Rifle Scopes Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

[ArcticFun]

In the process of planning my build for this year I've come across a dilema... Whether to use a Mil/Mil scope or a MOA/MOA scope. 90% of the guns use will be from 1000m to 2000m (or yards). I prefer to dial in my dope using my turrets and aim dead on for any elevation changes. So the question is this: for those that do the same, which do you use and why? Shooters using a Mil/Mil set-ups: do you feel that coarser adjustment are a handicap in any way shape or form?

The scope I'm looking at getting is the 3.8-22 SN3. If I went with Mil/Mil I'd get the GAP Mil reticle and if I went MOA I would get the MOA version of the GAP reticle. Also I usually shoot alone and spot my own shots, I know both the MOA and the Mil systems well enough to range find with them. Just trying to gather some more knowledge before I start ordering all my parts.

 

[GOING FOR 2000]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

Know you said you like to turn turrets but have you looked at the Horus Vision Falcon.

I have one on my 700P-.308 (0-MOA rail zeroed for 100)and M-96 windrunner in .408 CT (20 MOA rail zeroed for 1000), it takes some getting used to having the mil grid in the scope in the first focal plane, once I did I would never trade it. zero at 100 and forget it, if you want a 1000 yd. zero change to the appropriate rail (MOA) re zero at 100 crank on the calculated hold over and you are zeroed for 1000.

Faster follow up shots by correcting to the grid point of impact without knob turning, just point and shoot, eye never leaving the grid.

Also FFP eliminates the magnification correction factor.

I understand the Horus grid is becoming available in other scopes S&B, NF, Leupold.

Just my opinion but I like working in mils, easier for calculations, 1 Mil = 3.6" at 100 yds. and 36" at 1000 yds. and the reticle is in a 1 Mil major .2 Mil minor grid, turrets are in .1 mil adj.

 

[Captain Kirk]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

I find working with mils to be easier, just personal preference. I think it is most important to have matching reticle/turrets, both systems are equally effective and accurate.

Kirk R

 

[gugubica]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

A mil setup is more accurate than your rifle at those distances.

I would not worry about the coarceness of the adjustments.

It really boils down to which you are more comfortable with. I like using MOA, but recently switched to mil because it is the standard on a firing line. More people can call corrections in mils.

I didn't have any learning pains and the transition has been seamless.

 

[Captain Kirk]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

One nice thing about mils is you dont have to wonder if the scope adjustments are in MOA or inches.......

Kirk R

 

[Bronco]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

Really doesn't matter as long as the turrets and reticle match. Choose which ever you are most comfortable with. I like moa, iphy really, doesn't get much simpler.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

 

[Lindy]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

 

[dan46n2]

Re: Mil vs MOA past 1000, pros/cons

Milli Vanilli