Hi,
It is what endorsers of MOA have to deal with, lol. That is why they are so grumpy and holier than thou...
Sincerely,
Theis
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes MOA vs Mil.
- Thread starter L2bravo
- Start date
Hi,
It is what endorsers of MOA have to deal with, lol. That is why they are so grumpy and holier than thou...
Sincerely,
Theis
I gotta say, yall are the meanest people I've come across on internet forums - and that says a lot!It doesn't matter if you use divisions of a cheese wedge to measure angle, as long as you are consistent and know what you are dealing with.
I like MOA because 95% of the people I know don't have a spotting or rifle scope with capabilities to perform any angular measurements. Any correction calls I get are going to be in inches and I need to do the mental math quickly to figure out how to adjust my scope before my target runs away.
Consider this. You are shooting at a wolf at 600 yards across a windy canyon. Pretty much a once in a lifetime opportunity. You shoot. Your crazy uncle Timmy is watching through his $250 rifle scope and tells you that you were a foot and a half to the left. What do you correct your MRAD scope to? You have 10 seconds until the wolf runs. Once in a lifetime opportunity. No pressure. Show your work.
height of a wolf is around 2.5'.....adjust hold half a wolf-height and fire again.
if you are converting feet to MOA and dialing...the wolf is already gone.
oooooooor.
if you and uncle timmy were using MILS like you should.....he could simply tell you, "you are 1MIL low"......you could simply adjust your hold 1 mil and be done with it.
Whew —I gotta say, yall are the meanest people I've come across on internet forums - and that says a lot!
I like MOA because 95% of the people I know don't have a spotting or rifle scope with capabilities to perform any angular measurements. Any correction calls I get are going to be in inches and I need to do the mental math quickly to figure out how to adjust my scope before my target runs away.
Consider this. You are shooting at a wolf at 600 yards across a windy canyon. Pretty much a once in a lifetime opportunity. You shoot. Your crazy uncle Timmy is watching through his $250 rifle scope and tells you that you were a foot and a half to the left. What do you correct your MRAD scope to? You have 10 seconds until the wolf runs. Once in a lifetime opportunity. No pressure. Show your work.
You are kidding right?
You’re going to take someone’s guess and then somehow make it perfect? It’s no different in either scope system.
Btw see it all the time with guys using $3000 bino’s — us mil guys have zero issues with it.. yes, at a match or hunting
But the real question in this thread should be, 'What would Sterling Shooter use?'
I'm waiting for paparockcal to wriggle his way back in here and tell us what's really up.
Made my first 600y cold bore on an MOA target with a MK4 with M3 turret. Crazy uncle Timmy said I missed 18 inches low on the previous outing, so I........
I miss sterling shooter. He was the first to both challenge my early newbie posts and lead me to a good answer.
And would also somehow manage to bring up the use of a sling and bone on bone shooting positions in response to someone asking if they should use H1000 or Retumbo.
https://precisionrifleblog.com/2013/07/20/mil-vs-moa-an-objective-comparison/
Awesome article.
I'm more comfortable thinking in inches and yards and thus, I prefer MOA and that's what I use. I don't care what anyone thinks about it. I know what works for me, and like Lintz makes crystal clear, they both work just fine.
Awesome article.
I'm more comfortable thinking in inches and yards and thus, I prefer MOA and that's what I use. I don't care what anyone thinks about it. I know what works for me, and like Lintz makes crystal clear, they both work just fine.
And there lies the root of the issue. I have both and use both. There is no need to think in inches and yards, or centimeters and meters. If a person is thinking in a linear measurement to start with, they are making it too hard. Once a person can get past the initial linear measurement problem, they realize MOA and Mil are actually very easy to use.
Like I said, "dirt"head....MOA is what I use and why. I don't give a crap what you or other "dirt"heads on this forum have to say about it, that anyone gives a crap about it to the point they spend time around here arguing about just tells me they have way to little to do with their poor, pathetic excuses for a life.
Once a person can get past that reality, it doesn't matter.
LOL.
Once a person can get past that reality, it doesn't matter.
LOL.
I have to say, this whole thing has been a blast. I’m down with strep and it has made my day so much better. Thank you all !
Hey Amsdorf.......I mean Centuriator.......I forgot you changed your screen name a while back. Did I say you couldn't use MOA? I did say I have and use both. Did I not? Aren't you some sort of Lutheran Pastor? You don't really come off that way on the forums. Maybe I have you mixed up with someone else. Anyway, Like I said. If a person starts their correction with "I missed 18" left, that's the problem.
D
Deleted member 113831
Guest
All other valid arguments aside....at 600 yards 1 mil is 0.6 yards, which is close enough to 1.5 feet.I gotta say, yall are the meanest people I've come across on internet forums - and that says a lot!
I like MOA because 95% of the people I know don't have a spotting or rifle scope with capabilities to perform any angular measurements. Any correction calls I get are going to be in inches and I need to do the mental math quickly to figure out how to adjust my scope before my target runs away.
Consider this. You are shooting at a wolf at 600 yards across a windy canyon. Pretty much a once in a lifetime opportunity. You shoot. Your crazy uncle Timmy is watching through his $250 rifle scope and tells you that you were a foot and a half to the left. What do you correct your MRAD scope to? You have 10 seconds until the wolf runs. Once in a lifetime opportunity. No pressure. Show your work.
So I hold 1 mils right and let fly. It was no pressure at all. It took 10 times longer to type than figure.
It still doesn't mean that "uncle Timmy" shouldn't learn a better way.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice! And exactly...as per the usual when people try to argue MOA v MIL
It apparently is an obsessive compulsion some have, to overcome some kind of weird insecurity problems, to try to convince people to agree with them about an issue that is of absolutely no consequence.
I just knew that it was gonna call in an O/C type in the midst of an apparent absence of sufficiently authoritative opinions.
Yap ... yap ... yap ... yap ... yap ...
Last edited:
Wow- does that make you Bi? Dang what people admit to on this thread..
Can’t...look...away...
Yes! I am. I admit it. I'm almost ashamed, but I really don't give a shit one way or the other. MOA........Mil................whatever. Whiskey........beer..........who cares.
@treillwI gotta say, yall are the meanest people I've come across on internet forums - and that says a lot!
I like MOA because 95% of the people I know don't have a spotting or rifle scope with capabilities to perform any angular measurements. Any correction calls I get are going to be in inches and I need to do the mental math quickly to figure out how to adjust my scope before my target runs away.
Consider this. You are shooting at a wolf at 600 yards across a windy canyon. Pretty much a once in a lifetime opportunity. You shoot. Your crazy uncle Timmy is watching through his $250 rifle scope and tells you that you were a foot and a half to the left. What do you correct your MRAD scope to? You have 10 seconds until the wolf runs. Once in a lifetime opportunity. No pressure. Show your work.
Ok, I didn't read any of the responses to this, just jumped right into problem solving mode. I'm sure others had epic responses...
Crazy Uncle Timmy didn't give you any useful information. If he had said "you missed by 1/4 of a target," you would have something to work with. But, Crazy Uncle Timmy (CUT) used his $250 scope (sans ranging reticle) to give you a linear correction. He could have given you as much information with "I dun don't think ya hit 'em." How does CUT know it was 1.5 feet? What was his point of reference? Sure, you could say "That's 3 MOA or about 0.8 MIL," but, BUT you are still as likely to miss as not because CUT doesn't know fuck all about calling a correction and gave you shit information. So, what do you do? Turn the rifle and put 2 in that worthless CUnT, push him in the ravine. Wait until dark when the wolves come to feast on the carcass and take out whatever wolf you want. When the law comes around, tell them- honestly- that CUT was eaten by wolves. WINNING!!
But to your actual question. 1.5 ft = 18". 18/6=3 3<3.6, but not by much. Correction is most of a mil- go with 0.8. Time for math==>5 sec. Actual value 0.833.
But, here is the rub. Whether you correct 3 MOA or 0.8 MIL, you are likely to still miss the wolf. CUnT said you were in front by 1.5 ft, not that you missed you mark by 1.5 ft. If you are aiming for a heart/lung shot, you are off more by 2.5 to 3 (4?, how big is a wolf?- that gets back to the point of reference question) feet than by 1.5, so correcting to 3 MOA puts your next shot just off the tip of the wolf's nose. You need to correct an additional amount to account for the head/neck/shoulder.
CUnT didn't give you any information because his estimate of 1.5 feet is just as fraught with bull shit as just sending a WAG shot and hoping. CUnT was probably the guy that told you "Just hold top of the back out to 400 and you are good..."
Last edited:
I shoot MOA because I had over 20 years of experience with it before MIL became popular and it just works for me. I have no need to reprogram my brain. My shooting is primarily range, hunting, and F-Class. I'm not going to scope range an animal, I'm going to laser it or pass.
If I were a blank slate today I suppose I'd give MIL serious consideration.
i'm in this camp, wont tell anyone they are stupid for shooting mil based optics.
If I were a blank slate today I suppose I'd give MIL serious consideration.
i'm in this camp, wont tell anyone they are stupid for shooting mil based optics.
Last edited:
Mil vs MOA threads in video representation:
R
R
I’d like to know where this came from. It was mentioned previously too. Almost every serious PRS shooter I know loads their own ammo. There are a few who do not, but if you poll the top 100 shooters, I’d bet that you’ll see that the top guys reload.
This perception that PRS shooters do not care about optimizing the performance of their rifle is inaccurate and bogus. Consider that, for this particular sport/game, 1/2 MOA is truly fine and should get you hits the majority of the time. But I know plenty of guys that are not satisfied with just 1/2 MOA and push harder than that.
Please enlighten me as to where you (collectively) got that perception.
If we are thinking in inches/feet/yards why wouldn't I just switched to an IPHY setup. Then it's a one for one when your buddy tells you the last 600 yards shot was 12" right. Easy correction.
Thought the thread was slowing down so you should throw some more gas on the fire?
Wait, so you come up with some wolf story and uncle Timmy. You challenge anybody to come up with a solution, then act like a less than a brainiac, by saying “show your work”. I’m literally 3 seconds I have my dope. The you follow up with we did extra math converting into MOA. Then you act like a douche on the 6.5 which I don’t own. Dude, that shit is like 90% of a 300 mag. Read on it.
My huge burning question, is how/how many times, do you have to be wrong, to be wrong???
I’m probably the newest guy in here and I smell what you’re standing in.
I love these threads. The more you actually get out and shoot, the more you realize how many people don't, just by the things they say. I have these conversations with friends and coworkers all the time. You can explain it over and over again but until they actually do it, they will never understand/believe you.
I'll use myself as an example. When i first started getting into long range shooting, i did a lot of reading on this very site and understood the difference between 1st and 2nd focal plane scopes. But still, even though i understood the difference on paper, no one could have convinced me it mattered. My thinking was, "if I'm shooting over 400-500 yards, I'm going to be at max magnification anyway." I proceded to buy a NXS 5.5-22 (in moa too...haha). It was a nice scope, by far better than anything i had ever had. Then i got out and started shooting. It didn't take many range trips to realize that mirage and a tiny field of view at 22x were not things that were fun to deal with. "Shit, that's why they use 1st focal plane," i thought.
Some people just won't get it till they do it, but some of those people will argue about it till they're blue in the face anyway. So mil or moa, it doesn't matter, but if you're on here talking about inches, feet, centimeters, or meters then i have a feeling you don't actually get out there and do it much or at all. If you did, you would quickly realize it is completely unnecessary unless you are using your reticle to range a target.
I'll use myself as an example. When i first started getting into long range shooting, i did a lot of reading on this very site and understood the difference between 1st and 2nd focal plane scopes. But still, even though i understood the difference on paper, no one could have convinced me it mattered. My thinking was, "if I'm shooting over 400-500 yards, I'm going to be at max magnification anyway." I proceded to buy a NXS 5.5-22 (in moa too...haha). It was a nice scope, by far better than anything i had ever had. Then i got out and started shooting. It didn't take many range trips to realize that mirage and a tiny field of view at 22x were not things that were fun to deal with. "Shit, that's why they use 1st focal plane," i thought.
Some people just won't get it till they do it, but some of those people will argue about it till they're blue in the face anyway. So mil or moa, it doesn't matter, but if you're on here talking about inches, feet, centimeters, or meters then i have a feeling you don't actually get out there and do it much or at all. If you did, you would quickly realize it is completely unnecessary unless you are using your reticle to range a target.
I've enjoyed this thread. Some funny stuff posted! You guys are brutal, and I mean that as a compliment!
I've learned a LOT about this in just the past year (since I started pursuing the precision long(er) range rifle stuff in earnest)... by reading, taking a course, sending a lot of lead down the tube, and signing up for the Online Training here on The Hide.
