Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting FFP Reticles

Rockers are definitely Head Bangers..

Negative. My implication was that I have no trouble with a 6x scope at 1130 yards on ~MOA sized targets, assuming a fine enough reticle and glass with good resolution. My comment "I've had no trouble" was directed toward the sight picture using a 6x scope, as where your interpretation of my statement is that I was referring to having no trouble with the exterior ballistics of a 1130 yard shot on a sub-MOA target, which is obviously not what I meant. We were discussing scope magnification when I made that statement, not the difficulty of making such a shot. Any reasonable person would understand what I was implying

That's too good not to save for eternity

Glad you like it. Hopefully you learned a thing or two about syntactic ambiguity

jordan real quick since you are educating us all on why we should be using a 3x9 super sniper, I think your new nickname should be super sniper how is that?? so super sniper, lets say you come down to utah and we go to the desert you have 3 shots NOT 25 to hit at 1130 yards, on a 10" plate. what factors and how much are they in making a shot of this nature. of course there is wind and barometric, beyond that for your combo what do you have to take into consideration to make this shot?? then I will tell you how I would do it or at least give myself the best chance I know of to hit.

I'm not Jordan, but here's how I'd do it. First, I'd range the plate and observe it for a while to make sure it's not going anywhere. Then I'd look for a good concealed sneak route, drop down off the ridge, stay hidden, and cut the distance by 2/3.

Actually, that was tongue-in-cheek. Jordan is a pretty straight-shooter(!!), not prone to bragging and stuff like that. I don't think the nickname fits.

LOL, I'm not trying to educate anybody on why they should be using anything. I'm just saying what I USE and HAVE USED SUCCESSFULLY. Take it or leave it, I don't really care. I'm not sure why this turned into a thread about me, but alas it is what it is.

Now to start with, I've never claimed to be the best LR shooter that exists. Let's get that straight. I can hit a plate or two and the odd animal, but there are better shooters out there, some of which are on this site. I'm sure Rick is probably better than me, John Burns, Pat, etc, etc. I have no problem playing along with your scenario, though. The first thing I'd do is range the target a few times to make sure the reading is consistent. Then I'd check the atmospheric values (I mostly concern myself with absolute pressure and temperature, but humidity gets input, too), I'd take a Coriolis reading for a shot this far, both azimuth and latitude, check my dope for the shot, and dial the elevation. I'd have a good Spotter set up with a good spotter using either MOA or MIL reticle, then I'd settle in behind the rifle and start to analyze the landscape. Watch for topographical features that might funnel wind and affect wind direction and strength, both horizontal and vertical, check to see if the shot is at an up or down angle, and have a look at the vegetation, any mirage present, cloud movement between myself and the target, etc. After noting the various wind behaviours between me and the target, I'd take a wind reading at my location, then I'd make a net wind call for the shot. If I had a true skilled spotter, I'd let him do all this for me, but that's not the point of this exercise. After I had a wind call, I'd again check my dope (which also accounts for spin drift), make any minor tweaks to elevation due to any up/down draft conditions, and hold my windage on the reticle. I'd make sure my Spotter was ready, and let fly. He'd give me a correction using the reticle in his spotting scope, and I'd quickly fire again while conditions were the same and hope for a hit.

I'm not sure where you got the number 25 from. Last time I did this on the rock at 1130, I made a hit in less than 3 shots. I didn't sit there and pound the rock all day, but the 6x scope didn't prevent me from making a hit. Not saying I could do that every time, but it would be my shooting skills preventing 100% success, not the scope's magnification. But, that's how it turned out last time.


Okay, your turn. And any photos or videos of similar shooting scenarios you've encountered in the past are welcome

BTW, here's another comment that is sure to stir the pot. Last time I was shooting a sub-MOA target at 1 mile, I turned my scope down from 24x to 16x

I hate when a question is asked of someone and another poster feels the need to answer it. The Egos around here are amazing!

LOL

Having said that and laughing my ass off, your method to kill that plate is great!

Oh the irony... LOL

It's kind of an "inside" joke!

LOL

You cantankerous SOB.......

When you've accomplished as much as I have, in terms of sneaking up on inanimate objects, come back and we can have a real conversation.

Ha!

I was shooting 1000yds today at a 12" plate. I personally think 15x is marginal at that distance. I looked at the target with my scope on 6x and it was tiny. Maybe if there were zero wind and I had a 20lb gun. The target was just way too small to aim accurately. I am sure I could have hit it if I burned enough ammo, but not consistently. I have a hard enough time being consistent on 15x. My hit percentage was only 32%. I don't claim to be an expert, but I shoot more than a lot of people. Wind is sobering.

My next scope will go to at least 22x, or I am getting a larger target to better read hits.

...that shoots one-hole groups at 1000

..... and still miss because you don't know your dope.... or don't believe your dope..... or don't believe the experienced folks who are trying to help you.

.... then come back from the hunt and talk schitt about 'long range hunting' on the Long Range Hunting forum. Hope you get it figured out before your 'hunt of a lifetime' next fall.....

Jordan, Rick, Drew, Cummins, etc....... we all know 1153 yards is a far piece for 6x glass.... but we all know it CAN be done. I ask this: for big game, and 1-2 MOA targets, what magnification do you feel is necessary to consistently make hits to 1/2 mile?

I had a Leupold MK4 3.5-10x40 with a FFP reticle.

I could appreciaite constant milling values, but below about 5 or 6X the reticle became very tiny. Distractingly tiny to me.




I don't doubt Jordan can hold a consistent aimpoint on a 1 moa target with a 6X scope, regardless of distance to target. Reticle thickness would be the main thing that might hold someone back.


For reference I've shot clay birds off the 1000 yard berm with a Bushnell 3200 10X without trouble. That's about a 4.5" target, and less than .5 moa at 1K yards. The reticle almost covered the target, but not quite.

As long it's possible to bisect a target with the reticle, one can make repeatable holds on the target.

With my MK4 mentioned above, I most always ran it around 8X for the bigger fov. I shot it past 1K a lot.

One basic optical rule of thumb is that the average human eye (which means 20/20 vision, whether the eye's "naked" or lens-corrected) can resolve about one inch at 100 yards. This doesn't mean we can see a 1" dot at that range. Instead it means we can differentiate between alternating 1/2" black-and-white lines. Beyond 100 yards they begin to appear gray.

Whether we can resolve as well at longer distances depends on atmospheric and light conditions. A lot of mirage obviously reduces resolution, but in still, clear air we should be able to differentiate between 5" black-and-white lines at 1000 yards (10 times 1/2" = 5).

With good optics, resolution increases directly with magnification. This means a 10x scope at 1000 yards, in good atmospheric conditions, should allow us to resolve those same 1/2" alternating black-and-white lines as well at 1000 yards as well as at 100 yards without optics. With a 6x scope the size of the resolvable lines would increase to about .83" (10/6 x .5).

Obviously there will be some variation not only due to atmosphere and light, but individual eyesight and the specific scope. Then there's the size of the reticle: One subtending 1/2" at 100 yards covers 5" at 1000. But a little math can provide a good indication of what's possible.