moa vs mils, the forbidden thread

G

giveemshell2

Private
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Feb 23, 2017
103
64
#1
Hello dead horse. Looking for some advice. Bought a scope from a hide member, turned out to be MOA, decided to live with my mistake since it was a LPVO and l’ll run it anyway.

Edit: decided to send in the other MOA scope and get MRAD. Its important to standardize within your shooting team..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Emerson0311
#2
giveemshell2 said:
Hello dead horse. Looking for some advice. Bought a scope from a hide member, turned out to be MOA, decided to live with my mistake since it was a LPVO and l’ll run it anyway.

Ordered a very expensive scope from a large online store in MRAD and I got an MOA scope lol 😆 completely wrong scope.

Should I just standardize MOA at this point like wtf.. I’ve only ever shot mils and there’s no version of any team shooting where someone I know speaks MOA rendering it kind of useless
Click to expand...
Send the expensive MOA back !
 
  • Like
Reactions: giveemshell2
#9
Maurygold said:
lol it's not a fallacy.

please tell me how .36 times a number is easier than 1 times a number??
Click to expand...

It is and if you are stupid enough to use linear numbers in your computing of ballistics then you deserve to think that way. There is no need for inches or cm and neither of the angular, MOA or Mil, is related to the linear. It's a fallacy people who don't know any better spread.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: MCHOG, LR1845, BJames and 14 others
#10
Maurygold said:
lol it's not a fallacy.

please tell me how .36 times a number is easier than 1 times a number??
Click to expand...
You don't measure in linear terms of inches, feet, meters, etc. You measure with marks on a ruler (your reticle). Regardless of what numbers are on the marks.

If I'm shooting and I miss, my spotter calls the correction in the unit of measurement. Not inches or centimeters. It's "Point 3 right" not "10 inches right".
 
  • Like
Reactions: TurdFerguson, BJames, MarshallDodge and 11 others
#11
clcustom1911 said:
You don't measure in linear terms of inches, feet, meters, etc. You measure with marks on a ruler (your reticle). Regardless of what numbers are on the marks.

If I'm shooting and I miss, my spotter calls the correction in the unit of measurement. Not inches or centimeters. It's "Point 3 right" not "10 inches right".
Click to expand...

See that is someone who knows what he is talking about and should be listened to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Barry Lougheed, MarshallDodge, 308pirate and 6 others
#12
clcustom1911 said:
You don't measure in linear terms of inches, feet, meters, etc. You measure with marks on a ruler (your reticle). Regardless of what numbers are on the marks.

If I'm shooting and I miss, my spotter calls the correction in the unit of measurement. Not inches or centimeters. It's "Point 3 right" not "10 inches right".
Click to expand...
This was my concern trying to screw with moa…
 
#16
Rob01 said:
It is and if you are stupid enough to use linear numbers in your computing of ballistics then you deserve to think that way. There is no need for inches or cm and neither of the angular, MOA or Mil, is related to the linear. It's a fallacy people who don't know any better spread.
Click to expand...

I use both just fine. So that doesn’t make sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doubloon and giveemshell2
#17
Rob01 said:
LOL Don't confuse the poor guy. ;)

Luckily most are true moa now and not shooter moa. But even with shooter moa you can use the reticle the same. Anyone who had a USO years back knows that. LOL
Click to expand...

Nothing better than trying to get a hit at 1400 yards and your spotter has shooter and you have true...

Mill is just mill. That's what hooked me once I let go of inches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 03machstock, giveemshell2 and Rob01
#18
Rob01 said:
LOL Don't confuse the poor guy. ;)

Luckily most are true moa now and not shooter moa. But even with shooter moa you can use the reticle the same. Anyone who had a USO years back knows that. LOL
Click to expand...

No you’re right. Thinking of miss is in angular movement is much easier than the inches based system every single last person has been using their entire life.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Steel+Killer, NewsShooter, giveemshell2 and 1 other person
#20
clcustom1911 said:
You don't measure in linear terms of inches, feet, meters, etc. You measure with marks on a ruler (your reticle). Regardless of what numbers are on the marks.

If I'm shooting and I miss, my spotter calls the correction in the unit of measurement. Not inches or centimeters. It's "Point 3 right" not "10 inches right".
Click to expand...

Yes. Because he already did the math. Argument totally invalid because an inches to angular was still the basis
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: giveemshell2 and Rob01
#21
Maurygold said:
I use both just fine. So that doesn’t make sense.
Click to expand...

Maurygold said:
No you’re right. Thinking of miss is in angular movement is much easier than the inches based system every single last person has been using their entire life.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't get it if you are converting to linear so I'll just go back to helping the OP not turn out that way. ;)
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: johnnyvw, Steel+Killer, hafejd30 and 1 other person
#22
Rob01 said:
It is and if you are stupid enough to use linear numbers in your computing of ballistics then you deserve to think that way. There is no need for inches or cm and neither of the angular, MOA or Mil, is related to the linear. It's a fallacy people who don't know any better spread.
Click to expand...

Every human spotting is interpreting the linear movement. That’s how humans measure things. If you think converting from inches to moa or mil leads to inaccuracy I’m intrigued
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Taylorbok, Steel+Killer, Makinchips208 and 1 other person
#24
JerkyFreak said:
Please explain
Click to expand...

Uh... Look up?

Maurygold said:
Every human spotting is interpreting the linear movement. That’s how humans measure things. If you think converting from inches to moa or mil leads to inaccuracy I’m intrigued
Click to expand...

The average guy can't tell you anything reasonable through a scope without a grid to measure with.

So why would we say "hey, you missed by 1 mill, that's 36" because we're at 1000, move 1 mil up".

We simply say "you need 1 mill up."


I've found people who use tape measures daily are particularly resistant to abandoning inches. I bought a metric tape measure to break myself, and it actually surprised me how much better it was working with imported parts getting whole numbers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vivacious Stallion, stanley_white and giveemshell2
#28
IMG_5075.jpeg
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: lockedandloaded, 91Eunozs, VargmatII and 12 others
#29
JerkyFreak said:
I only know of one "MOA". That is one 60th of a degree. What other MOA is there? Please explain.
Click to expand...

Some scopes have been sold as "shooters moa". They are truly 1" at 100, instead of the 1.047" at 100.

Out to 500 with the average hunter you'll never be bothered. But try 1000+ and suddenly you'll be frustrated if you find you mixed the two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JKW70
#30
chevy_man said:
Some scopes have been sold as "shooters moa". They are truly 1" at 100, instead of the 1.047" at 100.

Out to 500 with the average hunter you'll never be bothered. But try 1000+ and suddenly you'll be frustrated if you find you mixed the two.
Click to expand...
I am always telling shooters to stop converting angular measurements to linear measurements, if your reticle matches your turrets. It is an utterly moronic waste of time and energy. It creates a muddled thought process and mindset.

Unfortunately BDC reticles are a different matter.
 
#31
We all know '1" at 100 yards" is not 1 MOA. Who comes up with this shit? And who called that a MOA?

I've been using MOA for close to 2 decades now. It is no different than mills. Provided you don't mix the two, whats the problem?
 
#32
I’d swap to what you’re used to and what is standardized among your shooting group. It’s just easier in the long run

Leave inches or centimeters completely out of the conversation

And “shooters moa” vs moa you’re talking 10” for 1 moa on the dial vs 10.5” at 1000 yds

Stick to using the reticle. Call the shots using your reticle and make adjustments using your reticle or dial

Most of us can and do use both. The biggest issue comes when spotting and calling for each other or sharing dope. Basically the communication end of things
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnnyvw, Makinchips208 and XP1K
#33
Maurygold said:
Every human spotting is interpreting the linear movement. That’s how humans measure things. If you think converting from inches to moa or mil leads to inaccuracy I’m intrigued
Click to expand...

Lol dude you have no idea what you are talking about and I never want you to spot for me! Lol No one who knows how to use a scope calls corrections in any linear but you have fun. At least it’s worth a good laugh reading your posts.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: BJames, Steel+Killer, Sullypants1 and 2 others
#34
Holliday said:
I am always telling shooters to stop converting angular measurements to linear measurements, if your reticle matches your turrets. It is an utterly moronic waste of time and energy. It creates a muddled thought process and mindset.

Unfortunately BDC reticles are a different matter.
Click to expand...

Using your reticle vs your natural inclination as a human is moronic.

It assumes you have matching reticles and leaves you untrained to handle a situation without. Using linear allows shooter and spotter to ensure the correction is right adding redundancy.
 
  • Haha
  • Wow
Reactions: Steel+Killer, RRW and Aftermath
#35
Rob01 said:
Lol dude you have no idea what you are talking about and I never want you to spot for me! Lol No one who knows how to use a scope calls corrections in any linear but you have fun. At least it’s worth a good laugh reading your posts.
Click to expand...

Lol I call misses by the target. .5,1,2 targets l/r. That way my shooter can understand the call. I then return the correction in the moa/ mil to shooter.

Please don’t ever spot for me if you’re just going to call mil corrections at me
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Steel+Killer, Aftermath, Makinchips208 and 1 other person
#37
oldrifleman said:
If my spotter told me go left 15 inches I would replace that person by the next stage.
Click to expand...

