hello all. first post here. i am about to make my first "real" scope purchase. i am currently shooting an swfa super sniper fixed 10x42. i like the scope but the glass is not up to snuff for what i am working my way into and i am going to need variable magnification and more magnification. i have decided on the vortex viper pst 6-24x50 but what i can not decide on is whether to buy the mil/mil model or the moa/moa model. any help would be appreciated and especially anyone with experience with either or both models of the same scope. thanks
Rifle Scopes noob question about mil/mil vs moa/moa
- Thread starter trevman
- Start date
Go with what you know how to use. Both will get the job done.
If you shoot with someone that uses one system it wont hurt to match them. If not you wont be able to do any better one way or the other. If still undecided just go mil and now your mind is made up. Good!!!
Good luck!! Naw, I shoot both and work well with both. DOnt let it scare ya, pick one and go shoot.
Good luck!! Naw, I shoot both and work well with both. DOnt let it scare ya, pick one and go shoot.
Do you prefer the metric system (mil) or the standard system (moa)? That really is the question you need to ask yourself. They both have their pros and cons and neither is really better or worse. At the end of the day its your personal preference.
It is easier to use the same as your shooting partner. If you are used to using mils already it is easy to continue. I converted from a SFP mil / moa to a mil / mil FFP... and have never looked back.
Steve
Steve
Yeah, dont worry about the system. And dont think in inches cms or whatever. If it takes 16.5 MOA to get there dial 16.5 MOA. If it takes 5 mils, dial 5 mils. No different.
i am currently using the mil reticle and moa adjustments. pita…..
i am a contractor and spend a decent amount of my day each day reading a measuring tape. so the standard adjustments feel very comfortable to me. one of my shooting buddies uses the moa system and a couple of my other buddies use the mil system. so this is the reason that i am torn. what are the benefits if any of using the mil system?
Im using a TMR (mil) reticle with MOA turrets and its not as bad as I thought it was. I dial elevation in MOA then hold off for wind in mils. The balistic calc gives me both and it wouldn't be any different than holding in MOA. The lines just have different values.
The mil system divides by 10's, 100's and 1000's easier
As others have alluded to its really as easy as flipping a coin and making sure your reticle matches the turrets. Personally I use mil, I can out shoot and out range guys who shoot both... and I've been out ranged and out shot by guys who shoot both. It's really as easy as making a decision and learning the system. Unless of course you have a partner you shoot with then matching has major advantages for spotting and calling adjustments for each other.
yep
It is .261 vs .36 of an inch at 100 yards. Moa vs Mil
So .099 difference
R
So .099 difference
R
Last edited:
I would respectfully disagree with what others have said here. Mills are much more capable of a higher accuracy potential than MOA adjustments. MOA adjustments will adjust at 1/4 or 1/2 inch measurements in one moa, whereas mills are divides into 10 adjustments in one mill so it's a more precise adjustment. Also, when doing the math for range estimation the mill is based on tens and thousands so the maths is much easier than the math in fractions for a MOA system.
Yes, both will work but if you use both systems at great length you will see the advantages of the mil system. Almost every military sniper that I know that was trained on the MOA system will say the Mil system is much better, especially at extreme range. For me the mil system is the only to go.
Just my two cents from my experience. Good luck and good shooting.
Yes, both will work but if you use both systems at great length you will see the advantages of the mil system. Almost every military sniper that I know that was trained on the MOA system will say the Mil system is much better, especially at extreme range. For me the mil system is the only to go.
Just my two cents from my experience. Good luck and good shooting.
I'm the same way with my current scope. It's not as big of deal as people think, if you're using a Mil reticle with MOA turrets then just remember 3.43 MOA per MIL.
As long as they both match it really doesn't matter which way you go on a new scope purchase.
I have 3 , PST's 6-24 of the Mrad reticle , I also have a couple of old MARK 4 's with MOA turrets and a mil reticle . I learned to use them but now
the option is nice to have all matching turrets and reticle.
For your question on the Viper PST's in your original post , I like them , clear glass ,they track well ..no complaints on them yet .
I say go with what ever system you feel most comfortable with . As long as they both match (turret and reticle) it doesn't matter really.
how do you figure? 1/10 MIL at 1000yds is 3.6" 1/4 MOA at 1000yds is 2.5"
MOA is 1/60 of an angle or 1,047 inches at a hundred yards. At five or six hundred yards 1.047 won't have much of a difference, but at a thousand yards the same 1.047 will have a much bigger difference. There will be much more math involved in figuring out how to adjust your moa scope to 1.047 inches at a thousand yards or more.
1 Mil is 1/1000 or 10 cm at a 100 meters. A mil adjustable scope has adjustments in 10ths so to speak of on the turits, or 10 clicks equals one mill at a hundred yards.
For estimating distance you would take the height of a target times 1000 and divide by the number of mills ( on a mil dot scope ) is the distance the target is from the FFP. Now comes the fun part ! try to convert the distance to figure out what the adjustment is for an MOA scope and use 1.047 inches in the equation while someone is trying to kill you.
It's kind of hard to understand until you try both systems and can differentiate between the two. I hope my short synopsis will help you understand why the mil system is better and more accurate at extreme distance.
Well my friend, I understand both systems very well. I used them both extensively in the military. And let me assure you that if you're in the position to be engaged then you more than likely already know your DOPE for the target. I was simply responding to your comment that Mil adjustments provide a finer adjustment, which I believe to be wrong.
Either way you cut it the math don't lie. a mil is 36" at 1000yds. 1/10 of that is 3.6. 1 MOA at 1000yds is 10.47" 1/4 of that is 2.6"
wrong...takes my 139 scenar load 8.5 mils elevation to 1000 (i use a mil/mil scope) ...takes 27.8 MOA...because MOA is a finer adjustment...@ 100 yds 1/4 MOA is .26" ... .1 mils is .36"...that relationship stays the same no matter how far out u go
maybe you need more experience
The difference really has almost nothing to do with the units of measurement (they're both angles), and a lot to do with the fashion of the day in scope manufacturing.
For historical reasons, MOA scopes will (almost?) always have fractional adjustments - 1/8 MOA, 1/4 MOA. Mil scopes will have decimal adjustments - .1 mil, .05 mil. Because of that convention, MOA scopes will have a finer adjustment resolution than their mil counterparts (.1 mil is a larger angle than 1/4 MOA). Whether or not that is a good thing is up to you. If you are not comfortable adding fractions in your head, that's a ding against MOA scopes, but this has NOTHING to do with MOA, and everything to do with fractions.
If you like to think in metric, there are some plusses to the mil units as well. 1 mil = 1 meter at 1000 meters. Yes, the same thing is true in inches (1 mil = 1 inch at 1000 inches), but when is the last time you thought about the range to target in inches or group sizes in yards?
If you like to think in inches and 100's of yards, the MOA has some plusses in that 1 MOA is about 1 inch at 100 yards.
Back to the fashion of it all, KD competitors tend to use MOA (again - history). "Tactical" shooters tend to use mils (I'm guessing because the military likes metric stuff like mils, and if the military does it, it has to be good, right?)
Both are perfectly good.
For historical reasons, MOA scopes will (almost?) always have fractional adjustments - 1/8 MOA, 1/4 MOA. Mil scopes will have decimal adjustments - .1 mil, .05 mil. Because of that convention, MOA scopes will have a finer adjustment resolution than their mil counterparts (.1 mil is a larger angle than 1/4 MOA). Whether or not that is a good thing is up to you. If you are not comfortable adding fractions in your head, that's a ding against MOA scopes, but this has NOTHING to do with MOA, and everything to do with fractions.
