In the words of Ambien Walrus, "Let's do this, man". Plus it'll bug the **** out of Trijicon. It's a win-win.Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSlide
Printable View
In the words of Ambien Walrus, "Let's do this, man". Plus it'll bug the **** out of Trijicon. It's a win-win.Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSlide
I need to find my reference, but I've got it pretty firmly stuck in my head that it's actually closer to 1.7MOA. Kinda like how Aimpoint advertised the first-flight T1 as 4MOA when it's actually smaller....Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietShootr
Anyway, I'm better than 90% on that, but need to find my cheat-sheet (we ginned it up as a part of creating imagery as to how the horseshoe-dot on the SDO and chevron on the RCO are similar in usage in spite of being so different in appearance...consider the audience....) so I can confirm that I'm not mixing it up with something else.
Gonna dig for it, but I imagine that what you have planned would bear the info out one way or another, and it's a simple thing to hang two different-sized dots and just go with the one that matches.
Oh, good to know. Given that, I'll prepare a range of dots on the paper from 1-2.5 MOA and we'll get this nailed down exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by JSantoro
So stupid. Why don't they just provide the information? If there was another scope that was comparable to this one I'd buy it just because of their attitude.
Just to document the formulae,
if you're at 100 yards exactly, 1 inch is .955 minutes of arc. So if
i is your measurement in inches,
minutes = i * .955
If you're not at 100 yds,
let d be the dist. to the target in yards,
and i be your measurement in inches
Then minutes = 95.5 * i/d
For the mathematically inclined, here I'm assuming that arctan(theta)=theta, a perfectly fine assumption for these small angles.
By the way, I'll put more credence in our measurements of actual reticles than in any info from the manfacturer.
Add: Going over my table to check the formulae, I found that I had miscopied some data and made some rounding errors. Fixed now. And typos in the formulae are now fixed. This time for sure.
I think I'll try to lay hands on an aimpoint magnifier before I do this, since it will probably enhance the precision.
The 3x Aimpoint magnifier I used was pretty sensitive to vertical alignment with the ACOG. My mounts were as different heights, and I had to move my eye around to see the crosshairs on the NSN. The view wasn't pretty but it worked.
I suppose you should put the 3x Aimpoint objective where your eye would be, in other words allow "eye relief" between the 3x Aimpoint and the ACOG. I didn't do this, which may be why I had trouble.
This is not necessary when using the 3x magnifier with the Aimpoint 1x red dot, because the 1x exit pupil is giant and the eye relief is 0 - infinity.
From the top of the donut:
Upper thicknes off donut 0.8MOA
Hole of the donut 2.2MOA
Lower edge of the donut 4.0MOA
400 line 6.0MOA, width 4.1MOA
500 line 9.7MOA, width 3.3MOA
600 line 14.3MOA, width 2.5MOA
700 line 20.3MOA, width 2.4MOA
800 line 27.7MOA, width 2.1MOA
Thickness of non-illuminated lines .4MOA
5.56?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippo
Ok just pulled a bullet. Took all the measurement length, width etc. entered the data into the PDA. With standard station and pressure. I used a BC of .304 and the G7 drag table. mV of 2900fps bullet measured .2225 wide and .905 long.
For a 600m engagement off a 100m zero you will need +4mils or +13.8 moa
If you're using G7 you need to use a BC of 0.151 for M855...at least according to the data I have. I'm going to stop being lazy and see what that comes up with also.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICANHITHIMMAN