want to use the turrets for in between adjustment, it's too hard to calculate mil and moa as they are to complete different measuring systems.

1 mil at 500m would be 500mm if you need 600mm hold over you could just crank the turrets 0.2mil and use the first mil dot.

I think I'm pushing **** up hill trying to push millradian measurements on a US based forum as I believe you still use imperial measuremnets.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

0.1 mil is more than 1/4 moa that why you dont have to crank as much. The down side is it's not as fine. Shame they dont have 0.05 mil turrets.

Yeah, that's what I thought... larger increments. Every time you clicka quarter MOA it moves 2.5" @ 1000 yds and every time you click a .1 mil it moves 3.6" @ 1000yds I like the smaller increments better. But is still doesn't seem like it makes up for turing the turret less than one revolution vs 2 1/2 revolutions for the MOA turret?

As for MOA fitting your brain, I dont know how you do it. I have grown up using both and always go toward the way of Metric if I can. Decimal money, Decimal counting, decimal years, Decimal money, Decimal everything but time.

Mil isn't metric, this is what is...

The "Mil" in "Mil-Dot" does not stand for "Military"; it stands for "milliradian." The radian is a unitless measure which is equivalent, in use, to degrees. It tells you how far around a circle you have gone. 2 PI radians = 360 degrees. Using 3.14 as the value of PI, 6.28 radians take you all the way around a circle. Using a cartesian coordinate system, you can use "x"- and "y"-values to define any point on the plane. Radians are used in a coordinate system called "polar coordinates." A point on the plane is defined, in the polar coordinate system, using the radian and the radius. The radian defines the amount of rotation and the radius gives the distance from the origin (in a negative or positive direction).

The mil system will work with any measurement except the non decimal stuff. For example 1 mil = 1" at 1000", 1' at 1000', 1 yard at 1000 yards the problem comes when there is 12" to 1', 3' to 1 yard and 1760 yards to the mile.

Nope, 1 mil = 36" @ 1000 yds

 

[joel0407]

Yeah, that's what I thought... larger increments. Every time you clicka quarter MOA it moves 2.5" @ 1000 yds and every time you click a .1 mil it moves 3.6" @ 1000yds I like the smaller increments better. But is still doesn't seem like it makes up for turing the turret less than one revolution vs 2 1/2 revolutions for the MOA turret?


As for MOA fitting your brain, I dont know how you do it. I have grown up using both and always go toward the way of Metric if I can. Decimal money, Decimal counting, decimal years, Decimal money, Decimal everything but time.

Mil isn't metric, this is what is...






Nope, 1 mil = 36" @ 1000 yds

Yep, thats what I said 1 mil = 1 yard at 1000 yards

(36" is 1 yard, 3' is 1 yard)

Agreed Mil isn't Metric but it is a decimal measurement as is Metric.

As for 0.1 mil at 1000 yard being 3.6" why not use 1000m, 0.1 mil is 100mm at 1000m much easier.

 

[Michael Eichele]

I think the math is easier. 1 MOA = 1.047" @ 100 yds... or for all practicle purposes, 1 MOA equals 1" @ 100 yds, 2" @ 200 yds, 3" @ 300 yds, etc.

I certainly am not trying to argue here but I have found using the 1 MOA = 1" at 100 yards rule of thumb a good way to miss a shot clean at ranges like 800+ yards.

Example: When you have a chart that tells you your bullet drops 300" at 1K and you wish to dial it and you use the one click = .25" at 100 yard rule, you will miss your target by 15". One click is NOT .25" It is .25 MOA which is .26175" You would be off by 6 clicks or roughly 15 inches.

I also am a huge fan of the mil system. I use a MLR reticle and Mil turrets as well. To me it is just much simpler + I can estimate range MUCH easier with the mil system in case my laser takes a dump.

I also highly recomend the MLR over the mildot. It is the same value but with 1/2 mil marks as well plus they are lines instead of dots. Lines cover over less of the target.

 

[jwp475]

The clicks are .1 mill which is the same as 1 cm wich is .36 inches oer 100 yards

 

[trueblue]

I have not used the mill system, but have some questions. If 1 mill is equal to
3.6" @ 100 yards, and there are 10 clicks per 1 mill and you are able to dial to 1000 yards in less than 1 revolution,my question is this. Are the .10 mill lines on the turret closer together than the .25 click MOA turret, and because of this, are they harder to read ? It would seem to me to be more diffucult to read my dial up from prone position with poor eyes, or lighting if these 0.10 mill lines are set closer than MOA lines on the turret.

 

[jwp475]

The lines are closer together. My exys are 58 years old and are not what they used to be. I have come to like the Mill system. Eithrt one wil work perfectly, it's a matter of personal preference

 

[jwp475]

Like John said he used the reticle and added to it with turret adjustment to fine tune it. But the ret by itself is hard to be as accurate if you fall between lines of MOA or Mil. I guess I get confused easy, I like to dial and hold dead
on I shoot a deuplex in most of my scopes and depend on a laser and my turrets. I use a loNt of Leupold M4 scopes and so far the turrets have held up fine. NightForce turrets are as good as they get, and in the words of one rep, "Why do you need a fancy reticle with turrets this good , I would shoot a NP1"

I no longer use the reticule for hold off, I just dial in for the distance. I was afraid that if I went more than 1 revolution and I forgot to turn the dial back immediately after the shot that I might forget where I was and that could cause a miss. Zero stops solves that problem.

The Nightforce Mill Dot is actually a circle that you can see through. The MLR with the 1/2 mill marks also has its pluses

 

[Rimfire]

I will be making my first nightforce purchase on monday. As of right now im going with a 5.5-22x50 with a mil dot rec, mil rad turrets and zero stop. I am still completly new to long range shooting and hunting so i want to make sure that now one had a problem with this set up. I have never learned MOA adjustment so i wont have to "relearn" anything. I was a little worried about the Mil Dot Rec being to busy, but mike said that he thought it would work great for shots where there was no time to make turret adjustments. Also can you have "to much" magnification lets say the (i believe) 8-32? I want to be able to shoot out to 1000yrds. Please weigh in as i dont have enough experience yet and am relying on your opinions and experience....no pressure...lol

I guess the bottom line is what are you going to use the Ret for. Hold overs range estimation?
1-For range estimation it will get you close a range finder will put you on.

2-For Hold overs it wil get you very close Dialing your dope will put you on with a confirmed drop chart and practice.

Keep it as simple as you can and less will go wrong when It's time to pull the trigger.

Here is another thought if the deer wont stand still long enough to turn turrets how are you going to hold over on it ? I guess after your spotter hit it with a LRF? and during that time I would be dialing my dope and ready to shoot, and have. turrets are just as fast or faster. You seen need an accurate range you cant get that with ret even more so while a deer is walking. Make use of your time and it comes easy.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I certainly am not trying to argue here but I have found using the 1 MOA = 1" at 100 yards rule of thumb a good way to miss a shot clean at ranges like 800+ yards.

Example: When you have a chart that tells you your bullet drops 300" at 1K and you wish to dial it and you use the one click = .25" at 100 yard rule, you will miss your target by 15". One click is NOT .25" It is .25 MOA which is .26175" You would be off by 6 clicks or roughly 15 inches.

I also am a huge fan of the mil system. I use a MLR reticle and Mil turrets as well. To me it is just much simpler + I can estimate range MUCH easier with the mil system in case my laser takes a dump.

I also highly recomend the MLR over the mildot. It is the same value but with 1/2 mil marks as well plus they are lines instead of dots. Lines cover over less of the target.

What you say is true about using inches and MOA marks for estimating long shots because multiplying 20 MOA at longer ranges exagerates the slight difference.

But, if your using a spoter, or even trying to spot yourself, IMO estimating a miss in MOA seems simpler and easier than Mils. As in 1 MOA high and 1/2 MOA left. But maybe that's just me? Also, I make and print my own targets using a 1" grid, When I'm shooting paper on the range, I can pretty much exactly estimated my windage and elevation corrections from the bench. The MOA scale makes it easier for me to make the mental calculations and dial in the correction.

Another thing I like about the NP-R2 reticle is that it is clean and simple. That fits in my simple brain very well. No fuss no muss. Estimations and calcs are easy and it doesn't clutter my view or my mind.

Now I am not saying that the MOA is necessarily better than the Mil. They both have their advantages IMO, and I think it boils down to personal preference and what works best and is more appealing to a particular shooter.

It would be intersting to take a poll on this. I know there are a lot for MOA fans in this forum who we haven't heard from. Maybe I'll (or someone else could) start a "Which reticle?" poll? The results would be interesting and might learn a few things.

 

[Michael Eichele]

But, if your using a spoter, or even trying to spot yourself, IMO estimating a miss in MOA seems simpler and easier than Mils. As in 1 MOA high and 1/2 MOA left. But maybe that's just me? Also, I make and print my own targets using a 1" grid, When I'm shooting paper on the range, I can pretty much exactly estimated my windage and elevation corrections from the bench. The MOA scale makes it easier for me to make the mental calculations and dial in the correction.

Another thing I like about the NP-R2 reticle is that it is clean and simple. That fits in my simple brain very well. No fuss no muss. Estimations and calcs are easy and it doesn't clutter my view or my mind.

Now I am not saying that the MOA is necessarily better than the Mil. They both have their advantages IMO, and I think it boils down to personal preference and what works best and is more appealing to a particular shooter.

You hit the nail on the head. Personal preference and appeal. We all have different shooting styles and tequniques. I used the NP-R2 for a few years. I cant really say I had a problem with it. As a long time fan of the mil system, once NF came out with the MLR AND mil turrets, I quickly traded up. Whether I use MOA with a MOA turret or Mils with a Mil turret doesnt matter much to me, but when it comes to range finding I find the Mil system MUCH easier to use. The choice for me is a simple one. Dont get me wrong, I use a laser but if it ever fails I have an accurate reliable and predictable back up method. Since much of the game I hunt like sheep and deer have an average cross section of 18" the mathematical formula * 18" always equals 500. 500 divided by the mils used equals the yardage. I have used this methed to within +/-25 yards out to 800 yards. Another trick I do is reverse math with the use of my laser for VERY accurately measuring a big bull moose's antler width. Up here we have a 50" minimum spread requirement. Is that bull 49" or 51"? I have used this system to get within +/-1" at 800 yards.

The MLR is a clean and simple reticle as well using fine lines. The thing I couldnt stand about the R2 was the 5 MOA windage. Like you say, when youre your own spotter and your 3 MOA to the left, it is pretty hard to know if youre 2.5 or 3.5 with those huge gaps. The MLR solves this in my opinion. From 0.5 mils to 5 mils in 0.5 mil increments. With the addition of the 0.1 mil turret I use the same principal as you do when your 1 MOA down. When I am 0.2 Mils down, as seen through my scope, I dial 2 clicks and it is there.

These are the things that appeal to me about the Mil system. However I can survive quite nicley with the MOA system as well.