• HideTV Updates Coming Monday

    HideTV will be down on Monday for updates. We'll let you all know as soon as it's back up and message @alexj-12 with any questions!

  • Win an RIX Storm S3 Thermal Imaging Scope!

    To enter, all you need to do is add an image of yourself at the range below! Subscribers get more entries, check out the plans below for a better chance of winning!

    Join the contest Subscribe

Rifle Scopes Vortex Razor HD AMG Reticles EBR MOA or EBR MRAD, which is a better all around reticle?

WT1

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jan 7, 2014
911
87
Wisconsin, USA
Looking at the Vortex Razor HD AMG scopes and wanted to consider the benefits of both reticles, the MOA and MRAD. I currently use Leupold Mark 4's, mildot and TMR reticles on SFP scopes.

Wondering if anyone can shed any light on which scope would be best for shooting PRS matches and also hunting long range with both 308 and 6.5 Creedmoor.
 
Aside from one being MOA and the other MRAD, they're essentially equal in effectiveness. What YOU need to decide is which method of measurement you want to play with, and go from there. I encourage everyone to go MRAD, as it's easy mental math since it's all base ten. None of this imperial fraction crap that MOA uses, or any of the true MOA/shooter MOA/IPHY confusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McCrazy and WT1
I encourage everyone to go MRAD, as it's easy mental math since it's all base ten. None of this imperial fraction crap that MOA uses, or any of the true MOA/shooter MOA/IPHY confusion.
If you know how to use a scope such as the ones being mentioned correctly, mental math is absolutely unnecessary regardless of the angular units chosen. Period. Full Stop.

The argument about fractions is false. Fractions are difficult when dealing with different denominators. When was the last time you saw an MOA scope that used different denominators within its own windage and elevation adjustments? In any event, see my previous comment about math.

When it comes to MOA vs IPHY, can you name one single time you've ever seen that be an issue in practice? Me neither.

I chose mils for my precision rifle scopes yet could have chosen MOA and be equally as effective. My hunting scope, Aimpoints, and AR LPVO all adjust in MOA and cause me no issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WT1
If you know how to use a scope such as the ones being mentioned correctly, mental math is absolutely unnecessary regardless of the angular units chosen. Period. Full Stop.

The argument about fractions is false. Fractions are difficult when dealing with different denominators. When was the last time you saw an MOA scope that used different denominators within its own windage and elevation adjustments? In any event, see my previous comment about math.

When it comes to MOA vs IPHY, can you name one single time you've ever seen that be an issue in practice? Me neither.

I chose mils for my precision rifle scopes yet could have chosen MOA and be equally as effective. My hunting scope, Aimpoints, and AR LPVO all adjust in MOA and cause me no issues.

I'm unsure why the attitude is necessary. Full stop. :LOL: I agree with you, except for the following issues.

MOA is a non-issue unless your spotter uses "MOA" but gives you wind calls in "estimated inches" rather than MOA (I HAVE had that issue before, years ago when I was still using Leupy mil/moa scopes). Or when most everyone around you is using MRAD and you're using MOA. Then you have to convert whatever calls your spotter is giving you, though I suppose this issue works both ways. But the first issue is one I still hear occasionally from those who haven't learned that, yes, it's an angular measurement and should be used as such. If your group of shooters knows not to compare things to inches, etc., then you won't have any problems.

Also, I, personally, have not run into the MOA/IPHY issue because I use MRAD, as does almost every other shooter in our club. Non-issue for me. Frank seems to think that the shooter MOA/true MOA/IPHY is still an issue, as many are unaware of the difference and how to correct for it in their ballistic software, or even that they have to correct for it in the first place.

The comment about fractions may have been poorly worded and technically incorrect, but to my mind, using a decimal is more natural. However, I'll concede that you're correct about it being no factor provided everyone is on the same page when giving you corrections. See my post above.

My MAIN point is that both reticles will work just as well as the other, as long as you educate yourself on them. But for most folks, a base ten system is more natural, as it's what we use in money, and what the rest of the world uses for pretty much every other form of measurement (I wish we did as well)!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 308pirate and WT1
That's interesting. Perhaps I should rephrase the question to, of the two reticles, which one would you rather have and why?

Mil, for me it's better resale value. Normally, scopes with moa reticle, I see them go for less.

Others, because they compete or have spotters, will prefer mil because it's all about communication. The majority use mil and so to be spotted in mil but have an MOA will only be time consuming when making corrections.
 
That's interesting. Perhaps I should rephrase the question to, of the two reticles, which one would you rather have and why?

The reticles themselves are, for all practical purposes, identical except for the minor differences needed to set each one up in their respective measurement units.

