Tikka T3x TAC A1 6.5 Creedmoor (Optic question for a newbie)

F

Fromwithin

New member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Hello everyone,
I just recently picked up my brand new Tikka TAC A1 and now require a scope.
I am leaning heavily to the NightForce 8-32X56 w/ MOAR-T Reticle

I'm also looking to get a 20MOA scope mount for this rifle as I plan on using this rifle as a long range 600+ yard target shooter. My question is, if I go with a
20MOA base, will I be able to zero this rifle in for shorter range shots say at 100 yds?

If I'm understanding the 20MOA base correctly, it angles the scope down towards the barrel, essentially giving you an extra 20 MOA (inches) of elevation?


Thanks
 
I was set on the 8-32 as well. All of my research pointed to the 5.5-22. Still more than enough out past 600. I have no first hand experience with the higher magnification NF, but read that it got darker and washed out much past 22x anyways.
You'll have no trouble with a 20 moa base either way.
 
If you want really good optics consider the K624i ffp mil mil, I use one on a hunting rig and most rested shots are done with 24mag even at dawn dusk. On my main hunting rifle I use a S&B PMII ultra short 3-20 which allows closer quick off-hand shots as well as longer range shots. Just a bit pricy. If it is only prone shooting on a range then one could consider something like a Kahles 10-50 which has fantastic optics. Most scopes will handle 20MOA.
edi
 
Be careful on the mil ml advice above...

It may be good advice if you are not already accustomed to MOA, but if you are, it can be a hard habit to break.

I've been shooting MOA for so long that mentally converting between mils and MOA just slows my reaction time. At this point I'm just better off to stick with MOA for myself.

Its like you need to be on one side of the fence or the other. Pick one (either one) and make sure everything you have and everything you get follows suit.
 
Agreed. I shoot moa and I'm pretty sure I will always shoot moa. As far as the base is concerned, I would not worry about getting a 20 moa cant. The NF NXS has 100 moa of adjustment if I am not mistaken. The 6.5 will be well below supersonic by the time you max that optic out.

As far as optics go i have had the kahles 624i, S&B ultra short, gen II razor, NF ATACR 5-25x56 and 4-16x50, and of course the NXS 8-32 And 5.5-22. In my experience, anything over 25x is not necessary. You will be very pleased with the NXS 5.5-22.
 
Badbadger said:
In my experience, anything over 25x is not necessary. .
Click to expand...

Agreed...

The only exception where I think you could get value out of higher magnification is the rare occasion where winds are dead and mirage is super clear... Like just as fog clears.

Usually mirage will wash out and smear the image to the point where more than 25x just looks like a smudge.
 
I have heard great things about the NF 7-35 and the S&B 5-45.

However, at $5K plus I would hope they are pretty nice.

You could maybe use those mags during winter shooting.
 
Go with mils. Everybody else you shoot with will most likely be working in mils, including spotters. I see it all the time at training courses and in competitions - the ones with MOA scopes are always left in the dust on wind calls, spotting misses etc. as everyone else is working in mils.

I don't understand the conversion argument. You shouldn't be converting anything when you are behind the rifle. Your reticle is a ruler, whether it is in mils or MOA. If your system is in mils, think in mils. If your system is in MOA, think in MOA. The reticle and the bullet will tell the story.

As for 20 moa base, you will be more than fine with a 20 moa base.
 
Last edited:
kthomas said:
Go with mils. Everybody else you shoot with will most likely be working in mils, including spotters. I see it all the time at training courses and in competitions - the ones with MOA scopes are always left in the dust on wind calls, spotting misses etc. as everyone else is working in mils.

I don't understand the conversion argument. You shouldn't be converting anything when you are behind the rifle. Your reticle is a ruler, whether it is in mils or MOA. If your system is in mils, think in mils. If your system is in MOA, think in MOA. The reticle and the bullet will tell the story.

As for 20 moa base, you will be more than fine with a 20 moa base.
Click to expand...

Have to agree with this guy. I started MOA and made the jump to Mils quite easily. You don't need to think in MOA vs inches, just think in MILs and that is it.
 
kthomas said:
Go with mils. Everybody else you shoot with will most likely be working in mils, including spotters. I see it all the time at training courses and in competitions - the ones with MOA scopes are always left in the dust on wind calls, spotting misses etc. as everyone else is working in mils.

I don't understand the conversion argument. You shouldn't be converting anything when you are behind the rifle. Your reticle is a ruler, whether it is in mils or MOA. If your system is in mils, think in mils. If your system is in MOA, think in MOA. The reticle and the bullet will tell the story.

As for 20 moa base, you will be more than fine with a 20 moa base.
Click to expand...

This fella gets it, there is no converting, just look, read and shoot.
 
Wow, thanks for all the replies everyone...
Lots of experience on here.

