Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Premier Reticle Mil-dot and M1 conversion...

Mr. Thomas, <BR> I have a Leupold Vari-X III 8.5-25x50 LRT with a fine duplex reticle and target turrets. I have given serious consideration to adding a USMC Mil-dot reticle with luminous posts and M1 target turrets to the scope. What is involved and what do you recommend? Its intended use is a heavy barrel 40X varmint gun. Regards, Matt.<p>[This message has been edited by Matt in Virginia (edited February 22, 2001).]

<P>Matt,<P>We would install a 10X mil-dot in your8.5X25 and mark the power ring at about 10X where spacing equals 1 mil. The power ring is marked again at 20X where you have 1/2 mil spacing. Luminous mil dot can add 20-30 minutes of shooting time at the end of the day. <P>Using the scope at 20X you can double distances in mil table. Good idea if object being estimated is very small.<P>M1 turrets are available and is a matter of personal choice. The knobs are the same as used on the 3.5X10 LR Tactical and Mark 4 M3. Some like the feel and look of these turrets over the target style turrets the scope comes with. Click value is unchanged from 1/44 moa.<P>Dick<BR>

Mr. Thomas, <P> Would you recommend the Mil-dot for Virginia Groundhog Hunting? Have also been considering one of the LRF 800s and can't decide whether to go with the Mil-dot or a laser. Or both. I have been told the Mil-dot reticle may well subtend the groundhog at longer ranges. Would appreciate your opinion.<P> What would the work run? <P>Thank you, Matt Garrett.

I too am interested in a mil dot set up. I have a leupold 6.5x20 with the target dot. Would I be better off to get a new scope or have you guys work on it. I also lost/misplaced the extra fat set of nobs that the scope came with. How much to replace them? BThorp3aol.com

Hi Matt. On a small target like a groundhog the Mil-Dot ranging system is pretty limited. On the other board, Mr. Thomas once commented to me that your limited to about 300 yds. if I remember correctly. With the 20X set up, it would, of course, work better. However, the laser RF is much faster, easier to use, and much more precise. The only real problem would be false readings due to your target being on the ground. You could get a composite reading, or average, of the ground covered by the laser beam. I suspect that with the quality units, like the Lecia, this won't be a real problem. I should think that some testing would reveal any errors here. Actually, I'm going to buy the Lecia 800, and find out for myself. I'll keep you posted. E