ThanksGuys
New member
SS, that is interesting info. I never heard of the stadia subtension method, sounds interesting. Do most scopes give the subtension between post tips? I like the lines instead of dots, plus the .5 mil lines are an added bonus. I may just have to check into some different types/brands of scopes. I am kind of partial to the higher magnification as it's wide open country up here. Plus i like to not just aim at a target or coyote, but aim at a spot on the target/coyote. One of my buddies has a rangefinder, but he doesn't get out much. Plus when it gets cold the batteries don't last long and sometimes with the snow, sun and open country you can't find anything to range. I go by myself alot so i wanted to be able to range things fairly quickly, accurately and reliably. My one buddy and i are always disputing over distances, it's kind of funny really. I always think they're farther and he thinks they're closer, not sure who's been right... yet!
The formula i've been using is the basic mil equation i guess.
---Target Size(inches) / 36 x 1000 / Mils read = Range(yards)
I have since simplified it a little,
---Target Size(inches) x 27.77 / Mils read = Range(yards)
1000 / 36 = 27.77 saves me an extra step or two
I may have to play around with your formula, although i know it's dependant on the scope's reticle subtension. I was trying to understand your formula a little better...
18 x 27.77 / 1.2 = 416.55 yds... 1.2 mils = 4.32"(100yds)
18 x 100 / 8.63 / .5 = 417 yards... 8.63 / 2 = 4.32"(100yds)
My mind is drawing blanks now, so tomorrow i'll have to play around with your "reverse mil" to figure out target size. I'm not sure what the Nikoplex reticle looks like offhand, but i think your way would be more accurate. You could really narrow it down and get an accurate reading vs trying to measure the little space between dots. Thanks for the information!! I think it will be pretty handy and definitely more accurate, i just have to play around with it. One thing i don't get is how an 18" object at 400+ yds covers half your scope (tip to tip) at 8x??
The formula i've been using is the basic mil equation i guess.
---Target Size(inches) / 36 x 1000 / Mils read = Range(yards)
I have since simplified it a little,
---Target Size(inches) x 27.77 / Mils read = Range(yards)
1000 / 36 = 27.77 saves me an extra step or two
I may have to play around with your formula, although i know it's dependant on the scope's reticle subtension. I was trying to understand your formula a little better...
18 x 27.77 / 1.2 = 416.55 yds... 1.2 mils = 4.32"(100yds)
18 x 100 / 8.63 / .5 = 417 yards... 8.63 / 2 = 4.32"(100yds)
My mind is drawing blanks now, so tomorrow i'll have to play around with your "reverse mil" to figure out target size. I'm not sure what the Nikoplex reticle looks like offhand, but i think your way would be more accurate. You could really narrow it down and get an accurate reading vs trying to measure the little space between dots. Thanks for the information!! I think it will be pretty handy and definitely more accurate, i just have to play around with it. One thing i don't get is how an 18" object at 400+ yds covers half your scope (tip to tip) at 8x??