# Scopes with marked yardages for ranging?

Discussion in 'Optics & Mounts' started by Vincine, Nov 23, 2011.

2. ### DillingerNew Member

Just about every maker has their own version of range finding reticles. If the circles work for you, then stick with it, if you are open to other types of range finding via reticle, I would look at "varmint" hunting reticles as they usually have the more intense patterns.

Should you not be able to find what you are looking for exactly, you could always sink your teeth into the math behind the mil-dot reticle. It will take some work, but it's been effective for I don't know how long. The one key ingredient in Mil-Dot ranging is that doing it in METERS is much easier than doing it in YARDS.

So if you know the metric system pretty well, the transition is pretty easy.

I don't know the metric system that well, so I struggled to learn the math/science behind the Mil-Dot for quite awhile before it just "clicked' and I was able to make the calcs.

Is there a specific type purpose reticle you are looking for?

JD

3. ### VincineNew Member

It’s just an academic question. Personally, I’m only looking at range shots out to 300 yards.

However I have an interest in long range shooting and often come across information on sniper skills, techniques, ballistics and requirements. Thus I’ve become familiar, if not practiced, with the mil dot system.

It strikes me as a needlessly cumbersome procedure to have to take something you know the size of, see how many dots it measures, do the math or look it up on your data card(s), and convert it to turret clicks. There's even a slide rule for this for Christ’s sake!

It’s like buying your clothes by using a ruler instead of seeing how they fit by looking in the mirror. Ranging should all be visual.

The average male’s head is 6” wide x 9” long and the average torso width is 18”. It’s a pretty good constant. Making allowances for clothing and body type, it seems to me it would be a lot easier to just place the head or body of the target, or someone who’s nearby, into whichever circle or box it fits in, read the range or one would know the range by which box it fit in, and hold over the appropriate BDC hash mark, or turn the turret to the appropriate yardage.

Example; if someone just almost fits in the 600 yard box, turn the turret to 625 yards, end of story.

I really don’t have any need (Thank God!). I’m just a designer. Figuring out better ways to do things is what I do.

Last edited: Nov 23, 2011
4. ### DillingerNew Member

That is where Keaton Industries has a nice little niche' market.

You pick your load, chrono your rifle and fill out a little form. They send you replacement knobs for elevation and windage based on your rounds performance from your zero out to how ever far you are hoping to shoot (realistically).

You range something, dial in the correct yardage, presto-chango you are good to go. No counting, no measuring clicks, just dial in 625 and go to work.

Of course you are still back at determining the target is 625 yards away, but that is why I have a laser range finder AND a mil-dot system.

JD

5. ### TCH2FLYNew Member

182
0
0
Shepherd Scopes has reticle that use rings for ranging, I believe they are set for 18".

Stadiametric reticles are pretty common although most use only bars (not both like the NF). This is one of the latest available in a Schmidt & Bender (they use a 1 meter torso height/ .5 meter width) and works very well. The stadia bars are very quick but lack the fine detail in the small milling scale.

I understand your point about doing the math but after a bit of practice it really isn't an issue. It also depends on what you are trying to do you. If I mess up the ranging at 650 yds by +- 25 yds, that could mean 10-12" high or low depending on the round being used.

6. ### VincineNew Member

Camputer M-1000 ART Scope

The Stadiametric looks like just about what I was thinking. It certainly does what I envisioned. I’ll have to look into their product further.

Somewhere here on FTF I posted something about how SLR lenses are visibly focused and how the distance could be read off of the barrel markings. It seemed to me that could be applied to rifle scopes, and it didn’t need batteries.

I’ve also been looking at the parabolic curves on ammunition ballistic trajectory charts and noticing how similar they are to French curves, helical threads, and other changing radius curves; I’m reminded of the how the cams on compound bows function and thinking this would be a viable approach.

And then I discovered the ‘Camputer M-1000 ART Scope’. If I understand this right, the process of zooming the scope so the target fits between in the marks on the reticle automatically adjusts the scope for your round’s drop.

And it’s not even new! It was developed and used during the Vietnam War!

Webpage:
Hi-Lux Inc. - Camputer ART Series
Short video, scroll down to the first video, not the second:
Hi-Lux Inc. - Video Tutorials

While the design is clever and what I was ‘aiming’ at, the few reviews I’ve read on it are mixed. The design works but the glass is poor. That’s too bad. It seems to me that if you had to hit a string of targets at 675, 423, 587, & 327 yards/meters, it would be faster than the mil dot system. It also looks heavy.

Last edited: Nov 23, 2011
7. ### Alpha1VictorNew Member

782
0
0
Take your pick of any mildot scope out there.... Proven science

Signing out, Alpha1victor.