New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - MOA/MOA or MIL/MIL
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

MOA/MOA or MIL/MIL

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/20/2010 at 19:39
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3380
In another thread, the Jons (JonoMT and Jon A) alleviated some fears I had about the upcoming Vortex Viper PST's FFP reticle being a bit to thin at low power for low light hunting situations.

Now I have this question:

For hunting and long range target shooting, would the MIL/MIL system or MOA/MOA system be more beneficial.  I will typically be dialing for elevation and holding for wind.

Any experience and/or preference out there?

Thanks,
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/20/2010 at 19:53
hotspot View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: December/26/2008
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 45
hi i am in boat  haha!    help!!   haha!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/20/2010 at 20:45
BeltFed View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: February/12/2008
Location: Ky
Status: Offline
Points: 16076
Good question.
I think there was a discussion about this a couple years ago. Just can't remember if it was in either Rifle Scopes, Tactical, or Target.
I guess it would depend on what you are used to, prefer, or can find. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/20/2010 at 21:30
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Online
Points: 18339
I thought about this a bit.  I really don't care as long as reticle and knob clicks are matched and consistent.  The math is a little more difficult with mismatched reticle and knob clicks, but mil-dot reticle with 1/4 MOA clicks has been my most common use... when you get used to it, it really doesn't matter.  Don't misunderstand... Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA is certainly preferable to Mil/MOA.  Eliminating variables reduces sources of error, reduces calculation time, makes things easier all around.   Simply for "replaceability", Mil/Mil is my overall preference.  But, I LIKE MOA/MOA best. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/20/2010 at 21:40
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13873
How would you like your dollar in change four quarters or ten dimes. HMM by the way if you have a dollar worth of change you can almost buy a coke. 
Ying YangI have three scopes that are Mil Mil and I like them but its not a deal killer cause the last scope I bought was a Mil Dot reticle quarter moa click Trijicon 5-20x50 with green illumination and the illumination was the deciding factor so everyone values the different aspects differently,  just find what works for you and spend time with it.  No matter which scope you use you are just looking for a number that corresponds to a distance so you can dial in the correction.


Edited by Urimaginaryfrnd - December/20/2010 at 21:44
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/20/2010 at 21:59
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3380

I haven't had much trouble with a MIL reticle/ MOA turrets either, but it just makes plain sense to match them up.  Sighting in is quick and easy, and one less column on the dope chart.

I guess my precise questions are:

1.  Would you prefer the slightly finer MOA adjustments or the slightly faster MIL adjustments? (especially when using the reticle to hold for wind)

2.  Do the reticles look very different?  Is the MIL reticle less cluttered?  Does the MOA reticle take up less of the field of view?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/21/2010 at 18:10
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 660
Originally posted by Bitterroot Bulls Bitterroot Bulls wrote:

Now I have this question:

For hunting and long range target shooting, would the MIL/MIL system or MOA/MOA system be more beneficial.  I will typically be dialing for elevation and holding for wind.


It doesn't make a huge difference, it's mainly a matter of preference.  If you have a safe full of USO or NF MOA/MOA already (or shoot with a bunch of buddies who do) it wouldn't make much sense to buy a Mil/Mil--unless that's all the particular model of scope you wanted to buy offered (such as S&B, etc).  If it's a relatively fresh start, that's another story.  I like Mil/Mil better for a few reasons, but keep in mind they're only my personal preference.  They aren't that big a deal, but they're why I like using Mils:

1)  Click value.  I don't do BR or F-Class or any other paper-type competitions (where people actually like 1/8 MOA clicks) and don't hunt varmints too often anymore, so .1 Mil (~ 1/3 MOA) I find to be "just right" for size.  A good compromise between precision and speed/simplicity.  I had a 1/2 MOA click scope and did find it to be a bit coarse for my tastes but I've never felt that way with .1 Mil.  Also in virtually every case, a Mil scope will have more travel per revolution of the knob which I really like.

2)  Simple numbers.  Two digits with a simple decimal for drops (until you really get WAY out there) just gives a nicer number to work with.  Say at a certain range your drop chart says 6.9.  Or it could say 23.75.  Or 23 + 3 or 24 - 1, etc.  6.9 is easier to say, to write in a chart, to read from a chart, to find on the dial, to measure with a reticle….  I just find the simple numbers to the tenth easier to work with.  

