Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

This is the place to discuss and compare all outdoor optics. Sponsored by
Euro Optic, and, Titanium Gunworks.

Moderators: thechamp, Dom

Post Reply
MM
Meister der jagd
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:41 pm
Location: Ohio
Location: Ohio

Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by MM »

Since I purchased my K95 a few years ago I have shot 19 animals with it but only 4 of them at a distance greater than 200 yards. Antelope at 325 yards, mule deer at 292 yards, axis deer at 212 yards and a mt. goat at 278 yards. A few years ago I went mt. goat hunting in BC and my only opportunity came afternoon of the last day and it was a little over 600 yards away. I was not prepared to take that shot with the equipment I had so the hunt ended without a shot. I went to Alaska September 2021 to try again and this time I used an older Swarovski scope with a TDS reticle that I got a good deal on, but in the end I didn’t even need it. I printed out the ballistic chart on their website and shot in the field to confirm and as I was expecting it was close but not precise enough to make me feel comfortable. In practice I felt more comfortable shooting at 478 yards than I did at 425 yards because oh how the crosshairs lined up with the ballistics of my load. With my cartridge and load I feel comfortable shooting game to 300 yards without touching the scope but I am trying to find the best solution (for me) for distances of 300 to 600 yards. This will be used on travel hunts so it will be used in a variety of conditions, altitude, temperature, humidity etc.
Ballistic Turret: if I work up my load and verify clicks in one set of conditions will it be accurate enough in a different location 300-600 yards?
Custom Turret : really the same question as above.
Ballistic reticle: I need to play around with it a bit more but it does not seem precise enough to me but does take some of the guess work of holdover. The reticle is a little busy compared to what I am used to but it is marginally faster.
Traditional turrets with dust caps: Is it advisable to just have a ballistic card and use the more traditional turrets to make my adjustments? I wouldn’t have a zero stop, I would have to remove the cap and not lose it, counting all the clicks will be a little slower, but since 300 yard plus shots are so rare would this be workable.
If I was going to take a shot at 300 yards+ I am making the assumption I will have time to get set up with a good rest and make any adjustments or I wouldn’t take the shot. I appreciate any experiences.
Matt

Rifletuner
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:29 pm
Location: Melbourne AU

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by Rifletuner »

In my opinion, BDC compensation is an outdated concept. If you have a Swaro with a ballistic turret, you can fit a custom turret and just dial whatever ballistics you need for the exact distance. I have one of these on my sons Z5 3.5-18 https://www.customscopeturrets.com/prod ... ion-Turret

We just range the target, get the data from an app (though a printout would work to about 500-600 yards, or further if it includes the relevant atmospherics for the environment you are shooting) and hold the crosshair on the point of impact. We do hold for wind, but this approach takes most of the guess work out of it (you still have to dope wind).

In the case of my sons Z5, we removed the factory zero stop when we installed the turret. That takes us from being restricted to one revolution (13.25MOA) to two revolutions with a total of 28MOA.

User avatar
SPEEDY
Moderator
Posts: 11282
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:50 am
Location: Southern highland- Australia
Location: Albury, NSW, Australia

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by SPEEDY »

I'm for traditional target turrets, various ballistic turrets are great for certain situations, but if your shooting at an angle ect then their data is off.
A better bet is to know your limitations and except the fact that that sometimes you simply don't have a shot, LR requires a lot of practice to make you able to take a 500m + shot at an actual living thing.
Knowing your maximum point blank range and sticking to it is the best way I've found without spending a lot of time practising.
I'm soft and I don't care. :dance:

dchamp
Meister der jagd
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:42 pm
Location: USA
Location: Bakersfield, CA

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by dchamp »

I either dial it up or use a mil reticle, my favorite being the Horus TreMor3. The TreMor 3 is very fast for long range and while you can range with it I would use a range finder that will give you horizontal distance when dealing with slope. I would also have a weather meter like a Kestrel. Atmospherics can matter when shooting long distances. The ballistic app I use is Strelok Pro. You can input the weather conditions from kestrel to adjust a shot solution. Horus also has a range finder and weather meter that will bluetooth to their phone app for shot solutions.

The two scopes that I am currently using for long range shooting are the Horus 5-20x50 with the Tremor3 and the Z51 3.5-18 P IW with the ballistic turret. With the Horus I mostly just use the reticle and the Z5i the turret. I for one like the zero stop. I get 53 clicks from zero. With the rifle and load I am shooting it will max out along with my load. Life is good.
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo

The fact that Jellyfish have survived 650 million years, despite not having brains, gives hope to many people. sun-gazing.com

BlaserBado
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2021 12:40 pm
Location: Tanzania

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by BlaserBado »

Great question that we all need to face once we stretch out the distance on game. For ethical hunting, meaning achieving a high degree of probability of quick kills, we need dependable and accurate correction.

My first venture into longer shots began by using a quality scope that had a mil-dot reticle. It was also second focal plane, so attention to power setting was essential. After many and careful calculations, I prepared a sheet and taped it to my butt stock. It has distances in yards, corresponding power setting, and also 10 mile per hour wind drift for each range. This set up was used with a rangefinder that only gave distance in yards. This was OK and I practiced a lot from close range out to about 500 yards. This however lacked the ability to adjust accurately for varying altitudes and for varying shooting angles.

Next came the purchase of the Leica 1600-B (if I recall the model correctly) rangefinder. This was a game changer! This tiny device will range, then spit out a MOA (minute of angle) solution (e.g. 3.7 MOA) taking into consideration the atmospheric pressure, the temperature, and angle of inclination. This was paired with a scope that has an elevation turret in 1/4 MOA per clicks. Now I could range, receive a firing solution, dial the elevation turret, and hold using the main horizontal reticle line.

Next, I had the opportunity to buy the Leica 2700 model rangefinder when it was introduced. The main difference between it and my previous one, was the addition of a micro SC card. Now I could go on-line, input the exact data for my load (rather than choosing the nearest ballistic curve from a limited number of options), and program the chip. The operation was the same as before, range and a MOA correction was displayed, but the solution was based not on a generic ballistic trajectory but upon my specific one.

My suggestion would be what I should have done from the beginning. Getting a rifle scope that has both MOA reticle marks as well as 1/4 MOA elevation turret. My sights are on buying the Leica Amplus 6 that is 3-18x44 and has an illuminated tiny red dot. Coupled with a Leica rangefinder or equivalent, this is how versatile the set up will be.
1) Range the animal or rock or target. Rangefinder will take into account the atmospheric pressure (altitude adjustment), temperature, and inclination. Immediately you have a number given. For example 3.70 MOA.
2) You can quickly do one of two things:
a) Quickly crank your power to max (if second focal plane scope that requires full power for reticle to be in calibration) if it is not already there, and hold just before the 4th mark (since 3.70 is not quite 4.0) on the reticle.
b) Reach up and dial the elevation turret to 3.75 (or the bold 3 and just past to the third small mark). Then aiming is using the large horizontal reticle line.
Disclaimer: All this does not discuss WIND. That is a whole different matter.
However, this is my preference to have the option of using either reticle or turret. Using the turret can give the most accurate aiming when there is time. Using the reticle can avert a possible mistake. Namely, dialing the turret for a long shot, then forgetting and leaving it there, and the next shot is made in the heat of the opportunity and missing because it was not reset to zero.
I realize this will be only one of many, many suggestions.
BlaserBado

User avatar
stokesrj
Moderator
Posts: 5918
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: USA
Location: Mesa AZ, USA

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by stokesrj »

This is a subject that I have spent much time studying, selecting, trying, and trying to improve upon for quite a few cycles of learning. I started long range rifle work using MOA instead of Mil systems, I see wind in MOA because that's how I learned. But when I started shooting NRL22 almost every top shooter was using Mils and I inquired why, the simple answer is that it is a base 10 system rather than 1/4ths etc. I made the hard switch and soon learned something I didn't understand before. The European system of 10 cm at 100 meters is Mils.
I also always preferred a 2nd focal plane scope over a first focal plane scope because I never cared for the finer reticles at low power and thicker reticles at high power fo the 1st focal plane scopes. However I, have changed my mind on that, again by competing in NRL22 with my Vudoo V22 and Kahles K25i Dynamic Long Range. I really like this scope for competition because it is one revolution for 10 mils with a revolution indicator that is intuitive and lets me know at a glance how may revolutions the vertical turret is above zero.
But for hunting I prefer a smaller and lighter scope. My current choice is a Swarovski Z8i 1.7-13.3 X 42 with the flex turret. When paired with my Swarovski EL Range TA binoculars, I can quickly range an animal and the binoculars display the range on the top line and the Mils hold over on the second second line. It is a simple mater to move the decimal one place to derive the number of clicks to dial the turret.
I just used this system on a coues whitetail hunt this past weekend and it worked quickly and flawlessly. I still have my reservations about integrated range finder and Binoculars because the technology of range finders moves at a much faster pace than that of binoculars but for now I'm really liking this combination of Swarovski EL Range TA and Z8i with flex turret.
My retirement job is managing the sporting clays range at an Arizona Game and Fish shooting range and one of the benefits is that I can set up and take one shot a day, day after day on the high power rifle range. There is a metal ram Silhouette at 567 yards and I take my R8 or K95 with the Z8i and the EL Range TA binoculars and shoot one shot and only one shot several times a week. I do this with each of my barrels for the R8, 22 LR, 223, 308 and 300 win mag and my 308 K95. I go out before daylight and paint the target and when it is light enough to shoot I make the one shot and record my hit. Over time I have tuned the ballistic curves to fit and after many cycles of learning, I can now always place that first shot in the vitals of that ram with all but the 22LR which often takes two to three shots to get the wind right, I'm still working on that one. But with any of the center fire rigs that 567 yard shot is a chip shot. And by practicing and practicing, I can quickly read the range and mils, dial the scope and take the shot without thinking about it.
So this long winded explanation is use a turret and carefully tuned range finder with mils read out.
Robert J Stokes

