New To F-Class - Equipment Check

[M12LRPV]

Also, I am not really after a fine duplex or target dot reticle, I would like something that has the hold over references to make it a bit more versatile for other kinds of shooting.

I have thought that way in the past.

The problem you will discover is that most mere mortals are typically not up to the task of performing the mental gymnastics needed to work out the hold offs.

With a quality scope with good precise graduations and adjustments you will quite likely find that it's quicker, easier and more precise to adjust than to try and hold off using a reticle.

[Quinny]

I have thought that way in the past.

The problem you will discover is that most mere mortals are typically not up to the task of performing the mental gymnastics needed to work out the hold offs.

True... that is why I have a ballistics program on my phone. Punch in how far I am shooting, and it gives me the adjustments I need to make to the scope, and also the holdover reference for various different reticles.

[M12LRPV]

I have thought that way in the past.

The problem you will discover is that most mere mortals are typically not up to the task of performing the mental gymnastics needed to work out the hold offs.

True... that is why I have a ballistics program on my phone. Punch in how far I am shooting, and it gives me the adjustments I need to make to the scope, and also the holdover reference for various different reticles.

Given the program is telling you the values, why do you need the reticle?

All those extra dots (and other reticle paraphernalia) do is give you the ability to line up the wrong one on your target for a big miss. Did that a few times with the nikon with bdc (same as yours) before I pissed it off for the target dot version.

I've also written my own ballistics program and in looking at many of the commercial ones they just cannot be tailored to your rifle and load like they need to be for field use.

There's no allowance for barrel harmonic variations which vary from load to load. Ignoring atmospherics and getting out into the real world there isn't just BC and velocity to contend with. A couple of different loads that should print the same from a ballistic perspective using the same rifle will not when it comes to putting them on paper. Wind and elevations zeros will vary from load to load.

Plus there's the need to take what the program is telling you and convert it into scope adjustments. A program that tells you to go up 113 clicks is fine if you can count each click precisely. I cannot. A program that maps to (and is tare'd to) your scope can tell you what scope reading to go to with no risk of getting lost. Few if any of the commercials can do this.

[Quinny]

The program that I have takes stuff like the BC of the bullet, zero distance, scope height, weather, muzzle velocity etc into account. It then tells me in inches, MOA or number of clicks the adjustment that I need to make to hit the desired distance.

The reason that I want to get a mildot or similar is just for times when I am stuffing around at the range shooting at varying distances - for instance at Little River, I might shoot at my target at 100m, then the gong at 330m, and the gong at 400m just for giggles - but it means that I don't have to constantly adjust the scope if I am doing that. Also for met sil, shooting at targets at different distances, the reference marks would be useful again so that I dont have to keep making adjustments between shots.

The rifle that I have will not just be used for F-Class, and having the mildot reticle allows flexibility for other kinds of shooting, without being intrusive.

[stu_bear2002]

quinny, i have 2 similar app's on my phone that i use. both are setup with all my loads for both hunting and target, belive me when i say that at the range you'll only use it before you fire your first sighter after that there are to many varibles to consider and you wont have time to be changing your data on the phone. i suggest if you want to use the app's data output create a load for a 300 zero and then adjust the scope with practice you will know exactly how much to adjust at any given distance. FWIW im using a high power hunting scope with a duplex recticle because i found milldots clutter the target(whatever it may be) at longer distances and therefore gave them away to a friend.
cheers stuey

[Brad Y]

Yep the only way to get a proper ballistics chart for your rifle/load combo is to count clicks. Even then a warmer day or cooler day you may need to adjust elevation. Windage depends if your one to hold off slightly or you crank the windage knob to suit the prevailing winds and hope like hell the flags dont change in the split second after you put your head down and touch the trigger.

The programs like isnipe and such are a tool to get you roughly on target but you will need to get closer otherwise your sighters end up going too quickly. Wont ever shoot without a dot reticle again. JMO

[M12LRPV]

Yep the only way to get a proper ballistics chart for your rifle/load combo is to count clicks. Even then a warmer day or cooler day you may need to adjust elevation. Windage depends if your one to hold off slightly or you crank the windage knob to suit the prevailing winds and hope like hell the flags dont change in the split second after you put your head down and touch the trigger.

The programs like isnipe and such are a tool to get you roughly on target but you will need to get closer otherwise your sighters end up going too quickly. Wont ever shoot without a dot reticle again. JMO

I'm not sure that came out right, that you're saying what you intended to say.

I have a great ballistics chart for my rifle and no click counting was needed. Just a scope with good clear, unique, repeatable graduations and turrets.

Scopes like the Leupolds and Nikons have that feature. Scopes like the weavers where the numbers appear twice on the turret do not qualify as suitable.

A chart: 1 rifle, 6 loads with the scope graduations marked on them. The "Scope MOA" has a zero that corresponds to the zero graduated mark of the scope and is configured into the ballistics program so that every value spit out is relative to the zero/zero of the scope.



I have another one that does one rifle, 2 barrels but only 3 loads.

[Quinny]

I will not be attempting to shoot competition using holdover marks on the reticle, the scope will be adjusted properly using the turrets to centre the crosshair on what I am shooting at.

The holdover marks will only be used when i am shooting in situations where I am shooting varying distances and don't want to have to readjust the scope between shots.

I have gotten a good price on a Leupold 8.5-25x50 with the Varmint Hunter reticle, and Optilock rings/bases so that will be the next purchase.

[flatlina]

I think if you are going to shoot some F Class you would be better off with a set of Burris rings with the inserts to allow you to shoot out to the longest distance without bottoming the scope out. Either that or put a 20 MOA rail on it.

Regards
john

[M12LRPV]

I think if you are going to shoot some F Class you would be better off with a set of Burris rings with the inserts to allow you to shoot out to the longest distance without bottoming the scope out. Either that or put a 20 MOA rail on it.

Regards
john

Seconded. All those in favour?

[Seddo]

Quinny,

I am in the same boat as you. I am new to f class and i love mildots, most of my scopes have them. I have used isnipe on my iphone to make balistics charts for my rifles and ammo but these are just the start. Everytime i shoot the rilfe/load i make adjustments to my chart until all the data is proven. In the end you need all the data you can get.

I use to use the mildont to adjust for wind, fire the first shot and then use the reticle to tell me how many minutes of wind i have to add. The downside of this is you loose your first shot to find out the wind and then only have 1 shot to make any other adjustments. Overtime i have been getting better with my initial wind call.

I have taped a drop chart to the stock (or inside the scope covers) on my varmint rifles so i know with a glance what distance each mildot will zero the rifle.

[Quinny]

I think if you are going to shoot some F Class you would be better off with a set of Burris rings with the inserts to allow you to shoot out to the longest distance without bottoming the scope out. Either that or put a 20 MOA rail on it.

Regards
john

I did look at Burris rings, but they don't come in stainless, same as I can't find a 20MOA stainless rail. I know it is only a cosmetic thing, but I really don't want to put black rings on a stainless receiver.

I have just ordered the Leupold 8.5-25x50 with Varmint Hunter reticle and Optilock rings and bases to suit. The scope has 94MOA of adjustment, so I am hoping that will be enough to shoot as far as I need to from a 100m zero. According to my ballistics program, I would need about 31 MOA up from a 100m zero to get out to 914m (1000yds) using a bullet with a 0.505 BC at 2850fps.

Come to think of it - I think that the Optilocks have similar inserts to the Burris ones... may need to double check that.

EDIT: The optilocks just have a polymer ring inside to stop the body getting scratched.

[Brad Y]

I'm not sure that came out right, that you're saying what you intended to say.

I have a great ballistics chart for my rifle and no click counting was needed. Just a scope with good clear, unique, repeatable graduations and turrets.

Scopes like the Leupolds and Nikons have that feature. Scopes like the weavers where the numbers appear twice on the turret do not qualify as suitable.

A chart: 1 rifle, 6 loads with the scope graduations marked on them. The "Scope MOA" has a zero that corresponds to the zero graduated mark of the scope and is configured into the ballistics program so that every value spit out is relative to the zero/zero of the scope.

I have another one that does one rifle, 2 barrels but only 3 loads.

Im currently 1700km from my rifle safe to check but im sure none of my weavers have numbers more than once.... Dunno why a scope needs to "qualify", to me they just need to magnify and have a decent tracking system... Im not going into another holden vs ford debate about scopes. Dont care for that but I found my t24 worked fine, as did a nikko target master for a while til I could afford something better.

As for isnipe, Once I wind to what isnipe tells me, I usually have a couple of clicks to get it exact. Granted conditions vary from day to day. Also with the isnipe you put in the listed BC of a projectile but I find this doesnt quite work out correct at longer ranges. When you work count how many minutes you have to wind on from 300, 400 etc all the way to 1000 and enter them into the program, I had to modify the BC to get the correct reading on this program. I too have an excel spreadsheet that I did up and had it printed out in the gun case to know how many minutes to wind.

Fair enough I reckon they are another tool to use and gets hits close but IMO I wouldnt trust it as good as something you have proven by getting behind the trigger and recording what works in real life. Thats what I meant to say and sorry if the previous post didnt sound like it.

Quinny sounds like you have your scope sorted, hope it works well for you. Never owned a loopy before, mates rave about theirs but Ive shot with anything from nikko stirlings to weavers and plenty of nightforces on the mound too. They all seem to do the same thing to me.

[AlanF]

...im sure none of my weavers have numbers more than once.... Dunno why a scope needs to "qualify", to me they just need to magnify and have a decent tracking system...

Brad,

I seem to remember seeing a Weaver with numbers going upwards both ways from zero. But I have a T-24 a few months old and that goes one way round from 0 to 9 minutes. So maybe they dumped a bad idea.

I agree with you regarding the basic requirements of a good scope, although for F-Class I'd add suitable reticule. Of course there are some types of shooting such as Fly, where clear optics at high magnification give you an advantage. Weavers are renowned for reliable mechanicals, but not for optical clarity, although you can be lucky. I've seen a few March scopes in F-Class recently - as you probably know, they have superior optics but you pay for it (about 5 times the price of a Weaver). Most of them are owned by shooters who do both F-Class and BR, which makes sense.

Alan

[johnk]

Alan,

The original steel tube(?) Weavers had the interesting/challenging/unique/problimatic (select one or more) scale markings. Those of recent manufacture are conventional.

John