Recently while viewing Youtube videos on long range shooting, I have been surprised by the number or references made to the use of MOA versus MIL. Then when exploring Fierce Firearms, I learned they typically mount MOA scopes as that is what the largest segment of their customers desire. So I was just curious if I am just imagining this reversal in optic trends or if in fact MOA is making a comeback?
- Thread starter IDbound
- Start date
I would think if you are shooting a 'target game' vs an 'action game' you would want MOA because of the known distance ranges, ie: 200, 300, 600, 800, 900, 1,000 yards typically shot in known distance target matches. You just don't see MIL scopes in those games. PRS and other action or unknown distance situations would be where MOA may be at a disadvantage and MIL preferred. Although I don't compete any longer, and never in PRS or NRL, my most recent rifles have MIL scopes, just because.
All my tactical/PRS shooting friends run mil and the benchrest friends run MOA.
I've got both, and recently picked up some MOA based Nightforce scopes for ridiculously low prices because nobody wants them.
I've got both, and recently picked up some MOA based Nightforce scopes for ridiculously low prices because nobody wants them.
Nope
Pretty much this. I'd add a number of older shooters that don't want to have to relearn math also seem to stick with MOA.
That's what they told me. I only learned MILs so never really thought about it that much.
Different sounding rooms will hype different tools & methods. War & its followers/fans will always try to be like & promote same. One of the reasons you see AR's and some bolt guns dressed, in certain ways. Also remember the military is always looking/using/buying based upon many different task reasons, the main are troops grasping usage, maintaining & employing of different, tooling. Is that tooling the best for all venues, no its not. However when money is involved outside of that arena/venue that is a moot issue.
Last edited:
Fierce sells mostly hunting rifles. Most hunters prefer SFP. It's not impossible to find one but most SFP are not in MIL.
Not a "comeback." MOA is just plugging along in the normal user fields it has been for the past 5-10yrs. Many hunters still prefer things like MOA and/or SFP optics.
Our customer base is mainly hunters and if anything, we continually see a slow movement from MOA to Mil. It's a very slow movement, but more movement from MOA to Mil than anyone moving "back" to MOA from Mils.
Our customer base is mainly hunters and if anything, we continually see a slow movement from MOA to Mil. It's a very slow movement, but more movement from MOA to Mil than anyone moving "back" to MOA from Mils.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 8,647
- 17,554
The benchrest guys that I shoot with, know the different yardages at the local range, and have memorized how many MOA to dial so they can hit the targets.
I input the load, weather, and distance into a ballistics calculator which spits out MOA, Mils, clicks, and inches. It doesn't matter if I am running an MOA scope or a Mil scope, the info is at my fingertips. If I miss, I use the reticle to measure, adjust accordingly, and get on target.
There is no math.
One thing that I can appreciate, is when the spotter is giving me feedback in the same units that I am using.
The reasons you see this isn’t due to the distance being known or unknown. It’s typically due to being able to use SFP optics with 1/8 moa adjustments.
They don’t need the reticle to be the same measurements at every magnification and they want the smallest unit of adjustment possible.
Last edited:
Thanks for all the responses. I have two nice Kahles scores, one in MOA and MIL. I was just making sure that I was making the correct decision to sell the MOA version. Thanks again.
So in other words you added nothing to the conversation
Same as it ever was with you
Nobody using an MOA scope in a PRS match would be at a disadvantage unless they were stone dumb. You're given the distances to targets, so you look up your elevation dope and either dial it or hold off. If someone were to tell you their wind call in mils, it takes a fraction of a second to make the conversion in your head.
I can only speculate that moa predominates in NRA shooting because fudd history. When I shot that in the early 2000s all the data books had target plots with an MOA grid over the target image and all the service rifle NM sights were in 1/4 moa clicks.
These threads are ridiculous. They are both different ways of accomplishing the same thing. Use what works for you and your purpose.
I dial in clicks, it matters not whether those clicks are MOA or MIL. In a free country you can choose to do it differently.
People playing a particular game may find an advantage in one system over the other, but that doesn't mean it is the only way to do something.
I own both and both work just dandy for my purpose(s).
I dial in clicks, it matters not whether those clicks are MOA or MIL. In a free country you can choose to do it differently.
People playing a particular game may find an advantage in one system over the other, but that doesn't mean it is the only way to do something.
I own both and both work just dandy for my purpose(s).
They are both rulers.
Inch or cm. In the end as long as you know what ruler you are using, it don't make no difference.
Inch or cm. In the end as long as you know what ruler you are using, it don't make no difference.
Just use what you have in front of you at the moment. When you see that you did not hit where you aimed, notice where in relation to that point of aim that the bullet impacted. Missed high right? Hold the opposite (low left) and try again.
The real weird thing is, this seems to work for me no matter if I am using one of my FFP/MIL scopes or one of my SFP/MOA scopes. You know what is even more strange? It seems to work no matter what zoom that scope is set at.
The real weird thing is, this seems to work for me no matter if I am using one of my FFP/MIL scopes or one of my SFP/MOA scopes. You know what is even more strange? It seems to work no matter what zoom that scope is set at.
Good point.
This will work on SFP scopes as long as you are holding to correct and not dialing.
