target turret question
08-15-2008, 06:35 AM
#11
Join Date: May 2008
Location:
Posts: 499
RE: target turret question
ORIGINAL: gunnermhr
If you can tell the difference between .980 and 1" at a hundred yards you're a better shot than most. .125 is an 1/8" and your telling us you can notice .020 at a hundred?? Wind will play with the bullet that much! Heck an 1/8" at a 100 yards is still only 1.25" at a 1000 yards. Granted there has been plenty of times I wish I had a scope with 1/8 mil clicks for 1000 yard matchesbut .020" I have my doubts.
If you can tell the difference between .980 and 1" at a hundred yards you're a better shot than most. .125 is an 1/8" and your telling us you can notice .020 at a hundred?? Wind will play with the bullet that much! Heck an 1/8" at a 100 yards is still only 1.25" at a 1000 yards. Granted there has been plenty of times I wish I had a scope with 1/8 mil clicks for 1000 yard matchesbut .020" I have my doubts.
200 yard zero, computer generated drop is 160.8 inches at 800 yards, in a perfect world....
160.8" divided by 8= 20.1 MOA worth of elevation to compensate.
Round up to 20.25 MOA, that's 81 clicks with a 1/4 MOA scope.
If your scope adjusts 1.25 MOA per 4 clicks instead of 1 MOA then you have just dialed in 25.31 worth ofMOA, which is 5.06 MOA,or 40.48 inches worth of elevation,too much.
You WILL miss.........
The value of 1/4MOA, one click, at 1000 yards is not 1.25 inches, it is 2.5 "inches". One MOA roughly equals "10 inches" at 1000 yards, divide "10 inches" by 4 clicks and you get "2.5 inches". If your scope adjusts 1.25 MOA per 4 clicks, or "1.25 inches" at 100 yards, then it will adjust 12.5 "inches" per 4 clicks at 1000 yards instead of only 10 inches. If shooting the same load/zero as above there is a drop of 312.8" at 1000 yards or a required 31.28 MOA of elevation adjustment. With the same scope you will dial in 31.25 MOA but the scope will adjust for 39.1 MOA which is 7.85 MOA too much...or IOW's, a bullet that goes 78.5 inches OVER the target.
Pretty sure I can tell the difference in that...................
08-15-2008, 10:40 AM
#12
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 240
RE: target turret question
Loony don't try to twist my words or change the story. I'm pretty sure I have spent more time shooting at a 1000 yards than you . I'm not positive but I am pretty sure. I never said 1/4 click = 1.25 at 1K. I said 1/8" = 1.25" at 1K. There are scopes out there that have 1/8 mil clicks. And I hate to start the argument but there is no way you can see on a target at 100 yards .020" difference in the point ofimpact. Thebest shooter with the best equipment is not going to adjust for .020". .020 at a 100 yards is the equivelent to .2" at a 1000. Less than a 1/4", I would bet my life there is no one that is good enough to adjust for that at 1K!!
08-15-2008, 01:48 PM
#13
Join Date: May 2008
Location:
Posts: 499
RE: target turret question
Talking about the inherent mechanicaldifferences between similar scopes regardingcalibration per "MOA" and the effects affected exponentially is not the same thing as tweaking .020" at 100 yards, were that EVEN possible.
The fact that you are stuck on 100 yards in your argument, and can't grasp theconcept of MOAcertainly bodes well to your long range experience.......give or take.
There's two points being made here and neither of them are whether or not I, or anyone else,tries to adjust for ..020" at 100, or .20" at 1000 if that too were EVEN possible.
First point is, no two sets of errectors function identically, even within the same models of scope. That's not a bad thing unless you rely on it obliviouslywithout first checking it out.
Second point is, that because of point one, a computer generated program will get you close but when slight differences compound exponetially at longer range it takes real world knowledge of your gear and real world shooting to confirm.
The fact that you are stuck on 100 yards in your argument, and can't grasp theconcept of MOAcertainly bodes well to your long range experience.......give or take.
There's two points being made here and neither of them are whether or not I, or anyone else,tries to adjust for ..020" at 100, or .20" at 1000 if that too were EVEN possible.
First point is, no two sets of errectors function identically, even within the same models of scope. That's not a bad thing unless you rely on it obliviouslywithout first checking it out.
Second point is, that because of point one, a computer generated program will get you close but when slight differences compound exponetially at longer range it takes real world knowledge of your gear and real world shooting to confirm.
08-15-2008, 06:40 PM
#14
Join Date: May 2008
Location:
Posts: 499
RE: target turret question
ORIGINAL: Ridge Runner
give your ballistic program accurate info and it'll do ya right, the one thing is, the published BC's of todays bullets are just the results the maker got on the day they tested and most are adjusted to sea level. Every bullet I ever tested except 1, had a different BC shooting under my conditions than was stated, its an easy fix but to make one shot hits at extended range by using a computer generated drop chart, all your data has to be as close as you can get it.
The one bullet which tested out as the correct BC, on the third shot taken at game took a whitetail at 781 yards, the first killed a chuck at 150 yards, the second was a very near miss on a turkeys neck at 506 yards (yep, very near miss, I saw the vapor trail and watched the bullet blow off course the last 150 yards). Once you get your chart tweaked to your rifle, the only limiting factor is your ability and the limits of your "up" knob.
RR
give your ballistic program accurate info and it'll do ya right, the one thing is, the published BC's of todays bullets are just the results the maker got on the day they tested and most are adjusted to sea level. Every bullet I ever tested except 1, had a different BC shooting under my conditions than was stated, its an easy fix but to make one shot hits at extended range by using a computer generated drop chart, all your data has to be as close as you can get it.
The one bullet which tested out as the correct BC, on the third shot taken at game took a whitetail at 781 yards, the first killed a chuck at 150 yards, the second was a very near miss on a turkeys neck at 506 yards (yep, very near miss, I saw the vapor trail and watched the bullet blow off course the last 150 yards). Once you get your chart tweaked to your rifle, the only limiting factor is your ability and the limits of your "up" knob.
RR
08-16-2008, 10:42 PM
#16
Join Date: May 2008
Location:
Posts: 499
RE: target turret question
Ear hole via turrets, 320 yards. This particular scope adjusts .279 MOA per click,not .250 as most would think.......
Exit "wound" via 87 Vmax and a fire forming charge....2905 fps.
First Blood shot, BTW, taken with this rifle....thinkin' it'll maybe work okay.
Tall grass and a goodly poke from just right of the pole mid image....turrets helpfull.
Exit "wound" via 87 Vmax and a fire forming charge....2905 fps.
First Blood shot, BTW, taken with this rifle....thinkin' it'll maybe work okay.
Tall grass and a goodly poke from just right of the pole mid image....turrets helpfull.
08-18-2008, 09:04 PM
#18
Join Date: May 2008
Location:
Posts: 499
RE: target turret question
Yep. you're right Ridge, and am surprised noone else chimed in, even after a couple of days.
Woulda thunk gunner been all over that......telling, likely.
Reinforces my point about the calibration of individual scopes not being exactly what they are "supposed" to be.
The 2X7 w/ M1's on my243AI adjusts .279 each click for 1.116 per "MOA", which is an overage of .0687..............
Woulda thunk gunner been all over that......telling, likely.
Reinforces my point about the calibration of individual scopes not being exactly what they are "supposed" to be.
The 2X7 w/ M1's on my243AI adjusts .279 each click for 1.116 per "MOA", which is an overage of .0687..............
