Rifle Scopes Adapting to First Mil Scope

[Packfan]

Ok. I'm finally convinced and will be buying a Mil scope for my new MPA PMR Pro. My question is how to adapt as this will be the only Mil scope in the stable?

All the others are MOA as I shot NRA/CMP service rifle and that was the "language". The scope on the rifle now is a Vortex Viper PST Gen 2 5-25x50 MOA. It will be moving back to my Bergara B-14 HMR. I also have several MOA scopes on AR's and on my rimfire trainer.

How tough will it be moving back and forth? Should I look to eventually change out all the scopes?

 

[PBWalsh]

Shouldn’t be any. They both adjust to compensate for elevation and windage. The important thing is that your reticle matches the turret adjustments. Your DOPE matched to the system should be matched to your actual adjustments.

In other words, there should be zero difference in actual shooting. The only difference is the angular measurement.

 

[Packfan]

I was more concerned about doing calculations and executing hold offs using 2 different scales. I am so used to MOA, it will definitely be teaching an old dog new tricks.

 

[wpeach1912]

What calculations? Hold offs shouldn’t be a problem since you’re just using the scope as a ruler anyway

 

[spife7980]

I was more concerned about doing calculations and executing hold offs using 2 different scales. I am so used to MOA, it will definitely be teaching an old dog new tricks.

Just switch your ballistic silver to mils and use the reticle.

 

[loveha]

The ruler for adjustment is in your scope, the reticle.
Don't try and do the mental gymnastics converting .36 and 1 click and all that. I tried when I was switching over, didn't work, probably because I am terrible at math.
If you need to fine tune your poi for sighting in there is a very nice app called Ballistic-X that will tell you if your group center is off by .1 or .2 mils. Highly suggest that app.

 

[Packfan]

By calculations, I mean that If I am impacting 6 inches right at 600 yards, I know I need to hold or adjust 1 minute left. With Mil, it will now be .3 Mils.

I know I need to get better at using the reticle to make these adjustments. This has been atough transtion for me as in service rifle or F-class you get measurable results on paper to make adjustments off of.

 

[MarshallDodge]

I have both and shoot both.

Use your reticle and trust your reticle, and don't think in linear units.

 

[Rob01]

By calculations, I mean that If I am impacting 6 inches right at 600 yards, I know I need to hold or adjust 1 minute left. With Mil, it will now be .3 Mils.

I know I need to get better at using the reticle to make these adjustments. This has been atough transtion for me as in service rifle or F-class you get measurable results on paper to make adjustments off of.

As mentioned use the reticle as a ruler. Inches mean nothing in MOA or mils. Forget them. Use the reticle and make your life easier.

 

[Packfan]

As mentioned use the reticle as a ruler. Inches mean nothing in MOA or mils. Forget them. Use the reticle and make your life easier.

Got it. I was at the range today and used the reticle to get a newly mounted scope zeroed. This was pretty definitive as I had the holes to reference.

I need A LOT more practice when shooting steel as I am doing some guessing on impact points. I am hoping my new rifle, which is a lot heavier, will help me stabilize recoil and see better. My old rifle is a Bergara B-14 HMR and the new is an MPA PMR Pro, both in 6.5 CM.

 

[Rob01]

Between the weight and the brake you should have no issues seeing impacts with that new rifle. Impacts on shot up grey steel is hard with any rifle but should make it easier with the new set up in seeing impact.

Keep working with using the reticle and you will forget inches soon enough. When I look at targets at matches I look to see how many mils they are for holds like wind or hold overs. Doesn’t matter if they are 10” or 18” steel. Mils is what matters.

 

[Packfan]

Will do. Thanks Rob01.

 

[Rob01]

No problem and thank the rest of the crew too as I was a little late to this post but they posted similar info. You will get it and it will be easier the more you do it. Have fun.

 

[Barelstroker]

I was more concerned about doing calculations and executing hold offs using 2 different scales. I am so used to MOA, it will definitely be teaching an old dog new tricks.

The real advantage with the Mil system is that it is a decimal system as long as meters are used instead of yrds. While yards & inches can be used, it kinda defeats the the advantages & the purpose.
If you can manage to think in & use meters & centimeters, there's basically no conversions, at least that aren't decimal based.
This applies to everything the a Mil ret does including target ranging. Everything is divisible by10 or a multiple of 10 as long as you stick to meters & centimeters.