If you like to think in metric, there are some plusses to the mil units as well. 1 mil = 1 meter at 1000 meters. Yes, the same thing is true in inches (1 mil = 1 inch at 1000 inches), but when is the last time you thought about the range to target in inches or group sizes in yards?
If you like to think in inches and 100's of yards, the MOA has some plusses in that 1 MOA is about 1 inch at 100 yards.
Back to the fashion of it all, KD competitors tend to use MOA (again - history). "Tactical" shooters tend to use mils (I'm guessing because the military likes metric stuff like mils, and if the military does it, it has to be good, right?)
Both are perfectly good.
This topic has been discussed lots before. Read through this thread and all your questions about MILs will be answered:
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/snipers-hide-rifle-scopes/229906-understanding-mils.html
If you are already shooting with a mil reticle - then get a mil/mil scope and call it a day. Stop thinking in terms of measurements like a ruler. The scale in the scope is irrelevant as long as the knobs match. You can call the system anything you want. Its a "unit" is the easiest thing to think about it. As long as the unit on your reticle is the same unit as the knobs, there is not need to EVER think in terms of inches, cms, yards, or whatever for 99.99% of shooting. If you see a bullet hole in your target 0.7 units left and 1 unit high, then dial your scope 0.7 units right and 1 unit low. If you have an SFP scope, just make sure you are doing it this on the correct magnification for what the reticle subtends. If FFP scope, then its doesn't matter. Ideally, you should never need to think of a miss in terms of inches and then have to convert to Mils. Thats what the reticle is for.
The ONLY time where you would need to convert inches to cms and then to mils would be if you use the reticle to range something that is an unknown distance away. That's the only time math should ever be involved in the process. But even then, with the advent of affordable laser range finders - the need to use the reticle for that is exceedingly low. It can be done, but an LRF will be both far more accurate and far faster to do.
Don't over think it. Go for Mils. It is the new world standard and MOA will go the way of the dodo bird eventually. Fewer and fewer scopes are MOA now, and even then really only the ones made by US companies. So its pretty much a US only thing. When you get a hankering for some nice German glass down the road you will already be an expert on mil/mil reticles.
mil FTW.
As long as your reticle and turrets match, it's really personal preference.
Milling a target for range has become more of a schoolhouse exercise than a practical one. By the time you really need a very accurate range because of small danger space, milling isn't accurate enough to get you there consistently anyway.
Your reticle serves as a yardstick to measure how far off you are from point of aim, so you just measure the distance using your reticle and dial that number onto your turret. It works the same in mil/mil or moa moa. If you're just starting I'd say start with Mil and get used to it, it's nice when someone has a spotting scope with a reticle (most are mil) and you can work off their calls without exploding your brain on conversions.
Milling a target for range has become more of a schoolhouse exercise than a practical one. By the time you really need a very accurate range because of small danger space, milling isn't accurate enough to get you there consistently anyway.
Your reticle serves as a yardstick to measure how far off you are from point of aim, so you just measure the distance using your reticle and dial that number onto your turret. It works the same in mil/mil or moa moa. If you're just starting I'd say start with Mil and get used to it, it's nice when someone has a spotting scope with a reticle (most are mil) and you can work off their calls without exploding your brain on conversions.
I would go mil/mil. Both are easy to use, but easier to sell mil/mil scope the next time you're ready to upgrade!!!
I guess my explanation wasn't very good. Both systems work well but here's a little different way to look at it.
A 308 180 grain bullet at 2600 FPS needs 8.9 moa adjustment to be on target at 400 yards, as far as I know moa scopes can't make an 8.9 adjustment. They can come close but at 1000 yards or more that slight difference will make the bullet impact at a different place.
That same bullet in mills will have an adjustment of 8.9 on a mil scope. Mil scopes can make that adjustment exactly and moa scopes can not. At extreme distance the mil scope will be more accurate.
from my experience mil scopes are better for shooting extreme distance.
