Bracketing field targets

[RonnieD]

I shoot field target. I shoot a tx200 in hunter class. My former scope was a fixed 16 power SWFA. I used the mil dot bracketing formula to make a distance sheet. My new scope is a moa scope. The formula is different from the mil dot formula, but here is the question. The new scope is set to range moa at 25 power. I am range finding at 16 power. Does anyone know how to adjust the moa range finding formula to work at different.
powers? I understand that at 12 1/2 power is double and 50 power is one half, but how about 16 power? Thanks if you can understand this. 

 

[chasdicapua]

That's above my pay grade Ron!

 

[shootermeb]

Hopefully this is what you are trying to figure out...

For a second focal plane scope, take the reticle power (where the reticle is correctly defined) and divide by the new power. In your case 25 / 16 = 1.5625. This states if your hash marks are 1 MOA apart at 25 power, then at 16 power the marks have a 1.5625 MOA separation.

You'll see this same conversion works for your other examples,

25 / 12.5 = 2 ;

25 / 50 = 0.5

 

[RonnieD]

Shootermeb, that is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you!

 

[OkAirgunner]

Just put an object out at the different distances and find out what the measurement is. That way you are confident that a distance is accurate.

 

[Scotchmo]

Just put an object out at the different distances and find out what the measurement is. That way you are confident that a distance is accurate.

That’s a must do with many SFP scopes. You can’t assume that the factory numbers on the magnification ring are accurate enough. And compare it to the math. They are often close but I’ve measured some that are off by a significant amount. A fairly low priced 6-24x50 scope with only a 15x mark that actually gives me 17x. I’ve got one of those. I had bought a cheap 6-24x50 where the 16x mark tested out to under 12x, so I sent that one back.

 

[RonnieD]

I absolutely take real world measurements. Wanting to know the math is just a touch of my ocd showing through.

I like comparing what I am getting in the field to what the math says things should be. Thanks to all that replied.

 

[josh3rd]

Hopefully this is what you are trying to figure out...

For a second focal plane scope, take the reticle power (where the reticle is correctly defined) and divide by the new power. In your case 25 / 16 = 1.5625. This states if your hash marks are 1 MOA apart at 25 power, then at 16 power the marks have a 1.5625 MOA separation.

You'll see this same conversion works for your other examples,

25 / 12.5 = 2 ;

25 / 50 = 0.5

With all that being said, if a hawke Airmax 30sf is true at 10x, I divide it by 16x it equals .625 between enter of mildot to center of next mildot at 100yds correct? 



Now if I have mil reticule but moa 1/4" @ 100yds, what is 4 clicks equate to? 

 

[Scotchmo]

With all that being said, if a hawke Airmax 30sf is true at 10x, I divide it by 16x it equals .625 between enter of mildot to center of next mildot at 100yds correct? 



Now if I have mil reticule but moa 1/4" @ 100yds, what is 4 clicks equate to?

4 clicks equals 1” @ 100yds.

And in your case, at 16x, 9 clicks equals the distance between consecutive mil-dots.

note: 1/4 moa clicks are not quite the same as 1/4” @ 100yds