Say you range something and look up in your chart your 10 MPH wind correction for that range and it's .7 Mils, for example.  You measure with your Kestral, observe foliage and mirage all the way to the target and you estimate your total average wind value to be 7 MPH.  What's your hold?  .49 (.5) Mils .  How about 3 MPH?  .21 (.2) Mils.  How about 11 MPH?  .77 (.8) Mils.  How about 15 MPH?  1 Mil.  See how that works?  Now try the same for 2.5 MOA.  If you're good at math, it can certainly be done, just not as quickly and easily (for me, anyway).

3)  It's Universal.  While there are several companies coming out with MOA reticles this year--which I do think is a good thing--for those who just can't change (for reasons real or perceived), scopes with Mil reticles outnumber those with MOA by likely hundreds to one.  All the world's militaries.  Even in civilian market scopes EVERYBODY makes a mildot reticle or some variation.  But for many years NF and USO were the only game in town for MOA.

It's even worse for spotting scopes.  I got a spotter with a really nice Mil reticle several years ago.  I believe at the time nobody made a spotter with an MOA reticle.  Nobody.  Now there are a couple but from a numbers standpoint it's a drop in the bucket.  Being able to spot somebody's shots with an actual spotting scope vs. your rifle scope and being able to call corrections in actual angular measurements instead of guessing feet, inches, etc, is really, really, nice.

That doesn't really matter if all your shooting is done alone.  But if you go to competitions, informal shoots or anything where a bunch of random guys get together and plink at long range, the chances are much higher that people will be calling corrections in Mils either from a spotter or by using the scopes on their rifles.  It's not a big thing, but it's there.

If you want finer clicks, MOA has the advantage.  If you actually plan on ranging things with your reticle a lot, many do find MOA/inch easier to do in their heads.  I use reticles to range very little.  When hunting I have a cheat sheet taped to my stock so it doesn't matter anyway.  For impromptu targets a mildot master or a phone app works well.  And as I said, if all your buddies have NF's with R2, R1 reticles, or similar you might not want to be the odd man out.

Anyway, that should get your gears grinding.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/21/2010 at 19:14
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3380
Thanks Jon,

I was leaning towards MILs, and I think you pushed me over the edge.

Exactly the info I was looking for.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/21/2010 at 20:28
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10963
As Jon said, this is mostly a matter of personal preference.  In my case, the preference is strongly toward mils.  I think in metric units, so ranging with mils is easier for me: 10cm is exactly 1 mil at 100 meters.  It does not get easier than that.

With MOA reticles, in order to range quickly, I have to think of the target size in inches.  That is not very difficult, but a bit less natural for me.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/21/2010 at 21:29
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4613
If you ever want to range using the reticle, I think mils are easier to work with because of the decimal units. I would, for example, take an 18" target, think of it as .5 yards, then multiply that times 1000 to get 500 yards (the distance if it subtended 1 mil). Then the only hard part is doing the math where you divide 500 by the number of actual mils, e.g. 1.3 = 385 yards.

I also like 1/10 mil clicks. They are, as Jon says, not too coarse, fast, and it's easier to think "4.3 mils" than 59 1/4 MOA clicks, or even 14.8 MOA. Regardless, I would definitely match the turrets. Oh yeah, one more little thing about MOA reticles: Unlike with mils (at least on a reputable scope) there is a possibility of getting a slight mismatch of MOA/IPHY, which will start to matter out at long distances. (Vortex would not do this, I'm sure).
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/21/2010 at 22:12
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13873
One thing that I particularly like about the 3-9x42 SS FFP 1/10 Mil MilDot scope it that if you are thinking solely in mils -  (mil dot reticle  Mil based clicks) it becomes very easy to take the info you have from charts and apply it.
 
Rangefinding Deer  18 inches brisket to back ====
5 mil    100 yds
4 mil     124 yds
3 mil     167 yds
2.5 mil   200 yds
2 mil      248 yds
1.75 mil 285 yds 
1.5 mil   333 yds
1.25mil  400 yds
1 mil      499 yds
.75 mil    666 yds
  http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmtraj_drift-5.1.cgi  now run a chart for your bullet and caliber and select the chart to show drop in mils.  Then you just dial in or use a combination of dialing in and holding over like if drop was 4.3 mil you could hold on the 4th mildot and dial in .3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/22/2010 at 10:16
Ernie Bishop View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/26/2010
Location: Gillette, WY
Status: Offline
Points: 659
I am a MOA guy.
Again it is just a preference.
With no Mil/LEO background, MILs were never a part of my shooting.
When instructing guys getting started, I have found that MOA is easier to work with generally speaking.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/22/2010 at 17:10
308 Sav View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: July/18/2010
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Originally posted by Jon A Jon A wrote:

 
2)  Simple numbers.  Two digits with a simple decimal for drops (until you really get WAY out there) just gives a nicer number to work with.  Say at a certain range your drop chart says 6.9.  Or it could say 23.75.  Or 23 + 3 or 24 - 1, etc.  6.9 is easier to say, to write in a chart, to read from a chart, to find on the dial, to measure with a reticle….  I just find the simple numbers to the tenth easier to work with.  

Say you range something and look up in your chart your 10 MPH wind correction for that range and it's .7 Mils, for example.  You measure with your Kestral, observe foliage and mirage all the way to the target and you estimate your total average wind value to be 7 MPH.  What's your hold?  .49 (.5) Mils .  How about 3 MPH?  .21 (.2) Mils.  How about 11 MPH?  .77 (.8) Mils.  How about 15 MPH?  1 Mil.  See how that works?  Now try the same for 2.5 MOA.  If you're good at math, it can certainly be done, just not as quickly and easily (for me, anyway).


Until I read this I never thought the mil/mil was any big deal. That in itself makes me rethink what I will definitely be looking for in my next scope. K.I.S.S. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/24/2010 at 23:18
sscoyote View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: October/05/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 326
That was a pretty insightful writeup Jon. Well said.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/25/2010 at 20:34
grimreaper21 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: October/25/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 182
Originally posted by Ernie Bishop Ernie Bishop wrote:

I am a MOA guy.
Again it is just a preference.
With no Mil/LEO background, MILs were never a part of my shooting.
When instructing guys getting started, I have found that MOA is easier to work with generally speaking.
easier compared to what? did you ever try MIL? i'm all for personal testimony as long as it is supported.  but thats just like saying "I like it better cuz its all I know" or I sometimes call it first girlfriend syndrome.  Not a personal attack just want to keep to facts here.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/25/2010 at 20:53
308 Sav View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: July/18/2010
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Originally posted by grimreaper21 grimreaper21 wrote:

Originally posted by Ernie Bishop Ernie Bishop wrote:

I am a MOA guy.
Again it is just a preference.
With no Mil/LEO background, MILs were never a part of my shooting.
When instructing guys getting started, I have found that MOA is easier to work with generally speaking.
easier compared to what? did you ever try MIL? i'm all for personal testimony as long as it is supported.  but thats just like saying "I like it better cuz its all I know" or I sometimes call it first girlfriend syndrome.  Not a personal attack just want to keep to facts here.

I would say that he is referring to the 1 inch at 100 yds or shooters moa. 2 in at 200 yds. Since the two are so close people can relate to them even though they are not the same all you have to do is stretch it out a bit and the relationship gets farther apart. I run into it in construction with shooting grade. For some reason at first people prefer to use a grade rod in feet and inches because that is what they are familiar with, when it is much easier and less mathematical errors occur using an engineers rod in tenths of feet. When they first start to use them they are constantly trying to convert instead of just using the measuring device they have in hand. The funniest thing I think I have learned about people is that they think something is easier just because it seems more familiar to them. Fractions are never easier than decimals. Just my thoughts.


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/28/2010 at 14:56
Clark View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: February/13/2004
Location: Near Seattle
Status: Offline
Points: 120
Originally posted by Jon A Jon A wrote:

 
..Say you range something and look up in your chart your 10 MPH wind correction for that range and it's .7 Mils, for example.  You measure with your Kestral, observe foliage and mirage all the way to the target and you estimate your total average wind value to be 7 MPH.  What's your hold?  .49 (.5) Mils .  How about 3 MPH?  .21 (.2) Mils.  How about 11 MPH?  .77 (.8) Mils.  How about 15 MPH?  1 Mil.  See how that works?  Now try the same for 2.5 MOA.  If you're good at math, it can certainly be done, just not as quickly and easily (for me, anyway). .


When I was at Boeing 30 years ago, 600 engineers to the room, 6 rooms to the building, several identical buildings in a row, I used to play a game. If the engineer said he liked algebraic calculators best, I had a problem that favored reverse Polish. If he liked reverse Polish, I had a problem that favored algebraic.

The handwritten cardboard chart I strap  with a rubber band to my LRF1600 has 3 columns; yards, elevation in moa, and windage in moa.

If I ever hunt with a scope that has the knobs is .1 mils, I will have to get out my pen and make a different chart.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/28/2010 at 15:26
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 660
We still use inches at Boeing, but with decimals, not fractions.  BTW, there are about 1100 Engineers in the room I currently work in.  Sardines....  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2011 at 02:37
Clark View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: February/13/2004
Location: Near Seattle
Status: Offline
Points: 120
Jon,
I have admired your posts and the internet for 6 or 7 years.
I know your type: hardworking engineer who is sincere, honest, and dedicated.

 Not me, I am lazy and selfish. Engineering is just another scam for me to get rich.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/02/2011 at 08:36
Ernie Bishop View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/26/2010
Location: Gillette, WY
Status: Offline
Points: 659
GR,
I have not used Mils as often as MOA. 
I suggest it would be doubtful that any one person that has used one system extensively would also have the same amount of time with the other.
I use Mils from time to time and I understand it. 
I have used it for reticle ranging too.
I prefer MOA, and it is easy for me to think that way.

As far as instructing people over a short period of time, it is easier for them to catch on for the reasons that 308 Sav mentioned.
The majority of guys that I help teach typically, have a goal of being competent at 400-600 yards on game. 


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/09/2011 at 11:34
Easy2 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Originally posted by Jon A Jon A wrote:

[QUOTE=Bitterroot Bulls]
Say you range something and look up in your chart your 10 MPH wind correction for that range and it's .7 Mils, for example.  You measure with your Kestral, observe foliage and mirage all the way to the target and you estimate your total average wind value to be 7 MPH.  What's your hold?  .49 (.5) Mils .  How about 3 MPH?  .21 (.2) Mils.  How about 11 MPH?  .77 (.8) Mils.  How about 15 MPH?  1 Mil.  See how that works?  Now try the same for 2.5 MOA.  If you're good at math, it can certainly be done, just not as quickly and easily (for me, anyway).

I am a lost here, if my windage says 2.5 moa I dial 2.5 moa, there is no math?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/09/2011 at 11:36
Easy2 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/11/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Originally posted by Easy2 Easy2 wrote:

Originally posted by Jon A Jon A wrote:

[QUOTE=Bitterroot Bulls]
Say you range something and look up in your chart your 10 MPH wind correction for that range and it's .7 Mils, for example.  You measure with your Kestral, observe foliage and mirage all the way to the target and you estimate your total average wind value to be 7 MPH.  What's your hold?  .49 (.5) Mils .  How about 3 MPH?  .21 (.2) Mils.  How about 11 MPH?  .77 (.8) Mils.  How about 15 MPH?  1 Mil.  See how that works?  Now try the same for 2.5 MOA.  If you're good at math, it can certainly be done, just not as quickly and easily (for me, anyway).

I am a lost here, if my windage (windage chart) says 2.5 moa I dial 2.5 moa, there is no math?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/09/2011 at 16:25
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 660
In the interest of saving space and being simple, many or even most simple drop charts people make list only the 10 MPH wind value.  So the chart says 2.5 MOA for 10 MPH wind.

So if the wind is only blowing 7 MPH, how much do you dial?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/09/2011 at 17:31
338LAPUASLAP View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar
Scope Swapper

Joined: October/17/2009
Location: STATESIDE
Status: Offline
Points: 2455
After the PM's here is my explanation at the bottom.

The cover up of Dots is an entire other debate or explanation but mils vs MOA is easy IMO.

Skip next paragraph I misinterpreted the question.

What is the temp, humidity and what is the altitude, barometric pressure, angle of wind,  bullet weight, velocity, range? = 62.832/60 = 1 min so 1 min = 1.0472~ Wind drift (in MOA / INCH = 12 x (88 x s /60) x sin a x (t - (3 x r) / v)  NO CHART is going to do it for you or no scope that I know of regardless of reticle math is necessary.  Not able to do math not able to hit 1st time...  No rock or ground shooting...

Mil = miliradian. A radian is approx. 57.295645 degrees, or there are 6.2832 radians in a circle. This makes 6283.2 miliradians in a circle and makes 3.438 moa in a mil. this is often rounded to 3.44 and we use 3.5 for ease of math. With our math this would make 35 inches at 1000 yards in stead of 36 inches.

Mils can range a target by using is height in meters X 1000 / mil height.  METERS

Can MOA do this?

Is it not the most important thing of shooting a target?

Knowing its (target or animal) approx. distance.

Conversion of mm to inches?

3.1416 x 2 equals 6.2832 (number of radians in a circle) with 360 divided by 6.2832 equals 57.295645 degrees. A miliradian is 1000th of that or 6283.2 in a circle. Thus 1 mil equals 21600 (number of moa in a circle) divided by 6283.2 equals 3.4377387 or 3.438 moa in a mil. Or 100 x 2 x 3.1416 – 628.32 yrds then 628.32 x 36 – 22619.52 inches 22619.52 / 360 – 1 degree 1 degree = 62.832 inches – 62.832 / 60 – 1 minute 1 minute – 1.0472 or =100*2*3.1416*36/360/60=1.0472

            1 Milliradian = 1/1000th of a radian, 1 radian = 2 PI

            1 Milliradian = .0573 degrees or 6283 parts of a circle

USAR: 360 degrees = 1 circle
   6400 mils = 1 circle, 360
    17.8 mils = 1 degree
   360 degrees divided by 6400 = .0563 multiplied by 60 = 3.375 MOA or
    1 mil = 3.375 moa  

 

USMC: 360 degrees = 1 circle
   6283 mils = 1 circle, 360
   17.5 mils = 1 degree
   360 degrees divided by 6283 = .0573 multiplied by 60 = 3.438 MOA or
    1 mil = 3.438 moa

USAR: 3.375 moa X 1.047” = 3.533625” @ 100yrds or 35.33625” @ 1000yrds
USMC: 3.438 moa X 1.047” = 3.599586” @ 100yrds or 35.99586” @ 1000yrds

Since a radian is approx. 57.295645 degrees, or there are 6.2832 radians in a circle. This makes 6283.2 miliradians in a circle and makes 3.438 moa in a mil. this is often rounded to 3.44 and we use 3.5 for ease of math. With our math this would make 35 inches at 1000 yards in stead of 36 inches.


MIL/MIL


Original Question...


For hunting and long range target shooting, would the MIL/MIL system or MOA/MOA system be more beneficial.  I will typically be dialing for elevation and holding for wind.

Any experience and/or preference out there?


MIL/MIL

 

I haven't had much trouble with a MIL reticle/ MOA turrets either, but it just makes plain sense to match them up.  Sighting in is quick and easy, and one less column on the dope chart.

I guess my precise questions are:

1.  Would you prefer the slightly finer MOA adjustments or the slightly faster MIL adjustments? (especially when using the reticle to hold for wind) 

1/8 is very nice for precise MIL is nice for ease.

2.  Do the reticles look very different?  Is the MIL reticle less cluttered?  Does the MOA reticle take up less of the field of view?

MIL


MIL is the only way to do this IMVHO...

DOTS/CIRCLES/OVALS are another subject that gets me goin
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/09/2011 at 17:32
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4613
Originally posted by Jon A Jon A wrote:

In the interest of saving space and being simple, many or even most simple drop charts people make list only the 10 MPH wind value.  So the chart says 2.5 MOA for 10 MPH wind.

So if the wind is only blowing 7 MPH, how much do you dial?


Multiplying .7 * 2.5 = 1.75 MOA. Of course, looking for the easier math, I thought "25 * 7 = 175" then divided that by 100. You'll be close enough at a fair ways, but if you run your load(s) through JBM, you'll see that the results vary more as you get out there.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "MOA/MOA or MIL/MIL"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
small/light with mil/mil or moa/moa c670809 Rimfire / Airgun 4
Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA Anton Chigurh Rifle Scopes 4
mil/mil vs mil/moa kgriff Tactical Scopes 31
New Sightron mil/mil and moa/moa scopes Chris Farris Tactical Scopes 22
FFP - Mil/Mil -MOA/MRAD Flanny Tactical Scopes 15
Mils / MOA and The Range Estimation Equations Bags Rifle Scopes 0
why a mil instead of moa for a Vortex PST 1-4x cruft Rifle Scopes 4
Mils / MOA and the Range Estimation Equations Bags Tactical Scopes 22
MOA vs MIL Chart Chris Farris Tactical Scopes 28
MOA or Mil? S197 Tactical Scopes 17


This page was generated in 0.391 seconds.