I think I will go with the ATACR. I was wanting to look at the new Steiner, but after talking with a rep he said they only planned to come out with a mil/mil version. As I don't plan on shooting any kind of tactical matches I am beginning to lean toward the NF. I plan on shooting 600 & 1000 yds at a semi local (about 125 miles away) range where they only shoot moa targets. The NF is offered in both and roughly the same price range.
Rifle Scopes The more I think about it
- Thread starter phillip61
- Start date
Sounds like the ATACAR would be your perfect choice for your shooting conditions and the glass is equal to that in the BEAST at a much more reasonable cost!
What is an 'MOA' target?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
What difference does that make?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
You can shoot a 6 in. target or a 6.7293 in. target with a MIL scope as easy as with a MOA scope. Dial your elevation, make a wind call, hold wind, & shoot.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
No. MOA (or MIL) is just a measurement, it doesn't make a difference if the target is 2 MOA or ~0.66 MIL. You dial your ele, make a wind call, get your wind hold, make hold, fire. Why would it make a difference if the target is 2 MOA or ~0.66 MIL? If you didn't have a calibrated reticle and had to do your wind holds off the target size it might matter, so if you were shooting the match with a hunting type duplex reticle it would matter. Maybe that is why they do it. But it wouldn't make a difference between a MOA or MIL long range-type reticle. I spent the day shooting a prototype new Steiner with the SCR reticle. The 0.2 wind/mover hashes are REALLY nice.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Target size is irrelevant. QD40 is exactly right. Dial it up, call the wind, and let it rip.
I'm a NF guy myself right now, but I'm going to try the new Steiner the minute I can get my hands on one. Two, in fact. Lots of good reasons to buy NF, but I don't think that logic, as I understand it, is one of them.
I'm a NF guy myself right now, but I'm going to try the new Steiner the minute I can get my hands on one. Two, in fact. Lots of good reasons to buy NF, but I don't think that logic, as I understand it, is one of them.
Noticed new ATACAR just went up for sale in the Scopes for Sale section here on the Hide for $2000 shipped! Good deal, if you're ready to buy now.
Dial your elevation. Hold wind with your reticle. The size of the target is irrelevant.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
If you are zeroing your rifle at 100 yards, does it matter if the target is 12 in., 3 in., or 1.047 in.?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sounds like Phil is wanting to be able to use a "calibrated" target to correct a shot rather than the reticle.
Phil, do deer hunt in Texas? You DO KNOW that the deer here are calibrated in Mils? Gotta go to OK to find the MOA deer.
Phil, do deer hunt in Texas? You DO KNOW that the deer here are calibrated in Mils? Gotta go to OK to find the MOA deer.
holy shit.....
Go with whatever you feel comfortable with. I made the switch to MIL a little while ago and do not regret it. I'm still learning how to use it but right now but I havent experienced anything that has made it any better than when I was using MOA. In the end its like the others said. Dial, call your wind, and pull the trigger.
Please explain? when I ask others that shoot the kind of matches I'm talking about what kind of scope they prefer I usually get SFP with moa reticle. Are they wrong? I need to know before I make a purchase.
Here is what I found on this very web site.
I’d guess that 90% of the 200+ scopes on the line at the 2012 Nationals were Nightforce 12-42s with 1/8 MOA clicks. The eighth min clicks are invaluable for getting your elevation tuned in the 10 ring. If your shots are grouping slightly high and you have ¼ min clicks one click and you are now grouping slightly low. You are shooting at a known target at a known distance with rings that correspond to MOA (IPHY) measurements, you need all the magnification you can afford with a reticle that you like, that is thin enough not to cover too much of the ½ MOA X-ring at max magnification. You do not need (or want) a FFP reticle, they are too thick at high mag, they increase cost and they serve no purpose on a defined target at a known distance. If you hit low and right in the 9 ring you can look at the target and see that you need to come up ¾ and left ½ and having turrets that will get you there is good. Mil turrets are going to make your life harder, and you don’t need a reticle measure anything, the target is laid out so you should know the distances. That doesn’t mean you can’t come out and shoot with anything you’ve got, the guy shooting next to me yesterday was having a blast using a 10X SWFA. Nightforce 12-42, 8-32, or the new 55x competition scopes are all popular, for less money the Sightron SIII 10-50 or 10-60 are good scopes, some folks are running March high mag (50x, 60, or even 80x) scopes. All are SFP scopes.
If Mr. Holy Shit disagrees with the above sticky found on this site I would love to hear it.
I’d guess that 90% of the 200+ scopes on the line at the 2012 Nationals were Nightforce 12-42s with 1/8 MOA clicks. The eighth min clicks are invaluable for getting your elevation tuned in the 10 ring. If your shots are grouping slightly high and you have ¼ min clicks one click and you are now grouping slightly low. You are shooting at a known target at a known distance with rings that correspond to MOA (IPHY) measurements, you need all the magnification you can afford with a reticle that you like, that is thin enough not to cover too much of the ½ MOA X-ring at max magnification. You do not need (or want) a FFP reticle, they are too thick at high mag, they increase cost and they serve no purpose on a defined target at a known distance. If you hit low and right in the 9 ring you can look at the target and see that you need to come up ¾ and left ½ and having turrets that will get you there is good. Mil turrets are going to make your life harder, and you don’t need a reticle measure anything, the target is laid out so you should know the distances. That doesn’t mean you can’t come out and shoot with anything you’ve got, the guy shooting next to me yesterday was having a blast using a 10X SWFA. Nightforce 12-42, 8-32, or the new 55x competition scopes are all popular, for less money the Sightron SIII 10-50 or 10-60 are good scopes, some folks are running March high mag (50x, 60, or even 80x) scopes. All are SFP scopes.
If Mr. Holy Shit disagrees with the above sticky found on this site I would love to hear it.
as others have stated, there is no real moa or mil targets unless they are specifically marked as such for some formal reasoon. that being said, it wouldnt matter any how as you use the reticle of your optic as a ruler so as long as you know your reticle and it preferably matches the turret adjustments then whatever you choose will work. i personally dont want a sfp scope and for the type of shooting, competing and hunting i do i need my reticle to subtend at every mag all the time not just at one magnification. thats my personal need. others may feel fine with a sfp scope. you're getting too wrapped around the axle about the wrong stuff. back up and do some more research and talk to people fielding optics and not just starring at them in their safe.
after reading your last post flcass or square range/known distance must be your game. get whatever you want and a sfp scope may be fine for you there. it wouldnt fly for my type of shooting nor would the 1/8moa adjustments. if youre talking about tactical or field type shooting then matching reticle and turrets in ffp are the way to go in my opinion.
Gotta love cherry picked reasoning.
If you;re gonna pull stuff out that is specific to F Class, then the conversation should be based 100% on what succeeds in F Class, however you have to understand none of that speaks to a cross over optic.
Saying the ATACR and then pointing to the Competition Series of scopes is two different things.
Personally I think Philips' ban ended and he is back to trolling the site. He must of spent the time off watching "BIG" again, as it's nothing but "I don't get it" ... or the old, Lowlight excuse. Sure he doesn't understand what the hell he is talking about, but he read one post with a different context out of 3 Million posts and he is right everyone else is wrong
If you;re gonna pull stuff out that is specific to F Class, then the conversation should be based 100% on what succeeds in F Class, however you have to understand none of that speaks to a cross over optic.
Saying the ATACR and then pointing to the Competition Series of scopes is two different things.
Personally I think Philips' ban ended and he is back to trolling the site. He must of spent the time off watching "BIG" again, as it's nothing but "I don't get it" ... or the old, Lowlight excuse. Sure he doesn't understand what the hell he is talking about, but he read one post with a different context out of 3 Million posts and he is right everyone else is wrong
I was picturing a steel target..... If you have a paper target with markers, like high-power. Having the MOA reticle will save you from having to measure the correction with your reticle. Sounds like 1/8 clicks is important also. I would get the same scope everyone else is using.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Phil are you planning to use Imperial Inches, US inches or Canadian inches?