That would be stupid. You’re spotter should see its 15 inches off then convert that to angular. I’m simply arguing that conversion with whole numbers is easier than .36 - which I guess deeply offends people

But thank you for supporting my point that humans naturally intake information likes this linearly in inches
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Schütze
#38
Maurygold said:
That would be stupid. You’re spotter should see its 15 inches off then convert that to angular. I’m simply arguing that conversion with whole numbers is easier than .36 - which I guess deeply offends people
Click to expand...
You simply don’t understand

It’s ok you can still learn

Most times it’s the OP who shows up to MIL vs MOA school. Rarely does someone like you step to the plate to absorb the knowledge 😁👍
 
#39
hafejd30 said:
You simply don’t understand

It’s ok you can still learn

Most times it’s the OP who shows up to MIL vs MOA school. Rarely does someone like you step to the plate to absorb the knowledge 😁👍
Click to expand...

I use both at least 3-4 times a month, every month, out to 1k. I understand plenty.

Usually it’s old guys like you stuck in there ways trying to gate keep this hobby who can’t accept new perspectives and ways of thinking.
 
#41
I don’t and was using that as an example I would treat someone calling left 1/2 target the exact same way. Does me absolutely no good, I still have to process target size to mils to adjust the scope unless I do hold overs😖
 
  • Like
Reactions: hafejd30
#42
oldrifleman said:
I don’t and was using that as an example I would treat someone calling left 1/2 target the exact same way. Does me absolutely no good, I still have to process target size to mils to adjust the scope unless I do hold overs😖
Click to expand...

Try reading. You’re just argueing a point no one is making. No one said to call thing in linear inches. People interpret things liberally in inches. I’m still suggesting the spotter and shooter confirm moa/mil drop
 
#44
Maurygold said:
I use both at least 3-4 times a month, every month, out to 1k. I understand plenty.

Usually it’s old guys like you stuck in there ways trying to gate keep this hobby who can’t accept new perspectives and ways of thinking.
Click to expand...
Old guys? I’m 34

You probably win a lot of comps huh? Calling like that must confuse the competition immensely
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Schütze
#46
No I am not, you may be too dense ( using distance) to understand. There is only one place where I allow my spotter to use distance directions and that is when I am shooting black powder cartridge in my sharps ( iron sights don’t do mild). My spotters call left point 5, up point 6. That is the only acceptable direction for me.
 
#47
oldrifleman said:
No I am not, you may be too dense ( using distance) to understand. There is only one place where I allow my spotter to use distance directions and that is when I am shooting black powder cartridge in my sharps ( iron sights don’t do mild). My spotters call left point 5, up point 6. That is the only acceptable direction for me.
Click to expand...
Fclass they’ll sometimes call like that as well. But rings. Left 1, 1.5 etc. But some guys there use just fine reticles without mil/moa built into them
 
#48
Maurygold said:
Again. You’re just making stuff up. My spotter (in tmr) is probably nicer than your whole rifle……

View attachment 8473749
Click to expand...



If your spotter has a TMR mil reticle with hash marks already used to measure, why are you thinking in inches and then converting to mils when there is already a Mil measurement in front of your face?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LRRPF52, Steel+Killer, Makinchips208 and 2 others
#49
The language I was first introduced to was moa so that's the direction I went. Oh how I wish I'd have just went mil. The scope gods even tried to save me. My first scope I ordered to start shooting longer distances I ordered in moa but when it came in it was in mils. I foolishly sold it and ordered another in in moa.

I've considered switching but I'm too heavily invested in it now. Most people I shoot with also shoot moa so there's another reason I stick with it.
 
#50
JakeM said:
If your spotter has a TMR mil reticle with hash marks already used to measure, why are you thinking in inches and then converting to mils when there is already a Mil measurement in front of your face?
Click to expand...

That would be true for any mil/ mil or moa/moa setup so that’s not relevant since they’re identical in that respect.

I’m just saying I call the shot placement before a correction - you guys are twisting that. I call all corrections in mil/moa.

So therefore when are we stoping to describe misses? With new shooters (like I said and op is) because they are whole numbers.

If anyone thinks one is significantly or even marginally better than the other then you need help.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 308pirate, Aftermath, BobinNC and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

3
Sako TRG 42 pre 2013
Replies
16
Views
845
babyguppy
B
Milirad
Rifle Scopes Burris Eliminator 6 Accuracy Range Test Review
Replies
19
Views
8K
Eric B.
E
W
Hunting scopes, 6x42, 8x56, vs. variable
Replies
3
Views
650
Woodlanddude
Woodlanddude
carbonbased
Flare / Glare / Backlit notes on 4 scopes (NX8 4-32, Razor Gen II 4.5-27, Razor LHT 4.5-22, S&B 5-25)
Replies
10
Views
439
carbonbased
carbonbased
Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes Steiner T6Xi 3-18x56 Review and comparison with NF ATACR 4-16x42, S&B US 3-20x50 and March 4.5-28x52
Replies
129
Views
12K
Kickin45
Kickin45
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts