What is a mil?

[darkker]

1) And it wouldn't make any difference what type scope was on the gun as for focal plane, or reticle.
2) As for your not needing to know the distance if using a ffp scope, let me say I have $500 that says there isn't a single person on this site willing to take the bet for scoring a first round hit using that reticle or any reticle to range with.
In fact ill even go further and allow for a wind error so long as the elevation is correct.
3) So in theory, a 1 minit dot will cover 10" at 1000 yds and please, no lectures about fp. Also remember this, at 1100 yds an error of 50' probably means you miss the rock.
4) There can be legitimate reasons a person might choose certain scope setups for certain type shooting and that's fine.
5) But accurate distance ranging isn't one of them, so don't be fooled by the b s some people might sling around about that.
6) As for having a mill scale reticle in a spotting scope, its possible but I'm not aware of any having that setup and I'm pretty much up on them.



You have a few issues here that need corrected to keep the OP from getting mixed-up. It doesn't matter MOA or MIL, as Foxx said. But for my replies I'm assuming Mils, because that's what I shoot.
1) Yes, it does matter quite a lot actually. If you have a SFP, then the reticle DOES change size, relative to the target. So in a SFP scope 1 Mil is NOT 1 mil except at only one magnification.
2) Believe we've had this "bet" discussion before. Anyone in my neck of the woods is more than welcome to shoot me a PM and I'm happy to take them out shooting. A first round hit can be difficult in this country if it is windy, but it isn't voodoo to do it.
3) But the FP in fact DOES matter greatly to this discussion. 1 Mil is only 1 mil, when talking about FFP. It is also 1 mil on a SFP, but ONLY when used at the specific calibrated power setting.
4) Yep, I'm good with this.
5) This is absolutely incorrect. When using a SFP, your reticle changes size relative to that target. With a FFP scope, it is always constant, so ranging is quite simple. Understanding this is fundamental to operation of a scope.
6) I don't know of one either, but I also don't shoot with anyone using a spotting scope. My spotters are always using a rifle and scope, luckily for me, they use Mil also; so I'm in tall cotton. :cool:

[foxx]

Darkker already addressed many of my responses to Yobuck.

However, my reply to Yobuck's question was based largely on my MISINTERPRETATION of his question. (Yobuck has a vernacular all his own). :)

I thought he was spotting for me because he said, essentially, "this is the situation and then I TELL YOU YOU MISSED 2 FEET THIS WAY AND THAT." I thought that meant he was there spotting/observing, and I knew nothing more than what he was reporting to me, etc. Therefore, in my mind, it wasn't helpful to tell me I missed by so many feet. I needed to know by what mil or moa I missed. MY spotter would report to me in terms of MIL's or MOA's, not by feet or inches from the target. If I was shooting on my own, and made those observations myself, I would not thing "Oh, I missed the rock by so many feet..." Instead, I would say, "Oh, I missed by so many MIL's." If I was in a hurry, I would just hold off the same amount in the opposite direction and hope for the best. Regardless, I would NOT think aim 2 feet the other way... I would think, "Aim about the same amount in the other direction."

Again, the distance did not matter because I had already taken one shot and was "schooled" by it and his report of his observations. I might be good/lucky enough to make one hit shots, but I was already on my second shot. :)

As for "spotting scopes with MILS"... I don't know about those, either. But, if my spotter is gonna be able to help me, he would need to use SOME kind of scope with Mil's like my own. Probably be his rifle scope.

[earl39]

In case you guys are really wondering Leopold makes a Mark 4 spotting scope with a mil reticle

[yobuck]

In case you guys are really wondering Leopold makes a Mark 4 spotting scope with a mil reticle


Thanks for that update on Leupold spotters. Makes sence that somebody would do that and no doubt others will follow.

[yobuck]

Well both Darkerr and Foxx are both still hung up on ffp scopes as being the only real choice, which is actually the gist of their entire argument.
Ive flat out called out anyone who claimes they can accurately range distance with a reticle. And ill go further and say those who think they can are on a fools errand.
Note I didn't condem ffp scopes, or those who prefer them. Frankly i could case less what anybodys choice is, but its also hard to read all the comments and not offer some opinion.
I know there are some on here from MI, I also know how far it is from Driftwood PA. Its an easy days drive, cmon down and get your mind set straight, ive got lots of room. Pump some more air in the pipsqueaks before you come. lol
Id also like to see some of those tiny groups shot on those rocks way out there. They usualy make little white marks when/if they hit.


PS I'm not smart enough to post pics, but I can email a few if someone could figure out a way to post them.

[foxx]

Only speaking for myself, here...

I like FFP scopes for certain applications, not all. I am only trying to explain what they and mil/mil or moa/moa scopes are and how they are used.

Honestly, I have no actual experience in long range shooting! I am sure a trip down there would be rewarding and fun.
Maybe some day.

[darkker]

Classic Yobuck, starts mis-spelling my name when he's mad.

With as loudly as you bash the FP argument or at least bash FFP, it would appear that you do care what someone chooses. I disagree with you on this or that, but that's what this is about anyhow.
The thing I do find a bit odd with your view on this topic as it pops up a few times, you still don't seem to grasp the actual operation, and fundamental differences between the two when telling people your view.
Unless you don't want to, I'm not sure why the understanding seems to escape. So I don't have to re-type, and perhaps to offer another way of explanation to anyone interested; I'm stealing this from a post by MZ5.

MZ5 said:

My experience has been that most shooters prefer what they're used to. That applies both to mils vs minutes, and to SFP vs FFP. I frequently see people expound the virtues of their preference, but very rarely see a decent comparison of where or when each offers functional advantage. The below assumes that the FFP scope has a regularly-marked reticle (mil-dots, 2-MOA hashes, etc.). It is also crucial that the scope's adjustment increments match the markings. Combining a mil-dot reticle with moa adjustment clicks is unforgivably stupid.

Significant instances where FFP has the advantage in a variable-power scope:
-- Quick adjustments for windage or lead, in the field, especially on fast movers like coyotes. Doesn't matter whether you dial or hold, whether you're at low, medium, or high magnification, FFP ALWAYS gives you an accurate mil/moa scale with which to adjust.

-- Multiple targets at multiple ranges, under time pressure (eg. multiple critters, possibly scattering, or you're at a match firing against the clock). FFP allows you to adjust hold-over or hold-off very rapidly regardless of magnification.

Significant instances where SFP has the advantage in a variable-power scope:
-- Shooting at high magnification on very small targets. A FFP reticle can be made to work well here, too, but then it will likely be un-useful at low magnification unless your erector has a very low zoom ratio.

There are other situations, either fairly minor or unusual, where FFP has at least theoretical or potential advantages, but I see these as the majors. I can't honestly think of even any other minor instances where SFP has a functional advantage.

FFP is a bit more expensive to build correctly/accurately, and as many already know, a fixed-power scope makes SFP vs FFP moot.

Basically, then, FFP is functionally superior when flexibility or speed are of high importance. SPF is _generally_ functionally superior at very high mag on very small targets.

[LoneWolf]

Yobuck. 1 gallon milk jug at 1000yds. Initial wind call was 1.8mils for 10mph. Missed by .2 Mils right first shot. Adjusted and sent one... Impact! Now if I couldn't see my impact it would be a different story, but I also am very familiar with my setup. You'll also notice my spotters were about clueless of the impacts location. Mil reticles work very well when they are of a quality accurate design!

https://youtu.be/CDos9MBsjPc

Sent from my 710C using Tapatalk

[yobuck]

Only speaking for myself, here...

I like FFP scopes for certain applications, not all. I am only trying to explain what they and mil/mil or moa/moa scopes are and how they are used.

Honestly, I have no actual experience in long range shooting! I am sure a trip down there would be rewarding and fun.
Maybe some day.

Well try to understand that knowing what the differences are, and the reasons some might prefer them, isn't the issue and whats lacking here.
Whats lacking is simply first hand knowledge of what a shooter, ( especially a hunter), actually requires to make a shot at long distances.
I actually have 50+ years experience doing it, and im saying it aint much. Especially as to scope and reticle type and the list could go on.
Ive offered up a challenge for those interested enough to come prove me right or wrong at our very nice camp where we can shoot from a lawn out to several miles. But I'm not really expecting any takers.
And for what its worth I'm not angry Darkker (fixed it), i don't get angry over things this trivial, especially when i know i'm right.
If you don't know i'm right that's your problem. lol

[LoneWolf]

It's not that you're right or wrong yobuck. It's that there's more than one way to skin a buck.... What's right for you is right if it works. What's right for someone else is also right as long as it works. What I've practiced and what you've practiced are two different ways of accomplishing the same task. And I'm sure a number of other members ways of doing will vary as well!

