Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Understanding MRAD |
Post Reply |
Author | |
USN_Sam1385
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/19/2010 Status: Offline Points: 52 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: March/20/2010 at 08:15 |
Okay, so I have read a few posts on here about MRAD. However, it is not COMPLETELY clear to me yet. Further, there is very little on the internet to read about it, in order to fully understand it.
Here is my understanding thus far. MRAD is metric system. Therefore 1 click = 1 MRAD. At 100 yards, this would change the Point of Impact of the bullet by 1 cm. At 200 yards, 1 click would equal 2 cm. Correct? Well, if there are 2.54 cm in an inch.. then this is less precise than MOA. As MOA is done in measurements of .25 inches, or 1/4" MOA. Am I correct in understanding all of this?? Is there somewhere that I can read more literature on it, or someone who can break it down more for me. Also, what are the advantages of MRAD? |
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
it is not as precise as moa especially 1/8" moa, but you can get .05 cm or 1/2 mil on some scopes (zeiss in particular). As an example a normal 175 gr smk 308 load would be about 10 moa or about 3 mil, the number of clicks in the 10 moa would be higher and thus the gradiation finer. Milrad is not really metric. usually and usually its, .1 cm at 100 meters not yds. |
|
USN_Sam1385
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/19/2010 Status: Offline Points: 52 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
So, you that that some of the scopes are .1 cm. Is that 1/10 of a cm per click, or simply 1 click = 1 cm change?
For example, the FFP SWFA SS 3-9x42 Tactical Scope. That is .1 MRAD. Am I correct in believing that I would not be able to fine tune this quite as well as a scope that was 1/4" MOA? Also, I understand that the difference would be very minute. Is it worth really worrying over that small minute amount of precision? I understand for practical hunting applications, it would not matter at all. But in the competitive sector, do you think that the .1 MRAD would be adequate, or would you go with a scope that is 1/4 MOA? |
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
1 click is .1 cm movement at 100 meters, 1/4 moa click is .25 so if you are a 100 yd target shooter, the 10 clicks in the 1 mil adjustment allows for 109 yds, which would be 4 clicks in 1 in. at 100 yds, or 1 click mil. but at 500 yds say 3 mils would be 30 clicks, and 10 moa would be 40 clicks (more decimation).1000 yds or 10 mil would be 100 clicks and 30 moa or 120 clicks. nobody counts clicks -- use the numbers on the turrets and if its set up it will give about 1 turn , thus the phrase 2 turn or 1 turn in the scopes discription. 100 yds is a long handgun shot.
Edited by Dale Clifford - March/21/2010 at 14:48 |
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
the advantage to mil rad is based in the judgement of who is using it. If you are a lone shooter there is none. If your in a team everyone needs to read of the same sheet of music, so if your spotter calls a correction in mil and your scope is moa, go figure.
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
heres a site posted by cheaptrick awhile back in the tactical section
|
|
USN_Sam1385
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/19/2010 Status: Offline Points: 52 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Okay, so I think I have it... But I have two clarifying questions.
1 click on the .1 MRAD is .1 cm, not ONE centimeter, but ONE tenth of a centimeter. So if I am at the range, sighting my rifle in, and I am about 2 cm low, it would take 20 clicks of elevation to get on the X? If this is the case, then MRAD is MORE precise than MOA, as you are able to dial it in 1/10's of a centimeter. The SWFA SS 3-9x42 Tactical, is one of these scopes correct. Also is there a difference between .1 MRAD, and .10 MRAD? |
|
Kickboxer
MODERATOR Moderator Joined: February/13/2008 Status: Offline Points: 23679 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sam, you are missing something here... .1 MRAD or mil is .36 inches at 100 yards = .914 centimeter. 1 Mil (or mrad) = 3.6 inches at 100 yards. Go to the site below and read carefully. Then get a mil-dot master... http://www.mildot.com/Content%20Images/The_Derivation_of_the_Range_Estimation_Equations.pdf
|
|
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.
