Rifle Scopes MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

[Phil3]

I am hesitant to bring up MOA and Mildot, but did not see anything in the considerable comments on the forum about my particular issue.

I will be shooting at the local 100 and 200 yard range. I have no need to "range" anything, making moot the ranging benefit of the mildot. Just wondering which would be best for shooting off the bench to known distances. I think I have the following correct.

I get to the range and the wind is blowing. I estimate the wind, look up the MOA values from the JBM ballistics calculator data and dial in the adjustments on the MOA turret. My wind estimate is off and bullet impact is off by 1 MOA according to the MOA reticle. Dial in 4 clicks of the 1/4 MOA turret and I am there.

To do the same with the mildot, I convert the JBM values into mils. Adjust the .1 mil turret as needed. If I have a MOA turret, adjust as I did for the MOA scope. If my shot is off a bit, I can see in the reticle how many mils off it is, and adjust using a .1 mil turret. Harder to do if I have a MOA turret.

I think finer estimation of distance can be done with mils, so finer adjustments can be made. But, dialing in initial settings is clumsier because ballistics data is in inches. On the other hand, it is very hard to find a MOA reticle with fine graduations.

I am not sure how anyone adjusts properly using plain crosshair reticles with no markings. ???

For shooting at the local range off a bench, mildot or MOA?

- Phil

 

[Luvman]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

I'd still go with a mils. Mils are a power of ten system. simpler to use than quarters or halves

 

[bigwheeler]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

You have it backwards, moa is finer. Not that it makes it better.

 

[johnsobr]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

MOA once you are used to it it is way easier. Say your target is 400 yrds away drop of bullet is say 32". MOA at 400 is approximately 4" divide 32" by 4=8. dial 8 moa and send it.you can range with moa Scopes too.

 

[Phil3]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bigwheeler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have it backwards, moa is finer. Not that it makes it better. </div></div>

If I have this wrong, then could you explain where I am off course.

At 100 yards, one mil is about 3.6". Using a .1 mil turret, I can make adjustments as fine as .36". Making 1/4 MOA adjustments at 100 yards, I can make adjustments just over .25".

- Phil

 

[Early Cuyler]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

I'm more of an MOA guy, myself. I can do the ranging in my head fairly easily. But if you're just going to be shooting at known distances and want to get the most precise scope adjustments, MOA is better than Mils.

1 MOA = 1.047" at 100yds. Using the base 1/4MOA adjustments most scopes have and you get to shift your POI by .262". 1 Mil = 3.599" at 100yds so the standard .1 mil means shifts of .359". That might not sound like much, but if you're shooting benchrest target comps, that just might be the difference between first and second.

Now if you go full on BR, you can find scopes with .05mils and 1/8MOA (NF BR comes to mind). When you get that picky (moa-.131" vs. mil-.180") I don't think it'll matter whether you go mils or moa. The shooter will vary more than that.


If you really want a detailed MOA scope.... http://www.schmidtbender.com/images/downloads/Data_Sheet_P4FineL_MOA_5-25x56_PMII.pdf

 

[bigwheeler]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Phil3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bigwheeler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have it backwards, moa is finer. Not that it makes it better. </div></div>

If I have this wrong, then could you explain where I am off course.

At 100 yards, one mil is about 3.6". Using a .1 mil turret, I can make adjustments as fine as .36". Making 1/4 MOA adjustments at 100 yards, I can make adjustments just over .25".

- Phil </div></div> Pretty much answered your own question. .25 is less than .36.

 

[Goin'Hot]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

Phil, if you NEVER plan on moving past 200 yards and NEVER plan on shooting anything other than paper, a standard crosshair will be fine.

The mildot and moa based reticles are basically a ruler inside of your optic. They are used when you miss your intended target AT ANY DISTANCE. If you shoot at a tareget that is 348 yards away and your impact lines up with the 1st mildot to the left on the horizontial line, all you need to do is move the windage dial, 1 mil to the right.

If you're shooting a target that is 612 yards away any your impact occurs 2.8 mils low, well, you come up 2.8 mils on your elevation dial.

See your poi at any distance, measure how far you are from center, make your correction and take the shot. Its really less of measuring distance to the target than it is making a correction in the event of a miss.

And yes, 0.25" is smaller than 0.36" but, when measuring on a mil scale its easier to to divide the scale into 10th's than quarters.

If you decide to go with a mil or moa scale reticle, make sure your turrets match your reticle. Of course this is a moot point for a plain crosshair.

 

[vtb]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

There are two aspects
1) width of the reticle - MOA reticles are usually more thin. So if you're shooting groups on paper reticle with .25 MOA center dot will be finer than reticle with .1mil center dot
2) in which coorinate system you live? If you surrounded with object which size in inches you know from childhood - go with MOA. For me it was like a miracle when someone said that dollar bill is 2" long - I never had the idea

For the mil system quick example - what's mil size at 483 meters? - 48.3cm.

And I agree with ppl above - turrets should match the reticle.

 

[SSSamurai]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Phil3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I think finer estimation of distance can be done with mils, so finer adjustments can be made. <span style="font-weight: bold">But, dialing in initial settings is clumsier because ballistics data is in inches.</span> On the other hand, it is very hard to find a MOA reticle with fine graduations. </div></div>

If your ballistic data is inches, you are going about it the wrong way, at least if you plan on using mils. Using the mil system requires a complete conversion. Calculate your tentative data in mils, via some program, and then correct it in mils to have real dope.
I find the mil reticles more than accurate enough for everything I need them to do. When range estimating you learn to break the reticle down to .05 to be as accurate as possible, if time allows.

 

[zipollini]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

Take a look at this game/simulation. Will really help you out. Fun too !!!!

http://www.shooterready.com/lrsdemo.html

 

[VaFarmer1]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

Thanks for that link zipollini
Your right Educational and fun...
But now its going to cost me money because I want the full version cd.

 

[zipollini]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

I bought the full version. It's OK but not as good as I was hoping for. Not very exciting. If you want to practice ranging (MOA and Mil) and use different ballistics programs for practice it's pretty good though.

 

[BigJimFish]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

Disclaimer, I lean towards MOA for all uses.

That being said, a majority of serious paper punchers use MOA. This is probably because almost all targets with grid lines are in inches. In fact, I went to some trouble looking for a metric grid line target to download for some testing I needed to do when reviewing a Mil based scope and never found one. Hundreds of target patterns and bupkis. As mentioned by others 1/4 MOA is finer than .1 mil and MOA reticles also tend to be made of finer lines than Mil reticles. I suspect that the target bent of many MOA shooters probably has a good deal to do with all of this.

 

[Killer Spade 13]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

BigJimFish,

If you have a spreadsheet software program you can create your own grided targets by adjusting the column widths and row heights and then inserting objects for aim points, etc.

 

[SurgicalPrecision]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

Just my $0.02 worth. I use both systems. I prefer mil/mil setups on my long range guns but MOA setups with standard crosshairs on anything I'm using inside of 400 yards. I like the finer adjustments for the benchrest shooting I do but I find the mil system a TON easier at the longer ranges, especially when I have to spot my own misses and make corrections.

 

[krlemas]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

If you only plan on punching paper at 100-200 yds you might consider a scope with 1/8 MOA adjustments and fine cross hair.

 

[elephantrider]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Phil3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am hesitant to bring up MOA and Mildot, but did not see anything in the considerable comments on the forum about my particular issue.

- Phil </div></div>

Your issue is not that you need to know what scope will be better for your uses, but rather that you lack a fundamental understanding of how the optics, reticles, and ballistic programs work together. If you understood these, then you would realize that there is plenty of information on this forum section to answer your question. Not trying to be a jerk, but your original post is full of statements that show you are missing an uderstanding of some optics basics.

My advice is that you spend more time reading here and you will have all the knowledge needed to make the informed decision. You will be a more knowledgable shooter as well.

 

[Phil3]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

I disagree. I believe my original post makes it clear I know how to operate the two systems in my environment. I would ask what in my OP indicates I am missing an understanding of basic optics. I really want to know. Are my two scenarios in the OP in error? If so, need to know about that!

I have reads TONS of info here (and elsewhere), including the long debates on the merits of both systems. These are understood. My question here was to hone in on a use that is not so much the norm for tactical (paper targets at known distances w/no need for ranging). The guys over at 6mmBR do benchrest shooting, which I don't do either, so my needs somewhat straddle BR and tactical. I see how both MOA and mildot systems work, and can use either. There is no real mystery, but since I have not used MOA, I can not compare in practice to my existing mildot system. Just wondering what others who might be shooting like I do, are using and what they have found works well for them and why.

I am probably going to use MOA. I have good reasons for that (IMHO), but will of course listen to other opinions.

- Phil

 

[XTR]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

why get either in your reticle? If you are shooting paper at known distances, or short distances the reticle isn't of much use to you.

The retticles, whether mis or moa with a series of markings are
a ruler, do you need a ruler in your optic? I shoot F class with an NP-2DD, a ranging reticle would only b more clutter in my view. I know the exact distance in MOA from any point on the target to the center.

The point of a reticle with lines or dots whether thy be MOA or mils is one of three things:

1. Provide an input to calculate range to target by comparing the targets demensions to a known scale.
2. Provide a scale to use to correct//adjust for misses by using the scale in the reticle and measuring distance from the POI to the POA
3. Provide reference points for holdovers or holdoffs at ranges other than your zero.

If you are not going to do any of thoes things then it's just clutter.

If you are going to be shooting targets whith distances that <span style="text-decoration: underline">you</span> understand in inches or (1/4 inches), tht is to say you look at the hit and think "that needs to more up 1 inch, and right 3/4 inch, then get something with MOA adjustments.

If you thing the same way in cm then get mil knobs.

If you need to measure the distance from point of impact tot he center of the target and you will use the reticle to do it then get either just make use the reticle and the knobs match beause then range doesn't matter, x[units] up and y[units] right is all you need to know if you have a miss to reference.

 

[Phil3]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

With the NP-2DD reticle, I presume you know the MOA from any point on the target to the center by way of knowing the dimensions of the concentric circles on the target. If the target had a circle with a 10.5" radius, and POI was on the that circle at the 3 o'clock position, then you are 1 MOA to the right at 1000 yards. if the POI was at the 1:30 position, this would a bit harder to calculate. A reticle with a ruler could help.

I have not shot in F Class or long distance, so when the wind comes up, do you dial in scope adjustments? Or do you holdover or holdoffs using markings on the target (circles, whatever) to determine how much to hold?

I agree the "ruler" is clutter, and if I can get by with a fine crosshair, fine. Just wondering HOW you determine how far off bullet impact is from center and how you handle wind (dial in adjustments or holdoff using markings on target as the ruler).

Thank you.

- Phil

 

[Goin'Hot]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Phil3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have not shot in F Class or long distance, so when the wind comes up, do you dial in scope adjustments? Or do you holdover or holdoffs using markings on the target (circles, whatever) to determine how much to hold?

I agree the "ruler" is clutter, and if I can get by with a fine crosshair, fine. Just wondering HOW you determine how far off bullet impact is from center and how you handle wind (dial in adjustments or holdoff using markings on target as the ruler).

Thank you.

- Phil </div></div>

They put windage and elevation knobs on your scope for a reason. Use them. If it's one shot and you're rushed for time, thats one thing. If you have multiple shots, you can never be sure if you're "holding off" exactly the same as your last shot.

 

[Phil3]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

Good points. - Phil

 

[XTR]

Re: MilDot or MOA If No Ranging Necessary?

Actually the rings on official targets are in MOA. In F-Class the X is 1/2 moa the 10-ring is 1 MOA, and they add 1 MOA of diameter for each ring. In Palma/High Power they do the same thing but start with a 1MOA X-ring.

Personally I only know of one guy who holds off most shots, but even he dials it to the center with his spotters (I think)

In your application, plugging a 168 SMK into JBM at 2600fps you're looking at a wind drift of .35 in per MPH of full value wind at 200 yds. So, 3.5 inches if you've got a 10MPH cross wind. I wouldn't dial that, hell on a deer you could hold dead center and still probably get the heart.

There is practical value in a scaled reticle, on the 308 I hunt with I have a mil dot reticle. Zeroed at 200 with my hunting loads I get .8 mils drop at 300, 1.3 at 350 and 1.8 at 400. Basically I hold +1 at 300 and hit the top of the dot, or +2 at 400, and hit the top of the dot. It works for me