Im in the market for a new rifle.....

[tinker]

if the moose was shot sunday then yep! haha. thats a ND grand slam or something!!

im thinking we know the same person... that rifle has been busy1

 

[Enslow]

I nearly bought a .260 nosler but didn’t want a 28 inch barrel to burn all that powder.

- - - Updated - - -

I went with a .300 winny with a 24 inch barrel instead. I think that will do everything that .260 nosler will do.

 

[Glass]

I am leaning towards the vortex crossfire 4-16X50 with the dead-hold reticle. Anyone running one of these crossfires, and if so are you happy with it?

 

[PrairieGhost]

Only a little more money to get you to the Diamondback HP. For years I run the mildots. Now I have minute of angle reticles. Now Vortex PST first focal plane have the large diameter turrets like the Razors and you get 25 minutes of angle per revolution. I think they are trying to make sure I can't be happy more than one year at a time.

There are a number of advantages to the minute of angle reticles. If your program says that at 600 yards your 308 needs 16 minutes of come up you can dial or pic 16 minutes on the reticle and get a shot off faster. The other good thing if you're running a laser range finder and you know your deer is 655 yards and the width of his rack is 3.5 minutes of angle in your scope. Simply multiply 6.55 X 3.5 and you know the rack is 22.9 inches wide. You will never be that accurate, but you will know it's within an inch or two, somewhere in the 21 to 25 inch area. If your judgement is good you will be even closer.

 

[H82bogey]

Another option might be the Carcano 6.5. Rifle was made famous in 1963. Seems like a pretty accurate rifle from the video footage I've seen.

 

[Norske]

I don't own a 270 of any flavor so have no experience with one, but I have a Tikka T3 6.5X55 (6.5 Swede) that's very accurate. It's also pleasant to shoot.
But buying a new hunting rifle just before the season opens is like buying a new shotgun of a different brand (and stock dimensions) just before bird season opens and wondering why you don't kill anything. Buy new hunting rifles at Christmas, and you'll have eleven months to learn it.

 

[Livetohuntandfish]

I don’t really get the obsession for the 6.5. If it were me and I wanted to do a lot of shooting I’d pick up a .308. Or if I didn’t do a lot of shooting and wanted an all around rifle I’d go .270. Just my stance but the 6.5 if ballistically better but unless you have it in the back of your mind your gonna shoot 1000yrds. Which 99% of people buy one for and never shoot past 200..... go

 

[Kentucky Windage]

I don’t really get the obsession for the 6.5. If it were me and I wanted to do a lot of shooting I’d pick up a .308. Or if I didn’t do a lot of shooting and wanted an all around rifle I’d go .270. Just my stance but the 6.5 if ballistically better but unless you have it in the back of your mind your gonna shoot 1000yrds. Which 99% of people buy one for and never shoot past 200..... go

Your comment is right on for the 200 and under crowd. For the well over 200 crowd, heavy for calibre, high BC bullets is why. Wind is your enemy, and these bullets help with that problem. If I was a WT MD only guy, I'd have a 6mm, 25 cal or 6.5. I'll single out the 25 though because no one has really developed heavy for cal, high BC bullets..........yet. You look at those heavy for cal offerings and tell me it's not enough pill to knock deer down. When you start talking elk, 6.5mm min and upward. Why wouldn't one want adequate pill weight and high BC bullet in the same package?

 

[gone_fishing]

Your comment is right on for the 200 and under crowd. For the well over 200 crowd, heavy for calibre, high BC bullets is why. Wind is your enemy, and these bullets help with that problem. If I was a WT MD only guy, I'd have a 6mm, 25 cal or 6.5. I'll single out the 25 though because no one has really developed heavy for cal, high BC bullets..........yet. You look at those heavy for cal offerings and tell me it's not enough pill to knock deer down. When you start talking elk, 6.5mm min and upward. Why wouldn't one want adequate pill weight and high BC bullet in the same package?

