-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
moa vs mils, the forbidden thread
- Thread starter giveemshell2
- Start date
psshhh... simple. Furlongs
@Maurygold If you are spotting for someone and you see through your scope using the reticle their POI is 1 MOA high and 2 MOA to the right you convert that back to whatever the linear equivalent is for whatever the given range is instead of just saying you are 1 MOA high and 2 MOA to the right?
I’m not trying to get you in any kind of gotcha scenario. I am truly curious as to what your answer would be.
I’m not trying to get you in any kind of gotcha scenario. I am truly curious as to what your answer would be.
It's pretty clear that you think MOA is inches, it's not.
Instead of translating to inches you should simply be multiplying your mil correction by 3.438 to get your MOA correction.
Like this.....
You look in the spotter and see they hit 1.5 MILs to the right using your TMR reticle.
Instead of converting MILs to inches and then converting inches to MOA, you should just 1.5 x 3.438 = 5.157 MOA.
The better option is to get rid of your MOA scope and get one in MILs so you can communicate.
I tell ya, I don't get no respect! My wife, she says I'm leaving you for another man.
I tell her that guys a fudd, he uses MOA!
She says I use MOA too! This is why I'm leaving, you never see things from my angle.
Women I tell ya, give em an inch they'll take 10 mils @ 100 yards
I tell her that guys a fudd, he uses MOA!
She says I use MOA too! This is why I'm leaving, you never see things from my angle.
Women I tell ya, give em an inch they'll take 10 mils @ 100 yards
Attachments
Last edited:
IPHY, yes.
MOA, no.
8.368" Is the correct answer. If your reticle is in MOA, it will have moved your impact 1 MOA, providing the range is correct and you have no further movement due to wind.
In other words, your impact will align with your 1MOA left hash mark.
I'm still trying to figure out why you insist on doing math when it's unnecessary.
At this point, I would have to think that he just doesn’t realize he could just look through the reticle see the correction and just call it out.
I got a feeling he doesn’t even realize the reticle matches the turret and you can use it to see the difference.
Or he does and he's fucking with everyone.
For the sake of humanity, I’m gonna keep my fingers crossed and hope that this is the case.
I think he is either a next level troll or he is really just that fucking stupid…..lol
He is either having a ha ha I’ve seen the light moment or he is having a ok my jig is up moment……lol
He is either having a ha ha I’ve seen the light moment or he is having a ok my jig is up moment……lol
1 mil @ 100 yards (3600 inches) = 3.6 inches
1 mil @ 1 inch away =. 001"
1 mil @ 1000 lightlears = 1 lightyear
1 mil @ 1000 squirrel bals = 1 squirrel ball
1 mil @ 1000 philbits = 1 philbit
1 mil @ 1000 skoashs = 1 skoash
1 mil @ 1000 (insert unit) = 1 ( unit)
The only reason why the 3.6" or .36" of .1 Mil seems weird is because people forget that 100 yards = 3,600 inches.
@Maurygold use angular of whatever flavor you want while you are not in touching distance of the target. When you walk down to the target use whatever linear measurement you feel like. I don't suggest using braincells.
Calipers don't measure angles protractors do calipers measure the linear distance between two points
If you look up radians you will find they are pare of the SI system this is the metric system a mil is 1/1000 of a radian
Except if it works with all units it is essentially unit less. It works with everything not just metric measurements. Too many people think you have to use metric only with mils. That isn't true.
Here is another.
1 mil @ 1000 furlongs = 1 furlong.
You can interchange any part of the English or scientific (metric) system just use the proper conversion constants in this case 3.6
So is a squirrel ball imperial or metric? It also works with possum or opossum balls. Is that imperial or metric?
The lesson is why the heck do you need to convert at all? Use the freaking angular measurement any time you are not in touching range. Doesn't matter what the target is. Cause guess what? Target size is angular as well. Doesn't matter whether the target is a match stick head, ipsc c zone, ipsc c zone turned 90°, truck at 30°, 18 wheeler trailer, tower crane, high heel, computer printer, or a baseball cap. Do they all have linear measurements? Yes but who cares? If you miss if by a 1/2 target you missed by a 1/2 target.
This isn't that complicated.
Angular measurements, regardless of whether they are expressed in radians, degrees, or fractions thereof, are agnostic to unit systems (Imperial or SI).
And before the fucking mouthbreathers chime in, tenths, hundredths, and thousands of something are still fractions (1/10, 1/100, 1/1000}.
Incorrect. The spotter doesn't have to do any math whatsoever. He and I both know I was aiming center mass of that particular target at whatever distance. He sees in his reticle the impact of my shot is 1 unit measurement left and 0.5 unit measurement low of center mass. So the spotter says "up 0.5, right 1." I make that correction either by holdover in my scope reticle, or dial on turrets.