 

[Aftermath]

To me, it doesn't matter how the scope measures the angle. When I take a shot and see the impact not where I was aiming, I can look at the little marks in the scope and see that I need to either hold (back in the day, we called that Kentucky windage) so many little marks or dial that same number of marks.

 

[Mike Casselton]

The real advantage with the Mil system is that it is a decimal system as long as meters are used instead of yrds. While yards & inches can be used, it kinda defeats the the advantages & the purpose.
If you can manage to think in & use meters & centimeters, there's basically no conversions, at least that aren't decimal based.
This applies to everything the a Mil ret does including target ranging. Everything is divisible by10 or a multiple of 10 as long as you stick to meters & centimeters.

For Christ sakes!!

Mil reticle with mil turrets you think in mils.
It's a simple ruler measurement using your Mil reticle.
If you're doing a center hold and you miss the target, look where it impacted based on your reticle. That's the correction.

You don't use the fucking metric system.

In Moa/Moa, you use the Moa reticle in your scope as a ruler, just like in the above example.
No inches, feet, yards or any other complete bullshit to create an unnecessary math problem.

You fuckers must have been taught common core. That's the easiest way to fuck up a simple solution.

 

[Packfan]

The real advantage with the Mil system is that it is a decimal system as long as meters are used instead of yrds. While yards & inches can be used, it kinda defeats the the advantages & the purpose.
If you can manage to think in & use meters & centimeters, there's basically no conversions, at least that aren't decimal based.
This applies to everything the a Mil ret does including target ranging. Everything is divisible by10 or a multiple of 10 as long as you stick to meters & centimeters.

This a new way of thinking for me, but I don't understand how meters versus yards or centimeters versus inches enters into it. I do see that using a decimal system using tenths with Mil can be easier than using quarters with MOA.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am trying to eliminate any measurement of distance (inches, feet, yards, centimeters or meters) from my adjustments and instead focus on the measurement of angles. If I impact 2 Mils left, I need to hold (or dial) 2 Mils right, regardless of the distance of the miss or to the target. If I get the angle right, it will accommodate for both.

Of course, distance to the target (in yards or meters) will come into play in making the initial dial or holdover. If the first shot is a miss, measure the angle of the miss to the target using the reticle (in Mils or MOA) and adjust accordingly when making the next shot.

Am I on the right track here?

 

[Mike Casselton]

To me, it doesn't matter how the scope measures the angle. When I take a shot and see the impact not where I was aiming, I can look at the little marks in the scope and see that I need to either hold (back in the day, we called that Kentucky windage) so many little marks or dial that same number of marks.

^^^^^^
This right here.
I doesn't get any simpler than that.

 

[wpeach1912]

Threads like this make me wonder if people could use a speedometer in KMH instead of MPH. If the sign says 60KMH, then put the needle on 60KMH

 

[Mike Casselton]

Maybe I missed the point, but


This a new way of thinking for me, but I don't understand how meters versus yards or centimeters versus inches enters into it. I do see that using a decimal system using tenths with Mil can be easier than using quarters with MOA.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am trying to eliminate any measurement of distance (inches, feet, yards, centimeters or meters) from my adjustments and instead focus on the measurement of angles. If I impact 2 Mils left, I need to hold (or dial) 2 Mils right, regardless of the distance of the miss or to the target. If I get the angle right, it will accommodate for both.

Of course, distance to the target (in yards or meters) will come into play in making the initial dial or holdover. If the first shot is a miss, measure the angle of the miss to the target using the reticle (in Mils or MOA) and adjust accordingly when making the next shot.

Am I on the right track here?

Yes. It really is that simple

 

[Mike Casselton]

Threads like this make me wonder if people could use a speedometer in KMH instead of MPH. If the sign says 60KMH, then put the needle on 60KMH

If it says anything in KMH, I'm in the wrong country.
But yeah, I can do the math if I need to or I can look at my speedometer and select the MPH or KMH part of the dial.

I'm still driving the same speed.

 

[Aftermath]

The real advantage with the Mil system is that it is a decimal system as long as meters are used instead of yrds. While yards & inches can be used, it kinda defeats the the advantages & the purpose.
If you can manage to think in & use meters & centimeters, there's basically no conversions, at least that aren't decimal based.
This applies to everything the a Mil ret does including target ranging. Everything is divisible by10 or a multiple of 10 as long as you stick to meters & centimeters.

If you are using MIL for ranging, it works in whatever unit of length you want. 1 furlong is 1 mil at 1000 furlongs. 1 horses ass is 1 mil at 1000 horses asses.

