I'm trying to get an estimate of how far 900m is. Like what distance qualifies as "you're never gonna have to hit anything that far out ever unless you force yourself to" I know 400m is like across two farms, 300m is like across a large river, 200 is across a large city square, and 100 or less is right on top of you. I *think* 700 is when the amount of air in between you and the thing makes stuff start to shift blue, but I really have little to no idea.
Also how far is "you're never going to have to hit anything this far away ever in a million billion years" distance? I know it's somewhere under 1.5km
Sorry if I sound stupid, I'm just assessing cost for distance.
Ooh, ive not seen that one. That is a nice ass reticle. Link?
Henry Watson
>You can typically use a reticle to range. Even an iron sight post can be used for ranging. I want to unpack this: Find a known range and compare aspects of your sighting system against known sized objects in your known distance view. Extrapolate these numbers to give you an understanding of how big objects appear in your sights. Examples: >find the MOA distance across the entire field of view >find the MOA distance from the center of the reticle to the fat part of the duplex >find the thickness in MOA of the reticle at both the thin and thick portions >know the heights of power poles, stop signs, and various other standardized objects in your area - cars are good too but they vary in size
That reminds me of the how to piss off a sniper video from the polish army, where Bartek just walks up to their squad's DM with the SVD, and just starts randomly turning the adjustments on the scope.
Camden Scott
>Just measure your goobers with a micrometer and then measure your eye relief with a tape measure. If I understand you correctly then I still posit that you will need to maintain extreme discipline in establishing perfect eye relief every time you range in addition to doing so at the initial measurement - plus this requires a separate tool.
Luis Gutierrez
>precise eye relief Yup, thats why you need a point of index. I.e. bump your nose up against your charging handle. It makes for more accurate shooting so you may as well practice that consistent eye relief either way >a seperate tool Buy a micrometer immediately. They are 25 dollars and are incredibly useful for all crafts and ESSENTIAL for reloading. If you plan on doing any thing resembling long range, reloading is a borderline necesity as only you will be able to spec rounds to exactly what your barrel likes. 10 thousandths of an inch in bullet seat depth is the difference between .2 moa groups and .5 moa groups. At 1000 meters, that is easily the difference between a hit and a miss.
Robert Evans
>Buy a micrometer immediately. I have a stack - not everyone does. >nose to charging handle This is a good reference - I use it. Not everyone does. Anyway, I still think sighting on known standardized objects and making note of how they appear at a known range is the easier, more error free method.
Asher Nelson
>known range is more error free Thats your operative problem, "known range". How did you determine your known range? Tape measurs, marking spots as you go? Hope you had your tolerances tight. If you used a more accurate method you quickly find yourself in a realm of tools orders of magnitude more expensive than a micrometer. Knowing the exact measurement of your sight picture can be done at home, a reference can be taped to your stock or stuffed in your grip. In order to range objects in the field, it must be a known firing position. Not very useful if you're not operating on your own turf.
Chase Gonzalez
>How did you determine your known range? >you still need tools for your method Shit. Point taken. Carry on.