In this particular case the reticle would not be (for me) a factor in choosing. If you want a Razor AMG, pick the units you want to work with and forget about the reticle because they are equal in function.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Basher
The reticles themselves are, for all practical purposes, identical except for the minor differences needed to set each one up in their respective measurement units.

In this particular case the reticle would not be (for me) a factor in choosing. If you want a Razor AMG, pick the units you want to work with and forget about the reticle because they are equal in function.

That's a good point. When I look at the subtension diagrams, there appears to be a distinct difference in some markings in size, that is. If you look at the MRAD subtensions, the center point is .03, for example, while the MOA is .13, which is pretty substantial. Unless that is a typo.

MRAD http://www.vortexoptics.com/uploads/ret_rzr-amg_6-24x50_ebr-7b_mrad_web_subten.jpg
MOA http://www.vortexoptics.com/uploads/ret_rzr-amg_6-24x50_ebr-7b_moa_web_subten.jpg

I would think that'd make a pretty big difference at long range. One would obscure the target less than the other but also might be more difficult to see in certain instances.
 
Mil, for me it's better resale value. Normally, scopes with moa reticle, I see them go for less.

Others, because they compete or have spotters, will prefer mil because it's all about communication. The majority use mil and so to be spotted in mil but have an MOA will only be time consuming when making corrections.

That's interesting. Thanks for the tip.
 
That's a good point. When I look at the subtension diagrams, there appears to be a distinct difference in some markings in size, that is. If you look at the MRAD subtensions, the center point is .03, for example, while the MOA is .13, which is pretty substantial. Unless that is a typo.

MRAD http://www.vortexoptics.com/uploads/ret_rzr-amg_6-24x50_ebr-7b_mrad_web_subten.jpg
MOA http://www.vortexoptics.com/uploads/ret_rzr-amg_6-24x50_ebr-7b_moa_web_subten.jpg

I would think that'd make a pretty big difference at long range. One would obscure the target less than the other but also might be more difficult to see in certain instances.

You are assuming the .03 Mils and thee .13 MOA are working from the same unit of measurement and they are not. One is mils and one is MOA. At 100 yards .03 Mils is about .12" and .13 moa is about .13" so you see they are about the same.

As mentioned the reticles are identical in use but you need to decide if you want MOA or Mils. Both will work but up to the end user what they like better.

As for spotting if your spotter is using the same MOA or Mil scope/spotter as you then it's the same again. They just call the correction in either mils or MOA and you just make the correction. Neither is slower than the other. The slower comes in when mixing systems whether moa to mil or mil to moa.
 
You are assuming the .03 Mils and thee .13 MOA are working from the same unit of measurement and they are not. One is mils and one is MOA. At 100 yards .03 Mils is about .12" and .13 moa is about .13" so you see they are about the same.

This

OP, 1 mil = 3.43 MOA so .03 mils x 3.43 MOA/mil = .1029 MOA

The central dots are identical for all practical purposes regardless of the reticle you choose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WT1 and Basher
Is it possible to get the Mil reticle with MOA turrets?
That'd be the best of both worlds.

If your spotter gives wind calls in Mils you can hold them, but dial in MOA and yards as that is more betterer. Also 1/4 MOA gives finer adjustments than 0.1Mil.
 
Is it possible to get the Mil reticle with MOA turrets?
That'd be the best of both worlds.

If your spotter gives wind calls in Mils you can hold them, but dial in MOA and yards as that is more betterer. Also 1/4 MOA gives finer adjustments than 0.1Mil.

Welcome to 15 years ago. LOL That's the worst set up possible. Having matched reticle and turrets is by far a better set up.

Oh and the finer adjustment equates to 1" at 1000 yards so not a difference in actual use.
 
Is it possible to get the Mil reticle with MOA turrets?
That'd be the best of both worlds.

If your spotter gives wind calls in Mils you can hold them, but dial in MOA and yards as that is more betterer. Also 1/4 MOA gives finer adjustments than 0.1Mil.

NF has a new scope coming out with two sets of turrets and two superimposed reticles covering both units.

Win-win
 
While not the reticle, the turrets might sway you one way or the other. The amg and gen 2 razor are limited by turret rotation. I’m am a MOA guy and get a little screwed compared to the same scope in MIL. 71moa up available?? Come on!
 
I think were I to purchase the AMG I'd go with the MRAD at this point. Though I must admit the Leupold Mark 5 3.5-18x44 with an H59 reticle is looking very tempting as well. Different piece of kit completely.
 
I think were I to purchase the AMG I'd go with the MRAD at this point. Though I must admit the Leupold Mark 5 3.5-18x44 with an H59 reticle is looking very tempting as well. Different piece of kit completely.

That mark 5 is a scope I looked real hard at because I wanted to buy it. I ended up not buying it tho. Anyhow, I'm just not sure it has glass as good as the AMG!
 
  • Like
Reactions: WT1