User avatar
SPEEDY
Moderator
Posts: 11282
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:50 am
Location: Southern highland- Australia
Location: Albury, NSW, Australia

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by SPEEDY »

It that does highlight the key factor, to make a long range hit on game then you need to practice, and practice in different conditions.
Putting one shot where it nerds to be is no easy feat, anyone can get lucky but to make a clean hit on the vitals takes practice more then it takes equipment.

Any of the aforementioned scope types will do the job, some better then others as long as the shooter puts in the work to understand them and the rifle they are using.

I used to shoot a lot of LR on one property culling goats and there were a lot very messy kills until I realised it took more then equipment to make clean kills, it's not something you can get better at by spending more money, it's something that you yourself have to get better at.
There's nothing wrong with hunting that way if you can understand that one principle.
I'm soft and I don't care. :dance:

9.3x64
Meister der jagd
Posts: 4454
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 4:37 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by 9.3x64 »

What about wind....?
Life is too short to hunt with an ugly dog.
Hunt with a German Shorthaired Pointer.

MM
Meister der jagd
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:41 pm
Location: Ohio
Location: Ohio

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by MM »

For purposes of this conversation please make the assumption that we all agree on the following
1. You have to practice
2. Skill is more important than equipment
3. You must verify any ballistic charts with actual range shooting
4. Long range is defined S 300-600 yards
There has been some great information shared so far thank you. I have been shooting at extended for me ranges but I am trying to increase my knowledge base so that I can improve. Since gravity has a more consistent effect on trajectory than wind I have been focusing on bullet drop and once I am competent dealing with that then I will move on to wind and it’s effects.
I ran some calculations on the Hornady ballistics program to look at the effects of various inputs on the trajectory:
First I set altitude, pressure, temp, and humidity all at zero thinking hypothetically it would be like shooting in a vacuum and noted the trajectory in 25 yard increments to 600 yards.
Second I set them all at the maximum values that the program would allow
Third I set them all at the minimum value the program would allow
Then I set each one individually at the maximum and minimum imputs with the others set at zero
In all calculations the trajectory calculated was identical.
Assumption:
1. The program is wrong
2. Even though the program asks for those inputs it does not use them in the calculation
3. Those factors do not have an effect on trajectory at 600 yards and under
4. I don’t understand what I am doing and am showing my ignorance on this subject
If they don’t have any effect at the distances I am looking at a custom turret looks attractive because it could be used anywhere anytime which is completely opposite of my understanding to this point. I could also just have a card printed and click up with the standard hunting turret if need be but again contrary to my understanding so far.
Any observations?
Matt

User avatar
SPEEDY
Moderator
Posts: 11282
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:50 am
Location: Southern highland- Australia
Location: Albury, NSW, Australia

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by SPEEDY »

One thing I've found is 500 yards is easy, with any calibre out to that range getting a 1st round hit us very constant, any of the aforementioned turrets will work to that range.
Knowing now what I didn't know years ago I'd go custom turrets to 500 yards, but beyond that is when things change and that's when traditional adjustment becomes a must have.
Reticles I'd only use to 350 yards maybe 400 yards I open flat country.
But knowing your load and your gun is essential for consistency with any of those aids.
So I would suggest that if you limit your shits to 500 yards then get custom turrets made but if you want to to go any further then definitely get adjustable turrets.
I'm soft and I don't care. :dance:

Rod
Meister der jagd
Posts: 2004
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 1:01 am
Location: Brisbane
Location: Queensland, AUSTRALIA

