My question is if you have a riflescope that is 1/4 MOA at 100 Yards if I were shooting at 200 Yards any adjustment would then be 1/2 MOA and so on so for every 100 yards add 1/4 MOA.
Thanks
Thanks
- Thread starter DXT_Shooter
- Start date
yes
Figure it like this. At 100 yard 1 MOA is one inch. 200 yards would be 2 inches, 300 would be 3 inches and so on. So a 1/4 MOA adjustment at 200 would be 1/2 an inch. Guess you could just keep adding 1/4s or figure 1 MOA at the distance and divide by 4.
MOA is the same at any distance. So if you look thru your scope and see that your point of impact is, let's say, two MOA left, you adjust your scope by that two MOA, whether at 100, 200 or 1000 yards. depending on your scope and focal plane, you may need your magnification all the way up to see and adjust for the needed change. that's the real easy way, no conversions or anything necessary.
now, if you run out to your target and see you're hitting, let's say, two inches left at 50 yards, then you'd adjust your scope by 4 MOA, as 2 inches at 50 yds is roughly 4 moa because it would be roughly 4 inches out at 100.
bottom line, use your crosshairs to see how far you are off and adjust based on that, not an actual measurement using a ruler.
now, if you run out to your target and see you're hitting, let's say, two inches left at 50 yards, then you'd adjust your scope by 4 MOA, as 2 inches at 50 yds is roughly 4 moa because it would be roughly 4 inches out at 100.
bottom line, use your crosshairs to see how far you are off and adjust based on that, not an actual measurement using a ruler.
Just remember this only works correctly on First Focal Plane optics or a Second Focal Plane set at its ranging magnification which is normally max power or denoted with a line or different color number on magnification ring.
For example, imagine you are shooting at 300 yards. You know that a MOA spreads out 1″ per 100 yards, so 1 MOA at 300 yards is 3″. Therefore, for your calculations at that 300 yard target, you should think in 3″ increments. By doing so, you can easily see that 2 MOA is just 2 of those 3″ increments, or 6″ total. And likewise, 1/2 MOA is 1/2 of those 3″ increments, or 1.5″.
If you are having trouble determining the increments in your head and would rather have a formula, you can try this method. Divide the distance (in yards) you are shooting by 100 and you will know how big 1 MOA is in inches. For example, imagine you are now shooting at 250 yards. 250 / 100 = 2.5. So, 1 MOA at 250 yards is 2.5″.
If you are having trouble determining the increments in your head and would rather have a formula, you can try this method. Divide the distance (in yards) you are shooting by 100 and you will know how big 1 MOA is in inches. For example, imagine you are now shooting at 250 yards. 250 / 100 = 2.5. So, 1 MOA at 250 yards is 2.5″.
If you can think of it as a unit of angle (which it is), it might be more intuitive. A MOA is just a 1/60th slice of a degree. Think of the way a flashlight beam gets wider farther out and you have got units of angle. What this means is that a 1 MOA reticle dot, for example, covers about 1" at one hundred yards, 2" at two hundred yards, and so forth, it is still 1 MOA.
MILs (milliradians) do the exact same thing, just a different slice of angle. Inches to centimeters or cubes to liters. Same principles apply.
MILs (milliradians) do the exact same thing, just a different slice of angle. Inches to centimeters or cubes to liters. Same principles apply.
As noted above,
The reticle is a calibrated ruler right in front of your nose, or eyes. You measure and adjust and what you see is what you dial.
We don’t even teach 1” at 100, 2” at 200 because it confuses people and is not how you look at the angle. All angles have a linear distance, including Mils, we don’t need to know it, it’s irrelevant to good, accurate shooting. It’s a disservice to the system we use. It’s not accurate either.
Unless you walk down range and measure it, it’s not correct. Measure with the reticle.
Use the angle not the linear value, that is the old way and it’s the least accurate way. Do it right you progress quicker and it’s less to think about
The reticle is a calibrated ruler right in front of your nose, or eyes. You measure and adjust and what you see is what you dial.
We don’t even teach 1” at 100, 2” at 200 because it confuses people and is not how you look at the angle. All angles have a linear distance, including Mils, we don’t need to know it, it’s irrelevant to good, accurate shooting. It’s a disservice to the system we use. It’s not accurate either.
Unless you walk down range and measure it, it’s not correct. Measure with the reticle.
Use the angle not the linear value, that is the old way and it’s the least accurate way. Do it right you progress quicker and it’s less to think about
What Frank said, but 1 moa is 1.047" at 100yds an 10.47" at a grand. No big deal shooting, but when you start ranging with a moa ret an forget it's not 1 at 100 an 10 at a grand it will bite you real quick past about 650 depending chambering. Easiest way is range in 1"s an subtract 5%, your shot it will be cost enough for gov work.
Wow a bit more complicated than I thought...thanks all for responding ?
Not that it makes a ton of difference, but keep in mind that most optics are 1/4 inch per click and not 1/4 MOA per click.
This must be a typo. I think you meant "1/4 MOA per click, not 1/2 MOA"?
I've had/have scopes that adjust in 1/4iphy, 1/4moa, 1/2iphy, 1/2moa an 1moa. Never believe what they say, check them on a barber poll or other known size object, never assume.
No sir, no mistake.
I was speaking about ‘some’ optics, and the turret adjustment (click) value and highlighting that albeit small, there is a margin between the turret adj value and MOA regardless of the distance.
As others have pointed out - you need to verify.
Good luck
Things get way bad when people don't realize the .47" they aren't figuring when say you have to dial 41moa.....41 x .47 = bad shit. Just added a 4-5% error on top right out the gate when they should have been dialing 39 moa, but they gave it a linear value. Then people get online and start bitching about how their ballistic software is no good.
Last edited:
Similar threads
