Long range scope questions

[DapperDan]

Still contemplating a 300 prc build but has some scope questions. I’m leaning hard on the leupold mark 5 hd 3.5-18x44 FFP pr1 reticle. Seems like a solid scope from looking in person and reviews. Curious if anyone is running it and their thoughts.

Most importantly……. MOA or Mil? I have a second focal plane moa night force on my 308 and my wife runs a very similar March scope FFP in mil. I just can’t decide which route to go and haven’t spent much time behind hers to be honest. Not sure if two very similar scores with one of each would get confusing or not. I wouldn’t be shooting her gun anyways. Lol.

What’s the differences in the two (moa vs mil) being the scopes are identical? Pros vs cons basically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CWendling]

does your brain work in fractions of tenths or do inches? Both work well. If you think in inches, MOA may be better. If you think in tenths, MIL may be better for you

[kck]

Dan,

Minutes and Mils do the same thing, just with different math. That's the reason you have MOA scopes in 1/4 MOA (sometimes in 1/8 MOA on some target scopes) and 1/10 MILs on others. 1 MOA is 3.6 MILs. This is all stuff you can do homework on with the good ole duckduckgo over a couple of cold ones in the evening, though. You can estimate range using both if working with a known sized target. Honestly, for HUNTING PURPOSES, I don't think you'll need a FFP just because I doubt you'll need to dial down under full power with any caliber. That'll be up to you, though, so decide if you think you may want to shoot a PRS match as that's when a FFP would kinda be a necessity for holdover and such. Personally, I'd stick with one or the other but perhaps that's just because I'm a borderline troglodyte...

[DapperDan]

does your brain work in fractions of tenths or do inches? Both work well. If you think in inches, MOA may be better. If you think in tenths, MIL may be better for you

Honestly, my brain works in both. Lolol. Seriously. Which makes it harder to decide. I was looking at the specs and if I read correctly, it looks like the mil allows for more elevation correction (yardage). But I could have been mistaken. 30 mils vs 25 moa. So, 25 moa is approx 750 yards out of my 308 vs 30 mil to 1545 yards. Seems to reason then that mil has the ability to dial further yardages. But maybe I’m missing something.

Running the numbers above off StrelokPro ballistics software.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DapperDan]

Long range scope questions

Dan,

Minutes and Mils do the same thing, just with different math. That's the reason you have MOA scopes in 1/4 MOA (sometimes in 1/8 MOA on some target scopes) and 1/10 MILs on others. 1 MOA is 3.6 MILs. This is all stuff you can do homework on with the good ole duckduckgo over a couple of cold ones in the evening, though. You can estimate range using both if working with a known sized target. Honestly, for HUNTING PURPOSES, I don't think you'll need a FFP just because I doubt you'll need to dial down under full power with any caliber. That'll be up to you, though, so decide if you think you may want to shoot a PRS match as that's when a FFP would kinda be a necessity for holdover and such. Personally, I'd stick with one or the other but perhaps that's just because I'm a borderline troglodyte...

Not gonna lie, it’s nice to not have to worry about if the reticle is set to the appropriate magnification when holding wind. It’s gotten me a couple times on the nightforce. I like my wife’s FFP scope a lot. It makes it super simple to me! One less thing to worry about lol

Won’t be running this in a prs match, it I intend to stretch it out on some steel!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JakeGraves]

I went to Mils and life is much simpler. Both are angular measurements. Those who “think in inches” are referencing inches per hundred yards which is not an ideal way to think about sight corrections. In short, use the very expensive calibrated tool in your reticle and measure moa or Mil corrections instead of trying to calculate how many inches of correction just to calculate it back out in reticle hood or turret adjustment.

[McClain]

Either can be used effectively as stated. However, a 1/4 MOA click is a finer degree of adjustment when compared to a 1/10 Mil click. The former is .26 inches at 100 yards as compared to .36 inches for 1/10th Mil. The most important thing to consider tho is that your turrets should match your reticle, as well as your spotter if using one.

[duckhunter175]

Dan,

Lots of good advice above. I'm going to hyperlink 3 articles for you as well as some notes on that exact scope. The first two article are explanations of the angular deviation measurements that are MOA vs MIL and the 3rd covers SFP and FFP.

MOA/IPHY- https://www.primalrights.com/library...art-1-moa-iphy

MIL- https://www.primalrights.com/library...-2-angular-mil

SFP vs FFP- https://www.primalrights.com/library...t-3-sfp-vs-ffp


Notes:

1. MIL vs MOA- When one works for you stick with it- neither is 'wrong' for the rifles you have and the one you are having built. Each rifle has its purpose and a scope to match. I do think it simplifies things if you and your wife hunt and shoot together to have scopes that are at the same measure (MOA or MIL) when it comes to calling corrections. The biggest advantage I see in MIL is making windage calls-- because you are working in 1/10ths it is easier to multiply your hold- EX: 10mph full value crosswind at 600 yards is 1.2 mils-- if the wind jumps by 50% to 15mph you do quick math and get a new hold of 1.8. With MOA this math gets wayyyy more messy using 1/4moa and digital readouts that are giving you a hold to the hundreths (3.37moa or something-- who can hold that? Or multiply it quickly, lol)

2. For that hunting and shooting that you've described for the rifle you are building I would for sure go FFP. More forgiving in the field when things get busy and you are holding on a critter and need to change magnification or setting up a hasty shot.

3. The Mark5HD-- This is an awesome little scope-- I owned one that was on a .308 AR10-- and before that my ultralight 7saum

Pros: Nice and light weight, short length, the turret system is great as was the illumination. Repeatability was just fine dialing out an back (30+moa and back). The 35mm tube is a bit of a PITA because it does limit mounting options. I orginally had this scope on my ultralight 7saum and it was hard to find a one piece base/ring but I did score a set of Hawkins Hybrids. If you are using a pic rail there are more ring options out there now but not a ton- however I won't call this a 'con'. I moved this scope off the SAUM because it did not balance well on that light of a rifle.

Con:
1. The reticle- I do like the center dot but the PR1 is just too thick at max magnification. At lower power it is usable without illumination but FFP, there is no free lunch so it is THICK at 18x and because of that the PR1 doesn't have any wind holds (christmas tree). They do offer the Impact-60 reticle but it might only be in the 5-25x now as I think they discontinued it in the 3.6-18x.

Last- If you decide you like FFP/MOA for a hunting scope there are certainly some good options out there depending on your budget. If you don't need a low bottom end magnification the Vortex Razor AMG 6-24x50 is a top notch scope, 30mm tube, great turrets, FFP/MOA, holds zero (ask mine that was on a .338RUM)- and it weighs in at 28oz--- and can be had on secondary around $1700. Nothing else really touches that combo. Some other good offerings are the NF ATACR F1 4-16x42 (they do have a 4-20x and 5-25x depending on your budget but they are heavy). If you have a March already on a rifle that is a great option too and probably the best in terms of quality, weight and magnification range. I've owned the above (March, Mk5, NF 4-16) so shoot out any questions you've got!

[aggiegolfer09]

FFP in Mils

[DapperDan]

Long range scope questions

Dan,

Lots of good advice above. I'm going to hyperlink 3 articles for you as well as some notes on that exact scope. The first two article are explanations of the angular deviation measurements that are MOA vs MIL and the 3rd covers SFP and FFP.

MOA/IPHY- https://www.primalrights.com/library...art-1-moa-iphy

MIL- https://www.primalrights.com/library...-2-angular-mil

SFP vs FFP- https://www.primalrights.com/library...t-3-sfp-vs-ffp


Notes:

1. MIL vs MOA- When one works for you stick with it- neither is 'wrong' for the rifles you have and the one you are having built. Each rifle has its purpose and a scope to match. I do think it simplifies things if you and your wife hunt and shoot together to have scopes that are at the same measure (MOA or MIL) when it comes to calling corrections. The biggest advantage I see in MIL is making windage calls-- because you are working in 1/10ths it is easier to multiply your hold- EX: 10mph full value crosswind at 600 yards is 1.2 mils-- if the wind jumps by 50% to 15mph you do quick math and get a new hold of 1.8. With MOA this math gets wayyyy more messy using 1/4moa and digital readouts that are giving you a hold to the hundreths (3.37moa or something-- who can hold that? Or multiply it quickly, lol)

2. For that hunting and shooting that you've described for the rifle you are building I would for sure go FFP. More forgiving in the field when things get busy and you are holding on a critter and need to change magnification or setting up a hasty shot.

3. The Mark5HD-- This is an awesome little scope-- I owned one that was on a .308 AR10-- and before that my ultralight 7saum

Pros: Nice and light weight, short length, the turret system is great as was the illumination. Repeatability was just fine dialing out an back (30+moa and back). The 35mm tube is a bit of a PITA because it does limit mounting options. I orginally had this scope on my ultralight 7saum and it was hard to find a one piece base/ring but I did score a set of Hawkins Hybrids. If you are using a pic rail there are more ring options out there now but not a ton- however I won't call this a 'con'. I moved this scope off the SAUM because it did not balance well on that light of a rifle.

Con:
1. The reticle- I do like the center dot but the PR1 is just too thick at max magnification. At lower power it is usable without illumination but FFP, there is no free lunch so it is THICK at 18x and because of that the PR1 doesn't have any wind holds (christmas tree). They do offer the Impact-60 reticle but it might only be in the 5-25x now as I think they discontinued it in the 3.6-18x.

Last- If you decide you like FFP/MOA for a hunting scope there are certainly some good options out there depending on your budget. If you don't need a low bottom end magnification the Vortex Razor AMG 6-24x50 is a top notch scope, 30mm tube, great turrets, FFP/MOA, holds zero (ask mine that was on a .338RUM)- and it weighs in at 28oz--- and can be had on secondary around $1700. Nothing else really touches that combo. Some other good offerings are the NF ATACR F1 4-16x42 (they do have a 4-20x and 5-25x depending on your budget but they are heavy). If you have a March already on a rifle that is a great option too and probably the best in terms of quality, weight and magnification range. I've owned the above (March, Mk5, NF 4-16) so shoot out any questions you've got!

What’s your opinion on the nx8 nightforce? That’s my second option I’m looking at. Either 2.5-20 or 4-32x50. Both the same weight, just different magnification. Within 3 ounces of the leupold as far as weight. Also, considering getting a reticle along the lines of the mil-xt although I’ve never really used one. The floating dot doesn’t bother me too much as long as it’s a small dot lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[trophy8]

What’s your opinion on the nx8 nightforce? That’s my second option I’m looking at. Either 2.5-20 or 4-32x50. Both the same weight, just different magnification. Within 3 ounces of the leupold as far as weight. Also, considering getting a reticle along the lines of the mil-xt although I’ve never really used one. The floating dot doesn’t bother me too much as long as it’s a small dot lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Super finicky parralax. Very tight eye box. The reticle on 4x is way too small. And way too big on 32x. The 2-20 is the only usable one in my opinion. I disliked the eye box and parralax. I’m used to big 34/35mm tubes. With those come very forgiving eye boxes. You need to open up to things outside of Nightforce. The NXS is meh at best. NX8 has issues stated above. The atacr is a great scope just heavy for its size. Kahles Gen 3 624i, Leupold Mk5. Both favorites of mine. Downside with the mk5 is the reticle is thicker on illuminated models as they have to be per their design. I have several and only one is illuminated. I never use illumination. Not sure why I bought it lol.

PR1 and PR2 mil reticles are outstanding for hunting and target shooting. The weight is very light for what they are.

I prefer the floating dot. You can be far more accurate. It’s much more user friendly.

[duckhunter175]

I'll second what Trophy8 said on the NX8 (he and I were actually discussing these a few weeks back).

I had an NX8 4-32 F1-- nice scope, the glass was really good BUT as described the eye box was a bit tight and finnicky parallax.

[DapperDan]

Super finicky parralax. Very tight eye box. The reticle on 4x is way too small. And way too big on 32x. The 2-20 is the only usable one in my opinion. I disliked the eye box and parralax. I’m used to big 34/35mm tubes. With those come very forgiving eye boxes. You need to open up to things outside of Nightforce. The NXS is meh at best. NX8 has issues stated above. The atacr is a great scope just heavy for its size. Kahles Gen 3 624i, Leupold Mk5. Both favorites of mine. Downside with the mk5 is the reticle is thicker on illuminated models as they have to be per their design. I have several and only one is illuminated. I never use illumination. Not sure why I bought it lol.

PR1 and PR2 mil reticles are outstanding for hunting and target shooting. The weight is very light for what they are.

I prefer the floating dot. You can be far more accurate. It’s much more user friendly.

Non illuminated is what I’m looking at so reticle won’t be an issue. Back to leupold….. for now! HA!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Saltyag15]

I’m a fan of my 4-32 NX8. In all reality, I consider it a 6-24x scope. It has some tunneling at lowest power, and the image quality falls off above 24. But for a long range hunting scope, it checks all the boxes. Lightweight for what it is. Quality elevation turret with a zero stop, capped windage turret, quality glass, illumination if needed, and more compact than others in its power range.

[HTOWN]

I’m a fan of my 4-32 NX8. In all reality, I consider it a 6-24x scope. It has some tunneling at lowest power, and the image quality falls off above 24. But for a long range hunting scope, it checks all the boxes. Lightweight for what it is. Quality elevation turret with a zero stop, capped windage turret, quality glass, illumination if needed, and more compact than others in its power range.

What he said. I love my NX8 4x32. Great for hunting and target shooting. I'm a MOA guy. What ever u like, go with it.

I think trophy 8 has cataracts, or is it glaucoma jk

I'm happy with it. Love the scope. But Leopold makes wonderful scopes, i have a few. Pick what u like. You can't go wrong with any of your choices.