The only advantage I see with MOA VS a Mil scope is if you are dialing wind instead of holding. MOA allows for finer adjustment range. More clicks, but the adjustment isnt as coarse.
If you hold wind, as most do that are shooting tactical style stuff do, it makes no difference, use what works for you and how your mind sees things.
Personally I would prefer MOA because I think in yards, feet and inches. Everyone I know shoots mil, including the guy I shoot matches with....so mil just makes more sense in my case.
If you hold wind, as most do that are shooting tactical style stuff do, it makes no difference, use what works for you and how your mind sees things.
Personally I would prefer MOA because I think in yards, feet and inches. Everyone I know shoots mil, including the guy I shoot matches with....so mil just makes more sense in my case.
And it's digressed to there.....
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
I've got the standard response! You can't hold 0.1 in. at 100 yards and MIL has nothing to do with metric!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Mil or MOA are angular measurements with no linear dimension association. Both work with imperial or metric units once we input size and/or distance if needed. Isn't the OP "IOR scopes rock" Phil from a few months ago?
Soon to be "ATACR scopes Rock"!
I think you'll find most of the shooters on here are shooting field matches, unknown distance, unknown targets. For F class, SFP is popular. For practical field shooting, you won't find hardly any SFP - Almost all FFP, usually using mil/mil.
But the other point is that these are all units of measure, it doesn't matter what reticle you have as long as you know how the subtensions work. Otherwise it would be really hard to shoot bad guys overseas where they use the metric system with MOA scopes.
what does thinking in yards, feet and inches have anything to with mil or moa?
Yeah, I guess youre right. When you break the mental box and realize that it really doesnt matter what unit of measurement you use, as long as the reticle is calibrated to the turrets and the unit of measurement is calculated in your software, you could call the measurement "flugalcarps" and you would still hit the target.
In the end its about making X and Y intersect at a given distance.
exactly
I agree completely with that. I really wanted the Steiner, but after taking a long look at what I intend to do and after reading what kind of scopes most people (90%) use at the kind of events I want to shoot in I slowly started changing my mind. And while I understand most of those 90% are using competition models I feel having MOA/MOA is the most important part. After that the mag. range and adjustment values are something else I can think about for awhile. I like what I have read about the ATACR and it held its own in the 2014 scope shootout. No trolling, just looking for input.
Glad RJ came and asked wtf a MOA target is so I didn't have to! lol
Phil,
Seriously, I'm really confused now... What kind of shooting are you planning on doing?
Are you actually planning on f-class/bench rest shooting, practical/tactical or just all around recreational?
Even with the square range f-class type response it seems you are more of a recreational shooter from your first post. In that case MIL or MOA doesn't mean jack just get what you want.
If you are the square range type you are asking the wrong group of folks and should try to find a different source for information.
Now, if you want good advice for practical long range rifle shooting out in the field ask away because this is the right place as that is the type of shooting most on here do. Just be more clear on your questions and provide all relevant information for your intended uses instead of blanket false statements and you will get good legitimate responses.
Phil,
Seriously, I'm really confused now... What kind of shooting are you planning on doing?
Are you actually planning on f-class/bench rest shooting, practical/tactical or just all around recreational?
Even with the square range f-class type response it seems you are more of a recreational shooter from your first post. In that case MIL or MOA doesn't mean jack just get what you want.
If you are the square range type you are asking the wrong group of folks and should try to find a different source for information.
Now, if you want good advice for practical long range rifle shooting out in the field ask away because this is the right place as that is the type of shooting most on here do. Just be more clear on your questions and provide all relevant information for your intended uses instead of blanket false statements and you will get good legitimate responses.
Finally!!! Mk 4 with mil dot reticle and MOA turrets covers both sides.......yippeeee!
OFG
OFG
Still too much scope .... A Walmart Centerpoint might work better. No on second thought that's too low maybe a Counter Sniper with that super high speed reticle MOA targets can't be missed.
Lol you totally baited me into this...
I am first and foremost a recreational shooter. I shoot for no other reason than I like it. A friend of mine let me put up some steel targets around his lake. We have 100, 200, 428, and 600yd targets. this pic is of the 600yd target (I don't think you can see it).
but after shooting these for awhile I started wanting to shoot in a monthly match a Camp Robinson Ark. They shoot 600yds on Saturday and 1000 on Sunday. So at first I was thinking of the new Steiner, after doing some reading I found most people are using moa/moa scopes, so I started leaning toward the ATACR. Now I'm thinking I may need/want the competition model with more mag. So I just threw my thoughts out on the board to see what others would say. That is all except what "blanket false statement " did I make?
Phil,
You had all of us confused and didn't really give us much info to go on if you were actually seeking advise. That post you quote about the 1/8 MOA turrets was pretty generalized as X scope is better than Y scope when we Y scope is better in a different application and X in a totally different application. You have mentioned three different scopes (Steiner, NF ATACR and a Comp scope) with three different applications comparing Apples to Oranges to Watermelons. As a recreational shooter an ATACR will serve you fine. In fact I've heard the glass is excellent on those. If your style of shooting is punching paper at known distances for tight little groups in competition then the 1/8 MOA comp scopes are what you need. If you are shooting practical/tactical type shooting at various distances rather than the tight little paper groups you'd be better served with a FFP scope. MOA or MIL are just different ways to the same end result even though MOA is a tad bit finer (doesn't matter much in practical rifle shooting).
That's what I meant it was very generalized and not very precise. Most of us shoot as more practical field type shooters here so you will generally get steered to a MIL/MIL FFP scope from us because that's suits our style of shooting best. What suits you may actually be different so to get advise relevant for you please just include more information on your intended uses and everyone (well most everyone) here will do their best to give you an actual relevant response.
That's an amazing looking place to shoot. My range is only grass with a big hill so it's not as nice to look at.
You had all of us confused and didn't really give us much info to go on if you were actually seeking advise. That post you quote about the 1/8 MOA turrets was pretty generalized as X scope is better than Y scope when we Y scope is better in a different application and X in a totally different application. You have mentioned three different scopes (Steiner, NF ATACR and a Comp scope) with three different applications comparing Apples to Oranges to Watermelons. As a recreational shooter an ATACR will serve you fine. In fact I've heard the glass is excellent on those. If your style of shooting is punching paper at known distances for tight little groups in competition then the 1/8 MOA comp scopes are what you need. If you are shooting practical/tactical type shooting at various distances rather than the tight little paper groups you'd be better served with a FFP scope. MOA or MIL are just different ways to the same end result even though MOA is a tad bit finer (doesn't matter much in practical rifle shooting).
That's what I meant it was very generalized and not very precise. Most of us shoot as more practical field type shooters here so you will generally get steered to a MIL/MIL FFP scope from us because that's suits our style of shooting best. What suits you may actually be different so to get advise relevant for you please just include more information on your intended uses and everyone (well most everyone) here will do their best to give you an actual relevant response.
That's an amazing looking place to shoot. My range is only grass with a big hill so it's not as nice to look at.
The ATACR and the Competition scope are roughly the same price. I have a 308 with a 3.5-18 for rec. shooting. I'm having a 6.5 built for shooting the comps with. I'm thinking I'll go with the NF Comp. scope. Then I can have a dedicated rifle for each.
This from the same guy that was hanging crap on Okran and TT in the TT525P thread......
As has already been stated you're choice of Mil or MOA reticle/adjustments is almost purely personal preference as they are both angular not linear units of measurement. If you're only looking to compete in F-Class then SFP and 1/8 MOA adjustments will work well but outside the confines of a F-Class match you will find there are limitations to the use of that style of scope in practical applications.
The new Steiner and ATACR have far more relevant difference's such as being SFP compared to FFP and having different reticle choices which would be far more pertinent to me when making a decision in relation to which scope to purchase
The more versatile of the 2 scopes would be the Steiner. Nough said!
Whats wrong with shooting over a lake?
Nothing as long as you always shoot over it. Low angle hits on water are very likely to ricochet.
OFG
Nothing on the other side but private land (the same owner as the lake), so no-one should be over there.
Similar threads