Sent from my 710C using Tapatalk

[upSLIDEdown]

There are at least 5 spotting scopes with mil reticles in them that I can think of off the top of my head, and some have been around a while.

This thread has turned into another FFP vs SFP debate. While guys like yobuck do just fine with a SFP reticle, guys like myself and LoneWolf are much better off with FFP reticles.

Throwing down $500 bets is laughable, because the same could be done on the other side of the coin. With a rifle setup the way you're used to it, with your SFP scope, and however else it's set up, you'd play hell trying to do the type of shooting we do in a PRS style match with multiple targets, multiple ranges, 10 shots, and 90 seconds. Like LoneWolf said, there will always be multiple ways to skin the cat. People that are used to what they're used to rarely change. That's just the way it is.

[LongRange]

it's not that you're right or wrong yobuck. It's that there's more than one way to skin a buck....

Sent from my 710c using tapatalk

lmao!!

[yobuck]

I'm always interested in being shown other ways of doing things.
Since your moving east, you would be a perfect person to accept my challenge
and pass along the results to our friends here.
Since I'm also close to Ridgeway possibly some benefit can be shared by a trip to a match there.
Some of those boys seem to be strugeling with their ability in knocking over those steel targets even from a bench.

[yobuck]

The $500 is for those claiming they can range with a reticle and I thought that was clear but apparently not.
Again I didn't say shooters couldn't shoot with a ffp scope but apparently that wasent clear either.
As for hunting, the fact is none who are responding actually do it, they know that, and so do the few of us here who do.

[Robinhood]

Good night

[darkker]

As for hunting, the fact is none who are responding actually do it, they know that, and so do the few of us here who do.

That is also not true. I've been hunting(big game and varmints) with nothing but FFP's for the past 6-ish years.

[foxx]

Well try to understand that knowing what the differences are, and the reasons some might prefer them, isn't the issue and whats lacking here.
Whats lacking is simply first hand knowledge of what a shooter, ( especially a hunter), actually requires to make a shot at long distances.


But, Yobuck, "...knowing what the differences are, and the reasons some might prefer them..." IS the issue here (in THIS thread) and what is lacking here.

What isn't the issue HERE is whether YOU or anyone else finds them useful or even necessary. I'd say you are always welcome to share your opinion, but your life experience doesn't discount how or whether I chose to answer his question.

I was answering the OP's question. " WHAT IS MIL...?"

I admit I am not an experienced long range shooter. I don't have to be to know and understand what MIL's are and how they are used. If it offends or troubles your sensibilities that I would be so bold as to try to explain what I know about it without actually shooting at 1,000 yard ranges, so be it.

Beyond just trying to answer his question, I went ahead and answered your hypothetical question. Which I did. You simply rejected my answer because I did not say I would prefer to use your system. When, in fact, I could choose to do (no matter what scope I was using) by simply taking another shot and aiming off, as you would. Jeez-oh Pete!

[Rob01]

This is a pretty entertaining post. LOL Anyone who thinks using a SFP scope in PRS style comps will be as easy as a FFP either hasn't shot any matches or is fooling themselves. You can fight your way through a match with a SFP scope but why use the mind power to worry about a SFP scope and what power you are on when you can use it on making the shot and getting points. It's just one more thing to make your life harder. I haven't used a SFP scope in a match since 2004.

Also making that $500 wouldn't be that hard as I have ranged and made first round hits on many targets in matches especially the Allegheny Sniper Challenge out to just over 1000 yards and many inside. Ranging with a reticle isn't overly hard but you need to know target size and be able to break the reticle down to at least .1 mil and even better .05 to be more accurate and this is where a good reticle comes into play. Also a FFP scope as you might not always be able to be on the highest power due to conditions. Ranging over 600 yards or so takes practice. With the availability of good, less expensive LRFs, it's a skill that is being lost.

[LongRange]

we will be reticle ranging targets out to 950yds today and tomorrow and using pin and paper to come up with dopes...NO range finders allowed on this stage...ill let you guys know how it goes and how many first round hits are made on this stage.

[Robinhood]

*Can't be done by anyone on this forum.*
----Devils Advocate--- AKA Yobuck