Interesting that a few of you say 22x is all you need. I will certainly take that into consideration as I have never even shot out past 200 yds. I would love to make a 1000yrd shot and I assume I would have no issue with 22x?

So the recital of MIL-R is better choice to go with?

Forgive my ignorance, I want o learn and if anyone could point me in a direction to learn it would certainly be appreciated.

Thanks again!
 
In my opinion, it all boils down to what your comfortable with. I think yards and inches, there for MOA suites my shooting. If you think meters and cm then go mils for sure. And like mentioned before, use the same system then the people you shoot with use. Everyone I know and shoot with use MOA.

And let's not forget 1/4 moa adjustment is finer then mils haha
 
Badbadger said:
In my opinion, it all boils down to what your comfortable with. I think yards and inches, there for MOA suites my shooting. If you think meters and cm then go mils for sure. And like mentioned before, use the same system then the people you shoot with use. Everyone I know and shoot with use MOA.

And let's not forget 1/4 moa adjustment is finer then mils haha
Click to expand...

With matching reticles/turrets now dont think in inches or cms think in MOA or MILs.
 
Ryan.M.Anderson said:
With matching reticles/turrets now dont think in inches or cms think in MOA or MILs.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean. You need to think both inches and yards. 1 moa is (roughly) one inch at 100 yards, 2 inches at 200 yards ECT. That's why if you think in yards and inches, using the MIL system you have to do the conversion from cm/m.
 
I dunno, I think MOA is the way to go, but I go by inches. The math is not the problem, its the reference to how much you missed, ( 12" low, 3ft or whatever ). I have no idea without converting, what centimetres looks like for MILS.
But if measuring your target by the reticle, like Ryan suggests, after the shot you measure by how many MILS or MOA that you missed, not inches or centimetres. Just hold off or use the turrets to adjust. My next rifle scope is going to be a SHV F1 MOAR.
 
THis is why FFP (First Focal Plane) is a must as far as I am concerned. FFP can be a SFP (second focal plane) if you choose to use it as one but not vise versa.

The whole point of FFP with MILs is that you don’t need any unit of measurement to figure out misses or hold off. The reticle acts as a ruler at any magnification. Miss high or low by X amount of hash marks on the reticle, dial in the correction, fire again. MOA or MiL work the same way with a FFP scope but, in my opinion, MIL is far more simple because it works in multiple of 10, just like our metric system.

Having ranges in yard and meters and targets in MOA or inches is all pretty confusing.
 
Lead hammer said:
I dunno, I think MOA is the way to go, but I go by inches. The math is not the problem, its the reference to how much you missed, ( 12" low, 3ft or whatever ). I have no idea without converting, what centimetres looks like for MILS.
But if measuring your target by the reticle, like Ryan suggests, after the shot you measure by how many MILS or MOA that you missed, not inches or centimetres. Just hold off or use the turrets to adjust. My next rifle scope is going to be a SHV F1 MOAR.
Click to expand...

Badbadger said:
Not sure what you mean. You need to think both inches and yards. 1 moa is (roughly) one inch at 100 yards, 2 inches at 200 yards ECT. That's why if you think in yards and inches, using the MIL system you have to do the conversion from cm/m.
Click to expand...

You guys are completely missing the point.

Why think in inches? Does your reticle measure inches? Or does it have hash marks in MOA?

You miss targets by half an MOA, 0.3 MOA, 1 MOA, 1.5 MOA, etc. Who cares who many inches that is? It doesn't matter.

Same thing using a mil scope. If I miss the center of the target by 0.2 mils because I was off on my wind call, guess what? I'm not converting that to inches because I don't give a sh*t about how many inches it is. I adjust by 0.2 mils, what the reticle told me, pull the trigger and get a hit.

No need to overcomplicate this, there's already enough things you have to think about when you are behind a rifle and getting ready to pull the trigger.
 
Anyone born in Canada prior to 1970 grew up with inches and feet. While we can also measure using metric instead, in our minds we are always translating to a unit of measure what we have spent our lives relating to.

Unless there is no other means of measuring we will naturally use inches, feet, yards and miles.

My 16 year old daughter has trouble going the other way... she thinks in metric values and cannot relate to how big a foot is, without considerable pause. You don't have time for that pause during a competition.

It does not make one person wrong and the other person right any different than a person who speaks Italian and not German.

What is wrong is to attempt to use a tool that you cannot personally relate to because that will just slow down your decision making processes.

A point was made above relating to feedback from other competitors who use mils when you are in minutes.... just because some guys use one, does not justify an argument that everyone must follow suit. Again, you must use what you are personally most competent with.

To this conversion point... just carry a laminated mils to minutes conversion table so you can translate the values, then get back into your comfort zone and move forward.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom