stupid MOA/scope question

[mattri]

Looking at a scope that has 40" or (+/-) 40 MOA of total adjustment (up and down) at 100 yards.

Correct me if I'm wrong but this equates to 80" of adjustment at 200 yards, 320" at 800 yards etc right?

 

[mikecr]

1moa = 1.047198" @ 100yds
40moa = 41.888" @ 100yds
= 83.776" @ 200yds
= 335.103" @ 800yds

 

[mattri]

Thanks for the reply- don't know why that was making me 2nd guess the numbers.

 

[brian427cobra]

My suggestion is stop thinking in inches feet yards and use what angular measurement do I need to hit my target, Mikes math is spot on, but without a reticle that matches your knobs adjustments is an exercise futility, also get a 20moa scope base.

 

[mikecr]

No, a reticle can be a simple crosshair or merely a dot. The 'knobs' can take care of adjustment all in their own. Also there is no reason to blanket install a biased base, given that it forces higher scope mounting. This should only be used where needed.
And lastly, if his scope adjustment is inches per hundred yards(IPHY), that's the way he needs to understand it(rather than MOA).
Personally, I prefer IPHY because it's finer resolution than any other standard(I know of), and doesn't get any easier to use.

I believe mattri got the peer check he was lookin for. No need to assume anything else.

 

[CPorter]

Scope adjustments aren't a perfect 1.0471987" per MOA . They vary between scopes and at each end of the adjustment range. Depending on the accuracy of adjustment you need you can find out by testing. A target with a rectangular grid that can be seen from the desired range with a clamp to hold the scope or rifle in place while adjusting the knobs, or shooting small groups while adjusting the scope in a box pattern, and so on. With 40" of adjustment moving 5 MOA or inches at a time and dividing by the number of clicks necessary to make it will show how the adjustments generally get smaller as you near the end of adjustment and give you a good chance of dialing in at various ranges the first time.

 

[mattri]

You are exactly right- thx.

 

[msinc]

"and it doesn't get any easier to use."...

Yes it does, Mil/Mil and it is so much easier it's worth buying the new scope for.

 

[mikecr]

Really?
Let's say I'm 3" off at 700yds.
(1/4"click x 7) is 1.75" so 2 clicks corrects 3.5"
(1/8"click x 7) is 7/8" so 4 clicks is 3.5", but 3 clicks is closer at 2 5/8"
Just did it in my head. I can do it in the field.

But I couldn't guess how many MILS that 3" offset is, or how many MIL clicks would get me closest & how close that is. Nor could I manage this(in my head) with MOA. I would have to use a calculator, because it just isn't as natural -to me.

Well, I know 1MIL = 3.6"/100yd, so .1mil = .36"/100yd, x7 would be 2.1+.42 = 2.52" per .1MIL@700yds. So 1click of .1MIL would get me as close as 2 clicks of 1/4IPHY.
But still, I had to take it all to inches(cheating), and that is my basis for inches being easier.

And for resolution, MIL adjustments are commonly to .1MIL or .36"/100yd/click.
They are commonly in FFP scopes with reticle subtension covering much of this .36"
IPHY scopes are commonly .25"/100yd/click, with SFP reticle subtension covering ~.05"
So at 700yds, my reticles conceal about the same as a typical FFP scope conceals at 100yds.
I don't know about steel plates, but these are pretty important differences with woodchuck hunting.

 

[brian427cobra]

Thats the simple beauty of MRAD's, they have no value unless your silly enough to assign one, which you did and I use to do, I have no idea what the MRAD correction is at 700 with a 3 inch miss, I would simply use the calibrated ruler my right eye is looking thru to tell me my correction in Mils, rack the bolt and hit my target with a simple hold, I have done that many times in practice and in Sniper matches, FFP makes life easy too, my NSX is SFP and the reticle is calibrated at 11x, that means I need to do math in my head when shooting at anyother power to give me proper ranging, and holds.

 

[mikecr]

Well yeah I could just hold off the 3" also. And I don't need FFP, MRAD dots or hash marks, or calibrated power settings.
It was just an example of how IPHY is easier to actually understand, and of the resolution differences with dialing.

I'm a hunter. I don't know about sniper matches. But I couldn't bracket range woodchucks and take them with FFP scopes, big reticle subtensions, and low resolution adjustment/hold-offs.
They are not a standard size, at standard distances. They present a small killzone. And they usually give me only one shot (~per ~hour). I also do not rely on a 'spotter'.
I hear all the time how easy tactical scopes are for follow-up shots. But that's just not the priority with hunting. I value single shot accuracy, more than war games.

But being a 'sniper' I'm sure you realize that accuracy is often defined -with single shots.

 

[brian427cobra]

I'm a military trained airplane mechanic, I still fix planes for the most profitable airline on the planet, and I too value first round hits, weather in a match or on animals, I really don't like using the word sniper, I usually use practical/tactical, I also value learning from others and helping people, trying to live by the golden rule is not as hard as people think it is, but it does take effort.