A 308 180 grain bullet at 2600 FPS needs 8.9 moa adjustment to be on target at 400 yards, as far as I know moa scopes can't make an 8.9 adjustment. They can come close but at 1000 yards or more that slight difference will make the bullet impact at a different place.
That same bullet in mills will have an adjustment of 8.9 on a mil scope. Mil scopes can make that adjustment exactly and moa scopes can not. At extreme distance the mil scope will be more accurate.
from my experience mil scopes are better for shooting extreme distance.
This makes no sense. 8.9 MOA is a lot different that 8.9 Mils.
either way you cut it, MOA allows for finer adjustment.
not trying to be a dick, just staiting the facts.
IMO Mil/Mil is far more practical. No, a mil is not as precise as 1 MOA. You're talking 3.6" vs 1" @ 100 yards. But, most scope turrets are 1/10 Mil which brings the gap a little closer when adjusting with turrets, to .36" per click vs. .25 with most MOA scopes.
It's very very simple and I'd imagine in some situations, converting to MOA in the heat of the moment would not be something most would prefer to do. I started with an MOA turret/Mil reticle, it was a little cumbersome at times. But, to each their own. I've talked to plenty of guys who like the MOA system.
When you spot your impact with a mil/mil scope, you simply see how many mils it was off with regards to windage or elevation, no matter what distance it is, that's the adjustment that needs to be made (as long as you are on a given magnification or have an FFP scope). So you're 2 mils low and 1 mil left in your reticle? Dial in 2 mils of elevation and 1 mil of right on your turrets.
It's kind of like the metric system vs SAE, you may like one more than the other, but I think we can all agree which system our brains naturally adopt more easily. Basically, what I'm saying is, if you have to ask the question, you're probably better off with mil/mil, as many of the guys who prefer MOA simply learned that system and are used to it.
It's very very simple and I'd imagine in some situations, converting to MOA in the heat of the moment would not be something most would prefer to do. I started with an MOA turret/Mil reticle, it was a little cumbersome at times. But, to each their own. I've talked to plenty of guys who like the MOA system.
When you spot your impact with a mil/mil scope, you simply see how many mils it was off with regards to windage or elevation, no matter what distance it is, that's the adjustment that needs to be made (as long as you are on a given magnification or have an FFP scope). So you're 2 mils low and 1 mil left in your reticle? Dial in 2 mils of elevation and 1 mil of right on your turrets.
It's kind of like the metric system vs SAE, you may like one more than the other, but I think we can all agree which system our brains naturally adopt more easily. Basically, what I'm saying is, if you have to ask the question, you're probably better off with mil/mil, as many of the guys who prefer MOA simply learned that system and are used to it.
Another angle to look at when deciding is, think down the road at what gear you may buy in the future. spotting scope, will it have a reticle and what reticles are avaliable, range finder? vectronix uses mil based reticles. etc etc. you want it all to match. I sold my one moa/moa scope a year ago and now everything i own is in mil/mil, range finder, spotting scope, and all rifle scopes. something to think about.
CJG
CJG
This isn't quite correct. Suppose your bullet drops precisely 8.75 MOA at a certain range? How are you going to dial that in exactly with your mil scope?
Think of it this way. Mrads and MOA are both angular measurement units. Like inches and centimeters. A centimeter is by definition shorter than an inch. An MOA is by definition a smaller angle than an Mrad. 1/4 MOA is smaller than .1 Mrad. 1/8 MOA is smaller than .05 Mrad.
If your Mrad scope has .1 Mrad turrets, then you have the coarsest clicks out of any commonly available long range scopes, not the finest. The order is .1 Mrad > 1/4 MOA > .05 Mrad > 1/8 MOA from coarsest to finest.
You will be able to center your group within +/- half of your scope adjustment unit. Choose your units accordingly. The smaller the target, the more likely that 1/8 MOA is the right choice, all else equal.
LMAO!
That's probably the most truthful post about contractors that I've read on the Hide this week.
Welcome aboard!
First thing, STOP THINKING IN INCHES, FEET, CM OR SUCH CRAP.
