PRS Talk Scopes in Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA or does it matter?
- Thread starter libertyman777
- Start date
Straight from the HMFIC:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cseJXocTr1o" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cseJXocTr1o" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Great thanks. So as per the video, does shooter communication play into a PRS match? If so, which is most frequently used, MIL or MOA?
From what I have seen, PRS matches are individual matches so you don't have a partner to share wind calls and such as you shoot. If that's the case it doesn't matter which system of measurement you choose.
If someone shares their dope with you it won't be on the clock so there's plenty of time to do the simple conversion in your head before you shoot.
If someone shares their dope with you it won't be on the clock so there's plenty of time to do the simple conversion in your head before you shoot.
as long as your dials match your reticle, you're good to go. you just don't want one in russian and one in chinese. for me, the ranging math is easier in MOA, and if someone tells you you're 6 inches high, that math is also easier in MOA (an inch isn't exactly a MOA but it's close enough in most situations).
but, pretty much what pirate said above.
but, pretty much what pirate said above.
If you are getting into PRS shoot MIL. A large majority of shooters in the PRS use MILS and if you attend club matches or train up days people will be glad to sight for you. Those corrections and assistance will mostly all comes in MILS. Now with that being said, if you already have a scope in MOA don't let it stop you from getting out there. We all started somewhere. My first scope on the PRS stage was a SFP MOA/MOA. It wasn't ideal, but it got me into the PRS and showed me I really wanted to shoot more big matches. Hope that helps.
You need to know all three Mil, MOA, an IPHY, why*?
It matters little want you use as long as you can USE what you have. The old adage, the up is in moa an the ret is in mils so it's a POS is just telling you that guy has issues converting on the fly. If you Know all three it's not an issue. Nice to have same/same but is it a requirement to poke something no it's not. If real an you fucked up same/same is great, but planning ahead trumps most internet BS.
* You never know for sure what you will use when it's all on the line. Yea you might learn 1 of the three to perfection, but what if your shit gets fucked up an you Have to use something different (let alone a different caliber) If you don't know it, what are you going to do, quit an go home? Learn all three.
It matters little want you use as long as you can USE what you have. The old adage, the up is in moa an the ret is in mils so it's a POS is just telling you that guy has issues converting on the fly. If you Know all three it's not an issue. Nice to have same/same but is it a requirement to poke something no it's not. If real an you fucked up same/same is great, but planning ahead trumps most internet BS.
* You never know for sure what you will use when it's all on the line. Yea you might learn 1 of the three to perfection, but what if your shit gets fucked up an you Have to use something different (let alone a different caliber) If you don't know it, what are you going to do, quit an go home? Learn all three.
Good advice. I run Mil/Mil, but it’s good to know both and use what you have and upgrade as you learn what you like.
They all work as long as turrets and dials match (and even when they don't you can do it but why?).
Just overcome your minds desire to turn the visual information into some sort of audible information related to our English measurement system.
Trust what your eye sees inside the scope regarding point of aim to point of impact and let your eye and reticle think the solution.
It only gets confusing when you try to convert what you visually see to a different linear measurement that is familiar but has no practical relation.
Doing this initially requires anyone else giving you information to speak the same language you are speaking otherwise you will need to know how to translate an apple into an orange, and you will eventually.
Break free from what you are familiar with.
Stop looking to translate the visual information of whatever gear you choose.
Assuming all is mechanically well with your gear trusting your 1. range estimation, 2. wind call, 3. visual observations at shot break, 4. reticle information post shot and 5. turret adjustment/hold off it will work for you.
Just overcome your minds desire to turn the visual information into some sort of audible information related to our English measurement system.
Trust what your eye sees inside the scope regarding point of aim to point of impact and let your eye and reticle think the solution.
It only gets confusing when you try to convert what you visually see to a different linear measurement that is familiar but has no practical relation.
Doing this initially requires anyone else giving you information to speak the same language you are speaking otherwise you will need to know how to translate an apple into an orange, and you will eventually.
Break free from what you are familiar with.
Stop looking to translate the visual information of whatever gear you choose.
Assuming all is mechanically well with your gear trusting your 1. range estimation, 2. wind call, 3. visual observations at shot break, 4. reticle information post shot and 5. turret adjustment/hold off it will work for you.
Last edited:
Yeah nothing worse than a spotter's call "you're six inches low/right/whatever". First of all that's a fucking guess. Second of all, I don't know of a scope that adjusts in "inches".
Either call the miss in angular units that match what the shooter is using or call it out in terms of fractions of target width/length/diameter (come right half a plate)
Either call the miss in angular units that match what the shooter is using or call it out in terms of fractions of target width/length/diameter (come right half a plate)
I ran moa knobs an a mil ret for years an never had an issue, ranging or holdovers. But when you range(not shoot) in moa an forget the 4.5% that is when you get into trouble. A IPHY scope is faster yet in ranging an you don't have the 4.5 to contend with. LRF's are great but a good match director like jhuskey an a few others can set/fix the target to negate a LRF real quick.
True but scopes with IPHY reticles and adjustments are rare. I think US Optics are one of the few, only ones?
Both USO's I have are in IPHY, mdmoa rets with 1/2 IPHY erek/wind, (wanted 1IPHY erek/wind but they not offered back then) Some of the very old Leupolds an Bushnells adjusted in IPHY, but were marked MOA. Lots of guys never check their gear, they just assumed the marking were correct, then wondered why they have issues.
I ran MOA, IPHY scopes for years and changed over to all MIL...the reason why is that most people use Mils so was easier to have your spotter and shooter on the same language. And, it was easier for me to remember those little numbers vice the big ones - like 8.2 Mils @1000 yards with the 6.5mm Creedmoor vice 28.25 MOA.
I can't believe no one has mentioned this yet, but reticle selection. MIL/MIL, you will have a much broader selection of reticles to choose from.
I just dont see the point in having a scope that is not MIL/MIL or MOA/MOA...there is absolutely no benefit that I can think of
I was in Wyoming at the NRA Phase 2 long range shooting. Everyone had a rifle provided to them except me. They were 1 rifle short. I happened to bring my own. The group was all using Huskamaw 1/3 MOA. I was in mils. We came up with system by calling misses in target value. Half a target high, 1/4 of a target right for example. The spotters is looking at the same thing that made it easy and no converting. Worked very well for holds.
I had to go look at Huskemaw scopes (never heard of them) and sure as shit some come with 1/3 MOA adjustments. Which is stupid when they could have calibrated the turrets and reticles in mils. 1/3 MOA is .333 MOA and .1 mil is .3438 MOA.
I don't think there's any other optics manufacturer (and I use that term loosley with Huskemaw) that does something that dumb. But then, from the looks of it those Huskemaw scopes are aimed at hunters.
In any case, calling misses in fractions of the target is the way to go if your spotter had different units or a spotting scope without a reticle/scale in it.
Last edited:
