PRS Talk MOA or MRAD

[NndMojoman]

I have been wanting to get into long range shooting and eventually want to enter some competition matches which brings me to the question. Should I purchase a MOA or MRAD scope? Looking at buying the Vortex Razor Gen 2 but don't know which one to buy, What are the Pros and Cons? I have to say I am more familiar with inches vs cm.
All information, knowledge and experience that you could pass on will be appreciated.
Thanks.

 

[Sniper266]

1/4 moa clicks = .25” at 100 yards.
.1 Mrad clicks = .36” at 100 yards.
So technically moa is more precise... but can you shoot the difference?
The reason i like mrad is its convenience and speed. Its easier and faster to come up 6.8 mrad vs 18.75 moa

 

[Alabusa]

Personal preference. If you are used to MOA, get that version.

 

[ThePretzel]

Technically speaking the MOA adjustments are slightly more precise. Realistically you will not be likely to notice any practical difference between the two, so it's a matter of personal preference really.

With that said, 90% or more of the shooters in PRS matches will be shooting with MRAD. Not sure exactly how that started, but now that it's the dominant choice it makes it much easier for new shooters to begin with MRAD since they'll be able to more easily communicate with other shooters that have more experience. This is something pretty important, in my opinion at least.

As far as inches go, it's not really much more or less difficult between the two if you're decent at mental math. 1 MRAD = 3.6 inches at 100 yards, and 1 MOA = 1.047 inches at 100 yards. The MOA is a bit nicer in that it's more or less 1 inch at 100 yards, realistically you won't be measuring anything in inches or any other distance measurement when you're shooting long range. Everything - wind holds, elevation holds, called misses, target sizes, etc. - will be measured as an angular measurement instead ("come three tenths left and half a mil up", "the target is a mil wide, so just hold right edge for wind"). Most of these items are just measured using the reticle on a rifle, meaning that you'll be better off sharing the same units as your fellow shooters so that they can help you without having to translate.

 

[Diver160651]

Ok I'll go against the grain.... There is a difference and it actually ends up being one of the things guys sell their scopes for~

If you into shooting benchrest, with the old guard speak and understand only in MOA, same for belly BR or F-class.. If thats what you like, the razor isn't your best choice anyway. But you'll want MOA

If you are interested in getting into positional long range and field style matches you will find far more people speaking in mils and the MOA shooters are becoming less and less every time I've been to a match. - Speaking the same langue is important, get Mils. Same langue, faster all the way around and far simpler.

All this moa = x inches or mils = x inches is really the wrong logic for field shooters. For some reason shooters are doing pointless math many times in their head with either system and all it does is slow down the comunication. Mil based wind estimates are simpler too

It is super simple - learn to speak and think in scope units only. If you are away from the center look at your scope.. thats how far away you are.. Simple. If I give a 1.4mil wind call or a correction call, I can careless how many inches it is.. the inches change at every distance 1.4mils is always 1.4mils etc..

Who cares what you are used to.. Get what is best for what you want to learn..

 

[NndMojoman]

So if I'm interested in attending matches the majority of shooters are using Mil. Mainly for the speed of dialing the turrets and communication with other shooters in the field. So, If I was wanting to shoot benchrest MOA might be a better choice and if I want to shoot in the field Mil would be the better choice. Is this correct?

 

[Diver160651]

So if I'm interested in attending matches the majority of shooters are using Mil. Mainly for the speed of dialing the turrets and communication with other shooters in the field. So, If I was wanting to shoot benchrest MOA might be a better choice and if I want to shoot in the field Mil would be the better choice. Is this correct?

Yes.

And if you were shooting benchrest, You might want 1/8” or .05mil turrets, a thin duplex and light weight scope so that more of the weight could go into the barrel and allow you to make the weight limits. The rub here is the majority of the scopes that shooters on this forum use, are poorly suited for benchrest use.

In BR you’re NOT having to self-spot. There is an argument to be made that you do not need subtensions at all, because the targets are your index (ie graduated in MOA).

Every other fun type of match, like NRL, PRS, field matches and other positional matches favor mil.

The thing to consider is many people never really step out of there local range or small pool of shooters. If that’s the case and you’ll never venture out and you tiny pool of shooters are using units marked in triangles you might as well too.

Note that most guys not understanding the benefits to mils will start in moa because that’s what the see at the public ranges. Step out side that closed loop and the world has changed.

