|
|
Post by ineedone on Apr 23, 2018 16:37:21 GMT -8
I'm building an ar10 platform .308 mainly for hitting steel and putting holes in paper. At home I can shoot 500 to 600 yards through the bottom from the house. I can stretch it to probably 800 plus yards if I go over to the next ridge, I've never ranged it though. Any way, I'm kind of using this build as an entry for my self into long range shooting. The scope is the last piece of the puzzle for me to complete this build. I'm having problems deciding what type of reticle to go with. To me i think a MOA scope reticle would be easier to learn to use. However there isn't a lot of options for reticles in a front focal plane scope. So would the smart thing for me to do is get a mil dot style reticle and learn that system since it seems like that's kind of the standard?
|
|
|
|
Post by GLSHOOTER on Apr 24, 2018 6:36:37 GMT -8
Starting cold either is not hard to learn. The MIL-MIL is a bit more precise in hold off using the hash marks. I taught with the standard MOA Mil dot scopes for many years and do all the math in my head so I have stayed with that though I can make the switch without any real angst.
FFP scopes are all over the place depending on your budget. The reticle choices are off r the charts though. Unless you are a run and gun PRS guy I find most of them to be like fishing lures. They look "cool" and flashy and the fish don't care. The same deal with a reticle. Teaching basic snipes in my old job and can not fathom getting the young guys to grasp or REMEMBER what all those lines/dots mean.
Keep us up to speed on what you pick.
Greg
Per Ritch Look at the Burris
|
|
|
|
Post by ineedone on Apr 24, 2018 17:22:37 GMT -8
Starting cold either is not hard to learn. The MIL-MIL is a bit more precise in hold off using the hash marks. I taught with the standard MOA Mil dot scopes for many years and do all the math in my head so I have stayed with that though I can make the switch without any real angst. FFP scopes are all over the place depending on your budget. The reticle choices are off r the charts though. Unless you are a run and gun PRS guy I find most of them to be like fishing lures. They look "cool" and flashy and the fish don't care. The same deal with a reticle. Teaching basic snipes in my old job and can not fathom getting the young guys to grasp or REMEMBER what all those lines/dots mean. Keep us up to speed on what you pick. Greg Per Ritch Look at the Burris When you use the MIL-MIL do you use meters and centimeters, or inches and yards, or a combination of both? |
|
|
|
Post by GLSHOOTER on Apr 24, 2018 19:38:50 GMT -8
Adjustments in mils as in MIL at 100 yards is 3.6" A 0.1 MIL adjust is 0.36 inches. Meters/centimeters are not used in these. By dividing the MIL by ten they really can dial it in quite quickly once you get use to it. The new scopes do so much more math with the reticle it is amazing. An experienced user can really fly with either one but you know guys always need the latest and greatest.
My usage now is fine with dots and inch turrets. PD's don't present much of a threat so dialing is not hard though I can put Kentucky Windage on the gun in a mano y mano shoot off pretty dang well.. Come ups are fine but sometimes you gotta get dirty.
Greg
|
|
|
|
Post by GLSHOOTER on Apr 25, 2018 18:25:19 GMT -8
You're right. I was taking it more from the viewpoint that when you are doing your clicks you weren't thinking of it as one centimeter in movement. One click in most will be 0.1 mil that equates to 0.36 at 100 yards and that is not a centimeter.
The things I shoot are rarely done in meters so I think more along application to yardage not the metric. My F-class matches are all in 100 yard increments. The only metric matches I've dealt with were metallic silhouette.
Greg
|
|
|
|
Post by ineedone on Apr 28, 2018 18:16:02 GMT -8
I've been reading more info on the equations for Mrad and think I'm going to go with it. The MRAD scopes seem like they are a more popular system with a lot more options.
|
|
|
|
Post by ineedone on Apr 28, 2018 18:27:50 GMT -8
I think I want to get a leapold vx3i LRP 6.5-20x50 30mm ffp, with the FFP CCH reticle. I like the open center cross hairs with the grid style hash marks, but it's not too cluttered in my opinion. How ever I have not looked through one yet, and I would like to look through a vortex viper pst gen 2 as another option. Any thoughts on these 2?
|
|
|
|
Post by ineedone on May 1, 2018 17:26:13 GMT -8
I've not used the Leupold you are talking about but have bought and had lots of Leupold scopes on issued rifles. They generally have good glass and the etched reticles are accurate. Internal adjustment is hit and miss but they will fix it for free. The Viper PST Gen 2 is a decent optic (good glass and decent adjustments) and Vortex has a good warranty which you are more likely to need than with any other brand. For the past 5 years I've not used anything but Nightforce or the Bushnell Elite Tactical line and have had great success and zero issues with either. That's what I'm afraid of with buying a vortex. I like the nightforce scopes but they are a little more the I'm wanting to spend on a scope for this build. I have not looked at the Bushnell Elite Tactical line yet but I'm definitely going to have to check that out. |
|