Also as long as you aren't relaying or being relayed information (unless somehow they are on the same measurement plane as you are currently or you do a calculation). Also as long as you aren't changing magnification before using the hold. Which would also require a calculation.
SFP is the "same" only in very limited circumstances.
SFP is the "same" only in very limited circumstances.
I have seen more MOA scopes in the last year vs the previous 2 or 3 years...
Not sure the trend but we started seeing them show up again
Not sure the trend but we started seeing them show up again
With how common ballistic calculators are now, I’m not sure it really matters any more. I learned on MILs so I’ll stick with it.
Negative ghost rider. You CAN dial, even if not on the zoom that is "correct" but you should know what you are doing. For example, if your SFP reticle is "correct" at 20x generally, it is two times that correct at 10x. Here is an example of one.
Even an old 3-9 duplex second focal plane scope with the capped turrets can be "dialed" for elevation by using the zoom feature. But you gotta know how far down the top of the arrow on the fat part of the reticle is. You can fairly accurately guess 1/2 or even 1/3 or 1/4 of that reticle. If you shoot it at say 3x at the top of the fat part and then again at 9x, your bullet will impact in different places. If you figure that out at 3x, 6x and 9x and then take some practice shots at each of those zoom levels for 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 3/4 of the reticle and write that shit down, you can use a laser range finder, look at your DOPE, choose the zoom and hold...
MOA scopes typically dial in 1/4 MOA clicks which is a more fine angle than 1/10 MIL. This makes MOA better for benchrest. With MOA reticles, however, they *typically* have hash marks every MOA which is equivalent to hash marks every .29 MILS which makes MIL scopes with hash marks every .2 MILS more fine. This makes MILS better for PRS where you tend to holdover for wind and follow-up shots.
Last edited:
But you stated that it works "no matter what the zoom is set at" on an SFP scope.
It does matter what the zoom is set at if you are using the reticle to measure the amount that you need to correct, and dial accordingly. If the zoom is set at a value that makes the reticle 1:1, then dialing or holding will work. If it is not 1:1, and you are going to correct by dialing, then you need to know the ratio and do a little math.
I think that is EXACTLY what I said using different words.
.1 Mil X 10 = 1 Mil
10 yards x 10 = 100 yards
.1 Mils = 10 yards
.25 MOA x 4 = 1 MOA
25 yards x 4 = 100 yards
.25 MOA = 25 yards
MOA needs to die a bastards death, fractions are shit
10 yards x 10 = 100 yards
.1 Mils = 10 yards
.25 MOA x 4 = 1 MOA
25 yards x 4 = 100 yards
.25 MOA = 25 yards
MOA needs to die a bastards death, fractions are shit
So it is easier for you to count in quarters than it is in dimes?
Many were using what is considered now a duplex, SFP scope as a hold over ret in the 60's. You had to run the ret in reverse but it worked. Then along came the ART 1
I discovered this 3-9 "trick" by accident when I was about 13 or 14. Once I realized what was going on, my mind was blown. A sporting goods shop owner helped me figure it out more exact. The main difference from today is that I still had to guess at the range to the animal. I tried using the reticle as a ranging device but by the time I had the distance, the deer was usually gone. So I went back to guessing.
It was a Bushnell on a Browning Safari Grade 30-06 and it was a true duplex, no inverting the reticle or whatever.
It was a Bushnell on a Browning Safari Grade 30-06 and it was a true duplex, no inverting the reticle or whatever.
With sufficient practice it can be quick if you break it down in 50yds increments. Knowing your gear is work and most would rather trade money, than spend the time.
Depending chambering, zero & target one can preform many tasks, some can't envision being completed.
Think about the conversion factors as frankflippers
Yeah...I was a kid. No dad to help me out.
I still practice using the calibrated eyeball. Look, make a guess, use the LRF. Repeat. Of course, if I am in an area where there are things I can use as reference, like a fence post or field with fences at the quarter section, it's less guessing. IF SHT proverbial F and I live long enough to run out of batteries for the LRF, I will use a reticle but for now I see absolutely no need.
When 4 leg hunting set you duplex for average chest size at 100 yds then when you see the target its easy to subtend the distance & shoot. Remember if you can quarter your target with your crosshair you have more than enough scope power to tag it properly. If its past your point blank for that animal its just split second to use a hold, if you know it. When hunting anything, time messing with getting ready to shoot, can be your worst mistake. Holds allow much quicker engagements across the board, but you have to know your gear.
Flippin a Frank
Is that like a LEGAL u-turn? Maybe doing a 360? No π needed
Last edited:
Yes. This is what I do with a custom Rem 700 in 280 Ackley. PBZ is 275. This give me plus 3" at something like 175 and minus 6 at 360. For the vast majority of the deer hunting I do, I look and maybe think "well, that is on over there about 350 so I'm gonna aim more near the spine" and pull the trigger. Real quick and intuitive. Having that fast bullet helps a bunch.
Also a SFP/MOA (sorry Frank) scope. One of my Swarovski's. I also have the dope for minimum, median and max zooms figured out.
Last edited:
Biden is expected to sign an executive order today, making MILs the official measurement of the Democrat party.
Similar threads