I don't have a 6.5 creedmoor so I have no first hand experience but I've read that one of the selling points of the 6.5 (besides ballistics) is the moderate recoil. Not a big deal for once a year hunting but if someone is interested in getting into target shooting, less recoil is always a plus. Of course their are other factors that determine felt recoil (gun weight being a big one).

Ammunition availability always plays a factor for the non-reloaders such as myself. I'm seeing that 6.5 is becoming more popular and most big box stores carry it. One of the advantages of older calibers that have been around a long time is ammunition is easy to find if you are in a pickle. 30-06, .308, .270 win can be found at about any mom/pop store that has ammo.

 

[Kurtr]

Only a little more money to get you to the Diamondback HP. For years I run the mildots. Now I have minute of angle reticles. Now Vortex PST first focal plane have the large diameter turrets like the Razors and you get 25 minutes of angle per revolution. I think they are trying to make sure I can't be happy more than one year at a time.

There are a number of advantages to the minute of angle reticles. If your program says that at 600 yards your 308 needs 16 minutes of come up you can dial or pic 16 minutes on the reticle and get a shot off faster. The other good thing if you're running a laser range finder and you know your deer is 655 yards and the width of his rack is 3.5 minutes of angle in your scope. Simply multiply 6.55 X 3.5 and you know the rack is 22.9 inches wide. You will never be that accurate, but you will know it's within an inch or two, somewhere in the 21 to 25 inch area. If your judgement is good you will be even closer.

You know you do the exact same with mils. They are both a unit of measure. If your program says 2.1 mils that is what you dial.

- - - Updated - - -

I shoot both and mils is almost easier as it is a in 1/10ths to me but neither is better than the other

 

[Livetohuntandfish]

I agree with the less recoil and better ballistics. Guess what it comes down to with me is effective kill distance for the caliber. With anything like a .308, 6.5 or .270 your looking at 600 yards max. So the extra reach of the 6.5 doesn’t really do as much good as one thinks. My long range rifle is a .308 so I guess I’m sorta one sided. And for deer I usually shoot 30/30. I still to this day have never needed something that would shoot further then that for a (deer) in Nd Wyoming or Montana...

 

[Kurtr]

600 max how do you come up with that?

 

[Stan's Dad]

what's the effective point blank range of a dirty/30? like 125 yards? I have no idea just guessing. it wouldn't be my first or even 30th choice for a western deer rifle that is fer sure and fer certain.

 

[Livetohuntandfish]

600 max how do you come up with that?

With most factory ammo you only have enough power to out to that distance to make a good kill. I’m going off of 1200 ft lbs of energy. And I’m saying that as a estimation. Some rounds are a little over and some round way under

what's the effective point blank range of a dirty/30? like 125 yards? I have no idea just guessing. it wouldn't be my first or even 30th choice for a western deer rifle that is fer sure and fer certain.

Effective range is like 300 yards. They drop like a sob but I wouldn’t think twice at shooting something at 200. They know it’s not a popular rifle and I understand why, but for me it’s my favorite so that’s what I shoot a lot. If I need longer range I’ve got about every other caliber needed. But just for the sake of conversation I mentioned the 30/30. Because around here I rarely have an opportunity to shoot past 200. But could be me to. I’ve seen many a hunter shoot at a running deer at 500 yards. But then again I don’t see any hunters hunt anymore outside of their pickup. But ethics is a conversation for another topic.........

 

[gr8outdoors]

I love my Ruger M77 MARKII but but she has a bit of a thump on the ole shoulder. Although u don't feel it unless target shooting! Its chambered in .280.

 

[PrairieGhost]

You know you do the exact same with mils. They are both a unit of measure. If your program says 2.1 mils that is what you dial.

- - - Updated - - -

I shoot both and mils is almost easier as it is a in 1/10ths to me but neither is better than the other

Yes I know Kirt, I have about ten mildots. I wish I could trade them all for minute of angle. As you say mile is ALMOST easier.

- - - Updated - - -

You know you do the exact same with mils. They are both a unit of measure. If your program says 2.1 mils that is what you dial.

- - - Updated - - -

I shoot both and mils is almost easier as it is a in 1/10ths to me but neither is better than the other

Yes I know Kirt, I have about ten mildots. I wish I could trade them all for minute of angle. As you say mile is ALMOST easier.
Mils is more for people. One mil is 36 inches at 1000 yards. Interesting that the difference in height of people is mostly in leg length. From crotch to top of head most people are about 36 inches. Have you ever wondered why someone six inches shorter than you is about the same height when your sitting? The military developed the mil based on human body height. There is some difference between army mils and marine mils. One is based on tenths as you mentioned (most popular on civilian scopes) and the other is in eighths. One is round dots and the other football shaped. Some people prefer mils, but I find minute of angle much easier, especially for estimating rack size.
For a mil to estimate range you need to know the size of your target. A minute of angle will do the same thing. However if you have a laser range finder and know your tangle the minute of angle will tell you the size of your target. A mil will work, but minute of angle works for anyone with third grade math without Rambo training.

 

[SDMF]

MOA, assuming 1/4MOA increments of internal adjustment, you only ever "count" to 3. Get to "4" and you're at another whole number.

Mil-Dots in a 2nd focal plane scope on it's LOWEST power setting are generally 3x more than their designated/calibrated "X" setting on a power ring. IE: SFP scope, 3.5-10 w/Mil-Dot calibrated for 1Mil @ 10x. Each Mil-Dot = 3Mils @ 3.5x, now you're getting pretty close to a good "lead" starting spot for running vermin.

Livetohuntandfish, the big appeal of the 6.5Creedmoor in particular is that it's one of the 1st chamberings in which std bbl twist, chamber geometry, and magazine box constraints were all considered AHEAD of time. Right from the get-go they have enough twist to shoot bullets from the newest generation of R&D. Those bullets are easily housed within a factory offered internal box magazine with enough space left over for a bandleader to jam the lands, and a volume shooter to chase them.

For the reloader and.or volume shooter, the 6mm and 6.5mm make financial sense because the bullets are just plain less expensive. My 243AI costs roughly 60% of what my 308 does every time I pull the trigger with the bulk of that cost differential housed within the projectile. "Good" .308 diameter high BC bullets are going to be .35+ cents each. 6MM high BC bullets are in the low .20's. No biggie if you're shooting 2-3 boxes of ammo/year. Much bigger deal to the guy going through 2K-3K (or more) bullets/summer.

Recoil is also a factor. I know 50rds of 155gn 308's from a 10# rifle in an afternoon will give me a headache. Add a little weight to the rifle and neck it down to 243AI and 50rds is barely a drop in the bucket of recoil toleration in a given afternoon.

 

[Kurtr]

Yes I know Kirt, I have about ten mildots. I wish I could trade them all for minute of angle. As you say mile is ALMOST easier.

- - - Updated - - -


Yes I know Kirt, I have about ten mildots. I wish I could trade them all for minute of angle. As you say mile is ALMOST easier.
Mils is more for people. One mil is 36 inches at 1000 yards. Interesting that the difference in height of people is mostly in leg length. From crotch to top of head most people are about 36 inches. Have you ever wondered why someone six inches shorter than you is about the same height when your sitting? The military developed the mil based on human body height. There is some difference between army mils and marine mils. One is based on tenths as you mentioned (most popular on civilian scopes) and the other is in eighths. One is round dots and the other football shaped. Some people prefer mils, but I find minute of angle much easier, especially for estimating rack size.
For a mil to estimate range you need to know the size of your target. A minute of angle will do the same thing. However if you have a laser range finder and know your tangle the minute of angle will tell you the size of your target. A mil will work, but minute of angle works for anyone with third grade math without Rambo training.

