Rifle Scopes I said I'd always use MOA. I switched to mils because...

[moaorbust]

The constant for moa is 95.5. Not 100. Some always say 100 as they get it confused with IPHY or shooter moa. Not saying you were but even mentioning it will make someone think it’s 100 for moa.

Second neither is intuitive. They are just a number used in a formula. You won’t be doing any of those ranging formulas in your head in the field or range. Save the few examples of perfect and easy numbers as they never work that way when actually ranging. You want easy? Get a mildot master which actually works with moa as well.

I have two MOA scopes, not cheap ones mind you, that differ on the 100 or 95.5. Not that I disagree. Just an interesting tidbit. I was always under the impression the glass was etched different to make it simpler. Which for thousand dollar scopes should be expected.

I still think factors of 95.5 is easier than 27.77. I have never felt a need for a mil-dot master. I just bought a MIL scope so I will be testing it and may have a more nuanced opinion soon.

 

[DownhillFromHere]

After seeing that we are gonna talk about this shit again, covid is now the second worst thing to happen in 2020.

Perhaps, in the interest of perpetuating such sh*t storms, someone could suggest to those who refuse to read the previous... well, someone said above the count is 15 million, up from the 8-plus million... threads on the subject that the best scope has the following features:

• 1-inch (or 0.35 mils) tube for light weight
• Fixed 4x for wide field of view
• Simplex reticle for uncluttered view
• Single-screw, split rings for economy
• Weaver mount, because...

...It was good enough for my daddy and his daddy before him so it be good enuff for me and it dang sure oughter be good enough fer evrybody else!

 

[Bolo]

MILs are MILs

Neat, I get to pull the pin and run for once...

"MILs" are not MILs, MRAD != MIL.
There are 6283-ish milliradians in a circle. 1 mil subtends 1M at 1000M. Everyone's cool with that, right?
Then why does everyone that has a MIL compass, arty fire control, air nav, and oh yeah.. half the optics in NATO countries have 6400 MILs in a circle?

*Which* MIL Mil / Mil scope is better and do the turrets and reticle have to match?
(I'll see myself out now. )

 

[...]

Neat, I get to pull the pin and run for once...

"MILs" are not MILs, MRAD != MIL.
There are 6283-ish milliradians in a circle. 1 mil subtends 1M at 1000M. Everyone's cool with that, right?
Then why does everyone that has a MIL compass, arty fire control, air nav, and oh yeah.. half the optics in NATO countries have 6400 MILs in a circle?

*Which* MIL Mil / Mil scope is better and do the turrets and reticle have to match?
(I'll see myself out now. )

think you pulled the pin on a dud there cochise

 

[DedicatedShooter]

I made the switch for the same reason. Tired of dialing up 30+ minutes to go over 1k. Now I stay well inside of one turret spin with my Kahles. Makes it simpler. I also found that thinking in tenths was easier too.

 

[LeftyJason]

First off I'm going to put this here. https://www.snipershide.com/precision-rifle/stop-the-debate-mils-vs-moa-vs-iphy/

For those saying metric with mils let me put some conversions here. Pretty sure I did the math correct.
0.001" @ 1"= 1mil
1 mm @ 1m = 1mil
1m @ 1000m = 1mil
1" @ 1000" = 1mil
1 leg @ 1000 legs = 1mil
1 mile @ 1000 miles = 1mil
1 light year @ 1000 light-years = 1mil
1 car height @1000 car heights = 1mil

Or in other words 1(insert unit here) @ 1000(insert same unit here) = 1 mil

 

[Rob01]

I have two MOA scopes, not cheap ones mind you, that differ on the 100 or 95.5. Not that I disagree. Just an interesting tidbit. I was always under the impression the glass was etched different to make it simpler. Which for thousand dollar scopes should be expected.

I still think factors of 95.5 is easier than 27.77. I have never felt a need for a mil-dot master. I just bought a MIL scope so I will be testing it and may have a more nuanced opinion soon.

If one is a USO then that one is IPHY and would use 100. If not then it might be off as the true MOA constant for the formula is 95.5.

If putting 95.5 in a calculator or 27.77 is the first easier due to one less number? As I said you won’t be doing it in your head, especially under stress, and if you do you are either rain man or not getting accurate numbers.

 

[iukamedic]

All was saying earlier was that in my past experience I was taught to judge range and hold overs according to how targets appeared in front of you. Those things were always in inches. Shoulder to shoulder 18 inches etc. That made sense to me in moa. Now it doesn’t matter. A mil is a mil and moa Is moa at known distance and holder overs can be measured with your scope no matter moa or mil As long as it tracks correctly. Wind is a lot of time a judgement call and varies. I use mil scopes because they are quicker and shorter to dial.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

About the only time that last 4.5% will really bite you in the ass is when ranging. Even at that, just use target size/subtention X 100 then just take off 5% it will be close enough to tag most any target. Most all of the math can be done in your head on the fly, but a sizing/range chart is much faster. These charts can be made for all three types of subtentions. The real old TO&E books gave everything in inches/feet/yards, the reason some of us never went mill as most of the ground gear is still in play.

 

[Bender]

Not to add gas to the fire but I’ve always found ranging with MOA scopes to be far more intuitive. Times 100 or 95.5 is easier to factor than 27.77. I agree MILs have mental advantages using base 10 for much the same reason. Measurement wise .25 allows more precision than .36 but few could shoot the difference so it’s kinda moot.

Did anyone ever make a reticle with the strengths of both? I have been imagining a SFP crosshair with FFP hashes as an advancement. You get the best of both worlds as most people I know, including me, grump about not being able to see the damn target sometimes.

Sheppards scopes have a combo of sfp and FFP. The bad part is they are all BDC reticles In outdated scopes. They must hold the patent on that because it would be a game changer if done properly.

 

[Leftie]

If you are still thinking this then you need to learn some more.

That's the plan - the learning never stops.

 

[Cobra M197]

I’m switching also from moa to mils because that’s what the tactical PRS types at my club use...gotta speak the language.

 

[TheGerman]

I'm going to go back to shooting Leupold Mk4, so everyone loses their minds when I have a MIL reticle and MOA turrets.

 

[Raffy]

I'm going to go back to shooting Leupold Mk4, so everyone loses their minds when I have a MIL reticle and MOA turrets.

Anarchy

 

[Dthomas3523]

I'm going to go back to shooting Leupold Mk4, so everyone loses their minds when I have a MIL reticle and MOA turrets.

You already run a barret. Might as well run junk on top of junk

 

[JB2987]

First off I'm going to put this here. https://www.snipershide.com/precision-rifle/stop-the-debate-mils-vs-moa-vs-iphy/

For those saying metric with mils let me put some conversions here. Pretty sure I did the math correct.
0.001" @ 1"= 1mil
1 mm @ 1m = 1mil
1m @ 1000m = 1mil
1" @ 1000" = 1mil
1 leg @ 1000 legs = 1mil
1 mile @ 1000 miles = 1mil
1 light year @ 1000 light-years = 1mil
1 car height @1000 car heights = 1mil

Or in other words 1(insert unit here) @ 1000(insert same unit here) = 1 mil

As much as this is a joke its actually a really good way to describe things for new shooters (Americans especially) I always thought mils was metric until I really started looking into buying my first scope. I forget the first place I heard it described as 1 something @ 1000somethings = 1 mil. As soon as I heard that example it all made since why its a much easier way to learn to shoot, especially with a FFP scope. I'm sure people who learned MOA feel very comfortable with it. Why anyone would choose to learn MOA today as a new shooter, when theres 1000 other things to learn in long range shooting I'll never understand. Not having to learn MOA and conversions sped up my learning and fun factor in long range shooting by a large amount.

 

[Steel head]

You already run a barret. Might as well run junk on top of junk

 

[driver8]

Changed for similar reasons. Easier to read, fewer revolutions,easier math (for me )when required.

 

[Raffy]

I'm going to go back to shooting Leupold Mk4, so everyone loses their minds when I have a MIL reticle and MOA turrets.

 

[308pirate]

IPHY, bitches.
Bottom line,... being good with one set up is all that, until your gear goes to shit and you have to use what you find laying around. Never limit your ability's to knowing but one system,... it may be your undoing one day,...

What makes you think that most of us don't know how to use all three?

And yet we have preferences because Mils > IPHY > MOA

 

[Rob01]

Yup. Have used all three over the years.

 

[b1 det]

For goodness sake Downhill. If after 60 years of shooting MOA your a convert it makes me think we could all be a little more sensible about our picks as experience is the best motivation for improving our own situation let alone helping out the next guy.

 

[DownhillFromHere]

For goodness sake Downhill. If after 60 years of shooting MOA your a convert it makes me think we could all be a little more sensible about our picks as experience is the best motivation for improving our own situation let alone helping out the next guy.

Sixty years of shooting - but just about three in PRS. The stuff we take for granted today didn't exist back in the '80s when I last dabbled in rifle. I started with MOA because MOA was what I knew, or thought I did (I can understand why people confuse linear versus angular measurements). But that rimfire stage where it seemed like it took me an hour to crank a turn and a half of "up" while struggling to read those little numbers is a life lesson, reinforced by watching the next shooter put barely a full turn on his scope for the same elevation change.

"The lessons learned from history depend on the quality of the student."
- Tom Clancy

 

[Baer45]

Thank for bringing this up. Almost 60 years of shooting and I just added the-new Leica PRS To my collection with the sole purpose of learning mills...not because I have to...just a challenge and I have always wanted to use one of those Christmas tree type reticle there is a lot of scope for the money although less expensive then most of my others So if it doesn’t work out...nothing lost...pray for USA....