 

[Huskydriver]

Mil is what most competitors in the prs world use and they use it because the military decided they wanted to use it so forward observers/snipers were using the same angular unit of measure as the fire support/artillery units were using. Most of your NRA sanctioned shooting disciplines mentioned above are going to be favoring MOA but that doesn't mean jack you can use a mil based scope and still shoot just fine because you see where your bullets land, measure with the reticle of your choice, adjust, reengage, done...

Forget the inches and cm crap. The mils/minutes are the unit of measure...the second you have to bring a linear measurement ie inches/cm into your shooting your doing it wrong. Now if you want to be able to quickly range targets of known size at unknown distances or trying to figure out how big something is at a known distance does require some knowledge of the angular relationship between the distance and the target size but is not rocket science and is pretty easy to learn. If they can teach your average crayon eater in sniper school in a day I am pretty sure you can too. I like to be proficient and quick with both manually because you never know what life will throw at you.

Honestly though its 2018 who doesn't have a laser rangefinder anymore?

 

[ThePretzel]

I agree, and that's why I primarily recommend using MRAD if you plan to shoot in field or positional matches similar to NRL or PRS.

The shooters in this community have been, in my experience, incredibly helpful to me with tons of advice and support - when I first started a local shooter was even kind enough to give me a high quality rear bag since I was previously just using a balled up sweatshirt. It's a lot harder to receive all this help when you're using an entirely different system for measurements than they are, and it's a lot harder for them to give that help when they have to translate everything into a different measurement.

It would behoove you to look up local matches, if they exist near you, that interest you (whether they be benchrest or field/positional matches) and either go to the matches to talk with the shooters or see if you can be an RO for a day. This will allow you to get more feedback from the people that will be helping you out when you are getting started and you can see which measurement unit will allow you to receive the most help.

 

[NndMojoman]

Thanks for all the information and I do appreciate the knowledge you all have shared with me. Are there any matches that are coming up around the Oklahoma area. Where would I find match information? What are the different type of matches?

 

[ThePretzel]

Oklahoma would be the central region for PRS Club series (here's the website: https://www.precisionrifleseries.com/profiles/clubs/CE), but it looks like the rest of the club matches for the year are in Texas and not Oklahoma. There may be an NRL22 match, but I'm not sure which if any of the host clubs are from Oklahoma (you can look up the clubs that run them here: http://nrl22.org/ and then just check to see if any are from Oklahoma).

 

[308pirate]

Its easier and faster to come up 6.8 mrad vs 18.75 moa

False.

Assuming the same scope, the turret turns the same distance regardless of units. The numbers are farther apart in mils, which makes it seem like you are dialing less. But you're not.

There are several good reasons to use milliradians for PRS style matches, but yours is not one of them.

 

[Sniper266]

Lets do some simple math: if you need to adjust 36 inches at 100 yards say for a tall target test you will move your scope

10 mils or 100 “clicks” = 36” @ 100yds
(This can also be refrensed as the massive 10 on the turret)

Or

36 MOA or 144 “clicks” = 36” @ 100yds
(This can be reffressed as the little 36 or 14 depending on how many moa your turrets have per rotation)

So you tell me whats faster
100 clicks and a massive 10
Or
144 clicks and little bitty 36 or some other number.

Could you please elaborate on the several reasons other reasosn for using mils over moa, i would be genuinely interested to hear some of them.

 

[Huskydriver]

Lets do some simple math: if you need to adjust 36 inches at 100 yards say for a tall target test you will move your scope

10 mils or 100 “clicks” = 36” @ 100yds
(This can also be refrensed as the massive 10 on the turret)

Or

36 MOA or 144 “clicks” = 36” @ 100yds
(This can be reffressed as the little 36 or 14 depending on how many moa your turrets have per rotation)

So you tell me whats faster
100 clicks and a massive 10
Or
144 clicks and little bitty 36 or some other number.

Could you please elaborate on the several reasons other reasosn for using mils over moa, i would be genuinely interested to hear some of them.

Its 34.4 moa for 36" at a 100 yds just an FYI but seriously...who the freak is dialing 10 mils or 36 moa when you are shooting for time under pressure? What the hell is a holdover reticle for?

 

[Diver160651]

Its 34.4 moa for 36" at a 100 yds just an FYI but seriously...who the freak is dialing 10 mils or 36 moa when you are shooting for time under pressure? What the hell is a holdover reticle for?

For me, one big plus of 10 based systems not discussed is when I am spotting for someone, especially ELR. I can generally look over if comunication took a dump and quickly identify where the shooter is..

Also MOA is actually both what you pointed out Huskey and what Sniper pointed out. It really could be either, drives me nuts when someone uses a shooter MOA turret also sometimes referred to as IPHY, but has there solver or working dope cards set to MOA. Thats a real issue with the two MOA systems on many scopes today. I see it most often with the LE guys

 

[Sniper266]

Good catch on the true MOA vs shooters MOA
And ultimately if you know your equipment you can do anything. Thats really what it comes down to. I also liked your point on the military using mils becuase thats what supporting elementals use for adjusting fire.

If you reqlly wanted to, you could use 1/8th MOA clicks and dial to a single hair on a cats ass at 1000 yards.

 

[308pirate]

Lets do some simple math: if you need to adjust 36 inches at 100 yards say for a tall target test you will move your scope

10 mils or 100 “clicks” = 36” @ 100yds
(This can also be refrensed as the massive 10 on the turret)

Or

36 MOA or 144 “clicks” = 36” @ 100yds
(This can be reffressed as the little 36 or 14 depending on how many moa your turrets have per rotation)

So you tell me whats faster
100 clicks and a massive 10
Or
144 clicks and little bitty 36 or some other number.

Could you please elaborate on the several reasons other reasosn for using mils over moa, i would be genuinely interested to hear some of them.

If both scopes cover the same turret angular rotation per unit of erector tube displacement, it takes just as long to cover 100 clicks in one and 144 in the other because the ANGULAR DISTANCE traveled is the same. The spacing between clicks is the only difference.

What's faster, 62 mph or 100 km/h? What's farther, 30 feet or 10 yards?

Same fucking question.

 

[NndMojoman]

Didn't mean to start a big controversy on the matter. I was just wanting to get a feel for what shooters are using. Sounds like Mil's are the majority, especially when it comes to reticles available in spotting scopes. I'm new to this, but so far this is what I am gathering.
My shooting buddy is MOA but don't know if he is wanting to do any match shooting so just trying to find out what type of equipment I need to buy. I cant afford to spend $1500 to $2500 just to try something new, So this will be my the most I have spent on a scope and would like to get it right the first time. Thanks,

 

[Huskydriver]

Na dont sweat it. Mil vs moa gets about the same drama for some people as 9mm vs 45acp...Bottom line @NndMojoman, get a FFP scope with turrets that match your reticle and you will be good to go as long as its not a super sniper or a barska .

 

[Rob01]

I have been wanting to get into long range shooting and eventually want to enter some competition matches which brings me to the question. Should I purchase a MOA or MRAD scope? Looking at buying the Vortex Razor Gen 2 but don't know which one to buy, What are the Pros and Cons? I have to say I am more familiar with inches vs cm.
All information, knowledge and experience that you could pass on will be appreciated.
Thanks.

Either will work and no need for linear measurements. If shooting matches more people with mil scopes so might help with wind calls etc but people with MOA too.

The "MOA is finer" thing is true but it's literally a difference of 1" at 1000 yards so a wisp of wind is more than the difference so don;t stress that. Pick a system and practice and shoot it.

 

[kthomas]

You should listen to Frank's latest podcast "The Every Day Sniper". He addresses this exact question and does a really good job covering all the angles.

 

[ThePretzel]

does a really good job covering all the angles.

I see what you did there.

 

[NndMojoman]

Where would I find that podcast?

 

[Fongman]

Where would I find that podcast?

https://theeverydaysniper.podbean.com/

 

[Long Range 338]

I have been wanting to get into long range shooting and eventually want to enter some competition matches which brings me to the question. Should I purchase a MOA or MRAD scope? Looking at buying the Vortex Razor Gen 2 but don't know which one to buy, What are the Pros and Cons? I have to say I am more familiar with inches vs cm.
All information, knowledge and experience that you could pass on will be appreciated.
Thanks.

I was in the same situation when I really started shooting at longer ranges. I had been trying to use hunting scopes and really thought the 2nd focal plane was better and MOA was much easier...... Wrong, and here is why in my opinion - as stated by others as well:

-For competition MIL is what everyone is talking and trying to do the mental math to MOA is going to be a royal PITA. The only caveat to this would be if you had a training/shooting partner and you both used MOA and always compete together.
-Swapping from MOA to Mils becomes an advantage in that at some point you give up on trying to do the whole "how many inches is that at XXX yards?" and just think and talk in mils. I never could get over trying to think 1" is 1MOA and trying to overthink it eventually means you spend more time calculating and less time focusing on shooting.
-FFP really comes into its own when spotting for yourself or your shooting partner as the reticle gives you all the feedback you will ever need and no math on the fly. As Frank says "that ruler 3 inches in front of your face"

Of course this is personal opinion and if you are doing benchrest/F Class then all this info goes out the window. No matter what game, buy matching reticle and turrets and buy the best quality you can afford.

 

[flustercuck]

For me, it's a matter of what unit of measure you prefer. If yards, MOA. If meters, MILS. Growing up in the USA, I've developed a mental block when it comes to the metric system, so naturally, I prefer MOA. I also like the finer adjustments it provides and (in my opinion) 1/4th moa adjustments are much easier to navigate than 1/10th mils on the turret, but it's probably because I'm more adapted to it. MOA just seems more intuitive, especially when you generalize it with 1 moa = 1" @ 100 yards and so on...

 

[Rob01]

For me, it's a matter of what unit of measure you prefer. If yards, MOA. If meters, MILS. Growing up in the USA, I've developed a mental block when it comes to the metric system, so naturally, I prefer MOA. I also like the finer adjustments it provides and (in my opinion) 1/4th moa adjustments are much easier to navigate than 1/10th mils on the turret, but it's probably because I'm more adapted to it. MOA just seems more intuitive, especially when you generalize it with 1 moa = 1" @ 100 yards and so on...

Nope. Nothing to do with linear units. Also no need to generalize 1 MOA as 1" etc. Use the reticle and it will tell you how many MOA or mils you are off and adjust. No need for linear at all.

Finer adjustments is literally 1" at 1000 yards. 1/4 MOA is 2.6" at 1000 yards and .1 mil is 3.6" at 1000 yards. 1" difference. No difference in actual use.

 

[flustercuck]

Nope. Nothing to do with linear units

What has "nothing to do with linear units"? I understand that all you need is the reticle in practical terms, but from a higher level perspective, MOA is way easier (and more intuitive) when dealing with yards. Just my opinion

 

[Sheldon N]

but from a higher level perspective, MOA is way easier (and more intuitive) when dealing with yards.

1000 yard shooting? 1 mil = 1 yard.

Who says mils have anything to do with meters?

 

[Huskydriver]

What has "nothing to do with linear units"? I understand that all you need is the reticle in practical terms, but from a higher level perspective, MOA is way easier (and more intuitive) when dealing with yards. Just my opinion

Please read before arguing further...

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/moa-or-mil-yawn-old-news.6899801/page-2#post-7203610

 

[flustercuck]

1000 yard shooting? 1 mil = 1 yard.
Who says mils have anything to do with meters?

how about 1mil = 1cm @ 100 meters?

 

[Deleted member 113831]

how about 1mil = 1cm @ 100 meters?

You are arguing against your own point. 1 MIL is 1@1000 of any unit you choose. 1 MIL can be 1 cubit at 1000 cubits. It isn't confined to any system. It stands alone. The only reason you are "used" to thinking in MOA is because you are still thinking of misses in linear units rather than angular units.

E.g. You say "I missed by 8 inches, and at 800 yards 8 inches is one MOA". You add that extra unnecessary step. If you were really using even MOA correctly, you would be measuring the miss with your scope and seeing the miss as 1 MOA with the linear measurement never entering your head.

 

[Rob01]

Fluster forget the linear and make your life easier. If I miss it doesn't matter if it's 389 meters or yards as I am making my correction in mils with my reticle. I don't care how far that is in linear as my scope doesn't adjust in linear.

Also when you run your data it doesn't matter if it's yards or meters. You get your angular to dial on. I use mils and never have I ever used meters. Yards works fine with either. When you start converting angular to linear to back to angular you just make your life harder and add more work.

 

[Deleted member 113831]

If Herman the German who grew up with the metric system and his MIL scope, is measuring his misses in centimeters and converting to MILs... he is making the same error in thinking.

 

[Long Range 338]

-Swapping from MOA to Mils becomes an advantage in that at some point you give up on trying to do the whole "how many inches is that at XXX yards?" and just think and talk in mils. I never could get over trying to think 1" is 1MOA and trying to overthink it eventually means you spend more time calculating and less time focusing on shooting.
-FFP really comes into its own when spotting for yourself or your shooting partner as the reticle gives you all the feedback you will ever need and no math on the fly.

This exactly what I was talking about when I said less time calculating and more time shooting.....

 

[Snuby642]

Lets see if this mil system works out at home.
I used to measure in ounces, commonly 12oz.

So I can use mil's instead.
So if my drink is half full that's 0.5 mil from empty.
And it doesn't matter if it's milk or beer.
Or if its in a coffee cup, yetty mug or stine.

So that would be an angular mesurment? Lol

 

[Deleted member 113831]

Lets see if this mil system works out at home.
I used to measure in ounces, commonly 12oz.

So I can use mil's instead.
So if my drink is half full that's 0.5 mil from empty.
And it doesn't matter if it's milk or beer.
Or if its in a coffee cup, yetty mug or stine.

So that would be an angular mesurment? Lol

That depends, was it a full MIL glass to begin with....?

 

[britneymadz]

Thanks for all the information and I do appreciate the knowledge you all have shared with me. Are there any matches that are coming up around the Oklahoma area. Where would I find match information? What are the different type of matches?

There's a monthly club match at Fouled Bore Precision in Ninnekah, OK. The dates aren't set a long way out, so they are usually announced shortly after the last month's match. They just had one this past weekend, but unfortunately I wasn't able to attend since I just had my appendix removed a week ago. If you're interested in the matches there, look up Fouled Bore Precision, LLC on facebook. The owner of the range is an awesome guy and puts on a really good match.

 

[Snuby642]

I had trouble getting my head around mils.
Was poping blood vessels trying to convert and make sense of it.

Was introduced to it at an old age so it was tough.
Then someone lent me a mill / mill scope.

All said I finally gave in and just started shooting it.
It is by far the simplest no brainer system that there is.
Absolutely no math to do.

Just try shooting one for a day, you will soon see, quit thinking and shoot.

Edit: wont take long till you think in mils because it is so much easier.

 

[flustercuck]

Alright so from everyone's responses, it's clear that no one is interested in the measurement itself. You could have dingos displayed on your reticle and if everyone is using it, it's the one to go with. I'm not arguing that one system has any practical value over the other one, in terms of PRS, however you can't deny the fact that there is a synergistic property between MOA and yardard vs MILs and meters. Like I said, If everyone were using dingos at matches, you'd be arguing in favor of it, same goes for MOA...I choose to use MOA because I, for one, am interested in the actual measurement and all of my local ranges are measured in yardage.

 

[Huskydriver]

Flustercuck you are still overthinking it....use degrees for example...a degree/moa/mil/ par secs/ does not matter whether you measure that degree at the muzzle or at 1500000 light years...the distance between two intersecting lines at a common vertex that make that degree grows linearly as you measure those lines farther and farther away from the intersection point. This is not a coincidence as you pointed out but a mathematical constant of straight line and angular geometry. You can measure the distance between the lines as you move away from the vertex using meters, inches, nano meters or big foots %&*$#* it does not matter because the distance between them is still just 1 degree....it is true there is a close relationship to inches and moa if you use inches to measure that linear distance but it is completely unnecessary when you have a measuring stick right in your reticle to measure the exact same thing without converting anything.....yes is is also true that there is a relationship between mils and cm because mils use a base of ten for there measurement...guess what divide an inch by ten convert yards to a tenth and mils will spit out both in .1's of an inch if you feel like running that math....mils and moa are both units to measure angles...you do not need linear yards,inches,cm , or meters to shoot and correct misses with reticles that have measurement marks in them because the tool to measure the distance is right in front of your eyeball with no needed knowledge of what the angular measurement converts to a linear measurement at a known distance away from the vertex....I don't know how to explain it any easier....if you think in inches,yards,cm,meters for your corrections you are doing it wrong or at least slower than you could be doing it...shot over

 

[Rob01]

Alright so from everyone's responses, it's clear that no one is interested in the measurement itself. You could have dingos displayed on your reticle and if everyone is using it, it's the one to go with. I'm not arguing that one system has any practical value over the other one, in terms of PRS, however you can't deny the fact that there is a synergistic property between MOA and yardard vs MILs and meters. Like I said, If everyone were using dingos at matches, you'd be arguing in favor of it, same goes for MOA...I choose to use MOA because I, for one, am interested in the actual measurement and all of my local ranges are measured in yardage.

Yes I can deny and from reading your posts you need to take a class or have someone teach you who knows how to use angular measurements as you just aren't grasping what is being said.

 

[Snuby642]

Your still thinking, your still measuring, your still doing math!
Stop.
Mils don't care if you use cars as as distance measurement or a dingo.

A mil scope don't care how far away you are, your caliber or how hard the wind is blowing!
You don't have to know any of that crap.

You simply take a shot, see impact, use the reticle to mesure how many mils you
Were off by and hold/dial over by that much..

Works at any distance, does not matter.
You will not end up caring if you are on a yard or meter range.
If you can see the impact you will not need to look back at a calculator either.

Take a "test drive" with a borrowed gun or scope.

 

[Snuby642]

The one and only problem with mil's is that they are hard to explain to a shooter
That has many years of moa shooting under thier belt, as was in my case.

I had no mentor exept for the hide.

Any capable shooter at the range can show you in minutes.
Probably quicker than reading all the posts.
There are many u tube videos out there as well.

 

[flustercuck]

it is true there is a close relationship to inches and moa if you use inches to measure that linear distance...yes is is also true that there is a relationship between mils and cm

Thank you, this is all I'm saying. If everyone were running MOA, you guys would be in favor of it.

Again, I'm not concerned about practicality within PRS, and I'm not saying any math is needed while shooting. You guys are putting words in my mouth and not focusing on what I'm actually saying.

Can anyone give an argument on why MILs are better, other than it's popularity?

 

[Rob01]

It's not a mil vs moa discussion. What he said above goes for moa as well. No need for linear or conversions.

 

[Long Range 338]

Alright so from everyone's responses, it's clear that no one is interested in the measurement itself. You could have dingos displayed on your reticle and if everyone is using it, it's the one to go with. I'm not arguing that one system has any practical value over the other one, in terms of PRS, however you can't deny the fact that there is a synergistic property between MOA and yardard vs MILs and meters. Like I said, If everyone were using dingos at matches, you'd be arguing in favor of it, same goes for MOA...I choose to use MOA because I, for one, am interested in the actual measurement and all of my local ranges are measured in yardage.

I'm with Rob01 on this, I deny that MILS have anything to do with metric measurement and work equally well for yards as meters. For example 1 mil is 36" @ 1000 yards which is 3.6" @ 100 yards, etc.

What is trying to be expressed is that your linear measurements aren't necessary and actually are a waste of time. It means nothing to me to miss center of the target by 7 inches because I simply use the reticle to see that as .5 mils and make the adjustment in my turrets or by holding. The situation should be the same even if you are using MOA in that you should use your reticle to measure and not try to think that the target is 18" wide and you hit the left edge so you need to adjust 9". Let the reticle tell you in mils/moa what your adjustment needs to be. No math, no calculating, just focusing on making a good shot.

Lots of good info here if you do the online training Frank does a great job of breaking this stuff down.

 

[Long Range 338]

Thank you, this is all I'm saying. If everyone were running MOA, you guys would be in favor of it.

Again, I'm not concerned about practicality within PRS, and I'm not saying any math is needed while shooting. You guys are putting words in my mouth and not focusing on what I'm actually saying.

Can anyone give an argument on why MILs are better, other than it's popularity?

Both systems work, you are just on a PRS site and mils are obviously used more due to ease of use and previous military experience I assume. Personally I had a hard time biting the bullet and going away from moa to mils - but it was the best move. From a simple math standpoint, mils are base 10 so that is much easier than working in .25 moa. If you were on a benchers site they would probably extol the virtues of the moa systems to you.

 

[Rob01]

Can anyone give an argument on why MILs are better, other than it's popularity?

They are two ways to get to the same place. Neither is better than the other. Both have slight differences some like over others. If you like MOA then use it but again the linear isn;t needed. That is what you aren't getting from this conversation.

 

[Snuby642]

Getting hits with mils is quicker in a timed event for one, no math involved.
That is the first reason and why it has become the standard.
It is a universal language. It is not caliber dependant.
The list goes on.
It gained popularity on it's own merits.
If you shoot in a timed event, you will loose repetitively due to the time.

I fought the mils and the mils won.