Funny thing... JUST TODAY... I was at a work-related course and met up with one of my colleagues / professional acquaintance. He is a shooter.... former military.... avid hunter. So, whenever we meet up, the conversation often turns to guns. He had just been on a hunt (deer and hogs) and was telling me about his rifle. I asked which scope he was running. He happened to mention it was MOA, but he preferred MIL, because..... "MOA is related to inches and yards and MIL is metric."
I just smiled and said, "Well, they're both just angular measurements" and left it at that. The conversation then wandered to other topics.
I've learned a LOT about this in just the past year (since I started pursuing the precision long(er) range rifle stuff in earnest)... by reading, taking a course, sending a lot of lead down the tube, and signing up for the Online Training here on The Hide.
Funny thing... JUST TODAY... I was at a work-related course and met up with one of my colleagues / professional acquaintance. He is a shooter.... former military.... avid hunter. So, whenever we meet up, the conversation often turns to guns. He had just been on a hunt (deer and hogs) and was telling me about his rifle. I asked which scope he was running. He happened to mention it was MOA, but he preferred MIL, because..... "MOA is related to inches and yards and MIL is metric."
I just smiled and said, "Well, they're both just angular measurements" and left it at that. The conversation then wandered to other topics.
Last edited:
I was in dealership fixed operations for 20 years, did it all from GM certified and Master Tech to writing service and Manager. Then sold Snapon for 4 years. I lived and breathed and read and went to every school offered in the car repair and tool business.
I would meet geezers who had turned wrenches all their lives as well as new “techs” who would repeat nonsense urban legend shadetree bullshit and declare it as gospel.
Drove me insane.
This topic is a lot like that.
Not using Mil based reticles because of “not based on inches” is like not being able to ever use conventional oil again in an engine that has ever used synthetic, and other such stories.
I would meet geezers who had turned wrenches all their lives as well as new “techs” who would repeat nonsense urban legend shadetree bullshit and declare it as gospel.
Drove me insane.
This topic is a lot like that.
Not using Mil based reticles because of “not based on inches” is like not being able to ever use conventional oil again in an engine that has ever used synthetic, and other such stories.
Last edited:
Yep, many, many people confuse repetition for experience/expertise.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you.......Irony!
Dunning-Kruger Effect is what it is. People mistake confidence for ability. Just because someone has a plethora of self esteem and a hint of understanding, does not mean they understand a fuggin thing they are talking about.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/deanyeong.com/dunning-kruger-effect/amp/
And as soon as some says “MOA & Inches” in a sentence, I know without a doubt they have no idea what they are talking about.
I am only 'used to' MOA at all for one reason: Sight-in targets and most of my optics (Aimpoints and an NXS 1-4X) and iron sights are set up that way for adjustment. Pretty much any shooting after that initial zeroing, maxed at 200 yards, has just been holdovers learned over time or a BDC. (and 99% of that was at 100 yards and in.) So I recently decided that I wanted to shoot out past that, with more precision. Once I started shopping optics, it was obvious that MIL was the more commonly used system, so I thought 'I better start reading...'
As it turns out, I also read that article by Lintz about MOA vs MIL that was mentioned elsewhere just yesterday, and I thought 'oh, I guess I can just stay with MOA, since I'm already kinda used to it.' Thinking about through the day as I looked at the plethora [word used on purpose] of MIL reticles out there, it made me contemplate the 'big buts' with that choice: fewer reticle options and the fact that if I ever wanted to interact with what appears to be the vast amount of precision/competition shooters, I'll need to adapt to it anyway. So that's what I'm doing, and it's not as difficult as I was expecting. Apparently you can teach an old dog (52) new tricks.
As it turns out, I also read that article by Lintz about MOA vs MIL that was mentioned elsewhere just yesterday, and I thought 'oh, I guess I can just stay with MOA, since I'm already kinda used to it.' Thinking about through the day as I looked at the plethora [word used on purpose] of MIL reticles out there, it made me contemplate the 'big buts' with that choice: fewer reticle options and the fact that if I ever wanted to interact with what appears to be the vast amount of precision/competition shooters, I'll need to adapt to it anyway. So that's what I'm doing, and it's not as difficult as I was expecting. Apparently you can teach an old dog (52) new tricks.
Similar threads
Rifle Scopes
Elevation math
