Rifle Scopes mil or moa

[BIG MASE]

Re: mil or moa

http://www.cstactical.com/Blog-Articles/Articles-Tutorials/MIL-vs.-MOA.html

 

[corey4]

Re: mil or moa

i have no idea what the f*ck you guys are talking about!!!!!!

lol

wow, i am way out of my league!

bedlam, i have not been scared away. i have a small business, and the last few days have been very hectic.

i bought a voretx viper pst ffp 4-16 moa/moa from a hide member the other day.

being a trained draftsman, fractions are not that big of a deal for me. when i was in school, i could add, subtract, multiply and divide fractions down to a 1/32", either in decimal form or fraction form with out a calculator. but, i haven't touch a CAD program in 9 years.

i have a lot to learn. that is the point to hobbies though.

from the research that i did, i wanted the ffp and the matching reticle and turrets per everyone's advice. the mil or moa is to each his own. like one guy said, ford or chevy, in my opinion, they are all junk at the end of the day!!!

thanks for all the feed back, and keep it coming.

 

[scott123456789]

Re: mil or moa

As long as your reticle matches it really doesn't matter but I would give the nod popularity wise to mil these days.

 

[corey4]

Re: mil or moa

i'm not going to fret about it. i debated with myself for about 2 weeks on mil or moa. but since i have ZERO experience with either in a precision situation, then it doesn't matter.

the only experience i do have is sighting in a rifle with "one click = 1/4 at 100 yards" stamped on the scope adjustments. which, the guy i bought the scope from pointed out is moa.

so to me, at 25 yds, if you are off by 3 inches, you have to go 48 clicks (.0625). then you shoot at 50 yds, you are off by .5", you adjust 4 clicks (.125).

so, i get the moa theory, i am comfortable with the theory, so that is why i sprung for the moa scope.

i have not sighted in a rifle past 100 yds though. when i learned, it was the school of thought "1.5" high at 100 yds and you are good". which made sense for bullet drop at 200. you know, the guy at the range that takes 2 shots at 100, has an 8" group, and says, "i'm on paper, thats good enough for me".

but i want to move into precision.

 

[427Cobra]

Re: mil or moa

I have both a all MOA Nightforce and a all Mil Premier Reticle, both work just fine, but I find that holds are easier to do with the Mil scope versus the MOA scope, another point to consider is Mils are universal across scope manufactures, 1 mil is 1 mil, on the MOA side no two scope makers puts the same reticle in there scopes, I prefer MOA for static shooting like F-class, on my match rifle for precision rifle matches where shots are from 10 feet to 1000 yards MRADs are the shit, to me they are different tools for different jobs, and please remember MOA are not inches, and Mils are not metric.

 

[cropins]

Re: mil or moa

After having each I prefer moa/moa but probably more important than my or anybody elses preference is what the the guys you shoot with use. It sure is easier if everybody speaks the same language. It is hard for a moa guy to tell a mil guy how to adjust a hold over.

 

[corey4]

Re: mil or moa

i don't shoot on a team with anyone.

i told the guy i bought it from, if i don't like it, i will just sell it.

 

[JWEvans]

Re: mil or moa

When it was explained to me, I went with the Mil scope. It is much easier and very simple to use. If you hit 1.2 mils low and 1.5 mils to the right, all you do is sdjust the turrets accordingly. It does not matter whether it is 100yds or 400yds, a mil is a mil.

 

[RemingtonSPS]

Re: mil or moa

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jevans7</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When it was explained to me, I went with the Mil scope. It is much easier and very simple to use. If you hit 1.2 mils low and 1.5 mils to the right, all you do is sdjust the turrets accordingly. It does not matter whether it is 100yds or 400yds, a mil is a mil. </div></div>

You do the same with Minutes of angle. A Minute of Angle is a Minute of Angle at any distance.

Mil and Moa are angular forms of measure thats it! They could correspond to Cubits and they would still be an angular form of measure, neither standard nor metric. Most of us in the USA think in terms of inches and because of inches, yards, and a Minute of Angle being rounded to 1", i think that Moa is a better form of measure for me. I see no tangeable advantage to go with a Mil based system over Moa for a US shooter.