You figure/learn your dope. You range and set the proper dope. You shoot. You see in the scope that you missed by X mils or MOA, and you adjust THAT MUCH IN MIL OR MOA, not inches, feet, cm, yards, furlongs, miles, meters, etc.
If you shoot with others, that will spot for you, having the same measurement system helps.
Mils and MOA are neither metric or English. Both are angles.
You figure/learn your dope. You range and set the proper dope. You shoot. You see in the scope that you missed by X mils or MOA, and you adjust THAT MUCH IN MIL OR MOA, not inches, feet, cm, yards, furlongs, miles, meters, etc.
If you shoot with others, that will spot for you, having the same measurement system helps.
Mils and MOA are neither metric or English. Both are angles.
My shooting is confined to a one way square range.
I love my mil/mil scope now that I have finally gotten my NPOA down to the point I can see my impacts and pretty much call my shots.
Pick up hole in target, adjust accordingly. I'm even starting to get a handle on wind calls now.
I'm moving my MOA scope to a once a year hunting gun and getting another mil/mil for my REPR. I have one on my AO AX now and man, it has really made things easy.
I love my mil/mil scope now that I have finally gotten my NPOA down to the point I can see my impacts and pretty much call my shots.
Pick up hole in target, adjust accordingly. I'm even starting to get a handle on wind calls now.
I'm moving my MOA scope to a once a year hunting gun and getting another mil/mil for my REPR. I have one on my AO AX now and man, it has really made things easy.
still wrong...ask more questions...give less advice...maybe u dont know how to use MOA but someone proficient with it would have no problem dialing in the finer adjustments in MOA AT ANY RANGE...your whole argument that the relationship changes at 'extreme distance' is retarded and u clearly dont understand what u are talkin about...just stop
i was reading thru this post getting ready to link to my thread. beat me to it! trevman, refer to post #116 in the thread notso posted.
also, these threads tend to get out of hand with the discussion of the linear measurement value (inches/metric) compared to the angle value (MOA/MIL). read them, they are good for some background info, but don't get caught up in them.
go with a FFP and use the ruler in front of your eyes. it really is that simple. we are always trying to quantify things so we can understand them. this is why we want to know, "how many inches am i off?". well, in a tactical situation, or in a competition, you can't call timeout, run down field to measure your target. so when you see your splash (which i have yet to do) or you see your shot is off from POA on your target paper, look thru the scope. it will tell you what you need to know and just dial it in.
i have actually stopped using targets with the grid layout on them for this very reason. at the end of the day, then measure your group size with a ruler so you can quantify to yourself the 2" group at 300yds.
You are correct that 1 moa is a smaller angular measurement than 1 mil but the mil is broken down into 10 units and an moa is broken down into 4 units ( if it's 1/4 inch per click ) of measure. If you take 3.4 and divide it by 10 you should come up with .34 ( I think ) which is very close to 1/4 of an moa. If you are using a scope with a mill dot reticle and moa turits it becomes more difficult to make the conversion to moa. Another issue is that for extreme range shooting an moa scope will run out of tracking before a scope with mil adjustments simply because the moa scope is roughly 1 inch at 100 yards and the mil scope has a larger adjustment at 1 mil (3.4 inches ).
I have never seen a scope on a sniper rifle with 1/8 moa adjustments, I have seen 1/8 adjustments on varmints scopes.
I was trained on the moa system and after using the mil/mil system there's no way I will ever go back.
also, stop thinking in imperial and metric. at the range, it is no longer an inch or a CM, it is now a MIL or a MOA...period.
as far as MIL or MOA, i choose MIL. to me, it seemed the formulas were easier. i'll post the formulas later tonight. run some hypothetical numbers thru them and see which one is easier to YOU. that was my deciding factor.
i was a drafstman for 5 years, so i thought i was going to like the MOA better. but once i realized to stop thinking in inches, it was an easy transition.
hope this helps.