There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living |
|
USN_Sam1385
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/19/2010 Status: Offline Points: 52 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Okay. I gotcha, I gotcha. Thanks a bunch for all of the information. I will check out that site.
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
.1mil=close to .3moa -- thinking to the unit 1 causes the confusion, 1 moa, 1mil, #1 on the dial forget that stuff and think of the target's distance in units of moa or mil doesn't matter,
Edited by Dale Clifford - March/21/2010 at 21:30 |
|
jonoMT
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: November/13/2008 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 4853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sam, a mil (or mRad) is 1/1000th of the distance. So whatever units you are using, whether meters, yards, fathoms, light years, etc. that is always the case. At 100 yards, a mil is .10 yards (3.6") and at 100 meters, 10 cm. (Its only resemblance to the metric system is that both are decimal).
You are right that 1/10th mil clicks are more coarse that 1/4 MOA clicks. However, for most shooters that isn't an issue. If you do want more precision, then an MOA-based reticle is the way to go. The important thing, IMO, is to have turrets that match. The reason for this because you can either make a correction (whether for a follow-up shot or while zeroing) using the reticle or the turrets. I will respectfully disagree, for this reason, that a matching system is not of use to a shooter acting alone. If you consider the use of a matching system in conjunction with a scope that has its reticle in the first focal plane (FFP), you can more reliably zero a rifle since it no longer matters if you are precisely 100 yards from a target (or 300 yards or 200 meters or whatever). If you see that the shot was off by 1.4 mils, you can dial in that correction. This is because an FFP scope can range at any magnification, so the number of mils measured across the target is always true. With an SFP scope, there is only one magnification setting for rating (typically the highest power). At any other setting, the reticle is no longer sync'ed with the turrets. In other words, if you see that you were off by 1.4 mils in the reticle, but are at 8.5X instead of 10X on a scope that ranges at 10X, you would dial too in too much correction. Edited by jonoMT - March/21/2010 at 21:33 |
|
Reaction time is a factor...
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
kind of off the topic now, but-- ranging with sfp is not the same as hold over or poi change with change in magnification. ranging is usually done on the highest power with either a ffp or sfp to get the most accurate distance posible. ffp on high power do not allow the shooter to bisect the target or shoot to a point on the target as well as sfp. If the shooter is thinking distance to target in terms of mil or moa the markings in the reticle or the dial doesn't matter, If you correcting for the shot in the reticle of a mil system, and want to dial in moa correction, my question is why? you already know the correction in the recticle just use it. One area that same system are better at that hasn't even been mentioned here is combination dial in hold over shots. Ex. on a nf npr2 reticle dial in 10 moa and use the first bar for 100 yds, etc, until the center bar at 500 yds, (the same system used on a zeiss Z1000 reticle) then either dial in or hold over. This same technique works well for nf's np-1rr reticle and is more accurate than just dial in.
poi changes with decrease in magnification are a function of the power range of the scope being used, the greater the range the greater the change, 2x10's are hardly noticable. The biggest problem is that the power range marking as stops on both ffp and sfp are not refined or defined well enough to be of much use. most variable power range scope have a top and middle and a bottom, and what the exact power is inbewtween is anybodys guess,but--- by taking a little time its easy to mark or scribe poi at that power on the power ring. Edited by Dale Clifford - March/21/2010 at 22:10 |
|
jonoMT
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: November/13/2008 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 4853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
No one should ever want to do that. It is a crime against humanity. Well, at any rate it just doesn't make sense. That's why I'm a firm believer in matching reticle subtensions to the turrets, e.g. mil/mil. |
|
Reaction time is a factor...
|
|
Budzo100
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/07/2013 Location: Alberta Status: Offline Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well you guys, thanks for all the info, I'm just looking to get better at long range shooting. But I always go back to the words of my grandfather. " Shoot more when the pressure is off, and learn your gun, you will be able to put your bullet anywhere you want when the pressure is on" I don't make a living by shooting, my thoughts go out to those guys, but I'm sure there are lots of good shooters out there who can make it count when they have to.
Like I say, I just want my .338 to hit where I want it to hit.
|
|
billyburl2
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: January/08/2009 Location: Cottonwood, AZ Status: Offline Points: 4015 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Dale, why doesn't a FFP reticle let you quarter the target as well as a SFP scope? According to NF reticle manual, their MLR reticle subtends 1/16th of a mil @ 22x. And the reticle in my SS 5-20 is .05, or 1/20th of a mil no matter what power it is on. I understand it might not be as fine as a MOA reticle, but let's compare apples to apples...
To the OP, is a mil adjusted scope as precise as a MOA adjusted scope? Not really. But I dare you to be able to hold the difference. It really boils down to about 1/3 of a 30 caliber bullet hole diameter at 100 yards.
|
|
If it is tourist season, why can't we shoot them?
|
|
Outlaw Ranger
Optics GrassHopper Joined: April/14/2020 Location: New Mexico Status: Offline Points: 6 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
Most of these responses are not correct. How I found this thread I have no idea but here you go
1 Milliradian is 3.6" at 100yds .1 or 1/10 of an MRAD is .36" at 100 yds.. 1/10 of 1 CM is .39" at 100 yds Mrad is not metric its just a value of measurement but because it's in 1000s it appears as metric. 1 moa is 1.047" at 100yds 1/4 moa is .26175" at 100 yds They are values of measurement not measurement based on system. Stop thinking in inches and think in angles but remember they are multiplied as distance increases 1MRAD at 1000yds is 36 inches .1 MRAD at 1000yds is 3.6 inches 1MOA @ 1000 YDS is 10.47 inches 1/4MOA @ 1000 yds is 2.6175 inches In the end it dosnt matter what system you use as long as You and your spotter are noth on the same system He tells you come up 1 moa and you come up 1 MRAD your gonna be 2 MOA high Also your turrets and your reticle have to match MOA TURRETS need a MOA reticle And same goes for MRAD . my personal preference pick a platform at stick to it. If I had to start over it would be in MRAD due to most PRS shooters are in MRAD and ice had to learn the hard way and get the whole standard vs metric out of my head. Moa is easier to understand at 1st but I prefer MRAD 100x now ESPICALLY if I can find a scope whith .05 Mrad adjustments because at 1000 yds instead of .1mrad =3.6 .05mrad is 1.8" a much finer adjustment than 1/4moa Hope this helps 10 years later lol |
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Outlaw Ranger, where in New Mexico are you?
To me, mrad are much easier to use, but I was surprised to find out how many people still stick with MOA for some unfathomable reason. ILya
|
|
Travis299
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/05/2020 Location: Cary, NC Status: Offline Points: 28 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Radians
and MOA, Minute of Angle, Trivia (Best
with a 6 pack of BUD) Circumference of a circle = D x Pi, Pi = 3.14159, 7200” in diameter
of a 100 yard circle. Circumference of a circle at 100 yards = 22,619.448”, 7200”
x 3.14159 Pi. 6,283.18 MILLIRADIANS = 1 CIRCLE (Pi x 2, 3.14159 x 2 x
1000 = 6,283.18), Mathematical actual (MRAD) 6,400 MILLIRADIANS = 1 CIRCLE, NATO rounded (MRAD) 21,600 MINUTES = 1 CIRCLE (360 degrees x 60 Minutes in 1 degree
= 21,600 minutes) 1 MOA = 1.04719” at 100 yards, 22,619.448”/21,600 Minutes. 1 MRAD = 3.6” at 100 yards, 22,619.448”/6283.18
MRAD, Mathematical. 1 MRAD = 3.534” at
100 yards, 22,619.448/6400 MRAD, NATO rounded. Scope settings MOA or MRAD. It also depends on what your
scope's notion of 1 milliradian is, because the NATO milliradian differs from
the mathematical definition of a milliradian. |
|
Semper Fi
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |