Does anybody know of a good easy to understand source on better understanding mil-dot reticles and mil usage in general? Thinking of purchasing a scope and I am looking at one with with mil-dot reticle, but do not know much about this area of shooting.

Thanks

I know there are a number of videos and other explanations of using a reticle calibrated in milliradians on the ’net, and because the subject is a little complicated to explain in detail in a reasonable post here, I’d recommend looking at them.

A couple of comments, though.

First, the old traditional “mildot” reticle with its dots strung on the crosshairs at 1 milliradian (MRAD/mil) intervals is generally considered obsolete. An example:




Most manufacturers I’m familiar with don’t even offer that as an option any more. Better are the many designs that are similar to Leupold’s Tactical Milling Reticle (TMR). This is one version of theirs.




The TMR has finer divisions that permit more accurate and precise measurements that we make with such reticles than the old mildot style.

Many reticles these days are even more complex for various purposes, such as this Horus.




Not everyone, however, likes the more complicated reticles for a variety of reasons. I have versions of both styles, and generally prefer the simpler design, but using the other style is mostly a matter of practice and becoming accustomed to its features.

The primary original purpose of calibrated reticles was for range estimation and to adjust one’s point of aim without dialing the correction needed with the elevation knob. If we knew that the target required 1 mil of elevation, we can use the 1 mil mark below the center of the crosshairs for aiming rather than dialing up 1 mil on the elevation adjustment.

Probably the most common uses calibrated reticles are put to these days are wind and moving target holds. Because winds often change frequently, if the shooter wants to hold a mil left for a 9:00 o’clock wind, it’s quicker to use the reticle to aim off as required rather than dialing five or 10 clicks left and holding on the center of the target.
Although not commonly used for the purpose these days because of the proliferation of inexpensive laser rangefinders, calibrated reticles can also be used for range estimation.

The formula:
object size × 27.8 ÷ object size in milliradians = range to the target in yards

For example, this is the view of an average American man’s 9 inch head through the scope equipped with the TMR.




Using the formula:
9 inches × 27.8 = 250.2 ÷ 1 mil ≈ 250 yards

Although range estimation using a calibrated reticle works fine in theory, in practice it’s often a different tale. It’s necessary to know pretty precisely the size of the target, and measuring with the reticle is often difficult. The method can give rough results, but being precise is somewhat tricky.

Added: Although my experience is with reticles calibrated in mils, and that’s what I prefer, many sights these days are available with reticles calibrated in minutes of angle. The principles of using MOA reticles are the same as with mils, but the calculations are of course different.

I won't comment on the issue of ranging with mil dot's. its a skill laser rangefinders have obsoleted except perhaps in the apocalypse. But in terms of a mil dot reticle, it works like any other assuming you have mil turrets. Find the required adjustment and either dial it or hold it. So not exactly sure your concern...

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
So not exactly sure your concern...

Who is concerned? Which of us are you addressing, and what are you referring to?

As for range estimations we agree that laser rangefinders have largely eliminated the need to use calibrated reticles for that, but not entirely. Rangefinders don’t always work for the purpose and therefore professional shooters should be able to use alternate methods, including employing reticles.

When I started using Mil dot reticles, I found a lot of good info on millets website, in the end though, it’s just another way to measure drop.

I make my load, chrono it out of the rifle make a drop chart, verify the drop and print it then tape it to the gun.

It’s pretty simple, 10 clicks to 1 mil, round up or down (1.22 miles would be 12 clicks). Aim, then send it.

I use the range finder, then either dial with the scope or hold with the dots. What works well for me.

I’m not a professional shooter or even a great shooter, just Very serious mountain hunter here in AK, I like the SWFA scopes and I have a few nightforce nxs scopes with MILr reticles, I just maintain proficiency out to 600yds, never really shoot past that.

The OP sigfreund. To express a bit more what part of the mil reticle he is asking for help on.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
The OP sigfreund. To express a bit more what part of the mil reticle he is asking for help on.

Ah. I did not understand “concern” to mean “request for information” so I was not certain and thought perhaps your comment applied to something I posted. Thanks for clarifying.

I understood his post to be a general request for information about how the mildot system was used.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
The OP sigfreund. To express a bit more what part of the mil reticle he is asking for help on.

To clarify I am asking more about the Horus type reticle with the "mil-tree" how to understand and go about using that type reticle. Specifically the Primary Arms Griffin 1-8x Scope is what I am looking at, the reticle is similar to the previously shown Horus reticle.

Also thanks for the responses received so far.

Here you go. All of Ryan Cleckner's video content is great.




Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5AGsHSIsVo

Mils hurt my brain. I tried with one optic and my brain just refused.

So next optic I grabbed a MOA scope w/ MOA turrets. Easy for me to think of a MOA as a inch @ 100 yards. Do easy math at 300 yards = 3" is 1 MOA.

For the casual shooter I think MOA is more intuitive if you know your reticles hash marks.

Now that we have the scope model, start with reviewing the following links. Specific questions will then be easier to address.

scope video

scope instructions

Search for “using the horus reticle” and the results are several videos. The top ones pertain specifically to the Tremor, but the principles are all the same.

In short, though, calibrated reticles permit precise “holds” for elevation and windage that would otherwise require the shooter to adjust the sight settings. Their use requires knowledge of the ballistics of the load being fired, but once we have that it doesn’t really matter whether the reticle is calibrated in milliradians or minutes of angle. I prefer mils because I’m accustomed to thinking in decimal numbers, i.e., 1, 10, 100, etc.

Here is a good discussion of why some of us prefer using mils:
https://www.snipershide.com/pr...mils-vs-moa-vs-iphy/

In any event, once we know what adjustment is required for a particular shot we can use the reticle to change the point of aim rather than dialing the change. For example, if I need to raise the POA by 2.5 mils, I place the intersection of the vertical crosshair and the 2.5 mil mark below the horizontal crosshair on the target when aiming.

The same principle is used when using the reticle to adjust for wind effects. If the wind will blow my bullet 0.5 mil to the right by the time it reaches the target, I move my point of aim over to the left by that amount (0.5 mil) when shooting.

The complicated grid below the horizontal crosshair in the Horus and similar reticles permits combining wind and elevation holds.

All that was possible way back in the days before calibrated reticles were developed, but the calibration marks make it much more precise rather than just estimating by eye.

quote:

Originally posted by Super Shooter:
Does anybody know of a good easy to understand source on better understanding mil-dot reticles and mil usage in general? Thinking of purchasing a scope and I am looking at one with with mil-dot reticle, but do not know much about this area of shooting.

Thanks

1 MIL rad = 2 x PI / 1000
1 MOA = 1/60 DEG

The concept of MOA and MIL-DOT is the same. But when you do the math between the two systems, MOA becomes easier whenn your shooting concept is layed out aroun inches and yards. When you are used to meters, MIL DOT is easier to comput.

The tangens of 1 Mil rad computes better wiht metric numbers. The tangens of 1 MOA computes better with yards.

Super Shooter -- Let's get a little better idea on how you intend to use this Primary Arms 1-8X scope.
- What rifle will it go on?
- What ammo will you use?
- Targets -- type, size, and distance?
- What are you accuracy expectations?

******
There can be boatloads of discussions on reticles, however they should be tailored to the shooter's needs. Topics that work for a long-distance PRS-type competitor probably mean little to someone looking for a scope on a defensive carbine or a 3-gun AR15.

Well, since we're talking about a 1-8, we're definitely not talking long range and ranging with a reticle is so 20th century.

Rather than trying to understand formulae of various complexity to try to figure out where to hold, I second the direction in which fritz is trying to take this discussion and I won't get in the way because he's got this.

The only thing I will say is this: Ultimately, you should not be doing calculations in your head to try to figure out holds and stuff. You should be able to see the wind and say something like that flag is showing me 2.5MIL right. Or that cow that just got blown over means 21MIL left. Distance should also be the same way: that target at what look like 250yards needs 2.6MIL up.

So the questions from fritz are dead on. Maybe you don't need a tree reticle, but maybe you do.

