2nd focal plane and mildot ranging.

[Kestryll]

Every time his drama starts several account show up backing him..

Really?

Do you have anything to back that accusation up with?

Because I do not and I have SIGNIFICANTLY more resources for finding that kind of thing than you do.

So show me your proof.

[PrimaryArms]

The great JMP scandal of 2015 has been exposed. Oh wait. That's just in your mind.

I wasn't backing JMP up on anything other than the fact that he had a relevant response to the OP on post #4. Or at least I wasn't trying to. If I did somewhere else it's because we must share the same opinion... There have been a few times that I disagreed with JMP. But, I think his use of a word that relates to being in a state of psychosis is what can be referred to as a hyperbole.

Well for OP in order to properly range estimate using a SFP he will have to find the right power where the mils are true. The only way to do that is to place stickers 3.6" apart at 100 yards. Then use the equation info I provided. Here is an example of our ACSS against a chart verifying (F)

[PrimaryArms]

2nd focal plane and mildot ranging.

Really?



Do you have anything to back that accusation up with?



Because I do not and I have SIGNIFICANTLY more resources for finding that kind of thing than you do.



So show me your proof.

I don't know.. Postal and others pop up on Q!
I just agree to disagree. I am over it.. A wise man once said don't give energy to negative things
I have gave the OP the info he needs and hope that helps him.

[stand125]

Wow, this is pretty cool reading all the responses. I seriously was just killing time looking at different scopes and thinking about stuff, not that it matters since I plan on getting a couple PA 4-14X44 FFP scopes when i get back from Military training. The Millet scope booklet actually has what each Mil conversion is for the given powers on their SFP scope. I was just curious if since you know what the given mil conversion is for each magnification, could you just substitute the standard 3.6" with the chart info.

[PrimaryArms]

Wow, this is pretty cool reading all the responses. I seriously was just killing time looking at different scopes and thinking about stuff. Not that it matters sice I am getting a couple PA 4-14X44 FFP scopes when i get back from Military training, but the Millet scope booklet actually has what each Mil conversion means for the given powers on their SFP scope. I was just curious if since you know what the given mil conversion is for each magnification, could you just substitute the standard 3.6" with the chart info.

There is a problem doing conversions like that IMHO because some scopes are not truly at 10x or 20x they have errors that throw the mils and their conversion way off! Its why I recommend he finds where the true mils are and range like that.
I hope this makes sense.

-Dimitri

[stand125]

Well for OP in order to properly range estimate using a SFP he will have to find the right power where the mils are true. The only way to do that is to place stickers 3.6" apart at 100 yards. Then use the equation info I provided. Here is an example of our ACSS against a chart verifying (F)

I think that is what the chart is for. It specifically shows the distance in inches between mildots at 100 yrds at various magnifications. Maybe I did not make very much sense in my original post, which actually happens alot

[PrimaryArms]

I think that is what the chart is for. It specifically shows the distance in inches between mildots at 100 yrds at various magnifications. Maybe I did not make very much sense in my original post, which actually happens alot

Got it.. Sounds like you got what you need!

[stand125]

There is a problem doing conversions like that IMHO because some scopes are not truly at 10x or 20x they have errors that throw the mils and their conversion way off! Its why I recommend he finds where the true mils are and range like that.
I hope this makes sense.

-Dimitri

That makes sense by taping a measurment chart at 100 yrds and noting the distance between mildots for each magnification. A FFP will of course negate having to do that, but I guess if somebody wanted do it for an existing scope and likes fiddling, it would work.

[PrimaryArms]

That makes sense by taping a measurment chart at 100 yrds and noting the distance between mildots for each magnification. A FFP will of course negate having to do that, but I guess if somebody wanted do it for an existing scope and likes fiddling, it would work.

I don't know how many ffp scopes I have tested by big name companies that are way off! Often people buy a big brand expecting quality and get a rotten lemon! You get what you pay for is not always the case.. Taking pride in your product and quality QC at a good price is key!

-Dimitri

[JMP]

Dimitri, I am sorry for the confusion. My invitation had NOTHING to do with your reticle. There is ALWAYS a lot for each one of us to learn. The folks that believe they already know everything are the folks that will be left in the dust.

[JMP]

I don't know how many ffp scopes I have tested by big name companies that are way off! Often people buy a big brand expecting quality and get a rotten lemon! You get what you pay for is not always the case.. Taking pride in your product and quality QC at a good price is key!

-Dimitri

For those that spend significant money on a scope, they should verify the tracking and subtensions, and return the scope if it is off. I am curious to know which ones you tried and how they were off. I think it's important for people to know.

[LBDamned]

Wow!!! I vote this thread as one of the best for 2015 so far... Primarily because of the entertainment value and I've never seen such interaction between Kes and a vendor...

As far as info... I primarily got what I already knew - Dimitri will risk turning people off in the name of his beliefs (sometimes you have to put that away in the name of business)...

Now back for the next episode - I hope this series doesn't end

[ElvenSoul]

How Napoleans boys range estimated to target

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InnhxGXQvoo&sns=em

[stand125]

Learned something else today reading online in preparation for getting into long range shooting once I get back from training. I did not realize that 1/4 MOA adjustments are slightly smaller than .1 MIL adjustments. For some reason I just assumed that .1 MIL would be smaller than 1/4 MOA . I got to say that I am really looking forward to learning mil ranging and other aspects of long range shooting. I will be hand loading also ( have been for a few years now ).

[JMP]

No, in fact, that's why target/benchrest shooters generally favor scopes with 1/8 MOA adjustments. To me, the units aren't that important. Mil is the way since it gives you so much more selection of scopes as MOA is still mostly antiquated from the old DMS system that is only used by US target shooters. Radian is the international standard unit of angular measurement and it all works out well in nature as it's much less arbitrary of an invention. If it weren't for the perversion of the US educational system that still sometimes teaches degrees to measure angles, nobody would even know what a degree is. Degrees, minutes, and seconds would only be taught in history class.