- Thread starter chickon1
- Start date
This is WAY off. My dad spots for me a lot and he uses terms such as... "I think it was 2 and 2/3s feet right", "one yard left", "six inches high and maybe loaf of bread right", and the classic "didn't see, shoot again". Anybody want to come spot for me???
There's a term for this, it's called Aspergers Syndrome. BTW, I think a lot of you are on the spectrum.
Welcome to the forum. Weaponized autism is definitely a thing here. Thanks for noticing
They both work. The MOA is a little easier to figure in your head. Forget about the x.955 crap Just multiply by 1 and subtract 5 yards every 100 or 1 for every 20 yards. The math for MOA is easier on face value. But, from years of experience, I can tell you that is easier on the brain to hold 2 mils left than it it is to hold 7 minutes left for any extended amount of time. The type of turrets don't really matter with practice. Practice with what you have.
@rustyinbend
Rule of thumb...
Look at the first number of the G1 BC for your bullet. A .5xx should take a 5mph crosswind to move the bullet impact .1 mil at 100yards. .2mil at 200, .3 at 300, etc.
A 10mph will move the same bullet .2 at 100.
.308 FGMM 175gr has .a 496.BC @2600fps.
@Jack Master has done some great spread sheets in mils and moa, the simplicity of mils is obvious on a wind rose.
Rule of thumb...
Look at the first number of the G1 BC for your bullet. A .5xx should take a 5mph crosswind to move the bullet impact .1 mil at 100yards. .2mil at 200, .3 at 300, etc.
A 10mph will move the same bullet .2 at 100.
.308 FGMM 175gr has .a 496.BC @2600fps.
@Jack Master has done some great spread sheets in mils and moa, the simplicity of mils is obvious on a wind rose.
Last edited:
I’m a very good driver...
That one is in the epic threads, this one has potential.
O yeah, I had forgotten about that dude
As someone who started shooting precision rifles (varmints) back in 1995, I have both MOA and MIL optics, and it only makes it a little more difficult when you are trying to spot for someone and they are using the opposite of whatever you are using.
The thing I find interesting is when people compare the two, and the MOA guys always use round numbers, like the 600 yard example earlier. What happens if you are 7.5" low at 633 yards? Or 22" high at 1030 yards?
Math sucks. Using a ruler, AKA a reticle, to actually measure the difference, makes life super easy no matter what the unit of angular measurement that you are using.
The thing I find interesting is when people compare the two, and the MOA guys always use round numbers, like the 600 yard example earlier. What happens if you are 7.5" low at 633 yards? Or 22" high at 1030 yards?
Math sucks. Using a ruler, AKA a reticle, to actually measure the difference, makes life super easy no matter what the unit of angular measurement that you are using.
Last edited:
Did she wear a short skirt and a loooooong jacket?
Yup, sadly I have a 3x9 LR with a mil reticle, MOA turrets that are 1 MOA elevation and 1/2 MOA windage. Fuck me
I started out using MOA because I didn’t know jack and the scopes I could afford were in MOA. I couldn’t understand how people used MIL because it seemed so foreign and I could easily do the math in my head for MOA.
Then it clicked with me one day. There is NO MATH!!!! Unless you are doing range estimation with your reticle you shouldn’t be doing any math. If you are then you are making it WAY harder than it needs to be.
A MIL is a MIL. If I miss .5 MIL low then I just dial .5 MILs. Done.
The rest is just inducing pain on yourself. I probably would have struggled more if I had my engineering degree... lol
Then it clicked with me one day. There is NO MATH!!!! Unless you are doing range estimation with your reticle you shouldn’t be doing any math. If you are then you are making it WAY harder than it needs to be.
A MIL is a MIL. If I miss .5 MIL low then I just dial .5 MILs. Done.
The rest is just inducing pain on yourself. I probably would have struggled more if I had my engineering degree... lol
The funny thing is that a scope with a MOA-graduated reticle and .25 MOA turrets is as dead easy to use as one that has a MRAD-graduated reticle and .1 MRAD turrets. Spot the miss, measure it with the reticle, adjust holdoff or turret, send another one.
Anyone who has problems remembering that his 600 yard elevation is 16.5 MOA and quickly dialing until 16.5 is line up with the turret hashmark is some special kind of retard.
If you're counting clicks, you're doing it wrong.
I can shoot with either just like I have to no trouble weighing shit in ounces or grams, or measuring shit in inches or centimeters, or driving a car in a place that uses kilometers instead of miles.
Anyone who has problems remembering that his 600 yard elevation is 16.5 MOA and quickly dialing until 16.5 is line up with the turret hashmark is some special kind of retard.
If you're counting clicks, you're doing it wrong.
I can shoot with either just like I have to no trouble weighing shit in ounces or grams, or measuring shit in inches or centimeters, or driving a car in a place that uses kilometers instead of miles.
Guys guys guys!
You're missing the point. A little history for you less educated.
en.wikipedia.org
MILS IS METRIC!
The SI-- formally the "metric system"-- unit for angular measure is the radian. Milli is the prefix for 1/1000th. So a milliradian is 1/1000 of a radian, the SI unit for angular measure, and it happens to subtend 1/1000th sideways of the longitudinal distance. 1m at 1km. The math is easy.
To use mils in the english unit of measure you have to convert first to MOA using the easy fact that it takes 2*pi radians to make a complete circle, then 360 degrees * 60 moa/degree for a complete circle, also. Then you are able to easily figure the MOA of the target in inches at a specific yardline, with a quick conversion of 36:1 from yards to inches. Then there is the obvious benefit of fractional graduations vs. the base ten of the metric system.
It's not that complicated and MOA is the obvious winner because you don't have the conversion step from SI to standard when shooting in US ranges that are almost all marked in "yards". Less math, less moving parts, quicker more accurate results.
You're missing the point. A little history for you less educated.
International System of Units - Wikipedia
MILS IS METRIC!
The SI-- formally the "metric system"-- unit for angular measure is the radian. Milli is the prefix for 1/1000th. So a milliradian is 1/1000 of a radian, the SI unit for angular measure, and it happens to subtend 1/1000th sideways of the longitudinal distance. 1m at 1km. The math is easy.
To use mils in the english unit of measure you have to convert first to MOA using the easy fact that it takes 2*pi radians to make a complete circle, then 360 degrees * 60 moa/degree for a complete circle, also. Then you are able to easily figure the MOA of the target in inches at a specific yardline, with a quick conversion of 36:1 from yards to inches. Then there is the obvious benefit of fractional graduations vs. the base ten of the metric system.
It's not that complicated and MOA is the obvious winner because you don't have the conversion step from SI to standard when shooting in US ranges that are almost all marked in "yards". Less math, less moving parts, quicker more accurate results.
Guys guys guys!
You're missing the point. A little history for you less educated.
International System of Units - Wikipedia
MILS IS METRIC!
The SI-- formally the "metric system"-- unit for angular measure is the radian. Milli is the prefix for 1/1000th. So a milliradian is 1/1000 of a radian, the SI unit for angular measure, and it happens to subtend 1/1000th sideways of the longitudinal distance. 1m at 1km. The math is easy.
To use mils in the english unit of measure you have to convert first to MOA using the easy fact that it takes 2*pi radians to make a complete circle, then 360 degrees * 60 moa/degree for a complete circle, also. Then you are able to easily figure the MOA of the target in inches at a specific yardline, with a quick conversion of 36:1 from yards to inches. Then there is the obvious benefit of fractional graduations vs. the base ten of the metric system.
It's not that complicated and MOA is the obvious winner because you don't have the conversion step from SI to standard when shooting in US ranges that are almost all marked in "yards". Less math, less moving parts, quicker more accurate results.
Ok dudes, the OP has a small point for a certain set of users. Not me. I use mils.
You hate these users. I smile at them that little smile that says, “There’s a better way, but you go Buddly, go.”
Buddly’s probably your dad. But you love him.
That’s fine. I think.
I didn’t misspell Buddly, buddy.
Maybe, if they’re interested, point them this way. But in all cases, do not engage in debate!
IDEAL USER WHO DESERVES & LIKES MOA
(there’s a lot more of them than us)
Jimmy does not think, “Missed Roy’s nads by 3 (insert angular measurement here).”
For the Jimmys of the world, can we quit whinging and concede this tiny point and retreat into our glorious MRAD Fortress of Solitude?
You hate these users. I smile at them that little smile that says, “There’s a better way, but you go Buddly, go.”
Buddly’s probably your dad. But you love him.
That’s fine. I think.
I didn’t misspell Buddly, buddy.
Maybe, if they’re interested, point them this way. But in all cases, do not engage in debate!
IDEAL USER WHO DESERVES & LIKES MOA
(there’s a lot more of them than us)
- Is a simple man
- Eats meat…
- That he shoots
- Uses Imperial measurements (inches/yds)
- Has a reticle without an effective way to measure much of…anything (simple crosshair)
- Probably uses a SFP scope
- Target shooting: Only shoots at 100 yds to zero scope
- Kills stuff often at 30-200yds, 300-400yds, max.
- Doesn’t use a laser rangefinder
- Looks at the hole in the target paper through the spotter, and thinks, “I’ve missed by about 3 inches.”
- Changes turret by 3 MOA. Hits bullseye. Goes hunting. Kills stuff like he and his forebears have done since guns were invented.
Jimmy does not think, “Missed Roy’s nads by 3 (insert angular measurement here).”
For the Jimmys of the world, can we quit whinging and concede this tiny point and retreat into our glorious MRAD Fortress of Solitude?
Last edited:
Mils is standard.Guys guys guys!
You're missing the point. A little history for you less educated.
International System of Units - Wikipedia
MILS IS METRIC!
The SI-- formally the "metric system"-- unit for angular measure is the radian. Milli is the prefix for 1/1000th. So a milliradian is 1/1000 of a radian, the SI unit for angular measure, and it happens to subtend 1/1000th sideways of the longitudinal distance. 1m at 1km. The math is easy.
To use mils in the english unit of measure you have to convert first to MOA using the easy fact that it takes 2*pi radians to make a complete circle, then 360 degrees * 60 moa/degree for a complete circle, also. Then you are able to easily figure the MOA of the target in inches at a specific yardline, with a quick conversion of 36:1 from yards to inches. Then there is the obvious benefit of fractional graduations vs. the base ten of the metric system.
It's not that complicated and MOA is the obvious winner because you don't have the conversion step from SI to standard when shooting in US ranges that are almost all marked in "yards". Less math, less moving parts, quicker more accurate results.
1 yard at 1000 yards.
mil is based off the thousandth of a radian. kind of like the metric system.. mil is in the name..
See how easy this is?
4 inch @ 400 yds = 1 MOA so if I am 2 inches low 1/2 moa adjustment
5 inch @ 500 yds = 1 MOA so if I am 2 inches low 1/4 moa adjustment
14.4 inch @ 400 yds = 1 Mil
18 inch @ 500 yds = 1 Mil
Watch this guy he breaks it down pretty good.
Then watch the math for this one.
Milliradian - Wikipedia
If you'r shooting two inches low at 500 yards on a steel plate how to you determine that you are 2 inches low? Walk out and measure it with a tape measure or use the ruler in your scope that says you're 5 quaarks low and make the adjustment? Mils, Moa, quaarks, cookies etc..., it doesn't really matter what you call them as long as they match the reticle in the scope.
I suppose the math is important to second focal plane folks. With first focal plane, if your shot is low by X, you just adjust your turrets based upon however how many dots it was low. i.e. If my shot is 2.5 MIL (or MOA) low, I click up to compensate that exact amount. No Math needed, at any distance.
If you consider the math troublesome, consider a scope upgrade.
For short range (100 yards), I appreciate that most good MOA scopes adjust in 1/10th of an inch increments at 100 yards. For those who are shooting match grade air rifles at 100 yards, with a quarter inch bulls-eye, that kind of granularity is nice. A MIL scope is about 0.36 inch per click by comparison. At longer distances, people don't normally obsess about the quarter inch difference.
If you consider the math troublesome, consider a scope upgrade.
For short range (100 yards), I appreciate that most good MOA scopes adjust in 1/10th of an inch increments at 100 yards. For those who are shooting match grade air rifles at 100 yards, with a quarter inch bulls-eye, that kind of granularity is nice. A MIL scope is about 0.36 inch per click by comparison. At longer distances, people don't normally obsess about the quarter inch difference.
You were doing soooooo good until you got to this paragraph.
1 MOA is 1.047" at 100 yards. Therefore an an MOA scope will likely have 1/4 MOA (~ 0.26") adjustments, some have 1/8 MOA (~0.13") adjustments. I've seen the crazy F-Class amd benchrest guys do the 1/8 MOA stuff because they have weapon systems that can register the differences. There are no MOA scopes in existence that do 1/10" adjustments.
So closseeeeee
You are correct.. they don't go down to a tenth. I let my typing fingers get ahead of my thinking.. but in the final analysis, the units of change are smaller on a high end MOA scope... which was the point I was trying to make.
What??? ^^^^
Oh I see it now. He’s a millicubit high.
Oh I see it now. He’s a millicubit high.
Actually, your battery outputs 10.8v, but I use milliamperes to measure everything.
Including my penis
You’re are correct sir. Sorry, my bad I was using moaamperes .
What rings should I use.
You do know that there are scopes that have .05 mil turret adjustments right?
I have not had the good fortune of finding such a beast, I suspect they are less common than 1/8 MOA. I just looked it up, and could only find it as a factory option on a Leopold Mk 4
why the hell are you even thinking in inches anyway? When you shoot and spot you dont make call out in inches. You dont say “impact was this many inches low and so many inches left” you make call outs using your reticle which is in minutes or mils. you adjust in minutes or mils. You dont adjust in inches. Quit making life so hard on yourself. If the people you shoot with are making call outs in inches, you need to find a different group of people to shoot with.
A few more just for reference. Yes expensive, but there you are:
March Genesis Tactical 4-40x52G FML-3 Reticle 0.05 Mil Illuminated FFP Riflescope D40V52GFIML
FREE SHIPPING on March Genesis Tactical 4-40x52G FML-3 Reticle 0.05 Mil Illuminated FFP Riflescope D40V52GFIML
Schmidt Bender PM II 5-25x56 LP LRR-MIL 1/2cm cw MT II MTC LT / DT II+ ZC Black Riflescope 677-911-41C-I2-H6
FREE SHIPPING on Schmidt Bender PM II 5-25x56 LP LRR-MIL 1/2cm cw MT II MTC LT / DT II+ ZC Black Riflescope 677-911-41C-I2-H6
Schmidt Bender PM II 3-27x56 High Power MT II MTC LT / DT II+ ZC LT GRID .05 mrad Riflescope 669-911-422-I5-H5
FREE SHIPPING on Schmidt Bender PM II 3-27x56 High Power MT2 GRID .05 mrad Riflescope 669-911-422-I5-H5
Schmidt Bender 5-45x56mm PM II High Power LP MSR2 1/2cm ccw MT II MTC LT / DT II+ ZC LT Riflescope 666-911-842-I1-H5
FREE SHIPPING on Schmidt Bender 5-45x56 PM II High Power LP MSR2 1/2cm ccw MT II MTC LT / DT II+ ZC LT
D
Deleted member 113831
Guest
The one with the pot of potatos
Dammit we’re still only in page three!!! Get busy berating one another other!
Since this is supposed to be Infomational per subforum... and boost page count.... Some modest advice:
1. If the morons you shoot with use Mils. then use Mils.
2. If they use MOA, then use MOA.
3. If neither, or both, then seek out different morons.
4. Repeat until you can somehow, inexplicably, magically, comminicate effectively on the line.
1. If the morons you shoot with use Mils. then use Mils.
2. If they use MOA, then use MOA.
3. If neither, or both, then seek out different morons.
4. Repeat until you can somehow, inexplicably, magically, comminicate effectively on the line.
“You’re about 18” off the left bottom edge...”
Only if you have the magnification at a level different from where reticle is calibrated. Otherwise, focal plane is irrelevant
If you're going to wade in at least know what you're talking about. MOA scopes adjust in 1/2, 1/4, or 1/8 MOA (not inch) increments
There is no scope out there that adjusts in 0.1 MOA or 0.1 inch/100 yard increments
To be fair, there were some scope makers who actually were using IPHY (inch per hundred yard), aka SMOA (shooter's MOA) instead of true MOA in their turrets, thus adding more to the confusion on the MOA side of the coin. Fortunately, I don't think anyone is still making turrets using IPHY. Good riddance.
What the hell? Are you a pirate sailing the seven seas? What the heck is that thing?
HUH????
All this time I thought it was 1 meter at 1000 meters.
Those pesky deer don't seem to want to stop at exactly at the distance the scope is calibrated for. You must be luckier than me.
I now really want to see a scope manufacturer offer 1/8 & 1/16 mil or 1/5 & 1/10 moa.
Nope it's 1 fathom acorss at 1000 fathoms away
Similar threads
