My ruler got shortened but that was because of age and BP meds.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
This is like when first deciding between MOA & Mils
- Thread starter Gunfighter14e2
- Start date
I didn't think it would be so hard to understand that divisibility by factors or orders of 10's is the definition of a metric system.
Yet it works with everything.
It may be metric but it leads others to think you have to use it with metric measurements only.
1 squirrel ball at 1000 squirrel balls = 1 mil. 0.001" at 1 inch = 1 mil. 1 light year at 1000 light years = 1 mil. 1 piece of paper at 3" =1 mil. 1 Frank at 1000 Franks = 1 mil. 1 dick at 1000 dicks = 1 mil.
Back to being deliberately obtuse because you’re bored? Or just seeing who will take the bait?
3.6" at 36,000 inches. The only reason why it seems weird is a yard is base 36.
Yes well, that's the problem with not keeping with other metric measurements.
An awful mess is what it is.
I live in Florida. Our squirrels are smaller.
Who cares what the actual linear measurement is? A mil is a mil is a mil. When are you ever at a round number? Only at a square range.
How big is a mil at 323 yards? 1 mil.
At 768 yards? 1 mil.
Forget the linear.
The same also applies to moa. Forget the linear. Measure in moa.
How big is an moa at 323 yards? 1 moa
768 yards? 1 moa.
The only time anybody should care about group size measurement in other than mils or moa is when you walk or drive down to the target and are in touching range. And can then measure it.
Knowing this I think it is easier to forget linear measurements with mils than moa since alot of us are used to the imperial system.
Last edited:
What is an opossum? Is that like a fat possum that wears 5.11's and hisses and faints when someone says anything about any caliber other than .30?
But the fox squirrel is bipedal and can probably use binoculars.I live in Florida. Our squirrels are smaller.
Yes well, that reasoning works fine until you need to actually work anything out.
Just use meters & all the bullshit goes away.
What about the one who don’t give a tat fuck about football.
Should have stated it better, my bad. Was indicating the 3 legged female. "The largest difference between the opossum and non-marsupial mammals is the bifurcated vagina of the female (the source of the term didelphimorph, from the Greek didelphys, meaning "double-wombed"). "
A three legged male over the head is only used for spin drift negation.
What I don't understand is why bother using yards in the first place. Since human beings are very poor judges of distance, we all use laser range finders. Since you reckon a mil is a mil..., why not reason the same way with meters & yards. Since nobody could judge 500 yards from 500 meters, why not simply set the range finder to meters & be done with it.
I dont give a rats ass meters or yards other than meters are divisible by ten & have SI units to use.
I don't know why anyone would continue with a such a backward, busted ass measurement system let alone try to twist it in with metric system.
I dont give a rats ass meters or yards other than meters are divisible by ten & have SI units to use.
I don't know why anyone would continue with a such a backward, busted ass measurement system let alone try to twist it in with metric system.
I tried that, but reverted back to Green, Blue & Pink cunt hair. Much finer method of spotter/shooter comms.
Or the only country to prove with enough HP, you can even make a rock fly. IIRC the F4U had a 1 to 1 ratio?
She is a heavy girl. Although I think the Cirrus sr-20 has an even shittier ratio.. but yes slap enough hp and even tanks can fly.
Went to the moon, don't get me started.
The U.S had fuck all to do with WWI.
Hitler had 14 divisions committed to the Russian front & 2 divisions to the Allieds. So the Allieds won WWII, yeah right.
True history is quite different to the propaganda you & we, for that matter, have read & heard all our lives.
Oh right, and next thing you’re gonna tell me the earth is flat.
Crazy, right?
European countries would never teach history that put them in a better light.
R
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,880
- 20,915
Metric is measuring based on the meter. Commies like it.
milliradians is not metric because it is not based on the meter or any particular unit of measurement. In fact, most americans can proudly use mil because it is not metric, i.e., not from the pinko commies.
'Merica.
milliradians is not metric because it is not based on the meter or any particular unit of measurement. In fact, most americans can proudly use mil because it is not metric, i.e., not from the pinko commies.
'Merica.
MOA is for Fudd .270 core lokt “meenut ov deener pluhate aht whan hunnit yahds” mouth breathers.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,880
- 20,915
Aren’t the numbers based of centimeters? Pretty sure that’s metric, but I’m retardant
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,880
- 20,915
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,880
- 20,915
Sorry I was cornfused at the angular part versus the vertical adjustment part of what I remember reading.
I’ll be over here cleaning my 270
It’s an angular measurement based upon the radian. It’s not a measurement of length.
Nothing to do centipedes or millipedes in any way.
See? That’s your problem. Still relying on what has always worked, the .270.
Missing anything between .260 and .308, I went new fangled (metric, shhhh!) 7PRC. I’m somewhat ashamed while I enjoy the hell out of shooting it.
Using a specifically non-metric mil/mil scope…
As long as it’s
FFP
Matching turrets
Spotter is FFP
Matching turrets
.3 low .5 right is the adjustment no matter what the actual distance is.
Dial or hold and it’s a hit..who cares about the actual “amount of inches”
FFP
Matching turrets
Spotter is FFP
Matching turrets
.3 low .5 right is the adjustment no matter what the actual distance is.
Dial or hold and it’s a hit..who cares about the actual “amount of inches”
A scope in Binary Angular measurement would be Uber nerd but the turrets would be really tough to read however turrets really only need 0 marked or 0x0000000 in this case since who looks at them anyway?
This would inherently be more accurate then the previously proposed 'cickypoo' method which was philosophically sound in not giving a shit about inches etc but was inherently esoteric and relied on the actual clickypoos per scope and was abandoned when the challenge became substance when the half clickypoo scopes came out
This would inherently be more accurate then the previously proposed 'cickypoo' method which was philosophically sound in not giving a shit about inches etc but was inherently esoteric and relied on the actual clickypoos per scope and was abandoned when the challenge became substance when the half clickypoo scopes came out