This isn’t to dispute any comments by the other knowledgeable shooters, but a bit more information of possible value to anyone who is having trouble following the discussion about holds.

Although these are not the best illustrations, they show what the “tree” type reticle can do for us.
Assume that the small circles below are the targets, and because of wind and target distance we want to hold 5 mils high and 2 mils right.

With a simpler milling reticle those holdoff distances must be estimated by eye, and the sight picture would look something like this. (With a very large target as pictured for the illustrations, eyeball estimates would no doubt work fine. What would be the results if the target was 1/5 or 1/10 the size, however?)




If we have the Horus-like Christmas tree reticle, our holds can be much more precise.

I prefer mils over MOA...simply because the numbers are smaller. The clicks are the the clicks though. I also prefer "Christmas tree" reticles because the wind holds are easy.

I can argue in favor of Moa or mils...just depends on who's paying the hourly rate really. What's more important imo and for the way I shoot is first focal plane. If you use a FFP scope, the hold overs/clicks are ridiculously easy. Hold shoot, done. the unit of measure is irrelevant as long as you've memorized your holds (or have a cheater card taped to your stock)

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:
I prefer mils over MOA...simply because the numbers are smaller.

For me it’s the fact that with mils it’s 10 clicks* per basic unit (mil) versus four† per minute of angle: “How many clicks is 1.7 MOA? Hmm …; let’s see: four for the 1.0; plus two to 1.5; then one more to 1.75; about seven total,” as compared with, “How many clicks is 1.7 mils? Move the decimal point; yeah: 17.”

Of course as has pointed out here, if we can see the adjustment knob, why would we count? (Except, perhaps, as a confirmation.) But sometimes some of us may need to rely on counting. That’s why many such scopes have zero stops: so we can dial back to a known starting point without looking.

* Yes, some scope adjustments are either five or 20 clicks per 1 mil, but they are rare.
† Equally rare, AFAIK, are scopes with eight clicks per MOA. As I recall, my old Redfield 3200 has 1/8 MOA per click adjustments.

Mils are not complicated. They are a unit of angular measurement the same as MOA, not voodoo.

1 mil = 1 meter at 1000 meters
.1 mil = 10cm at 1000 meters
1 mil = 10cm at 100 meters
.1 mil = 1cm at 100 meters

1 mil = 36 inches at 1000 yards
.1 mil = 3.6 inches at 1000 yards
1 mil = 3.6 inches at 100 yards
.1 mil = .36 inches at 100 yards

You might notice a pattern. It does not mater what unit of measurement you choose, a single mil is the distance to the item being measured, in the unit of measurement of your choice, divided by 1000. It is just easier (or faster) to handle in metric because there is no need to convert to inches.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:
I prefer mils over MOA...simply because the numbers are smaller.

For me it’s the fact that with mils it’s 10 clicks* per basic unit (mil) versus four† per minute of angle: “How many clicks is 1.7 MOA? Hmm …; let’s see: four for the 1.0; plus two to 1.5; then one more to 1.75; about seven total,” as compared with, “How many clicks is 1.7 mils? Move the decimal point; yeah: 17.”

Of course as has pointed out here, if we can see the adjustment knob, why would we count? (Except, perhaps, as a confirmation.) But sometimes some of us may need to rely on counting. That’s why many such scopes have zero stops: so we can dial back to a known starting point without looking.

* Yes, some scope adjustments are either five or 20 clicks per 1 mil, but they are rare.
† Equally rare, AFAIK, are scopes with eight clicks per MOA. As I recall, my old Redfield 3200 has 1/8 MOA per click adjustments.

Yeah, that last bit is wrong. There are plenty of 1/8MOA-knobbed riflescopes. If you go to an F-class match; virtually ALL scopes there are 1/8 MOA and they are from many different manufacturers and models.

I suspect the same at Benchrest matches, but I don't know for sure.

You are detecting a trend here, with high precision requirements come higher precision tools such as 1/8MOA knobs.

Hunting and target shooting do not need 1/8MOA knobs. Well, maybe varmint shooters.