Amazing. Playing with the Calc and lookin at the reticle, if u put the dot on the center of a target, and the targets shoulders rest between the -1 and 1 mil marks, then the target is at 236 yards. Therefore, if the targets shoulders are at those marks or larger( assuming a 200 zero) you can get mostly likely just shoot (depending on caliber). If the targets shoulders are noticeably between those marks....well time to put some math into the shot. Someone debunk me if im wrong. Still just amazing.
Was curious as to where I can get practice sheets to work on this in my off time? If you guys sell them or have a link I can go get a couple to practice with would be awesome. Anything to improve. Thanks!
Guys mills + metrics are created one for each other. 1 mill on 100 meters equal 100mm 1 mill on 200 meters equal 200mm etc. 1 mill on 1000 meters equal 1000mm so in result. size of any object in millimeters / size in mills = Distance in meters 1800mm / 2mills = 900 meters (human height) 4500mm / 3 = 1500 meters (for length of the car) and if you know the size of any object in the scope, you can calculate the distance very easy with.
If you already use millirad, doesn't it make sense to use the metric system for target size cause you always come back to 1/1000 based on the 1mm/1m anyway? No conversion factor needed that way. I get that one is used to what one is used to, but going like half way over there with the reticle choice seeing it's helpful and then mix both seems weird. The adjustment tables...everything is simpler if that little hurdle is taken. Helpful video. I hope there is more in that series.
Exactly came to say. 1.3 mildot for a 43cm wide target is 0.43(meter)/1.3(mildot aka milliradian)*1000(milliradian to radian)=330,8 meter. The video recommends that the shooter memorizes the coefficient for a given target width. In the meter world this coefficient for a 43 cm wide target will be the magical 430 :)
Choose the scope that you like, and that works for you......SFP is good for long distance....benchrest or F Class shooting. I use both. Also, you can get mill scopes with excellent glass for $500 to $600 now a days.
Got any scopes with excellent glass in that price range to recommend? I've been on the lookout for a solid mrad scope with good low-light performance for a precision hunting setup of sorts
Highest magnification that allows you to see the target and your mil-reticle clearly. Not all scopes are made equal as far as glass clarity, but the more detail you can discern the more accurately you can range estimate.
I just looked up the average American in the 90's was just under 17 inches of shoulder width. Probably can take that 472# he gave and round to 500 for easy division. If you are up against a person they may be fatter or wearing gear which this 500# can account for. If hunting animals you want to know their specific dimensions. Using 500/1.3=384.6 yards versus his 363 yards. Very close for most shooters.
I always get tangled up when using these formulas as it relates to magnification. I think my problem is using a second focal plane scope. Can a video be made to clear up my confusion? Please and thank you
be at full power and your sub tensions are on, dial to half power and your sub tensions are double...for instance if you have a 24X power SFP scope 4 moa/mils is correct on full power. at 12X power 4MOA/Mil now becomes 8. In a stressful situation where you dont have time to think, just dial to max and hold to whatever your windage or dope dictates, or just dial your elevation and wind and then it dont matter where your at on SFP magnification, youre on target (if you dialed right) Or just get a FFP and it doesnt matter where your magnification is set, your hold overs are on....as long as you are dialed up above 10X where you can actually see the FFP reticle. FFP scopes really only work well in the upper 3/4 zoom power range of the particular scope. Anything under that they just become a blurred up pile of shit. There is trade offs to both
I prefer: (size of target in yards (or meters) x 1000) / size of target in mils. For example 17 inches is .472 yards .472x1000 = 472 472/1.3 is 363 yards How to convert 17 inches into yards? Just divide 17 by 36.
How do you find unkown distance on man sized target , using mil scopes/stadia lines? Such as the width of an acog cheveron being roughly the width of a man's shoulders (19") at 300 yards.
@@broncosoutdoorsandmore507 As Connor stated above: It is a constant in the presented range finding formula. The formula (and therefore the 27,78) stays always the same, as long as: - you feed it with a target dimension (estimation of width or height) in [inch] - the measurement is taken with a scope that´s calibrated in [MRAD] - you want the result to be in [yards] The thing´s that might (and probably will) change is the measured MRAD value (depending on distance), and the estimation of the targets dimension (therefore depending what you are measuring). Here, Billy assumed, that an average male has a distance between his shoulders of 17 inches. Therefore he put ( 17" into the formula x the 27,78 constant ) divided by the measured MRAD value. Giving him a distance estimation (because the shoulder width is an estimation) in yards. There are other averages one can use: hip to head top on a human bottom chest to the back of a deer a pick up truck telephone pole .... If Arnold Schwarzenegger (more than 17" shoulder width) an average male (17") and a young child (less than 17") are standing right next to each other, you would get the most MRAD reading on Arnie and the less on the kid. Doing the calculation with the average value of 17" would give 3 different distance results, although they are standing right next to each other. The result for the average male would be quite accurate, because the estimated shoulder dimension is the same as the real one on him (17"). As long as you measured the MRAD quite precise. Arnie looks like an average man beeing nearer to you, the kid looks like an adult being farther away. If there would be an oil barrel standing around, you could take it´s width ~23" or height ~35" , measure the MRAD value and calculate the Distance. Or you know the approximate dimension of a pick up truck standing around, you can use these dimensions. But for the constant to be 27,78 you would need to feed the formula for the estimated/guessed dimension in inches, MRAD and you will get yards. The more perpendicular the target stands to you, and the more precise you know the measured dimensions, and the more precise you are "milling" the target, the more exact the distance result will be. Or just use a Laser Range Finder ;) Found It again! Watch this video, great explanation and with an even more simple formula ;) It´s worth the 20 minutes (of angle) watch. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-S5AGsHSIsVo.html
27.78 Is 1000 inches Or if I remember right 35.9 yards or 36 yards 27.78 yards is about 25 meters. And I found it by reading because of the old 1000 " basic zero in basic training Called the 1000 inch course. Had something to do with sight adjustment on the weapon being 1 inch at 100 yards . Then I started reading about Scopes and range finding etc. And I still get fused. Even if we know the range in what ever measure meant you still have to have good good ammo and read the wind and all the rest. Oh. Up hill down hill factors in as well. All the who's got the bigger dick or better way Mil Mil dot Moa etc I would study the mil system and figure a better way to apprehend comprehend the info in yards etc since we use yards mostly .. There are a few good reads on this On line as well as book form.. I still hit messed up adjusting the sites on the m14 for elevation and wind age at distance. Thanks to who ever made the vid . It was useful 11.30,2023
Well, that's why it's so much better and easier to use the metric system. For example. You have a target that is 1,7m in hight (average male). That means 1700mm. You measure 3 MRAD (MIL) vertically with radical. Your calculation is 1700/3 = 566m Distance to your target. It's even easier when you have examples like this: you have a door, usually about 2m hight, so you take 2000mm, then your radical measures 4 MRAD, your calculation is: 2000/4=500m. No inches, no yards, no strange conversions in your Emperial System. 😂😅
So true! I wonder if the Long range shooting sport is the key to convert the last standing country of the "freedom measures" to the metrics? It's obviously easier to learn the size of a meter or mm, than to do the complicated math.
Why bother with inches and yards ??? Tremor 3 is in METERS, the world is in meters, the low IQ who would not buy anything above $150 value scope will never use this.
i have a 800$ scope in mils and its just fine. mils and moa is the same just explained different like Km/H and MpH all they are is a guide to help you hit target you just need to understand the language associated with your sight. Also """"Milling Targets""" with Former USCG Precision Marksmanship Instructor Billy Leahy. Why watch it if you're gonna rip on the method lol