I personnally think Mil scopes are a trend set by the 'cool crowd' of this site, and people wanting to emulate military personnel. It also seems to irritate some in the Mil crowd when you say that in the US "we think in inches". When was the last time those same guys said they had a 1/10th Mil accurate rifle? They usually say its 1/4 Minute or that it will print X amount of inches at 100 yards.

For the Military sniper that was trained to Mil targets because they had Mildot scopes with Moa turrets, it makes sense to switch to a Mil/Mil system because they are already proficient at Milling targets and now their turrets would match. That i see as an advantage.

 

[corey4]

Re: mil or moa

i guess just to ad fuel to the fire, if so many people have mil scopes, then why does everyone claim their rifle will hold .5 moa at 400 yds?

 

[AXEMAN]

Re: mil or moa

mil/mil

 

[LongArm]

Re: mil or moa

If your starting out or been using MOA, go to mils. I had a friend that shot mil/mil and I decided to try it. I am no math wizard either. It seemed so much easier and there no need to convert mil-dot to moa. Go Mil/Mil and you'll never regret it.

 

[corey4]

Re: mil or moa

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lostcoyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: corey4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i guess just to ad fuel to the fire, if so many people have mil scopes, then why does everyone claim their rifle will hold .5 moa at 400 yds? </div></div>

because it seems that's the only thing rifle accuracy is specified as - LOL - at least that's all you ever seem to see and hear.

btw, i shot a .167 mRad group last week with my 7mag. </div></div>

i don't know what the means!!! lol

 

[corey4]

Re: mil or moa

the new scope should be here saturday or monday.

 

[scott123456789]

Re: mil or moa

.167 of 3.6 = ~.6"

 

[Blackrifle1]

Re: mil or moa

Holy CRAP! This is a little confusing - alot of different opinions. What I really get out of this is 2 things...

1- get a scope that is mil/mil or moa/moa.
2- use what your shooting buddies are using to make it easier

 

[corey4]

Re: mil or moa

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Blackrifle1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Holy CRAP! This is a little confusing - alot of different opinions. What I really get out of this is 2 things...

1- get a scope that is mil/mil or moa/moa.
2- use what your shooting buddies are using to make it easier </div></div>

RIGHT!!!

i got the moa vortex because the price was right and it was available. i bought it used, i didn't save a whole lot, but i don't have to wait for back order.

i don't know how to use moa or mil, so it really doesn't matter.

 

[Heltsley]

Re: mil or moa

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Heltsley</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Mils are metric.... You have to use a conversion to use yards, inches, ect...</div></div>

Mils work just as easily with inches and yards as they do with centimeters and meters. You just have to understand that a mil is 1/1000 of the straight line distance.

I.E. 1 mil equals 1" at 1000", 1m at 1000m, 1 yard at 1000 yards, etc. It really isn't difficult unless you make it difficult. No conversion needed. </div></div>

I am not trying to start an arguement but you have to convert every unit in any equation to an non SI unit to make it not metric. Mil's are an SI unit period...

 

[techtoy_al]

Re: mil or moa

Mil- Mil, I just change from MOA to MIL and dialing 7 mils s alot better then 22 MOA

 

[wielywilly-g]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: corey4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i guess just to ad fuel to the fire, if so many people have mil scopes, then why does everyone claim their rifle will hold .5 moa at 400 yds? </div></div>

because it seems that's the only thing rifle accuracy is specified as - LOL - at least that's all you ever seem to see and hear.

btw, i shot a .167 mRad group last week with my 7mag.

You are the first person I have ever heard give their rifle's angular accuracy in milliradians. Awesome!

 

[scudzuki]

I don't know where any of you are getting your mil math.
If 180 degrees = 3.14159 radians (and it does, by definition) then 180/3.14159/1000=0.05729 degrees to one milliradians.
The tangent of .05729 is 0.0010000011 or EXTREMELY close to 1/1000th soooooo one mil at 100 yards is exactly 3.6 inches, except for the versions of mils that use 1/6400 of a circle as opposed to the mathematically correct 1/6242 of a circle (USMC mils?).