Never said one thing about mil-dots they are obsolete. So my point stands

 

[PrairieGhost]

Never said one thing about mil-dots they are obsolete. So my point stands

Oh, ok. I guess I have never seen a mil adjustment without mil dots. Who makes those, and why? What's the reason for having such an adjustment if it doesn't incorporate into the ranging system?

I like the finer adjustment for small targets at long range. The way it is 1/4 inch click is often high and one click down is low on small targets at even 800 yards. One click for minute of angle is 1/4 inch while 1/10 mil is .36 inch.

I agree mil dots are obsolete, with the marine mil dots system going obsolete first. I would have to carry a calculator for a fast estimate of antler width and height. I guess if it's a half mil it's 18 inches wide at 500 yards which is easy, but .3 mils at 775 yards kind of clogs up my two brain cells. It takes a minute for me to come up with 27.9 inches. In my mind I have to first convert the mil to inches because even mil dots use the same measuring system. A mil is 3.6 inches at each 100 yard increment. It's just one more un-needed step. Maybe one of the guys in the military can chime in and bring us up to speed because I see new battle reticles that are not mil dot.

Mil-Dots in a 2nd focal plane scope on it's LOWEST power setting are generally 3x more than their designated/calibrated "X" setting on a power ring. IE: SFP scope, 3.5-10 w/Mil-Dot calibrated for 1Mil @ 10x. Each Mil-Dot = 3Mils @ 3.5x,

:;:thumbsup Years ago when we didn't have civilian mil dots I would set pumpkins at every 100 yards out to 600 yards. Then I would wrap white tape around my power ring on my 3X9 scope I sighted in at 200 yards and the post of the duplex crosshair hit at 300 yards on 9 power. Then I would move back to 400 yards and adjust my power until the duplex hit at 400 yards. I would write my yardages in red. Then I took a four inch plastic pipe 18 inches long (about the size of the average buck belly to back) and screwed it to a wooden stake. I set my scope on 3X and walked back until the pipe from top to bottom fit in between the crosshair and duplex post. Then 4X, then 5X and so on. I measured each of these out and wrote the yardages on my white tape in blue ink. If I can remember the 18 inch pipe fit at about 200 yards on 9X.

 

[Kurtr]

Oh, ok. I guess I have never seen a mil adjustment without mil dots. Who makes those, and why? What's the reason for having such an adjustment if it doesn't incorporate into the ranging system?

I like the finer adjustment for small targets at long range. The way it is 1/4 inch click is often high and one click down is low on small targets at even 800 yards. One click for minute of angle is 1/4 inch while 1/10 mil is .36 inch.

I agree mil dots are obsolete, with the marine mil dots system going obsolete first. I would have to carry a calculator for a fast estimate of antler width and height. I guess if it's a half mil it's 18 inches wide at 500 yards which is easy, but .3 mils at 775 yards kind of clogs up my two brain cells. It takes a minute for me to come up with 27.9 inches. In my mind I have to first convert the mil to inches because even mil dots use the same measuring system. A mil is 3.6 inches at each 100 yard increment. It's just one more un-needed step. Maybe one of the guys in the military can chime in and bring us up to speed because I see new battle reticles that are not mil dot.

:;:thumbsup Years ago when we didn't have civilian mil dots I would set pumpkins at every 100 yards out to 600 yards. Then I would wrap white tape around my power ring on my 3X9 scope I sighted in at 200 yards and the post of the duplex crosshair hit at 300 yards on 9 power. Then I would move back to 400 yards and adjust my power until the duplex hit at 400 yards. I would write my yardages in red. Then I took a four inch plastic pipe 18 inches long (about the size of the average buck belly to back) and screwed it to a wooden stake. I set my scope on 3X and walked back until the pipe from top to bottom fit in between the crosshair and duplex post. Then 4X, then 5X and so on. I measured each of these out and wrote the yardages on my white tape in blue ink. If I can remember the 18 inch pipe fit at about 200 yards on 9X.

