• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

  • Site updates coming next Wednesday at 8am CT!

    The site will be down for routine maintenance on Wednesday 6/5 starting at 8am CT. If you have any questions, please PM alexj-12!

Rifle Scopes NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">there is nothing metric about milrads.</div></div>

You tell 'em!
laugh.gif
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: beretta_man11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow, some touchy bastards out there... My bad. If I search something and it says it has a clear picture, clear compared to what? Compared to a Tasco world class or Clear compared to a Swaro... Geez man, just looking for someone who has experience with all 3. </div></div>


no kidding
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

The Huskemaw scope is bull. The turrents can be made for a scope with all the same data for about 70 dollars. This will limit you to where you shoot and first round hits. Because conditions change. Most serious shooters or hunters would not want to be bound by 1 level of accuracy.

Get a Nightforce and Get your dope. Shoot anywhere you want. This discussion has been talked about several times. NF is a high end scope. Turn the turrents track. Compare NF to S&BS,Premier, and maybe Vortex (in time). Maybe then have a topic.

My 2 cents
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">there is nothing metric about milrads</div></div>
Not only are milliradians not metric, they aren't even rational.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a-hull</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> there is a reason every military sniper on the planet uses Milrads. </div></div>

yeah most of the world uses the metric system
i prefer moa it was easier for me to learn </div></div>

there is nothing metric about milrads [/quote]


oh yeah my bad
it still sucks though
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

For you maybe. I find it pretty easy to use and remember. I have MOA scopes too, it's taking the time to learn both systems. Neither are that hard to learn. IMO it's a good idea to learn both Mils and MOA.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

well for me over the past almost 20 years i have smelled a lot of paint squirting cars.
grin.gif

thats my excuse.
why else would some one think yards are metric.
i found the math is easier for me to do in moa
but thats because i get confused to easy
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's true. But using them is rational.
laugh.gif
</div></div>
heh - well played!
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

i thought that 10cm per 100m was metric that means 1 MRAD at 1km that is a killomeeter or 1000 meters is exactly 1 meter now that is prety close to a metric system?


Mabe if you try to convert a Mrad to yards it does not work but a yard is not metric
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

ok but a mil to mil scope
are the clicks in inches or cm
because doesnt the military usually shoot "meters"
i guess it really doesnt matter what the scope is, because the military always uses meters and kilometers, i assumed it was a metric system.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

first off, a guy wants a scope with a reticule to match his adjustments. This allows one to visually measure impacts in relation to target and instantly dial a correction without some gay ass conversion. Used to be a guy would have to deal with a Mil reticule and MOA adjustments. This is where mil/mil or moa/moa scopes come in. You have either a scope with mil adjustments to go with a mil reticule, or a moa reticule to go with moa adjustments.

furthermore, mil scopes adjust in .1 mil clicks. A mil is one thousandth of a radian. This equates to one decimeter at 100 meters, an inch at a thousand inches, a foot at a thousand feet, one yard at 1000 yards, or a light year at 1000 light years.

Scopes adjust in units of angle, not linear measurement.

ETA: The whole point is to eliminate unnecessary math, ie. conversions. What you are doing by thinking in distance or linear measurements is throwing in another conversion for yourself. When I take a shot, the only reason I need to know range is to calc an adjustment for bullet drop. That adjustment will be in an angular unit of measure. After that, I couldn't give two shits what distance it is...everything from then on is in mils.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

that makes sense.
i guess i assumed it was metric because of the military always using meters.
i also assumed ricky martin wasnt gay but i was wrong there too.
either way i find moa math easier to do.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a-hull</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i thought that in a mil to mil scope the impact changes are in cm's
but i dont know for sure.
</div></div>

At 100yards 1/10 mil is .36"/1mil is 3.6", at 1000 yards 1/10 mil is 3.6"/1 mil is 36" or one yard

If your at 100 meters the click is 1 cm and 1 meter at 1kilometer
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

Once you truly understand you will find that MOA math is no easier or worse than Mil math. Mil is the golden standard, and once you start shooting with others it will be hard to communicate or call shots for others who are using mil setups instead of moa. Mil is the only way to go.

FYI, I gauge target size in inches and range in yards...but I use mils. It's no harder than MOA, probably easier.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a-hull</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i know guys that use it like it,
i was happy to get the moa math
one thing at a time i guess </div></div>

humor me for a bit.... what is MOA math for ranging a target?
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

and so do many others, but now you've just mis ranged your target by a 5% error because you used IPHY math instead of MOA math..
one minute of angle equates to 1.0475 inches at 100 yards.
what you should have done is target size in inches/moa X 95.5...
Now is 95.5 easier than 27.778?...I dont think so.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a-hull</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think target in inches X 100 divided by number of moa </div></div>

minus 5% = range in yards

1 moa = 1.047" at 100yds, so there's a 5% discrepency. IPHY needs no such adjustment.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

ewoaf, I do contend that taking 5% off a yardage number is easier than multiplying anything by 27.778, and as I typed while you were, if you get am IPHY scope there's no need.

That said, I just converted over to mil/mil, just becasue that's what everyone is going to and it makes spotting for others easier.

I am not completely convinced that I shouldn't swap my mil/mil USO's for IPHY/IPHY USO's.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ewoaf, I do contend that taking 5% off a yardage number is easier than multiplying anything by 27.778, and as I typed while you were, if you get am IPHY scope there's no need.

