Wouldn’t go back to that world for anything. I own my own business now that has zero to do with vehicles except I use them, and I am free of that BS.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes MOA vs Mil.
- Thread starter L2bravo
- Start date
We have a lot of those types in the aviation world. Had a guy come to me one time who wanted a tailwheel endorsement. He had about 250 hours total flying time, all in the same make and model airplane. His exact comment was "I know pretty much all there is to know about Cessna 172s". We told him he didn't have 250 hours. He had the same hour 250 times!!
And yes, once we got him in the Cub it became immediately apparent, even to him, that he didn't know nearly as much as he thought he did.
Just like many confuse correlation with causality...….
In all seriousness, I never found the switch to mils to be anything but easy, even after over a decade of shooting nothing but MOA match sights and scopes.
My brain is wired to see shit for what it really is and to look for fundamental understanding of how things work.
My brain is wired to see shit for what it really is and to look for fundamental understanding of how things work.
Good lord. I bet CUnT this thread wouldn't go four pages. Now I don't have enough money to register for PRS. FUCK!
Lolol! As a young mfg. engineer designing machines, one task was to make safety items “idiot proof”. One of my favorites sayings became, “But the idiots are so damn good at what they do.”Good lord. I bet CUnT this thread wouldn't go four pages. Now I don't have enough money to register for PRS. FUCK!
He was giving an example of how it’s easy to do. He was doing no “math” as it’s a memorized thing.
The only time you need a linear value is ranging with your reticle. There’s all kinds of other issues involved with reticle ranging that make it less than accurate.
When was the last time you ranged with your reticle?
There are zero other instances where you would need to think in inches (or centimeters).
Ok this is where I draw the friggin line!!!
A ruler is a king, queen, or fuckin’ tryant!!!
The little metal strips with inches on one side and millimeters on the other are RULES or SCALES!!! I learned this over 25yrs ago in machine shop class in high school.
Now back to your regularly scheduled shitshow! Sorry for the outburst!
BTW I think in inches, feet and yards. And I machine stuff for a living. Even in the machining world we measure angles in decimals (read 10 based system like MILS). It’s been over 15 yrs since I’ve worked from blueprints that had angles dimensioned in minutes and seconds, and they were drawn in the 1960’s.
Gianteyeroll.gifOk this is where I draw the friggin line!!!
A ruler is a king, queen, or fuckin’ tryant!!!
The little metal strips with inches on one side and millimeters on the other are RULES or SCALES!!! I learned this over 25yrs ago in machine shop class in high school.
Now back to your regularly scheduled shitshow! Sorry for the outburst!
BTW I think in inches, feet and yards. And I machine stuff for a living. Even in the machining world we measure angles in decimals (read 10 based system like MILS). It’s been over 15 yrs since I’ve worked from blueprints that had angles dimensioned in minutes and seconds, and they were drawn in the 1960’s.
Ok this is where I draw the friggin line!!!
A ruler is a king, queen, or fuckin’ tryant!!!
The little metal strips with inches on one side and millimeters on the other are RULES or SCALES!!! I learned this over 25yrs ago in machine shop class in high school.
Now back to your regularly scheduled shitshow! Sorry for the outburst!
.
Wow! Wrong for 25 years? Glad we can help...
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ruler
There are two kinds of nations in the world.
Those that use the metric system.
And those that have walked on the moon.
Those that use the metric system.
And those that have walked on the moon.
MILS are best, because I think so.........
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
What is short range today was long range when scopes started introducing adjustable bases or integrated into the scope itself. It is not a stretch of the imagination why early inventors of the technology chose MOA rather than MILS because the end users were used to Kentucky Windage and the MOA was the best angular fit for the migration. MILS became popular for reticle ranging later on. Then people not too long ago started precision shooting beyond 1000 yards. Along with this and the ability to range without a reticle led to complaints about mismatched MIL reticle and MOA internal scope adjustments. The changes made as a result of demand and the technical reasons supporting it was logical and natural. But the level of stupidy amongst users today still persists because of Kentucky Windage mentality. The stupidity is prevalent no matter which of the two angular types of measurements one may prefer. An inch is not 1 MOA and .1 MIL is only close to 1/3 MOA, which demand did away with and was replaced by 1/4 MOA and the introduction of the option for 1/8 MOA. The problem manufacturers have in dealing with this level of stupidity to meet demand is the result of so many choices out there. The stupidity continues with one side wanting the complete extermination of the other to the point of only one option available. The controversy is irrelevant and completely unnecessary. What we have is logical and natural in the form of a choice that may fit an individual's need but may not fit another's.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nasty cold with a sore throat, and I noticed that someone had just liked a prior post in this thread. Read a little while I was enjoying a Cepacol lozenge and the quoted post struck me funny.