they all adjust in .10 mil increments

well her we go first vortex one example with alot of others to choose from

night force with many more options

bushnell with many more options

athlon

So you can see the options are almost endless every scope manufacture makes reticles that are a mil measurement not in mill dots..
this will explain they are just each a measurement

MIL vs MOA: Understanding the difference in scope measurements

11/01/17| by Jacki Billings

The Bushnell Elite MIL Scope, left, and Vortex Viper MOA scope, right, illustrate a difference between MIL and MOA. (Photos: Newegg, Graphic: Jacki Billings)​

Within each sector of the gun industry silent wars are waged. Tactical shooters debate Keymod vs M-LOK, while pistol hounds growl over .45 and 9mm. For long range shooters, hunters or scoped shooters, the conversation lingers around MIL vs MOA.
While both represent measurements of an angle within a circle, helping shooters make adjustments at distance, they come with their own set of quirks and mental math. So what is MIL and MOA and, ultimately, which system is better?
MIL is short for milliradians and represents 1/1,000th of a radian. What exactly is a radian? Simply put, it’s a measure of distance traveled around a circle. To better conceptualize this, think of a round cake. If a person sat down to eat a cake and devoured exactly half, he/she would have eaten 3.14159 radians of cake or 3-4 slices depending on how big those slices are. In reality, the size of circle is irrelevant because radians measure the amount of travel around any size circle. A radian is a measure of an angle. A milliradian, therefore, is a small angle.

One MIL at various yards. (Graphic: Jacki Billings)​

How does this translate to target shooting? While there’s some complicated math involved, none of which is within the scope of this article, the basics come down to one MIL representing 3.6-inches at 100 yards. Since angles operate proportionally, that number increases with yardage. Therefore at 200 yards one MIL equals 7.2-inches, 300 yards is 10.8-inches and so on. At 1,000 yards the angle of one MIL translates to a whopping 36-inches.
MOA, or minute of angle, takes that cake mentioned above and slices it so that each piece is one degree. Therefore the whole cake is 360-degrees. One slice, or degree, divided into 60 equal parts becomes minutes and one full circle has a total of 21,600 minutes of angular measurement. MOA is even finer than MIL, working out to 1.04-inches at 100 yards, but for simplicity’s sake, most shooters simply round that figure down to 1-inch at 100 yards. Again, angles work proportionally, so at 200 yards that number jumps to 2-inches and 3-inches at 300 yards.

MOA adjustments at various yards. (Graphic: Jacki Billings)​

MIL and MOA allows spotters to easily and more effectively communicate adjustments to the shooter, allowing him or her to dial in shots on target. Putting MIL and MOA to work on a practical level requires the understanding that bullets do not offer a flat trajectory, instead descending towards earth due to gravity.
When aiming at a target 100 yards away, the barrel must be tilted up slightly to accommodate for that bullet drop. At 1,000 yards that aim must be significantly higher. While some shooters choose to perform adjustments and calculations by hand through formulas, modern technology has granted gun enthusiasts with the ability to use apps via smartphones to handle calculations for adjustments, even factoring in bullet weight.
Despite MIL and MOA accomplishing the same task personal preference and purpose usually dictate which style a shooter leans to. “In general, hunters and newer target shooters skew towards MOA,” Jake Edson, of Bushnell, told Guns.com in an email. “While, in general, competitive shooters and elite shooters who have come out of the operations world skew toward MIL.”
A 2013 sampling by Rich Emmons of Precision Rifle Series shooters appears to agree. In his study, Emmons discovered that 46 PRS surveyed shooters relied on MIL-based reticles with only three shooters utilizing MOA.
Though the math is strenuous and each system has its own loyal fanbase, MIL and MOA fundamentally boil down to a single concept. As Edson put it, “In reality, both are simply units of measurement — like speaking in metric or Imperial units.” At the end of the day, MIL and MOA are simply a measurement means to a thunderous end.