PM me if you have questions.
as far as MIL or MOA, i choose MIL. to me, it seemed the formulas were easier. i'll post the formulas later tonight. run some hypothetical numbers thru them and see which one is easier to YOU. that was my deciding factor.
i was a drafstman for 5 years, so i thought i was going to like the MOA better. but once i realized to stop thinking in inches, it was an easy transition.
hope this helps.
PM me if you have questions.
That's my point , you would have to do a conversion to mils. if your using a mil scope with mil reticle you can make a perfect adjustment because 1 mil is broken down into 10 units of measure. 1 moa is usually broken down into 1/4 units of measure. In mils you can make adjustments in 10th and in moa it has to be 1/4 adjustments. If your ballistic calculator tells you to make an adjustment at 3.9 moa you can't dial that adjustment into an moa scope but if it's in mills you can dial that same adjustment perfectly. You can round it off to 4 moa but at extreme range you will be shooting over your target. Rounding it off works well at 6 or 7 hundred yards but when thing get out past 1200 yards or more rounding it off will have a huge difference where your bullet impacts.
Trust me, mil/mil scopes are the way to go for very long range shooting. Also, I have seen moa scopes run out of tracking at extreme range and mil scopes not.
Corey4
I have been trying to say the same thing but they just don't seem to under stand. Like I said before I was trained in moa but when I started using mils a huge light went on in my head telling me how easy this is.
I predict in the not to distant future you will not see an moa scope in the U.S. military, I bet there isn't many in use now.
I have been trying to say the same thing but they just don't seem to under stand. Like I said before I was trained in moa but when I started using mils a huge light went on in my head telling me how easy this is.
I predict in the not to distant future you will not see an moa scope in the U.S. military, I bet there isn't many in use now.
I'll take any amount of money on that bet you want to place, you name the odds you want and I get to place my money down.
Graham,
I am pretty new to the hide, but I have noticed that I can always count on you to show up with some pwnage. The humor is appreciated by more than just myself I'm sure.
Like I said earlier to the OP, if you have to ask this question, you're better off going mil/mil. Would you guys agree, that mil/mil is the most intuitive system? I say this because, it involves no memorization or calculation.
I mean absolutely no offense or ill will towards the MOA supporters. This is an issue of tomato vs. tomaaaaato. I know if I was learning everything over again, though, I'd have a much better time with mil/mil. And now here is my .02.
Your argument has been proven wrong numerous times already in this thread. nobody is arguing about which scope is better.....they both have their pros and cons. The issue is with the measurement. MOA WILL BE A FINER ADJUSTMENT THAN A MIL. PERIOD!!! it doesn't matter if it's at 100yds or 1300yds. 1/4 moa is a smaller adjustment than 1/10 mil PERIOD!
again.....you're talking out your ass!
I've shot plenty of scopes with a Mil Reticle and MOA turrets.....I know many people that have and have zero problems. it's just math. 3.43 MOA per mil. simple!
bottom line, it doesn't matter who has the finer adjustments, just shoot! If you're using an MOA scope and you miss by "X" amount of inches, then adjust "X" amount of moa
if you're using mil and you miss by .5 mils...then you adjust by .5mils
and if you think there will be no MOA scopes in the military then you are sorely mistaken. Minutes is still the core foundation of our military's sniper schools.
Last edited:
I can tolerate the incorrect assertion that mils aren't metric because it really doesn't matter if they are or not. I can even tolerate the idea that people should stop thinking linearly, even though it's a necessary skill for iron sights and non-graduated scopes. Different strokes for different folks - these are fine points to be sure.
But one thing that is absolutely indisputable and not subject to any debate whatsoever is the mechanical fact that 1/4 MOA is a finer adjustment than .1 mrad.
Always.
But one thing that is absolutely indisputable and not subject to any debate whatsoever is the mechanical fact that 1/4 MOA is a finer adjustment than .1 mrad.
Always.
