Re: Mil vs MOA, don't worry, it's not what you think
wisam,
Maybe this will help. Several items you probably need to know to start with:
1) When Lindy responds to a thread - PAY ATTENTION
2) No matter what the variation of the inquiry, mil vs MOA will always generate a lot of [often heated] debate.
3) Everyone has their own preference of mil or MOA systems and will likely defend that choice to the death in many cases (LOL).
After reading thread after thread on this topic, my take is this. I think the problem/dilemna for many in the mils vs MOA debate stems in part from thinking in terms of distance. Specifically, the arc length subtended by an angle at some distance from the shooter, for example, group spread at 100 yd. Or how many inches will this many clicks on my scope turret move the point of impact at 500 yd. It doesn't matter what system you're talking about, it seems like the human brain just naturally wants to think of one MOA, for example, as 1.0472 inches at 100 yds. In other words, the brain has automatically converted an angular measurement to a distance measurement (1.0472" at 100 yd) and then thinks of one MOA as 1.0472" (or some multiple of that) from that point on.
If you can get away from that and think in terms that mils and MOA are both angular measurements (angles), you will realize that arc length at a specified distance doesn't matter. It is what it is, and is proportional to whichever angular measurement you're using. Mils and MOA both do the same thing, they're just a different angle, or angular fraction of a circle (radians or degrees, take your pick). So if you think of mils and MOA as simply angles, you'll realize that you don't have to retrain your brain to go from one to the other at all. It's those who think of mils or MOA in terms of the arc length they subtend at some specified distance that run into trouble because then they have to deal with conversion factors that needlessly complicate things.
The point to all this is that as long as your reticle and turrets utilize the same system, there is no conversion necessary for most things. For example, you aim for a target, put a hole in the paper, and use your reticle to tell you how many dots or hashmarks your shot was off from your point of aim in elevation and windage (high or low, left or right). As long as the dots or hashmarks use the same system as the adjustment turrets, it doesn't matter if it's mils or MOA, you dial the necessary correction in with your turrets and shoot again and hopefully, the point of aim and point of impact will be the same. Obviously there can be more to it than just that, but if you start by thinking of whichever system you choose, mils or MOA, as an angle, rather than an arc length at some specified distance, everything will fall into place.