There is no need to math this thing out in inches, centimeters, or furlong. Being off by 0.5 at 100y or 1000y is still a 0.5 correction.
Differ all you want. You are wrong.
Milliradians were conceived and developed long before the development and acceptance of the Metric System.
It's neither angular, nor linear. Not metric, not imperial.
It's testicular...
Was the shot off by one or two nuts?
Here is a thread on the subject.
Rifle Scopes - Mrad IS Meteric
I often see guys saying milliradians aka mrads are not metric. I can understand wanting to say it isnt as we often use it with yards and inches however a milliradian is equal to 1/1000 of a radian. A radian is a SI derived unit and therefore part of the metric system. If my logic is...
www.snipershide.com
Hi 308: haven't from you in a while, have trouble with your ass?
Mouthbreathers very good what do you breath shit.
Your absolutely right about fractions but that has nothing to do with the issue normal people are discussing.
Let me explain something to you although I think it is useless. We are discussing two different forms of measurement and how they relate to each other. Now are you finished chiming in.
Very good well saidHere is a thread on the subject.
Rifle Scopes - Mrad IS Meteric
I often see guys saying milliradians aka mrads are not metric. I can understand wanting to say it isnt as we often use it with yards and inches however a milliradian is equal to 1/1000 of a radian. A radian is a SI derived unit and therefore part of the metric system. If my logic is...
@Maurygold @cuirc
There have been at least a dozen folks on here trying to point you in the correct direction, showing and explaining the error in your thinking.
At this point, if you still do not understand, you are nothing short of a dipshit.
There have been at least a dozen folks on here trying to point you in the correct direction, showing and explaining the error in your thinking.
At this point, if you still do not understand, you are nothing short of a dipshit.
Aftermath did you ever take math? What conceptual error?
MIL-o'meters
Minute Of America
^^^^^^^ I think that is what is cornfuzzling peeps.
Minute Of America
^^^^^^^ I think that is what is cornfuzzling peeps.
all in fun he should and everyone have a nice day even 308
What credentials do you have to make such a statement about a discussion that it appears you know nothing about I have a good book on Ballistics titled Modern exterior Ballistics by McCoy you should get a copy then talk to me. Ass hole the best you can do is call someone a dipshit pathetic
Linear measurements are of course possible, they're just pointless. (and as you noticed, poor approximations) Using the ruler in your scope to call out an adjustment that can be dialed or held is infinitely superior to calling out a correction in inches/centimeters/etc. There's just no reason to do it.
There's no reason for using MOA adjustments. You aren't correcting an inch per MOA, and you shouldn't measure your corrections in inches. When people tell me they prefer MOA, what they're really telling me is that they're using their scope wrong. MOA (or shooter's MOA) made sense "back in the day" when people zeroed their scope and then never dialed.
It's fine for someone using a plex reticle and getting a scope sighted in, but geez. There's no circumstance where MOA is superior to Mils.
If your spotter doesn't have a reticle, calling the hold in targets (assuming it's only a few) isn't that bad, but calling inches? Yikes.
Where did you come from and what are you talking about do you know anything about ballistics and measurements
He said to ponder his username.
One could guess, maybe he has a degree, maybe he was a certified math teacher, might have had a career in math, maybe he just loves math?
Like my username, I’m from the 208 and I’m just makin chips.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,698
- 20,385
Good description Rooster haven't seen you in a while either
One time, at PRS Camp, I received corrections from my Soviet Spotter, Swedish Spotter, and British Spotter, and they were all different. I didn’t know what to do!
-Stan
The only thing that really matters is that the shooter and the spotter are using the same circle another tram could be using a different circle it all comes out in the wash if each team is consistent
Guys please if I could delete the thread I would
Only Americans insist to equate MOA to inches. It is on here today, an American site, by American posters, that I first read of "shooter's MOA".
Bisley shooters have been adjusting sights in "minutes" "halves" and "quarters" long before Americans started using mills on scopes. Why mills are the gold standard these days I have no idea. Maybe it is because Americans just can't get the idea that MOA is not inches.
MOA is an angular measurement, just like mills. Use one or the other. Doesn't matter, just don't mix them.
Bisley shooters have been adjusting sights in "minutes" "halves" and "quarters" long before Americans started using mills on scopes. Why mills are the gold standard these days I have no idea. Maybe it is because Americans just can't get the idea that MOA is not inches.
MOA is an angular measurement, just like mills. Use one or the other. Doesn't matter, just don't mix them.
Not your fault. This happens basically every single time this topic comes up. It's normal. Hopefully we can help people learn the truth over time.
Similar threads