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by Rod »

stokesrj wrote: Thu Dec 16, 2021 10:49 pm This is a subject that I have spent much time studying, selecting, trying, and trying to improve upon for quite a few cycles of learning. I started long range rifle work using MOA instead of Mil systems, I see wind in MOA because that's how I learned. But when I started shooting NRL22 almost every top shooter was using Mils and I inquired why, the simple answer is that it is a base 10 system rather than 1/4ths etc. I made the hard switch and soon learned something I didn't understand before. The European system of 10 cm at 100 meters is Mils.
I also always preferred a 2nd focal plane scope over a first focal plane scope because I never cared for the finer reticles at low power and thicker reticles at high power fo the 1st focal plane scopes. However I, have changed my mind on that, again by competing in NRL22 with my Vudoo V22 and Kahles K25i Dynamic Long Range. I really like this scope for competition because it is one revolution for 10 mils with a revolution indicator that is intuitive and lets me know at a glance how may revolutions the vertical turret is above zero.
But for hunting I prefer a smaller and lighter scope. My current choice is a Swarovski Z8i 1.7-13.3 X 42 with the flex turret. When paired with my Swarovski EL Range TA binoculars, I can quickly range an animal and the binoculars display the range on the top line and the Mils hold over on the second second line. It is a simple mater to move the decimal one place to derive the number of clicks to dial the turret.
I just used this system on a coues whitetail hunt this past weekend and it worked quickly and flawlessly. I still have my reservations about integrated range finder and Binoculars because the technology of range finders moves at a much faster pace than that of binoculars but for now I'm really liking this combination of Swarovski EL Range TA and Z8i with flex turret.
My retirement job is managing the sporting clays range at an Arizona Game and Fish shooting range and one of the benefits is that I can set up and take one shot a day, day after day on the high power rifle range. There is a metal ram Silhouette at 567 yards and I take my R8 or K95 with the Z8i and the EL Range TA binoculars and shoot one shot and only one shot several times a week. I do this with each of my barrels for the R8, 22 LR, 223, 308 and 300 win mag and my 308 K95. I go out before daylight and paint the target and when it is light enough to shoot I make the one shot and record my hit. Over time I have tuned the ballistic curves to fit and after many cycles of learning, I can now always place that first shot in the vitals of that ram with all but the 22LR which often takes two to three shots to get the wind right, I'm still working on that one. But with any of the center fire rigs that 567 yard shot is a chip shot. And by practicing and practicing, I can quickly read the range and mils, dial the scope and take the shot without thinking about it.
So this long winded explanation is use a turret and carefully tuned range finder with mils read out.
That would be a great way to test your gear and hone your shooting skills. :dance: would have to be the perfect way to gain knowledge and confidence in obtaining a first round hit.....exactly where you want it.

I reckon it would be a great experiment to see if your hit rate / accurancy altered with changes between shooting off a bi-pod, tri-pod and over bags. And I guess changes in light, temperature and mirage. (comparing hits between early morning or late afternoon etc)

Rod

User avatar
stokesrj
Moderator
Posts: 5918
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: USA
Location: Mesa AZ, USA

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by stokesrj »

All those factors play a part for sure. Of course reading the wind is the single most challenging aspect. I gave up a long time ago on dialing for wind I now just hold into the wind and watch the mirage if present or other clues, grass, leaves, etc. and when things look right, send it. I realize it is a subconscious thing but it beats a kestrel and setting turrets for wind consistently.
Robert J Stokes

Rod
Meister der jagd
Posts: 2004
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 1:01 am
Location: Brisbane
Location: Queensland, AUSTRALIA

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by Rod »

stokesrj wrote: Tue Dec 21, 2021 8:44 am All those factors play a part for sure. Of course reading the wind is the single most challenging aspect. I gave up a long time ago on dialing for wind I now just hold into the wind and watch the mirage if present or other clues, grass, leaves, etc. and when things look right, send it. I realize it is a subconscious thing but it beats a kestrel and setting turrets for wind consistently.
Yep :handgestures-thumbup: It's almost an Art....maybe even a Black Art. :lol:

Rod

Gamsjagd
Meister der jagd
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2018 2:04 pm
Location: das Heimat

Re: Turrets vs. Custom Turrets vs. Ballistic Reticle vs. traditional adustment

Post by Gamsjagd »

Ballistic turrets trued to your ammo are great. Under 800 yards atmospheric information is less critical and they work wonderfully.

Over 800 yards and atmospheric input is necessary for a higher degree of accuracy.

If you regularly shoot at 4500 feet elevation and you have drops to 600 on your turret you are probably good from sea level to 10,000 feet without much problem.

If you regularly shoot at sea level you are going to want to verify what your rifle is doing if you hunt at 10,000 feet.

Thomas Haugen is a Norwegian sniper and has done a lot of work on ballistic drop turrets, he uses them. https://www.youtube.com/user/sierra645

Post Reply

Return to “Optics - Hunting and Sport”