HighDesertHunter
FNG
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2024
Thank you Form for sharing your MIL based methods. I appreciate anyone willing to share things that work for them (and in this case lots of people) in the field.
rokslide.com
I am pretty invested in MOA from a scope ($$$), experience, and hunting party perspective. The group I hunt with talks MOA and when sighting shots we speak MOA. So as much as I understand the simplicity of a base 10 angle angle system, I have some inertia that keeps me thinking MOA. If I was starting fresh I would go MIL, alas I am not starting fresh.
Having said that, the post above got me thinking about MOA methods for wind gap and elevation. Because, basically it is just about a method that you can quickly resolve a shooting solution. Quicker than an app ore returning to your compensated range finder as the target is changing distances.
MOA wind gap method. Looking at shooting solutions, you can do a method similar to the one Form outlines but with MOA. The method I will be trying this fall is to find a full cross wind speed value that gives you 1 MOA at 400 yards. MOA folks think clearly in terms of 4s and clicks (1/4MOA). So with a 100 yard zero that would put your 100 yard full wind correction at 1/4 MOA, 200 1/2 MOA, 300 3/4 MOA... and so on. My current primary hunting rifle is a 9mph full cross wind 1 MOA gun at 400 yards.
So my wind correction is one click per hundred yards with a 9mph base speed.
Elevation, the MIL method doesn't work great for my rifle and DA (11,000' elevations). So for now I am sticking with my range card attached to the side of my range finder. The table I use is very simple with one addition of the delta in clicks between and range and the next further 50 yard increment. That way when I dial, I know how many clicks to get it to the next 50 yards .
I am basically sending this post to 1. thank Form to getting the community thinking, and 2. see if anyone has used a similar wind gap method for MOA based systems.
MK5 HD vs NX8 . . Thoughts?
Correction factors: Rule of thumbs to get close first, and then how to get your actual correction factor for your gun specifically. Standard base (average gun)= 100- 0 200- .5 300- 1 400- 2 500- 3 600- 4 So what happens when you have a combo that shoots faster than 2800’ish fps or slower...
rokslide.com
I am pretty invested in MOA from a scope ($$$), experience, and hunting party perspective. The group I hunt with talks MOA and when sighting shots we speak MOA. So as much as I understand the simplicity of a base 10 angle angle system, I have some inertia that keeps me thinking MOA. If I was starting fresh I would go MIL, alas I am not starting fresh.
Having said that, the post above got me thinking about MOA methods for wind gap and elevation. Because, basically it is just about a method that you can quickly resolve a shooting solution. Quicker than an app ore returning to your compensated range finder as the target is changing distances.
MOA wind gap method. Looking at shooting solutions, you can do a method similar to the one Form outlines but with MOA. The method I will be trying this fall is to find a full cross wind speed value that gives you 1 MOA at 400 yards. MOA folks think clearly in terms of 4s and clicks (1/4MOA). So with a 100 yard zero that would put your 100 yard full wind correction at 1/4 MOA, 200 1/2 MOA, 300 3/4 MOA... and so on. My current primary hunting rifle is a 9mph full cross wind 1 MOA gun at 400 yards.
So my wind correction is one click per hundred yards with a 9mph base speed.
Elevation, the MIL method doesn't work great for my rifle and DA (11,000' elevations). So for now I am sticking with my range card attached to the side of my range finder. The table I use is very simple with one addition of the delta in clicks between and range and the next further 50 yard increment. That way when I dial, I know how many clicks to get it to the next 50 yards .
I am basically sending this post to 1. thank Form to getting the community thinking, and 2. see if anyone has used a similar wind gap method for MOA based systems.