 

[Barelstroker]

This a new way of thinking for me, but I don't understand how meters versus yards or centimeters versus inches enters into it. I do see that using a decimal system using tenths with Mil can be easier than using quarters with MOA.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am trying to eliminate any measurement of distance (inches, feet, yards, centimeters or meters) from my adjustments and instead focus on the measurement of angles. If I impact 2 Mils left, I need to hold (or dial) 2 Mils right, regardless of the distance of the miss or to the target. If I get the angle right, it will accommodate for both.

Of course, distance to the target (in yards or meters) will come into play in making the initial dial or holdover. If the first shot is a miss, measure the angle of the miss to the target using the reticle (in Mils or MOA) and adjust accordingly when making the next shot.

Am I on the right track here?

Yes, you're correct. When you just use the ret, Mil & MOA rets do the same thing.
I'm looking at it from the sub tension perspective. For example, if you needed to move 6" to the right at 300 yrds, the system will work better if you think in cm instead of inches. So 6" is 15 cm & Mil rets are sub tended for meters & cm so, if you use metric measurements, there's no conversion perse, just a straight division or multiplying factor.
If you laser range to the target in meters, the ret will just fall into place, if you think in cm, the same applies to the 0.1 Mil hashes.
If you see bullet splash in the ret, you just correct the same as an MOA ret, it's only when there's an actual distance figure involved that you'll save yourself converting from imperil to metric or converting inches to 10ths of Mils.

 

[Barelstroker]

If you are using MIL for ranging, it works in whatever unit of length you want. 1 furlong is 1 mil at 1000 furlongs. 1 horses ass is 1 mil at 1000 horses asses.

Yes that's correct also but, you'll have to convert at some point to accommodate the Mil sub tensions. Faster & easier if you just use the measurement system the ret is sub tended for in the 1st place.

 

[Rob01]

Yes, you're correct. When you just use the ret, Mil & MOA rets do the same thing.
I'm looking at it from the sub tension perspective. For example, if you needed to move 6" to the right at 300 yrds, the system will work better if you think in cm instead of inches. So 6" is 15 cm & Mil rets are sub tended for meters & cm so, if you use metric measurements, there's no conversion perse, just a straight division or multiplying factor.
If you laser range to the target in meters, the ret will just fall into place, if you think in cm, the same applies to the 0.1 Mil hashes.
If you see bullet splash in the ret, you just correct the same as an MOA ret, it's only when there's an actual distance figure involved that you'll save yourself converting from imperil to metric or converting inches to 10ths of Mils.

You are not getting it. You are converting linear to angular when you don’t need to as you have a angular ruler, the reticle, in front of your face. A mil is a mil no matter the range using the reticle in a FFP optic. I haven’t though about inches for corrections in decades. You are making your life harder for yourself.

 

[Aftermath]

Yes that's correct also but, you'll have to convert at some point to accommodate the Mil sub tensions. Faster & easier if you just use the measurement system the ret is sub tended for in the 1st place.

MIL is not a measurement that is in any way related to any of the known or yet to be discovered units of length.

 

[SonoranPrecision]

Yes, you're correct. When you just use the ret, Mil & MOA rets do the same thing.
I'm looking at it from the sub tension perspective. For example, if you needed to move 6" to the right at 300 yrds, the system will work better if you think in cm instead of inches. So 6" is 15 cm & Mil rets are sub tended for meters & cm so, if you use metric measurements, there's no conversion perse, just a straight division or multiplying factor.
If you laser range to the target in meters, the ret will just fall into place, if you think in cm, the same applies to the 0.1 Mil hashes.
If you see bullet splash in the ret, you just correct the same as an MOA ret, it's only when there's an actual distance figure involved that you'll save yourself converting from imperil to metric or converting inches to 10ths of Mils.

You’re making this way harder than it needs to be. I haven’t the slightest clue what 146cm looks like at 583 meters, but when I’m looking through my scope (with my conveniently overlaid ruler), I can see that it’s about 2.5 mils. And that’s all that matters for making a correction.

 

[Barelstroker]

You are not getting it. You are converting linear to angular when you don’t need to as you have a angular ruler, the reticle, in front of your face. A mil is a mil no matter the range using the reticle in a FFP optic. I haven’t though about inches for corrections in decades. You are making your life harder for yourself.

