which mil dot scope for $300 to $500

Originally Posted By: sscoyoteWhatever u do try and purchase a mil-dot optic that's calibrated for a power lower than the highest. I have a 6-18 Nikon Buckmasters MD that's cald. for 12x (typical of all the Nikon mil-dot optics). But i apply it for rangefinding and downrange zeroing at the optic's highest power (18) where it now becomes 2.4 inch per hundred yds. between dots and the dots become a 1/2" dot now instead of a 3/4" dot...basically.

How can you tell what your mill dot is calibrated at if you bought the scope used with no book or any information about it?
 
Whenever u get a mil-dot optic, it should be marked on the power ring somewhere. But it's a good idea to check it. If u wanna' use it at the milliradian subtension of 3.6 inch per hundred yds. then go out and set a target at 100 yds. with 2 lines on it separated by 36". Then adjust the power ring until u've bracketed those lines perfectly between all 10 mils (heavy post tip to heavy post tip). Then mark the power ring somehow. But u should be careful with some optics. I was looking thru a Swift optic a couple days ago at a gun show and the last mil unit (from 4th mil to 5th mil) was larger then the other dot to dot spacings, so i'm not even sure if it was made correctly. Probably a good idea to make 2 more lines at 3.6 IPHY too and double check the dot to dot spacings as well.

Now when i checked my 6-18x Buckmasters @ 18x (mil. is supposed to be 12x) i just measured the reticle as accurately as possible on one of those sight-in tgts. that have 1/2" lines on them. The dot to dot subtension of that optic was as calculated (66% of 3.6 IPHY or 2.4 IPHY). I prefer to use my optics for rangefinding and downrange zeroing at it's highest power, instead of mil-cald. power. This way i have positive "zero stop" if u will that is very consistent.

To get the most precise subtension calculation possible (i think). Then go out and rangefind 10-20 tgts. of vaious known dimensions and known ranges, and "reverse-mil." the subtension using the mil-ranging formula. This way i think u can calculate reticle subtension to an accuracy level of ~.05". Actually that's just a theory of mine that i haven't proven yet.
 
Last edited:
I've got a falcon menace too. Tracks awesome with some long range shooting I've done. Its also a FFP (first focal plane) You can mil at any zoom setting. I would recommend the ML16 (hash mark i think) I picked up the EMD (enhanced mil dot) reticule and the dots are a little long (oval). It also comes with MOA knobs if you want to go that route too. I had my scope shipped for $420. The eye relief is also pretty good. I was a little afraid of getting the scope because the 3 screw turrets but was surprised how strong they were. Haven't had a problem with them stripping with all the resetting I've done. The glass is pretty good as well. I bought mine from Matt at Wonder Optics
 
Last edited:
Have you ever looked into getting a Sightron scope? I just recently purchased a Sightron SIII 6-24x50 for prairie dog hunting and am extremely pleased with it. Fantastic glass and tracking. I read a lot of reviews before making my choice but this one stood out for me. Lucky for me my buddy even purchased one before I was ready to and I got a chance to check it out before I made my decision. I paid $725 shipped for it. I know it's more then you were planning on spending but the SII series are in your price range and as far as I can tell the only real difference is a 1" tube instead of the 30mm.. (as far as I can tell) Check out the links for some decent information/reviews..

http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/quick-review-sightron-siii-6-24x50-lr-mildot/

http://www.westernshooter.com/2008/11/sightron-siii-6x24x50-riflescope.html
 
I have a 4-16x Mil Dot Sightron II on my .204 AR that I use for Prairie Dogs... It's super clear, not affected by mirage at 16x like some of the higher powers are, and still goes low enough to use for general hunting..

Sightron also has a great warranty and customer service, if you ever need them..I had to call and ask about the Mil Dot synchronization and they not only answered my question, but sent me a whole three page explanation on using them...
 
Sightron makes some of the best glass coming out of Japan they are a fine choice. Bushnell's higher end scopes are also very nice glass but not as much internal adjustment. Weaver is coming out with some tacticals also that should be worth a look. One of the most unique scopes though is the Trijicon Accupoint with its tritium and fiber optic illuminated reticles.
 
Another Sightron guy here. I started going with them last summer and have been very please! Was impressed enough, that I added their line. Like urimaginaryfrnd said, very nice glass, with a lot of adjustment. The also have one [beeep] of a warranty. I'm also becoming a fan of Weaver, nice glass at a great price. The Bushnell 4200 is one that I really like also, but Weaver offers the same glass for less money. All three lines track great from my experience!
 
Nikon Buckmaster 4.5x14x40 w/the BDC reticle. Have one on my 22-250 that allows me to shoot accurately out 500. Anything past that u might want to look into something different.
 
Another vote for Sightron. I have a SIII 6-24x50 and loving it. Ranged a coyote with the mil dot (forgot the range finder in the truck) at 350 yards. Actually yardage was 375 yards. I think I did pretty good. It is clear, bright, and tracks REPEATABLY.
 
I've been looking at the Bushnell 6500 Tactical 4.5-30x50mm and the Sightron SIII 8-32x56mm scopes, both in mildot. I've been searching (as you can tell by bringing up this old topic) but have been unable to find at what power the Sightron is set at. I found the SIII 6-24 is set at 24 power and the Bushnell 4.5-30 is set for 12?? So could anyone tell me what power the Sightron 8-32 is set at for using the mildots? Thanks
 
Midway
SWFA
OpticZone

There's other sites but these were the first two i came across. Aren't those it, or is there a "waiting list" type thing with these that i just missed?? I guess i'm confused now...
unsure.gif


Oops, well i think i just found my answer, guess i should read things more carefully. On the Midway link under the title in smaller print it says "Manufacturer #: SIIISS832X56LRMD(AT 24X MD)." So i'm guessing that means it's at 24x? This would make the Bushy more appealing as i can range at 12x and also use 6x, 24x, and 30x if necessary by going 1/2, 2 times, and 2 1/2 times respectively. At 24x on the SIII using 12x (.5 24x) to range, each .1 mil would be very critical and 32x would be 1 1/3 making it slightly more difficult to figure out. As an example, if my math is right, i used 12" for a coyote. At 1 mil it's 333yds away, 1.1 mil is 303yds and .9 mil is 370yds. So if i miss guesstimate by .1 mil i'm off 30-40yds. Now if that's at 12x then i can use 24x and double it so each .1 mil will be more forgiving. 2 mil is 333yds, 2.1 mil is 317yds and 1.9 mil is 350yds, so i'm only off 15-20yds. That is if my math is correct, i'm still learning the mildot system. Same thing goes for holdover and windage, except everythings doubled so you divide by 2.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like you've got it down pretty good TG. Playing around with the mil-ranging formula is a lot of fun. As it turns out the mil-ranging formula actually defines range finding (and downrange zeroing) with any reticle or turret. Many think that the mil-ranging formula was designed for the mil-dot, but it's actually just the opposite.

Thks. for the links. Sometimes the catalogs are great and sometimes they're not.
 
SS, no problem with the links, and thanks. Yes it is kind of fun, math was always my strong suit... Before all this i was leaning towards the Sightron, but the Bushnell seems more "user friendly" if you will. So now i'm back to square one ha. I noticed you use 18x to range, how do you think 24x would be? I guess if something is close, you shouldn't need to range it. So maybe that higher magnification wouldn't be so bad at greater distances, 250+ (that's when my bullet starts to drop off). I also noticed you're going up 1/3 power. I suppose once you figure it out and make a little "chart" it wouldn't be so bad. I think i may have to go to the sporting goods store and see if i can look through a scope set at 12x and one at 24x and see if there's a difference.
 
TG, if math is your strong suit then this stuff is right up your alley. When i 1st started investigating reticle-rangefinding i'd met this guy that was adapting Leupold's RES system for use on coyotes and he was having pretty good luck out to ~500 yds. or so with it. This was right before lasers came out and i was fascinated with what he was doing. At that time it was touted as the most accurate way to determine range for long shots, which was what i was into. So i started my research into the mil-dot for rangefinding, and once i understood that the most basic mil-ranging equation could be used with any multi-stadia reticle and not just the mil-dot that was a HUGE epiphany. Now i could use any 2 points to calculate range. I remember once i was talking about this stuff to a guy and i said u could range the moon with the simple plex reticle if u wanted once u knew what the stadia points subtended (measured) at any distance. Well the guy goes out and does it, and got within 5% of the true distance. I thought that was pretty neat.

I use every multi-stadia reticle i have for rangefinding from simple plex to Ballistic Plex to mil-dot, whatever. I have found that the finer the stadia subtension and the higher the magnification, the more accurate rangefinding is. Take this reticle for instance with the finest subtension at 0.2 mil--

TMR_Subtensions02.gif


Using this reticle to rangefind with u can interpolate (guess) to a level of ~.02 mil (~1 tenth of the .2 mil gaps--). I have one of these reticles (Leupold's TMR) in an 8.5-25x optic that allows me to reticle rangefind hard tgts. very accurately to ~1000 yds., because of the magnification and super-fine subtension. If i can guess the size of the tgt. accurately with this reticle i can always get the range within 3% of true distance. It's phenomenal how well ti works really. Here is the most basic equation that i use (inches to yds.)--

tgt. size (") x range of reticle subtension measurment (usually 100 yds.) / reticle subtension (") / "mil-reading" (decimal equivalent) = range (yds.)

Looks complicated, but super simple to apply. Hows about the Nikon 2-8x Nikoplex reticle (upper left corner of pg54 of Nikon's '10 catalog gives the subtension between post tips of 8.63 inch per hundred yds...@ 8x), and an 18" back to brisket deer that occupies 1/2 (0.5) of the post to post gap (x-hair to post tip). Just puch in the varaibles and u get--

18 x 100 / 8.63 / 0.5 = 417 yds.

Once the equation is understood u can "reverse-mil" with it to calculate tgt. size. One time we were at a shoot and one of the guys wanted to know the size of the 1000-yd. tgt. we were shooting at. A buddy had a mil-dot reticle that i measured on another tgt. at 500 yds. that i knew the measurement of (mil-dot was cald. for a power lower then the highest, and i wanted to use it the optic at a hgher power for increased accuracy). When i mild.' the thousand yd. tgt. and calcd. it out it came out 18.9". When we later measured the tgt. it was 19.2! I about fell over--adapting a reticle to measure a tgt. to a level of 0.3" accuracy at 1000 yds. was phenomenal i thought.

U wouldn't believe how much wrong information is circulating about reticle-rangefinding in the industry. Guys that own companies based upon the mil-dot don't know this stuff, and it's so simple. It amazes me the misinformation out there.

It takes just the right sort though. Your intuitive adaptation of the mil. reticle that u've shown in your posts already tells me that your one of those shooters, that has just a bit more than a passing interest in mathematics. Shooter + simple math is just the right combination really.

The End.
 
Originally Posted By: txdiamond17Heck, I went back and saw the HD model. It doesn't give much explanation as to why it is so much more. I assume its the mrad or whatever. I think is has much more precise clicks than moa. Just my guess


The 10x HD is a totally new scope and a lot better, from what I hear. It is the one that gets reviewed on snipers hide. The SS 3x9 is also a really good scope to for the money. Both the SS 10x HD and the SS 3x9 are mil/mil.
 
Back
Top