Rifle Scopes for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

[SpenceDaddy]

Hey im just starting out long range shooting, and ive been reading a ton of articles on scopes and was wondering which would be easier or better to start off with MIL or MOA. If you had person experience with one or the other. I know its all person preferance but just wondering if one would hold an edge over the other for a new long range shooter? Thanks ahead of time.

 

[AXEMAN]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

may as well start mil/mil, you wont have to unlearn anything

 

[jonaddis84]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

MILOA is my vote. You answered your own question, personal preference. Doesnt matter as long as they match, as has been said in about 15000 posts in this section.

 

[marduk185]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

mil retical and mil turrets on a first focal plane retical scope would probably keep things real simple for someone who wasnt already trained with different configuration but this is in an ideal world. rewality is get what you can afford and learn to make it shoot.

 

[coldboremiracle]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

Most of us learned on a MIL/MOA scope, I think it was good practice helping one learn to do the math and conversion ect. But MIL/MIL or MOA/MOA is by far superior in my opinion, it is easier to use, especially when coupled with an FFP scope. Either will do fine, but all my future scopes will be FFP MIL/MIL.

 

[geometro]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

+1 mil/mil FFP scope would probably be the easiest way to do it.

At the very least, have matching reticle and turrets.

If you understand the metric system and can do some basic unit conversions, mil/mil is a lot easier to understand and use.

 

[Swan]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: geometro</div><div class="ubbcode-body">+1 mil/mil FFP scope would probably be the easiest way to do it.

At the very least, have matching reticle and turrets.

<span style="color: #FF0000">If you understand the metric system and can do some basic unit conversions</span>, mil/mil is a lot easier to understand and use. </div></div>

Um, no, actually. Metric system has nothing to do with it and there is nothing to "convert". But I will agree, mil/mil will be an easier bag.

 

[dksd39]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

I have and use both types of scopes for different reasons. My personal preference is mil/mil but that option is not an end all beat all solution. If you are getting started either is good if for no other reason than learning how to use them. Knowledge of only one scope makes you very limited. You might consider looking at what is being used by the people you will be learning from and possibly use that as a starting point for learning.

 

[steve123]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

mil/mil FFP

 

[coldboremiracle]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Swan</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: geometro</div><div class="ubbcode-body">+1 mil/mil FFP scope would probably be the easiest way to do it.

At the very least, have matching reticle and turrets.

<span style="color: #FF0000">If you understand the metric system and can do some basic unit conversions</span>, mil/mil is a lot easier to understand and use. </div></div>

Um, no, actually. Metric system has nothing to do with it and there is nothing to "convert". But I will agree, mil/mil will be an easier bag. </div></div>

I could be wrong, but I think he was refering to the base 10 of the metric system. same as MIL's, 1/10th of a MIL VS. .25 moa.

 

[jrob300]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SpenceDaddy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey im just starting out long range shooting, and ive been reading a ton of articles on scopes and was wondering which would be easier or better to start off with MIL or MOA. If you had person experience with one or the other. I know its all person preferance but just wondering if one would hold an edge over the other for a new long range shooter? Thanks ahead of time. </div></div>

I'm going to challenge the mil/mil koolaid for a moment and ask, What are your long range goals?

If you're shooting center mass on 1.5-2 moa plates, either will serve you well. If you're shooting tactical matches mil/mil will offer an advantage in speed and simplicity. But if you're intent on shooting a golf ball at a 1000 yds. or clay pigeons at a mile, then an moa/moa scope *might* be better for you.

Mil scopes are typically .1 mil adjustments. That's .36" per adjustment at 100 yds. That's 3.6" at 1000 yds.

MOA scopes are typically .25 moa adjustments (with some 1/8) which is .26" at 100 yards or 2.6 inches at 1000 yds. (1.3" for 1/8, YMMV here because some are actually MOA while others are IPHY)

So, if PRECISION is your game, MOA will give you finer increments. If SPEED is your game MIL is definitely more intuitive and simpler.

.02

John

 

[coldboremiracle]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SpenceDaddy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey im just starting out long range shooting, and ive been reading a ton of articles on scopes and was wondering which would be easier or better to start off with MIL or MOA. If you had person experience with one or the other. I know its all person preferance but just wondering if one would hold an edge over the other for a new long range shooter? Thanks ahead of time. </div></div>

I'm going to challenge the mil/mil koolaid for a moment and ask, What are your long range goals?

If you're shooting center mass on 1.5-2 moa plates, either will serve you well. If you're shooting tactical matches mil/mil will offer an advantage in speed and simplicity. But if you're intent on shooting a golf ball at a 1000 yds. or clay pigeons at a mile, then an moa/moa scope *might* be better for you.

Mil scopes are typically .1 mil adjustments. That's .36" per adjustment at 100 yds. That's 3.6" at 1000 yds.

MOA scopes are typically .25 moa adjustments (with some 1/8) which is .26" at 100 yards or 2.6 inches at 1000 yds. (1.3" for 1/8, YMMV here because some are actually MOA while others are IPHY)

So, if PRECISION is your game, MOA will give you finer increments. If SPEED is your game MIL is definitely more intuitive and simpler.

.02

John

</div></div>

Splittin hairs?

hahahaha, JK Jrob, excellent point that I hadn't thought of.

 

[jrob300]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: coldboremiracle</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Jrob, excellent point that I hadn't thought of. </div></div>

I probably would not have either, but the focus of my shooting is moving towards long range precision for a time, so this is a relevant topic for me right now. There are times with a mil/mil scope that I cannot get a perfect zero.

All my friends who shoot long range precision almost ALL have SFP MOA/MOA NF's. Fine reticle and smaller adjustments. All my friends who shoot primarily tactical matches have MIL/MIL FFP. Need drives use.

John

 

[LRS_Ranger]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

As a new shooter, the best scope for you is the one that you are practicing with on your rifle. I will be getting my first mil/mil FFP for the new Grendel build, but I have been using mil/moa scopes for my whole life.. They are a bit more complicated when you are under stress, but with practice I wouldn't call them a handicap by any means..

 

[SpenceDaddy]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

Thanks for all the great feedback. I plan on useing the rifle for long range percision and also a long range hunting rifle. I will be putting the scope on a .300wm and as of right now I think I might be leaning towards MOA/MOA.

Is parallax adjustment as complicated as it sounds?

 

[jrob300]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SpenceDaddy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is parallax adjustment as complicated as it sounds? </div></div>

Not really if you understand what it really is. Most people look through the scope and move the knob until the target is in focus. That does not necessarily guarantee parallax free at that distance. To adjust parallax, get behind your rifle, look through the scope and move your eye around slightly behind the eyebox. Adjust the SF knob until the reticle moves the least amount, while you do this. This will greatly reduce or eliminate POI shift do to changing position on the rifle. Parallax error will also be greatly reduced as you work on consistent position on the rifle.

John

 

[SpenceDaddy]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

Sounds fairly easy then

 

[Nostradumbass]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

Fairly easy? Maybe, but whatever you decide on for glass go out and use it as much as possible! Reading atmospheric conditions at distance will be very challenging, whether you're using metric or the imperial system.

 

[rezmedic54]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

For me MOA's where easier to figure out. Don;t know why but it was. What really kills me is shooters that refer to moving the turrets up 138 clicks or down 63 clicks. I have tried working with them in converting to MOA's it's not hard if it's 1/4"divide 138 by 4 and your done it's 381/2 Moa's but he just doesn't get it oh well LOL what you going to do.

 

[gugubica]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

If its an option, go mil...it will keep you from having to switch later. Been there.

 

[USW.260]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

I'm a noob and have been since '08 still learning. Anyways. I read an article Ian McMurchy wrote one time on long range shooting and he stated that with his .308 168s I think, he would get 1 less MOA than what the Yardage was out to 700yds, and then 800yds is 8moa out to 1000 being 10moa. Now this is if you do the math on wind and dial your wind instead of hold off. Like if you shooting at 500yds and you have a 10mph with full value wind left to right then you would need 4moa left, 600yds would be 5moa and so on out to 800yds which then you start matching MOA with yardage. Now this isn't right on but damn close. And if you look through most data for .308 and do the math it will come out real close. Now seeing how this is imprinted in my mind this is what I will use. Also the great thing is too USO and Nightforce have recticles in MOA. I like the USO MOAtype1, and the Nightforce NPR-1 or NPR-2. Now with these reticles holding off for wind is easy just the same as with Mil/Mil. Anyways look into both and do what you want. But for me its like if I have to think about which is faster for me "to think about" the MOA wins out right now.

 

[bama110]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

Mil/mil ffp it just works

 

[USW.260]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gugubica</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If its an option, go mil...it will keep you from having to switch later. Been there. </div></div>

This is something I don't understand...Why would he be switching later. Is there something out there coming along to make MIL/MIL mandatory for all scopes everywhere? Now if I start with MIL/MOA and learn to read range using mils then aplying moa to come-up would it not be easier to move to MOA/MOA and learn to read range in MOA. All my come ups and wind dope would already be in my head and the only thing new would be a MOA reticle and a change of range math which would be actually easier. Hell with the new 20moa in one turn knobs on Nightforce scopes and the ERGO on the USO why bother.

 

[popeye089]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SpenceDaddy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey im just starting out long range shooting, and ive been reading a ton of articles on scopes and was wondering which would be easier or better to start off with MIL or MOA. If you had person experience with one or the other. I know its all person preferance but just wondering if one would hold an edge over the other for a new long range shooter? Thanks ahead of time. </div></div>

I'm going to challenge the mil/mil koolaid for a moment and ask, What are your long range goals?

If you're shooting center mass on 1.5-2 moa plates, either will serve you well. If you're shooting tactical matches mil/mil will offer an advantage in speed and simplicity. But if you're intent on shooting a golf ball at a 1000 yds. or clay pigeons at a mile, then an moa/moa scope *might* be better for you.

Mil scopes are typically .1 mil adjustments. That's .36" per adjustment at 100 yds. That's 3.6" at 1000 yds.

MOA scopes are typically .25 moa adjustments (with some 1/8) which is .26" at 100 yards or 2.6 inches at 1000 yds. (1.3" for 1/8, YMMV here because some are actually MOA while others are IPHY)

So, if PRECISION is your game, MOA will give you finer increments. If SPEED is your game MIL is definitely more intuitive and simpler.

.02

John

</div></div>

This is all you the info you need, great points. Some people here say mil/mil over and over again because that's what is harped here the most. Just reread above. As long as reticle and turret match you'll be fine. Everything will be easier

 

[popeye089]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: USW.260</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gugubica</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If its an option, go mil...it will keep you from having to switch later. Been there. </div></div>

This is something I don't understand...Why would he be switching later. Is there something out there coming along to make MIL/MIL mandatory for all scopes everywhere? Now if I start with MIL/MOA and learn to read range using mils then aplying moa to come-up would it not be easier to move to MOA/MOA and learn to read range in MOA. All my come ups and wind dope would already be in my head and the only thing new would be a MOA reticle and a change of range math which would be actually easier. Hell with the new 20moa in one turn knobs on Nightforce scopes and the ERGO on the USO why bother. </div></div>
All people are trying to say is why bother to learn one system then move to another. Start with something and become proficient at it. Yes, their are many of us here that know multiple systems and how to implement them. But we all realize that there are easier ways to complete the task, and that is shooting great. So, just start with one and be done with it. Then once you are good at that first one, and you want to become more knowledgable, then move on. Before you can multipy you need to learn to add. Before you run, learn to crawl then walk

 

[geometro]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

With regards to the metric system comment, perhaps it was in error. The basic premise for understanding a radian is the relationship that a radian is the angle subtended by an arc length that is equal to the radius. A millradian extends it to the angle subtended by an arc length that is 1/1000 of the radius.

This concept allows one to determine range in units of what is being ranged.

Borrowing the image of the MLR2 below from cstactical.

The target is 8 feet tall and is rougly 1.75 mils.

So the distance would be (8 / 1.75)*1000 = 4571 ft.
Then convert it into any unit your data card is in, for yards: 1523.

The calculation above is pretty close to the actual range: http://www.cstactical.com/Magazine/SHOT-SHOW/SHOT-SHOW-BLOG-2011/Nightforce-New-MLR2-Reticle.html

Hypothetically, if we made an error in dope and wind call that was exactly a mil off we would have to dial in 1 mil of adjustment in elevation and windage. In a mil/mil scope, that's just 10 clicks the right direction. If it's a mil/moa scope, then it's remembering a mil is 3.375 moa and then dialing in 13.5 clicks, on a 1/4 MOA turret, of elevation and windage.

For me, being simple minded, I just prefer consistent units and counting using the decimal system.

Sorry if that was just rehashing rudimentary information for anybody.

 

[HillbillyfromAL]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SpenceDaddy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey im just starting out long range shooting, and ive been reading a ton of articles on scopes and was wondering which would be easier or better to start off with MIL or MOA. If you had person experience with one or the other. I know its all person preferance but just wondering if one would hold an edge over the other for a new long range shooter? Thanks ahead of time. </div></div>

I'm going to challenge the mil/mil koolaid for a moment and ask, What are your long range goals?

If you're shooting center mass on 1.5-2 moa plates, either will serve you well. If you're shooting tactical matches mil/mil will offer an advantage in speed and simplicity. But if you're intent on shooting a golf ball at a 1000 yds. or clay pigeons at a mile, then an moa/moa scope *might* be better for you.

Mil scopes are typically .1 mil adjustments. That's .36" per adjustment at 100 yds. That's 3.6" at 1000 yds.

MOA scopes are typically .25 moa adjustments (with some 1/8) which is .26" at 100 yards or 2.6 inches at 1000 yds. (1.3" for 1/8, YMMV here because some are actually MOA while others are IPHY)

So, if PRECISION is your game, MOA will give you finer increments. If SPEED is your game MIL is definitely more intuitive and simpler.

.02

John

</div></div>

Sorry but you forgot the .05mil turrets. So that would 1.8in at 1,000yds So he could still keep it MIL/MIL.












I Just had to

 

[jrob300]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HillbillyfromAL</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry but you forgot the .05mil turrets. So that would 1.8in at 1,000yds So he could still keep it MIL/MIL. </div></div>

or...

I just left them out on purpose to see if y'all were awake.

After all, there's a metric shit ton of .05 mil scopes out there... right?

John

 

[Heltsley]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL


I would start out Mil/Mil my point is cost and options of scopes. One has the option of starting out with a matching retical and turrets at a much lower price point than a matching MOA/MOA scope. So for a greater number of options and cost the MOA/MOA rout is a great one.

 

[Zerodown]

Re: for a noob best to start with MOA or MIL

Thanks for the info!