I agree the rets are angular but, at some point everyone wants to reconcile what they see in their ret to a distance, be it yrds, inches, meters or cm. When looking through a Milliradian reticle, all the hashes & stadia are directly correlated to meters & cm. One Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 10 cm, 20 cm at 200 meters, 600 meters to 60 cm & etc. 0.1 Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 1 cm, 200 meters to 2 cm, 600 meters to 6 cm & etc. Do this same correlation with yards & you'll see what a dogs breakfast it all becomes.

This post was edited for clarity to correct a mistake mentioned by SonoranPrecision in the following post.

 

[SonoranPrecision]

I agree the rets are angular but, at some point everyone wants to reconcile what they see in their ret to a distance, be it yrds, inches, meters or cm. When looking through a Milliradian reticle, all the hashes & stadia are directly correlated to meters & cm. One Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 1 meter, 2 meters at 200 meters, 600 meters to 6 meters & etc. 0.1 Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 1 cm, 200 meters to 2 cm, 600 meters to 6 cm & etc. Do this same correlation with yards & you'll see what a dogs breakfast it all becomes.

1) 1 mil is not 1 meter at 100 meters
2) I don’t know a single American that thinks in the metric system, so if I know something is 27 cm, it means absolutely nothing, and I’m going to convert it to inches.
3) use the reticle as a ruler and stop confusing shooters new to mrad with all the “you have to use the metric system” bullshit

 

[Packfan]

Thanks all. The reference to the metric system, which I have seen many others make, didn't make sense. Nor does thinking in centimeters rather than inches. I now understand neither are relevant when measuring angles. It's amazing how much misunderstanding there is around this concept.

I came from the camp that would measure the miss in distance and then convert to an angle measurement based on the distance to the target, in my case in MOA. With an appropriate reticle, I can now just measure the angle and not mess with any distance calculations. Far simpler.

 

[Rob01]

I agree the rets are angular but, at some point everyone wants to reconcile what they see in their ret to a distance, be it yrds, inches, meters or cm. When looking through a Milliradian reticle, all the hashes & stadia are directly correlated to meters & cm. One Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 1 meter, 2 meters at 200 meters, 600 meters to 6 meters & etc. 0.1 Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 1 cm, 200 meters to 2 cm, 600 meters to 6 cm & etc. Do this same correlation with yards & you'll see what a dogs breakfast it all becomes.

No they don’t and no I won’t because there is no need to do any conversations or correlations when shooting. One day you will get it and the lightbulb will go off over your head. On that day remember this thread. LOL

 

[Mike Casselton]

And we measure our distance in yards, apply that number in the solver and it gives us an elevation correction.

If you're gonna go through all the mental mathematical masturbation, why not create a dope sheet and it's already done for you. It would take 30 minutes to make one out to a mile.

Let's just complicate talking a piss

 

[Barelstroker]

1) 1 mil is not 1 meter at 100 meters
2) I don’t know a single American that thinks in the metric system, so if I know something is 27 cm, it means absolutely nothing, and I’m going to convert it to inches.
3) use the reticle as a ruler and stop confusing new shooters with all the “you have to use the metric system” bullshit

Sorry, I was thinking 1000 meters. Yes, it's 10 cm at 100 meters.
I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I'm simply answering a question the Op had about the measurement system.
All I'm saying is the system works easier if the metric system is used to convert to some distance which, is what the Op was talking about.

"This a new way of thinking for me, but I don't understand how meters versus yards or centimeters versus inches enters into it. I do see that using a decimal system using tenths with Mil can be easier than using quarters with MOA."

I was merely answering his question.

 

[Rob01]

But the OP is actually learning from this thread to forget that BS.

 

[Aftermath]

I agree the rets are angular but, at some point everyone wants to reconcile what they see in their ret to a distance, be it yrds, inches, meters or cm. When looking through a Milliradian reticle, all the hashes & stadia are directly correlated to meters & cm. One Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 1 meter, 2 meters at 200 meters, 600 meters to 6 meters & etc. 0.1 Mil at 100 meters sub tends to 1 cm, 200 meters to 2 cm, 600 meters to 6 cm & etc. Do this same correlation with yards & you'll see what a dogs breakfast it all becomes.

One Mil at 1000 yards sub tends to 1 yard, 2 yards at 2000 yards, etc
One Mil at 1000 horses asses subtends to 1 horses ass.

 

[SonoranPrecision]

Sorry, I was thinking 1000 meters. Yes, it's 10 cm at 100 meters.
I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I'm simply answering a question the Op had about the measurement system.
All I'm saying is the system works easier if the metric system is used to convert to some distance which, is what the Op was talking about.

"This a new way of thinking for me, but I don't understand how meters versus yards or centimeters versus inches enters into it. I do see that using a decimal system using tenths with Mil can be easier than using quarters with MOA."

I was merely answering his question.

Which he said in response to you, after you confused him…. What you should have said is, “Inches, cm, meters, yards are all irrelevant to the angular measurement.”

 

[Barelstroker]

One Mil at 1000 yards sub tends to 1 yard, 2 yards at 2000 yards, etc
One Mil at 1000 horses asses subtends to 1 horses ass.

Yes, & 36"/10 = 7.2" per 0.2 Mil hash.
As far as I'm aware, the military use meters & cm & Mil rets to simplify things, that's all I'm saying & it's the way it is.

 

[Ghost29]

You don’t need to convert anything. All you need to do is think in terms of MIL’s. With a FFP scope, what you see in the reticle is what you hold or dial. Don’t over think it!!

 

[Aftermath]

Yes, & 36"/10 = 7.2" per 0.2 Mil hash.
As far as I'm aware, the military use meters & cm & Mil rets to simplify things, that's all I'm saying & it's the way it is.

Wait....36"/10=7.2"?
I'm pretty sure that is NOT the way it is.
You have a very long road ahead of you.

 

[Rob01]

Well if the military does something it’s always the best way! LOL Go ask all the PRS competitors shooting 10-12 shots in 90 seconds how they do all the conversions to make corrections in that time. LOL Again someday you will learn.

 

[Steel head]

When I switched to mils it was absolutely no issue.
A ruler is a ruler, mm, inches, mils or moa.
I find adding tenths a lot faster than quarters and I really like dialing ten more than dialing 34 something.

 

[Aftermath]

In 2 separate posts, you have fucked up with the nomenclature as well as some VERY simple arithmetic. You, especially, should not be doing any sort of conversion from angular to linear units of measure.

 

[Barelstroker]

In 2 separate posts, you have fucked up with the nomenclature as well as some VERY simple arithmetic. You, especially, should not be doing any sort of conversion from angular to linear units of measure.

Both of you should read it again. 0.2 Mils at 1000 yrds is 7.2"

 

[Rob01]

Both of you should read it again. 0.2 Mils at 1000 yrds is 7.2"

Which is useless info and just something to clutter your mind when shooting.

 

[Ghost29]

@Barelstroker: who cares how many inches in .2 Mils! If I miss by .5 Mils all I have to do is hold .5 Mils.

 

[Barelstroker]

Which is useless info and just something to clutter your mind when shooting.

If you say so but, it doesn't have to clutter anything.
The Op alluded to the conversion system & I answered his question. I didn't give him an answer to a question he didn't ask.
Now the ret will subtend to any measurement you want but, if you use yrds & inches it's not divisible by 10 & then that has to be converted.
I use my Mil rets most days & I don't bring any measurements into it but, that's not what the Op asked in the post I answered.

 

[Aftermath]

@Rob01 Remember that thread where the guy was confused about all this just a couple months ago where he was doing a conversion using squirrel nuts and such?
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
It's just too simple for some folks to understand.

MOA vs Mil

lmao!! This made for a great read while sitting at work avoiding actual work. not everyone from Niceville is an asshole though. some of us are just ignorant

www.snipershide.com

Stop the Debate, Mils vs MOA vs IPHY

Sniper's Hide is constantly fielding the question of Milliradians versus Minute of Angle vs Inches Per Hundred Yards. Mils vs MOA

www.snipershide.com

 

[Barelstroker]

@Rob01 Remember that thread where the guy was confused about all this just a couple months ago where he was doing a conversion using squirrel nuts and such?
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
It's just too simple for some folks to understand.

MOA vs Mil

lmao!! This made for a great read while sitting at work avoiding actual work. not everyone from Niceville is an asshole though. some of us are just ignorant

www.snipershide.com

Yes, I can see that.

 

[Rob01]

If you say so but, it doesn't have to clutter anything.
The Op alluded to the conversion system & I answered his question. I didn't give him an answer to a question he didn't ask.
Now the ret will subtend to any measurement you want but, if you use yrds & inches it's not divisible by 10 & then that has to be converted.
I use my Mil rets most days & I don't bring any measurements into it but, that's not what the Op asked in the post I answered.

Divisible by 10? Conversion? Still not getting it are you. You will some day.

 

[dirthead1]

At least the OP seems to get it.....