Joe

 

[swagbrdr]

Correct me if I'm wrong here folks, but I thought MOA was set up for yards opposed to mil and meters. So....1 MOA at 100 yds is 1.05"...1 mil at 100 meters is 1 cm.

I use MOA because I'm use to yds.

 

[Lowlight]

Correct me if I'm wrong here folks, but I thought MOA was set up for yards opposed to mil and meters. So....1 MOA at 100 yds is 1.05"...1 mil at 100 meters is 1 cm.

I use MOA because I'm use to yds.

if you are thinking in linear terms you are wrong... that is number one.

These are angles, so they work with anything when it comes to linear distances.

Minute of ANGLE... if you use the angle and ignore the linear distance things work much better. Same with milRADIANS which is also an angle.

Look at the definition, this explains it:

Although the radian is a unit of measure, it is a dimensionless quantity. This can be seen from the definition given earlier: the angle subtended at the centre of a circle, measured in radians, is equal to the ratio of the length of the enclosed arc to the length of the circle's radius. Since the units of measurement cancel, this ratio is dimensionless.

Look at this definition and see if you see a single linear distance in there: —One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance from the vertex.

—In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
—
—1 yard at 1000 yards.
—1 meter at 1000 meters.
—1 mile at 1000 miles.
—1 league at 1000 leagues.
—1 fathom at 1000 fathoms.
—1 inch at 1000 inches.
—1 foot at 1000 feet.
—3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
—1 centimeter at 100 meters

it works with anything... it is not constrained to ONE UNIT OF LINEAR DiSTANCE.

Stop using a linear measurement as a gauge with this stuff and life will be much better for you.

 

[swagbrdr]

if you are thinking in linear terms you are wrong... that is number one.

These are angles, so they work with anything when it comes to linear distances.

Minute of ANGLE... if you use the angle and ignore the linear distance things work much better. Same with milRADIANS which is also an angle.

Look at the definition, this explains it:

Although the radian is a unit of measure, it is a dimensionless quantity. This can be seen from the definition given earlier: the angle subtended at the centre of a circle, measured in radians, is equal to the ratio of the length of the enclosed arc to the length of the circle's radius. Since the units of measurement cancel, this ratio is dimensionless.
Look at this definition and see if you see a single linear distance in there: —One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance from the vertex.

—In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
—
—1 yard at 1000 yards.
—1 meter at 1000 meters.
—1 mile at 1000 miles.
—1 league at 1000 leagues.
—1 fathom at 1000 fathoms.
—1 inch at 1000 inches.
—1 foot at 1000 feet.
—3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
—1 centimeter at 100 meters

it works with anything... it is not constrained to ONE UNIT OF LINEAR DiSTANCE.

Stop using a linear measurement as a gauge with this stuff and life will be much better for you.

Yep, I agree you can use either with a linear distance. I'm on the same page there. However, I've heard it's easier mil and meters. Bad info? I'm still learning so be gentle.

According to this post, the only real difference is a more precise unit of measure. Is that the only advantage I'm picking up here???

 

[TiroFijo]

The metric system is decimal, and only one unit of measure for distance is used, the meter. One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance, so using meters and miliradians is VERY easy, fast and intuitive. One mil = 10 cm at 100 m, one click 1 cm at 100 m, etc. And the "fast and dirty" top of head to crotch distance is one meter, so it subtends 10 mils at 100 m, 5 mils at 200, etc.

The US customary system is fractional, and you use inches, feet, and yards (1 yd = 3 feet = 36 in). IF someone used yds and its decimal fractions for all measures, it would be the same as using the meter. But no one measures the size of a head in feet or yards, inches are normally used for smal objects, feet for stuff such as car lenght (or worse, X feet + Y inches), etc., and yards are normally used only for distance. This introduces a calculation constant in every calculation made.

 

[Lowlight]

As explained by TiroFijo, if you are "milling" or ranging a target then mils are easier, if you are gonna think it about it.

However there are other ways to skin a cat. Nobody says you have to do the math on the spot, prior proper planning and all, besides how much "mil'ing are you really doing". Its a legacy skill and even in most competitions its one or two stages out of a 20 stage event. You can accomplish the missions without a calculator.

For shooting, what is the difference if you dial

12 MOA for a target at 500 yards
or
3.6 Mils for a target at 500 yards

It's exactly the same thing.

If you want to range, I suggest building a chart which is 10x easier and requires no math. Fast the reticle on the target and then use the chart. No thinking, just reading.


Or use a Laser, if the range is 488 yards, the answer is no different, your dope is your dope, mil or moa, although Mils are much easier to remember as the numbers are much smaller.

 

[swagbrdr]

Awesome info fellas. Thanks. I have a lot of experience with our measurements and not the metric system. I know how to use the metric system, but I never use it. It's difficult for me to project metric measurements in my minds eye. But I had thought mil and metric worked well together. Thanks for the affirmation TrioFijo.

Lowlight, thanks for the idea on the chart. Great idea.

 

[sulcop96]

As long as my turrets and reticle match it makes no difference to me. I have a Razor and SS 5-20 in MIL and a NF in MOA not a big deal either way as long as everything matches up.

Sully

 

[DHNGUYEN747]

Most of us started long range shooting with MOA adjustments. I now use Mil adjustments the mildot reticule is done. It was a great tool when came out there are much better reticles that you can use. I did not like holding high and finding out that I. Needed another mil and having to do the conversion from MOA to mil. If I needed another mil holdover I would just dial up on mil and hold at the bottom of my reticule. Just my two cents.

 

[finefire]

Are we voting. Ok. There's my vote.

 

[USMC#1]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SGT Ticklefight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1 mil = 1.047</div></div>

To do more exact math, here are some additional numbers:

360 degrees in one circle
21600 MOA in one circle
6400 Mils in one circle (Army)
6283 Mils in one circle (Marines)

Sirhr

Okay gents, It's been a long time since I got out of the Marines and that was the last time mils came came across my readings....

So here we go!

Back in the day! We where told that the difference between the MILS (6400 and 6283) was what was used by Artillery and shooters.. I know because of the shooting training and called in the gun grapes for adjustments...

Most likely I am remembering this wrong... It's been a long time

 

[Joseph Floerke]

I have both but I prefer mil rad

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Lowlight]

The Army only used 6400 for one scope, then the error was corrected.

6400 is a Military Mil and was used for Artillery, Leupold mistakenly made their first mil dot scope this way. After it was changed.

 

[Supergyro]

Not sure if it's been pointed out, but a big consideration is who you shoot with. If you're shooting with a bunch of guys that are running MIL rigs, you don't want to be the guy calling shots with an MOA reticle. Of course, if you're with some casual shooters calling out "2 feet" a MOA setup might be ideal.

YMMV

 

[wielywilly-g]

One of the red dot optics leaders Ultradot sent a manual with my Matchdot that states "1MOA clicks at 100y and 1/2 MOA clicks at 50y. When I emailed tech support to let them know about the mistake, they were convinced it was not a mistake. I argued with them till they would no londer even reply. It is this kind of misinformation that is making the public ignorant about angles.

There is no fighting it if you can't get the manufactures to understand an angle is an angle, no matter where you are standing. They just keep teaching more and more new shooters that an MOA is a distance, not an angle.

To show how wide spread the problem is, I took this to the RimfireCentral forum and 90% of the responses were people that didn't see it as an error.

 

[remr5]

mil/mil system

 

[damoncali]

This is no where near as complicated as you guys are making it. A mil is a miliradian - a measurement unit for angles. A MOA is a minute of angle, another measurement unit for angles. They do precisely the same thing. It's like inches or centimeters. Just pick one and use it.

 

[glassbeaver]

As someone mentioned earlier, mils are smaller numbers. I think that alone makes it easier on anyone.

 

[tfont48]

Just my .02 moa is typically easier to pic up off the back being American (or used to inches) but I found that once I switched to mils calculations became much easier with smaller numbers. It is really just a preference but I agree with everybody and will stress that mil/mil or moa/moa scopes will save you time where in long range shooting time is not always on your side. Not to say that there is anything wrong with mil/moa as I used one for years and still own one (mst-100 probably my favorite scope)

 

[remr5]

They do both work but using the same system in your reticle and turrets makes things better.