There are worse (much much worse) threads that have been brought back from the dead. This one has some entertainment value if nothing else.
I was at a range where there was another group of shooters. I was ringing steel at 1,000 yards, so they asked me how far off I was holding windage. I replied, "8-MOA."
"Yeah, but how many inches?"
"8-MOA."
"How many inches is that?"
(I'm thinking.... you gonna run out there and measure it off?)
"8-MOA."
Then they gave up repeating the question.
"Yeah, but how many inches?"
"8-MOA."
"How many inches is that?"
(I'm thinking.... you gonna run out there and measure it off?)
"8-MOA."
Then they gave up repeating the question.
My best advice on this is shoot what your buddies shoot. We’ve got one in our group that is shooting “the other” and he has a hard time keeping up. My spotting scope has a FFP reticle in it and it matches all of us but the one. He won’t admit it (yet) but I think he regrets his choice.
Don’t think it matters which. Either can be easily picked up. They both make sense
Don’t think it matters which. Either can be easily picked up. They both make sense
I've finally converted over to MILs and it's the best thing I've done in a while. Sold all my MOA scopes (except 1 on my hunting rifle) and replaced them with their MIL counterparts. Base 10 system, easier math, smaller numbers, and the EBR-2C reticle on my Razor Gen II looks so much less cluttered in mRads. And more importantly, when I go shoot at the club I have the same ruler as everyone else.
For what it is worth, I was using MOA for the longest time and I enjoy it, but I just switched to MRAD with the Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25x56 because of the EBR-7C reticle for holdover. It seems relatively easy once you take a look at how milliradian works, just have to do a little converting but it seems as if you can be a bit more precise at long range.
What converting do you have to do?
I am no expert, but my understanding is that you will have to make conversions if you don't have an ap or if your spotter is using MOA, you will have to convert MOA by dividing by 3.5. So, for example 5 MOA after dividing by 3.5 (3.5 being a rough w.a.g. since it is 3.438 so it is rounded to make it easier) is 1.4 mils. If I am way off base here, please let me know. There is some really good info on the website listed below.
Reference;
www.longrangeshooting.org
Reference;
Long Range Shooting - MOA and MILS explained
A MIL or an MOA linear equivalent increases proportionally with distance. With the MOA and MIL systems, you correct the position of the reticle inside the scope, based on wind deflection and trajectory of the bullet at the target’s distance.
www.longrangeshooting.org
I am no expert, but my understanding is that you will have to make conversions if you don't have an ap or if your spotter is using MOA, you will have to convert MOA by dividing by 3.5. So, for example 5 MOA after dividing by 3.5 (3.5 being a rough w.a.g. since it is 3.438 so it is rounded to make it easier) is 1.4 mils. If I am way off base here, please let me know. There is some really good info on the website listed below.
Reference;
Long Range Shooting - MOA and MILS explained
A MIL or an MOA linear equivalent increases proportionally with distance. With the MOA and MIL systems, you correct the position of the reticle inside the scope, based on wind deflection and trajectory of the bullet at the target’s distance.
You are correct
Just want to say that inches are better than millimeters, thus MOA is better.
I am no expert, but my understanding is that you will have to make conversions if you don't have an ap or if your spotter is using MOA, you will have to convert MOA by dividing by 3.5. So, for example 5 MOA after dividing by 3.5 (3.5 being a rough w.a.g. since it is 3.438 so it is rounded to make it easier) is 1.4 mils. If I am way off base here, please let me know. There is some really good info on the website listed below.
Reference;
Long Range Shooting - MOA and MILS explained
A MIL or an MOA linear equivalent increases proportionally with distance. With the MOA and MIL systems, you correct the position of the reticle inside the scope, based on wind deflection and trajectory of the bullet at the target’s distance.
Yes, convert your spotter to MILS..... or find a new one!
I switched to MILS recently b/c I started shooting metric bullets. 6.5MM marries perfectly
Similar threads
Rifle Scopes
Elevation math
