Rifle Scopes MIL or MOA Reticle for Scope

[aoisdff8a7ytuigh]

Hello forum,

I recently picked up a 3-12x44 rifle scope with a parallax side turret, ocular lens adjustment, PLT’s with an MOA reticle. It looks like this (camera quality crushes the actual image quality from the scope. It’s extremely optically brilliant).

Even though you can’t clearly see the reticle there’s 5 full MOA dashes that are set below the centers of the crosshairs for bullet drop compensation, 2 full dashes on either side left or right, and 2 full dashes above the crosshairs.

The scope is extremely accurate and the MOA dashes on the reticle work perfectly. Shot at 200 yards, 162 gr ELD-X bullets @ 2940 dropped about 1.5 MOA in the conditions I was in. (For a 1.5 MOA drop if you don’t want to adjust the elevation you just move your POA down3 half dashes, and drop was good for me)

Now, I’ve heard that Mil Dot scopes are good range finders that can be used to measure the distance of a target, and also accommodate for bullet drop. I have no experience in using milliradians as a measurement, and am only really familiar with minutes of an angle.

What are some people’s opinions on MOA vs Mil Dot?

 

[hafejd30]

I’ll save you from getting barbecued on this and just suggest you do a google search for MOA vs Mil with sniperhide in the title. Will pull up many threads already on the subject including ways to measure distance using both

 

[Rob01]

MOA reticles can be used for ranging targets also. Same with reticle holds. In either you want the reticle to match the knobs so MOA knobs then MOA reticle and Mil knobs then Mil reticle. Both work well if the shooter knows how to use them. Comes down to practice and skill and not MOA vs Mil.

 

[SepticDeath]

Ha!

 

[Eostech]

Ease up guy, OP is basically a kid IIRC.

Edited.
Ok 13, sorry.

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/7mm-rem-mag-recoil-how-bad-is-it.6988549/

 

[Eostech]

If you are comfortable using Moa, why change?
You current scope in moa can be used for holding over as well.

Maybe familiarise yourself with a free ballistics program to see how your current scope matches what you intend to do with your rifle.

 

[jtackmann]

Every.Damn.Day.

It does make reading the forums a bit more fun when the zealots come out i guess.

 

[Steel head]

OP
I started with a reticle similar to that and ran with it a long time and it didn’t hold me back.
You can range with MOA as well.

learn with what you have, after that you’ll have a better idea of what you truly want.

 

[Krob95]

 

[Dthomas3523]

 

[Steel head]

View attachment 7276521

 

[I SHOOT]

Hello forum,

I recently picked up a 3-12x44 rifle scope with a parallax side turret, ocular lens adjustment, PLT’s with an MOA reticle. It looks like this (camera quality crushes the actual image quality from the scope. It’s extremely optically brilliant).

View attachment 7276215
Even though you can’t clearly see the reticle there’s 5 full MOA dashes that are set below the centers of the crosshairs for bullet drop compensation, 2 full dashes on either side left or right, and 2 full dashes above the crosshairs.

The scope is extremely accurate and the MOA dashes on the reticle work perfectly. Shot at 200 yards, 162 gr ELD-X bullets @ 2940 dropped about 1.5 MOA in the conditions I was in. (For a 1.5 MOA drop if you don’t want to adjust the elevation you just move your POA down3 half dashes, and drop was good for me)

Now, I’ve heard that Mil Dot scopes are good range finders that can be used to measure the distance of a target, and also accommodate for bullet drop. I have no experience in using milliradians as a measurement, and am only really familiar with minutes of an angle.

What are some people’s opinions on MOA vs Mil Dot?

Mils or MOA which is right for you

Milliradian, Minute of Angle, Inch per Hundred Yards, Shooter MOA versus Mils versus True MOA is the questions we are all asking. Mils vs MOA Threads

www.snipershide.com

 

[308pirate]

What are some people’s opinions on MOA vs Mil Dot?

Your question should be "what are some peoples' opinions on MOA vs milliradians.

Milliradians (abbreviated as mils) are an angular unit of measure.

Mil dot is a type of obsolete reticle with black dots spaced 1 milliradian apart on both vertical and horizontal stadia. No one really uses it unless it's on some sort of retro-correct sniper rifle clone.

My opinion on mils vs MOA is that both work exactly the same way, both work equally well, fire control using either is based on the Pythagorean Theorem of trigonometry.