That said, I just converted over to mil/mil, just becasue that's what everyone is going to and it makes spotting for others easier.

I am not completely convinced that I shouldn't swap my mil/mil USO's for IPHY/IPHY USO's. </div></div>
I know i don't need to explain this to you personally but for the benefit of others, I'll argue one more point.
When people seek out a matching reticule/adjustment system other than mil based, they may often find themselves with a MOA/IPHY or vice versa, being that they are commonly interchanged by many users and manufacturers. The only true IPHY setup that I know of is made by USO.

one more thing..with a MIL setup one can range in CM to meters or inches to yards just as easily. With a IPHY setup one is pretty well stuck to inches and yards.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a-hull</div><div class="ubbcode-body">would that be 4.75 inches off at 1000 yards or 4.75 moa </div></div>
you did it again....stop doing that
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

1 moa vs 1 IPHY error at 1K is .47"

But a 5% range mistake can be a huge miss- the difference between my 175's at 2700fps if I dope the shot for 1000 and its actually 950 is a miss by 4 feet (356" drop at 1K vs 309" drop at 950).
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1 moa = 1.047 inches </div></div> at 100 yards, or 10.47" at 1000......
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

The real question when it comes to ranging is-Duracell vs Energizer??

The only time I'll be ranging with my reticle is when my LRF goes down. And Ewoaf, you're right about the discrepencies in what mfr's call MOA. Add in accepted "tolerances" and it all comes down to one thing:

If you want to be sure you NEED to check the reticle in YOUR scope and then check the adjustments in YOUR scope (whether its billed as mil or moa or IPHY or huskemawjiggy)!!!!
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT


one more thing..with a MIL setup one can range in CM to meters or inches to yards just as easily. With a IPHY setup one is pretty well stuck to inches and yards. [/quote]




that is pretty cool
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a-hull</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so ranging a 10 inch target
10 x 100 =1000 / 1moa = 1000 yards
<span style="text-decoration: line-through">impact will be 4.7 inches low? </span></div></div>

Your range will be off by 5%, the impact will be off dependent upon what dope you put on your rifle. Like I said, if I forgot to change by range by 5% it would cause me to dial dope that would be 4 feet high (because I'd dial 1000yard dope, not 950-and the difference in drop between the two distances is such).
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: a-hull</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
one more thing..with a MIL setup one can range in CM to meters or inches to yards just as easily. With a IPHY setup one is pretty well stuck to inches and yards. </div></div>




that is pretty cool [/quote]

I know, I felt like Buddha when it all came together for me..but don't worry, the goosebumps go away after a few hours.

eta: WTF is lindy when you need him?
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

it seems then the real trick in ranging with a scope is getting,or guessing, the target size right, once you get the god forsaken math figured out
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">there is nothing metric about milrads.</div></div>

You tell 'em!
laugh.gif

</div></div>

I think the master is watching his grasshoppers snatch the pebble from his hand.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

You rang?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">one more thing..with a MIL setup one can range in CM to meters or inches to yards just as easily. With a IPHY setup one is pretty well stuck to inches and yards.</div></div>

It may seem pretty cool, but it's also wrong.

It's all just angles. We <span style="font-style: italic">call</span> that angular unit Inch Per Hundred Yards, but it's just another angle.

And a Mildot Master works with IPHY as well as MOA and mils. You just need a little trick, which is a new target range arrow for IPHY.

To make that, put 10 on the right-side MOA scale next to a "Bullet Drop" of 10 inches. With the slide in that position, make a mark with a scribe just above the regular "Target Range" arrow on the left window opposite 100 yards. Voila - that's your IPHY "Target Range" mark. Color the scratch in with a Sharpie, and you're done.

And if you're doing the math on a calculator, you just need a bit different formula to get meters from an IPHY reticle, all of which are in Ranging Formulas.

It's just math.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

I knew it was technically false when I typed it. But when people want a IPHY system it's usually because.....well let's face it, they are "stuck" on inches and yards. one of the beauties of the Mil system is that it frees the mind of having to think in those linear measurements, and one starts to think in those angular ones.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

My experience has been that arguing for one's limitations means that one gets to keep them.

I try not to do that myself, and I don't often let other people get away with it.
 
Re: NightForce VS Huskemaw VS Mark4 LRT

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My experience has been that <span style="font-style: italic">arguing for one's limitations means that one gets to keep them</span>.

</div></div>

Well said.

I like to "discuss" the merits of each because it keeps the knowledge accessible in my head, and I firmly believe that the ability to use all the systems you may run onto can't hurt.



I do think that we could all agree on one point germane to this thread: I don't think there are any men whose calling is working a two way range have Huskemajiggers on their rifles........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Burris xtr3 3-18 vs leupold mark 4hd
Replies
10
Views
810
redneckbmxer24
R
C
Somebody please explain the Nightforce SHV vs NXS to me
Replies
45
Views
2K
chevy_man
C
hanktw2020
LPVO 1-6 (or 1-8) for a 14.5 5.56 rifle Kahles vs Swaro vs others
Replies
36
Views
2K
TheHorta
TheHorta
N
Rifle Scopes Trying to pick first scope MK5 vs RZ3
Replies
116
Views
2K
Mike Casselton
Mike Casselton
RHINO69
Need advice choosing first scope - Atacr 4-20 vs 5-25
Replies
21
Views
1K
carbonbased
carbonbased
Top Bottom
Back