 

[brianf]

all joking aside the hide should make a thread for younger / early teens to ask questions

i used to ask my father and grand father what they wore and carried

used to wear some of the over sized trousers, belts and everything else they took home from the service playing army in the backyard

possibly a thread "difference between a airsoft ruck and a mystery ranch ruck thread" or alike

have the mods be the only ones who can answer until they open it up

and with that give the mods a pre thought out reply

if the "kid" has some good questions they either push him to a current thread or open it up

although having a kid ask a previously deployed sniper what his load out is, can be seen as disrespectful...kind of

but we should be trying to keep the youth involved in shooting, if the kid wants to play PRS with his airsoft buddies in their backyard and whats to know what guys wear so be it.

the more money the industry has (kids buying gear and such) the more products and possible lower prices for all

might be over thinking it because of this NY half-ass-lock down going on..

 

[aoisdff8a7ytuigh]

No no it's ok I get that I'm still a kid if you're talking about shooting, but I should've rephrased. This wasn't really supposed to be a "what's the difference", I know what both of them do. I wanted to know people from the side of Mils, and people from the side of MOA speak on which one they are more comfortable with, after they tried both.

 

[brianf]

i used to be better with MOA becuase that what i had.

then when i started buying MIL scopes i became better with those.

as said before its up to the user for most shooting.

and really its not MIL or MOA its a first focal plane optic.

once the lines are the same measurement no matter what distance the rest is irrelevant all things equal

and if using a spotter having the same so communication is clear

edit: im a numbers guy so that may even the playing field a little

 

[308pirate]

No no it's ok I get that I'm still a kid if you're talking about shooting, but I should've rephrased. This wasn't really supposed to be a "what's the difference", I know what both of them do. I wanted to know people from the side of Mils, and people from the side of MOA speak on which one they are more comfortable with, after they tried both.

I can use either one equally well. I have scopes with both systems for different purposes.

It's not an either or thing. I can speak, read, and write in English or Spanish equally well. I can work with Imperial and metric units in my job or at home equally well. It just takes average intellect and some discipline and curiosity to learn.

 

[Deleted member 113831]

No no it's ok I get that I'm still a kid if you're talking about shooting, but I should've rephrased. This wasn't really supposed to be a "what's the difference", I know what both of them do. I wanted to know people from the side of Mils, and people from the side of MOA speak on which one they are more comfortable with, after they tried both.

I started with MOA, ran it for a few years because I couldn't afford a new Mil scope. Back in the late 90's I was poor and all the Mil scopes were expensive.

Once I got my first Mil scope I never looked back.

I know many who can run either with equal competence, but none I know would choose Moa over Mils.

The difference comes down to math. Math in estimating drops between yardlines, and wind math.

Both are easier done by MOST people when done in multiples of 10's rather than 1/4's.

Which amount is easier to figure quickly, 17 dimes or 17 quarters?

 

[Jake the dog]

I started with two MOA scopes because "I think in yards and inches". When I got deeper into shooting, I bought a Gen 2 Razor in Mil. Either works fine, it's what you are used to and comfortable with. I have my rangefinder and kestral set to meters, and find that easier to do quickly in my head. Divide by 10 easier for me.
Get whatever you are comfortable with, and what your shooting buddies use. Learn to use it, and you will be fine.

 

[striped1]

To truly be on the cutting edge, you need to have a reticle in MOF...

 

[Centuriator]

No no it's ok I get that I'm still a kid if you're talking about shooting, but I should've rephrased. This wasn't really supposed to be a "what's the difference", I know what both of them do. I wanted to know people from the side of Mils, and people from the side of MOA speak on which one they are more comfortable with, after they tried both.

You will find a TON of helpful information here, well worth the effort to use the search function. You can and will spend hours reading and learning. Enjoy!

 

[hafejd30]

Just a few more thoughts on helping you decide

1) See what others you intend to shoot with use. Be it your friends or local competitors. Makes it way easier to spot for each other and share data if your both using the same. MIL tends to be the popular trend now days

2) If you want to save $$ on really nice optics than shopping in the px section on here will really help. Most of the options due to their popularity here that come up for sale are MIL/MIL scopes.

Ive used/owned both but use MOA currently. That’s what I started with, what I’ve used for the last 10 years I’ve been into long range shooting, it’s what I’m more familiar with and it’s what the guys I shoot with use as well.

If I was starting out where you are I would probably go MILs just for the couple reasons I posted above

 

[Rob01]

No no it's ok I get that I'm still a kid if you're talking about shooting, but I should've rephrased. This wasn't really supposed to be a "what's the difference", I know what both of them do. I wanted to know people from the side of Mils, and people from the side of MOA speak on which one they are more comfortable with, after they tried both.

I started with MOA knobs and Mil reticles as that was all there were back then. It actually helped me learn both. Neither have anything to do with inches or yards or cm or meters. Just different angular measurements.

I have used MOA/MOA and Mil/Mil scopes in matches but use all mil/mil now. I just find it easier number wise to use mils. Using tenths and writing data down for stages etc it's just easier for me. Not to mention most of the shooters use mils so easier to talk to each other. I can easily convert back and forth in my head though. Good to know both.

 

[Tokay444]

7.

 

[Dthomas3523]

I started with MOA knobs and Mil reticles as that was all there were back then. It actually helped me learn both. Neither have anything to do with inches or yards or cm or meters. Just different angular measurements.

I have used MOA/MOA and Mil/Mil scopes in matches but use all mil/mil now. I just find it easier number wise to use mils. Using tenths and writing data down for stages etc it's just easier for me. Not to mention most of the shooters use mils so easier to talk to each other. I can easily convert back and forth in my head though. Good to know both.

Wonder who was actually the first guy to ask “um......why deez not the same?”

I remember when we were running mk4 leupold with my dot reticles and moa turrets. Never once thought something was wrong. Painfully obvious now that it was.

 

[spife7980]

Now, I’ve heard that Mil Dot scopes are good range finders that can be used to measure the distance of a target, and also accommodate for bullet drop. I have no experience in using milliradians as a measurement, and am only really familiar with minutes of an angle.

What are some people’s opinions on MOA vs Mil Dot?

Not sure how familiar a 13 year old is with math but the short version is probably going to be easier to understand initially but the long version shows you all of the match and how to walk through it.

https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...quations-and-the-math-behind-them.25/download

You no doubt have been exposed to degrees/minutes/seconds your whole life, 360 degrees in a circle, 60 minutes per degree, 60 seconds per minute.

You have probably seen that the circumference of a circle is "2πr" by now in class, that "r" is the radius and a radian is that radius length but laid around the outside of a circle. That formula is from what this gif is showing.

Instead of measuring the angle in degrees, we measure it in radians.



Basically they get you to the same answer, metaphorically one takes the red pill and one takes the blue pill, they start at and ultimately end up at the same point.

A bit of algebra and you get the following to solve ranging for either in a red-blooded-americans-inches-and-yards units of measurement.

vs

Whats tougher is knowing what the exact measurements of the target and then measuring it with your reticle.

For a 10" target that measures .2 mils on the reticle gives us (10 inches x 27.8)/.2=1390 yards
But lets say the target is actually 10.5", 1/2 an inch larger and we get (10.5*27.8)/.2=1460 yards.

Half an inch of error in target size puts us waaaaayyy off at distance

Not everything is that far though, so let say its twice as close and measures .4 mils.
(10x27.8)/.4)=695
(10.5x27.8)/.4)=730
Thats still enough to put you off target at reasonable prs target size and distances.






So suffice it to say, ranging with a reticle is a crude and often imprecise exercise that is easily bested by a bit of technology.
A range finder or the geoballistics app will get you a better answer than the reticle ranging ever will.

 

[Tokay444]

Or
H in mm/H in mils=meters

 

[Rob01]

The mil meter formula is

Target size in CM x10/ mil reading = range in meters

John has a little write up about miling here

8541 Tactical - Mildot Range Estimation

 

[hafejd30]

Wonder who was actually the first guy to ask “um......why deez not the same?”

I remember when we were running mk4 leupold with my dot reticles and moa turrets. Never once thought something was wrong. Painfully obvious now that it was.

That’s the MIL/MOA scope I started with as well haha. I wonder that exact same thing. Then I stand there looking at my equipment thinking “what is the next painfully obvious upgrade that I don’t recognize yet”

 

[Tokay444]

The mil meter formula is

Target size in CM x10/ mil reading = range in meters

John has a little write up about miling here

8541 Tactical - Mildot Range Estimation

That’s literally exactly what I just said, minus the multiplication.

 

[Rob01]

The multiplication makes a difference.

 

[Tokay444]

Lol. It doesn’t. You’re just converting cm to mm. I start with mm.

 

[Rob01]

IF using metric the use of CM as a target size is going to be more the norm like inches is. Not MM.

 

[Diver160651]

MOA works perfectly with the imperial system.........

How many inches is a MOA at 1000 YARDS?
How many inches is 1/4MOA at 1000 yards?

A mil is 36" at 1000 many inches is .1mil at 1000yards?

 

[Rob01]

Here is a good list from Lindy as well.

Reticle Ranging Formulas

 

[Rob01]

MOA works perfectly with the imperial system.........

How many inches is a MOA at 1000 YARDS?

Who cares? The scope adjusts in MOA and the reticle is in MOA.

 

[Diver160651]

Who cares? The scope adjusts in MOA and the reticle is in MOA.

was getting there

 

[loveha]

His questions have been mostly answered I think.

The simple fact that a 13yo has stuck around here, and has handled things the way he has with his responses from members here is amazing. He is more of a man than some of the adults that come along and ask questions.

Young man, you will go far in life. Your parents did good.

 

[jconPNW]

No no it's ok I get that I'm still a kid if you're talking about shooting, but I should've rephrased. This wasn't really supposed to be a "what's the difference", I know what both of them do. I wanted to know people from the side of Mils, and people from the side of MOA speak on which one they are more comfortable with, after they tried both.

When I first started shooting I bought MOA scopes because I was under the mistaken impression that somehow 1 MOA was an 1" at 100 yards. Once you come to realize that is some serious rounding that will land you in hot water at longer distances, it doesn't really matter anymore. Factor in your loads and a whole lot of other information and you're doing as much math with MOA as you are MIL. I've come to prefer MILs because they dial as smaller numbers, call me simple. In reality, they both work.

 

[Tokay444]

IF using metric the use of CM as a target size is going to be more the norm like inches is. Not MM.

Lol. You literally converted cm to mm.
Just measure the target in mm, and save shifting the decimal.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Lol. You literally converted cm to mm.
Just measure the target in mm, and save shifting the decimal.

I’ve never heard of anyone using mm to describe a target size. The math works, but no one does it.

Inches in imperial or centimeters for metric is all I’ve ever heard.

You will occasionally hear feet and meters for the average height of a person. But you rarely mil a full person.

 

[Tokay444]

I haven’t measured anything in cm since I left elementary school.
I’m a machinist and an Applications Engineer.
Inches, or millimeters.
Multiply your inches by 25.4 and you have mm. Divide by mils and you have your meter range. Centimeters never enter into it.

 

[Dthomas3523]

I haven’t measured anything in cm since I left elementary school.
I’m a machinist and an Applications Engineer.
Inches, or millimeters.
Multiply your inches by 25.4 and you have mm. Divide by mils and you have your meter range. Centimeters never enter into it.

None of that applies to any amount of practical shooting outside your personal bubble.

 

[Tokay444]

How’s that? You’re USING millimeters to range your target. Either you measure it in one unit and do the math (albeit easy, someone will fuck it up), or you can skip all that and measure it in the units you need to do the milling with. It couldn’t be more basic than if you just start with those units.
All my measuring tapes are graduated in inches, or mm. All my calipers are graduated in inches and mm. All my micrometers are graduated in inches or mm. Literally nothing is in cm.
We should start calling it the .65cmCM

 

[Dthomas3523]

How’s that? You’re USING millimeters to range your target. Either you measure it in one unit and do the math (albeit easy, someone will fuck it up), or you can skip all that and measure it in the units you need to do the milling with. It couldn’t be more basic than if you just start with those units.
All my measuring tapes are graduated in inches, or mm. All my calipers are graduated in inches and mm. All my micrometers are graduated in inches or mm. Literally nothing is in cm.
We should start calling it the .65cmCM

Because zero matches give target size in mm.

Zero military or LE agencies teach target size in mm.

 

[Tokay444]

K.
I now shoot a .65centimeterCreedmoor.

 

[Dthomas3523]

The fact that you keep using the world “my” further illustrates my point that MM is in *your* personal bubble only.

Otherwise, you’d be giving examples how others use it.

Now, if you want to go make a thread about how we should be thinking differently, or start pitching the idea to military and LE agencies around the world, that is a completely different topic.

You may have an easier way of doing it. But the fact is, you (or very few of you) are using it. So it is of no value unless you can change the status quo.

 

[Tokay444]

What unit are you given the the target size in at a match?
Also, no one’s mics are graduated in cm. No one’s caliper are graduated in cm. No one’s machines are graduated in cm. Not just mine.
I can’t speak for everyone’s measuring tapes though.

 

[Dthomas3523]

What unit are you given the the target size in at a match?

Inches or CM depending where in the world you are.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Regardless of what you personally use, these are the two most common formulas taught around the world: