Rifle Scopes What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
- Thread starter minsane
- Start date
- Tags
- difference mil moa
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
are you serious?
are you serious?
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Try the FAQ page at the top of this forum.
Try the FAQ page at the top of this forum.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
minsane. if you are new to this you should find the search engine and just experiment with your question in several ways. You'll find a ton of reading, and some links to simple mathematics that will have you comfortable in no time. Seriously, there is more in the archives, from simple to detailed, than you can see on a quick perusal. It's all here.
minsane. if you are new to this you should find the search engine and just experiment with your question in several ways. You'll find a ton of reading, and some links to simple mathematics that will have you comfortable in no time. Seriously, there is more in the archives, from simple to detailed, than you can see on a quick perusal. It's all here.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Thanks for showing me where to go to DMG308. It is appreciated.
Yes, I was serious EWOAF and thanks for the warm welcome. This is my second post in this forum. Your one word comment was not witty or at all helpful. What was the point? We should share our knowledge and not put others down. One of the most gratifying times that I had in my shooting experience was showing a new guy that had just inherited a new rifle how to sight in his MOA scope and hold and shoot his new rifle. He did not have a clue. Passing on the knowledge that I had from years of shooting by asking questions and getting good advice from good people. The man was appreciative and when I went back the next day the range officer asked where I had gained all my knowledge of guns. I responded years of shooting, good people, and the internet.
We all need to start someplace. Let's be kind to each other.
Thanks for showing me where to go to DMG308. It is appreciated.
Yes, I was serious EWOAF and thanks for the warm welcome. This is my second post in this forum. Your one word comment was not witty or at all helpful. What was the point? We should share our knowledge and not put others down. One of the most gratifying times that I had in my shooting experience was showing a new guy that had just inherited a new rifle how to sight in his MOA scope and hold and shoot his new rifle. He did not have a clue. Passing on the knowledge that I had from years of shooting by asking questions and getting good advice from good people. The man was appreciative and when I went back the next day the range officer asked where I had gained all my knowledge of guns. I responded years of shooting, good people, and the internet.
We all need to start someplace. Let's be kind to each other.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Welcome to the Hide.
Here you go read this:
http://www.snipershide.com/node/1
GC
Welcome to the Hide.
Here you go read this:
http://www.snipershide.com/node/1
GC
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Minsane,
If you look down at my signature you will see a link "Search Snipers Hide the easy way" Click on it my friend, and it will help you more than you ever wanted. It's a custom Google search link that searches within the Hide itself. I got it from one of the other members in the Hide.
Believe me it works really, really, good, I use it all the time.
Enjoy,
-Pat
Minsane,
If you look down at my signature you will see a link "Search Snipers Hide the easy way" Click on it my friend, and it will help you more than you ever wanted. It's a custom Google search link that searches within the Hide itself. I got it from one of the other members in the Hide.
Believe me it works really, really, good, I use it all the time.
Enjoy,
-Pat
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
fuck the search engine! whats the point of this site if somebody cant ask for help! MOA knobs are usually 1/8 1/4 or 1/2 moa adjustments. A milradian is 3.6 moa and they usually adjust in .1 mil. thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.
fuck the search engine! whats the point of this site if somebody cant ask for help! MOA knobs are usually 1/8 1/4 or 1/2 moa adjustments. A milradian is 3.6 moa and they usually adjust in .1 mil. thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
Well, no. First of all, one mil equals 3.438 MOA, not 3.6.
There is nothing "metric" about mils. Both milliradians, IPHY (Inches Per Hundred Yards) and MOA are measurements of angle which have <span style="font-weight: bold">nothing</span> whatsoever to do with any system of linear measure.
There are two times Pi radians in a circle, and a milliradian is simply one-thousands of a radian. One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance from the vertex.
In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
1 yard at 1000 yards.
1 meter at 1000 meters.
1 mile at 1000 miles.
1 league at 1000 leagues.
1 fathom at 1000 fathoms.
1 inch at 1000 inches.
1 foot at 1000 feet.
1 lightyear at 1000 lightyears.
1 attoparsec at 1000 attoparsecs.
3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
Well, no. First of all, one mil equals 3.438 MOA, not 3.6.
There is nothing "metric" about mils. Both milliradians, IPHY (Inches Per Hundred Yards) and MOA are measurements of angle which have <span style="font-weight: bold">nothing</span> whatsoever to do with any system of linear measure.
There are two times Pi radians in a circle, and a milliradian is simply one-thousands of a radian. One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance from the vertex.
In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
1 yard at 1000 yards.
1 meter at 1000 meters.
1 mile at 1000 miles.
1 league at 1000 leagues.
1 fathom at 1000 fathoms.
1 inch at 1000 inches.
1 foot at 1000 feet.
1 lightyear at 1000 lightyears.
1 attoparsec at 1000 attoparsecs.
3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Surgeon-Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> A milradian is 3.6 moa and they usually adjust in .1 mil. thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
The only accurate part of that statement is "they usually adjust in .1 mil" - if you were refering to scopes that is.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Surgeon-Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> A milradian is 3.6 moa and they usually adjust in .1 mil. thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
The only accurate part of that statement is "they usually adjust in .1 mil" - if you were refering to scopes that is.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Holy shit Lindy, well done! You are way over my head on that one, I'm just tryin to help the guy out instead of saying " use the search engine" like everybody else. I use moa knobs so I'm no expert on mils, but I did stay at the holiday inn last night.
Holy shit Lindy, well done! You are way over my head on that one, I'm just tryin to help the guy out instead of saying " use the search engine" like everybody else. I use moa knobs so I'm no expert on mils, but I did stay at the holiday inn last night.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
Well, no. First of all, one mil equals 3.438 MOA, not 3.6.
There is nothing "metric" about mils. Both milliradians, IPHY (Inches Per Hundred Yards) and MOA are measurements of angle which have <span style="font-weight: bold">nothing</span> whatsoever to do with any system of linear measure.
Are you trying to blow the kids head up?
Nice explanation for a journeyman, but for an FNG?
There are two times Pi radians in a circle, and a milliradian is simply one-thousands of a radian. One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance from the vertex.
In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
1 yard at 1000 yards.
1 meter at 1000 meters.
1 mile at 1000 miles.
1 league at 1000 leagues.
1 fathom at 1000 fathoms.
1 inch at 1000 inches.
1 foot at 1000 feet.
1 lightyear at 1000 lightyears.
1 attoparsec at 1000 attoparsecs.
3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
Well, no. First of all, one mil equals 3.438 MOA, not 3.6.
There is nothing "metric" about mils. Both milliradians, IPHY (Inches Per Hundred Yards) and MOA are measurements of angle which have <span style="font-weight: bold">nothing</span> whatsoever to do with any system of linear measure.
Are you trying to blow the kids head up?
Nice explanation for a journeyman, but for an FNG?
There are two times Pi radians in a circle, and a milliradian is simply one-thousands of a radian. One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance from the vertex.
In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
1 yard at 1000 yards.
1 meter at 1000 meters.
1 mile at 1000 miles.
1 league at 1000 leagues.
1 fathom at 1000 fathoms.
1 inch at 1000 inches.
1 foot at 1000 feet.
1 lightyear at 1000 lightyears.
1 attoparsec at 1000 attoparsecs.
3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
</div></div>
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
The notion that fractional milliradian clicks has something to do with measuring range in meters is so widespread that when the Marine Corps switched their sniper rifles to scopes which adjusted in 0.1 mil clicks, a serving sniper was quoted in the press complaining about having to convert yards to meters.
I consider it useful to correct the faulty thinking which leads to that error.
If that is too complex for new shooters, so be it, as it's not only new shooters who read this board. And the new shooters might just as well start out on the right foot.
It takes little effort on my part - most of that post was inserted from a file which resides on my computer, as this subject is a FAQ.
The notion that fractional milliradian clicks has something to do with measuring range in meters is so widespread that when the Marine Corps switched their sniper rifles to scopes which adjusted in 0.1 mil clicks, a serving sniper was quoted in the press complaining about having to convert yards to meters.
I consider it useful to correct the faulty thinking which leads to that error.
If that is too complex for new shooters, so be it, as it's not only new shooters who read this board. And the new shooters might just as well start out on the right foot.
It takes little effort on my part - most of that post was inserted from a file which resides on my computer, as this subject is a FAQ.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Hello Minsane,
If you would like to give us a call at our store I would be glad to have someone discuss the differences between the two systems. The goal is to hit what you want to hit and both MOA and Mil will get you there. Call if we can help, we sell both systems every day. 985-340-2988
Chris
SportOptics.com
Hello Minsane,
If you would like to give us a call at our store I would be glad to have someone discuss the differences between the two systems. The goal is to hit what you want to hit and both MOA and Mil will get you there. Call if we can help, we sell both systems every day. 985-340-2988
Chris
SportOptics.com
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
The way I look at it:
1 moa is 1" at 100 yards and 2" at 200 yards.
.5 moa is .5" at 100 yards and 1" at 200 yards.
1 miliradians is 3.6" at 100 yards and 7.2" at 200 yards.
.5 milirads is 1.8" at 100 yards and 3.6" at 200 yards
If I zero at 200 yards with the scope mounted 2" above the bore, the
7mmMag needs 7.9 moa = 2.2 mils = 49.7" elevation at 600 yards, while the
7mm-08 needs 9.9 moa = 2.7 mils = 62.2" elevation at 600 yards.
The way I look at it:
1 moa is 1" at 100 yards and 2" at 200 yards.
.5 moa is .5" at 100 yards and 1" at 200 yards.
1 miliradians is 3.6" at 100 yards and 7.2" at 200 yards.
.5 milirads is 1.8" at 100 yards and 3.6" at 200 yards
If I zero at 200 yards with the scope mounted 2" above the bore, the
7mmMag needs 7.9 moa = 2.2 mils = 49.7" elevation at 600 yards, while the
7mm-08 needs 9.9 moa = 2.7 mils = 62.2" elevation at 600 yards.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
I have a MOA\MOA scope, that was a mistake on my part IMHO, MIL\MIL is such an easier system, it does'nt matter how many inches of drop a bullet has, what matters is what is the easiest adjustment to make to hit your intended target, MIL\MIL is it.
I have a MOA\MOA scope, that was a mistake on my part IMHO, MIL\MIL is such an easier system, it does'nt matter how many inches of drop a bullet has, what matters is what is the easiest adjustment to make to hit your intended target, MIL\MIL is it.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Isnt this pocket protector bi-focal wearing math loving i couldnt get laid in a mexican whore house with a fistful of hunderd doller bill post over yet?
Isnt this pocket protector bi-focal wearing math loving i couldnt get laid in a mexican whore house with a fistful of hunderd doller bill post over yet?
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
Well, no. First of all, one mil equals 3.438 MOA, not 3.6.
In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
1 yard at 1000 yards.
1 meter at 1000 meters.
3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
</div></div>
Very informative post. But something confuses me. Doesn't it say there that it's 3.6 inches at 3600 inches(100 yards), or very close to 3.6 MOA. But above you said it's 3.438, which I thought to be true. Is it because 1" isn't exactly an MOA at 100 yards?
BTW, I'm only asking because I'm curious. I'm not pointing anything out or anything like that...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thats good if you convert every thing in meters and like ranging with mildot.</div></div>
Well, no. First of all, one mil equals 3.438 MOA, not 3.6.
In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:
1 yard at 1000 yards.
1 meter at 1000 meters.
3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).
</div></div>
Very informative post. But something confuses me. Doesn't it say there that it's 3.6 inches at 3600 inches(100 yards), or very close to 3.6 MOA. But above you said it's 3.438, which I thought to be true. Is it because 1" isn't exactly an MOA at 100 yards?
BTW, I'm only asking because I'm curious. I'm not pointing anything out or anything like that...
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
A Mil subtends 3.6" at 100 yards
A Minute Of Angle subtends 1.047" at 100 yards
3.6 / 1.047= 3.438
So...1 Mil = 3.438 MOA at 100 yards
A Mil subtends 3.6" at 100 yards
A Minute Of Angle subtends 1.047" at 100 yards
3.6 / 1.047= 3.438
So...1 Mil = 3.438 MOA at 100 yards
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Thanks, Tony! I spent the day at the ranch fixing the mover - again.
Thanks, Tony! I spent the day at the ranch fixing the mover - again.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
You know, Lindy always goes on about how mils aren't metric, but they sure do play nice with the metric system. On the other hand, they don't play so nice with the standard system of measurement. I was brought up with standard. I think in standard. I know the average size of things in standard. I can judge size of things in standard. I just can't see myself using some weirdo conversion factor in order to use mils with inches and yards. 1/10th of a yard is just weird.
I prefer IPHY... It makes sense to me.
You know, Lindy always goes on about how mils aren't metric, but they sure do play nice with the metric system. On the other hand, they don't play so nice with the standard system of measurement. I was brought up with standard. I think in standard. I know the average size of things in standard. I can judge size of things in standard. I just can't see myself using some weirdo conversion factor in order to use mils with inches and yards. 1/10th of a yard is just weird.
I prefer IPHY... It makes sense to me.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
My small contribution. Was it the same problem as last time Lindy.
My small contribution. Was it the same problem as last time Lindy.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: He Shoot Me</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Minsane,
If you look down at my signature you will see a link "Search Snipers Hide the easy way" Click on it my friend, and it will help you more than you ever wanted. It's a custom Google search link that searches within the Hide itself. I got it from one of the other members in the Hide.
Believe me it works really, really, good, I use it all the time.
Enjoy,
-Pat </div></div>
Wow, a search function that is actually useful! The info on this forum is amazing, but the standard search tool is probably the worst I've ever seen on any site.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: He Shoot Me</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Minsane,
If you look down at my signature you will see a link "Search Snipers Hide the easy way" Click on it my friend, and it will help you more than you ever wanted. It's a custom Google search link that searches within the Hide itself. I got it from one of the other members in the Hide.
Believe me it works really, really, good, I use it all the time.
Enjoy,
-Pat </div></div>
Wow, a search function that is actually useful! The info on this forum is amazing, but the standard search tool is probably the worst I've ever seen on any site.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I prefer IPHY.</div></div>
I think IPHY is fine for a hashmarked reticle, especially if the hashmarks are at 2 IPHY intervals on the primary crosshairs. I used to make good use of the IPHY ranging reticle in the corner of the Horus H25 reticle.
However, I prefer Gen II mildots for visibility, and, so far, no one has come up with a reticle that approaches the utility of a mildot for me.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I prefer IPHY.</div></div>
I think IPHY is fine for a hashmarked reticle, especially if the hashmarks are at 2 IPHY intervals on the primary crosshairs. I used to make good use of the IPHY ranging reticle in the corner of the Horus H25 reticle.
However, I prefer Gen II mildots for visibility, and, so far, no one has come up with a reticle that approaches the utility of a mildot for me.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Salmonaxe. That's the exact way I see it also. When I see a target I just can't see wasting the time converting ANYTHING! Yes I understand the more you do it the faster and easier it is but it's still wasted time. I have no bias in this post I just don't understand, if someone could prove to me it's easier I would be happy to try it!
Salmonaxe. That's the exact way I see it also. When I see a target I just can't see wasting the time converting ANYTHING! Yes I understand the more you do it the faster and easier it is but it's still wasted time. I have no bias in this post I just don't understand, if someone could prove to me it's easier I would be happy to try it!
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
One of the articles on the home page of this forum is very well written and informative on this subject "Using a Mil Based Scope - Easy Transition". There is no need to translate the angular measurement (MOA or MIL) into a linear meaurement-that is the basic concept with either of these methods. You shoot-observe how many MOA or MIL's you're off-adjust, & shoot again. You are adjusting for the angular error, not inches or meters. Calculations are only required if you are using the reticle for ranging.
One of the articles on the home page of this forum is very well written and informative on this subject "Using a Mil Based Scope - Easy Transition". There is no need to translate the angular measurement (MOA or MIL) into a linear meaurement-that is the basic concept with either of these methods. You shoot-observe how many MOA or MIL's you're off-adjust, & shoot again. You are adjusting for the angular error, not inches or meters. Calculations are only required if you are using the reticle for ranging.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
No offense Salmon or Surgeon, but the fact that you're making the observations you're making tell me you've never tried a scope that has the reticle calibrated to the knobs, as in moa/moa, or mil/mil.
You simply don't do any converting at all, you measure what you see in the scope and then dial it, that simple.
I ran a moa adjust mil reticle scope for years before actually seeing the light on the mil/mil system. Once you get that conversion dilemma out of your head, it's so easy you'll wonder why you took so long to make the switch.
I would recommend the mil/mil system although there are guys who use moa/moa with equal ease. The only reason I recommend mil/mil is because it is much more common than the moa version by a wide margin, based on my experience shooting matches and training down at Rifles Only. Frank, Jacob, or Lindy may be able to comment on the percentage of one over the other based on their experience.
No offense Salmon or Surgeon, but the fact that you're making the observations you're making tell me you've never tried a scope that has the reticle calibrated to the knobs, as in moa/moa, or mil/mil.
You simply don't do any converting at all, you measure what you see in the scope and then dial it, that simple.
I ran a moa adjust mil reticle scope for years before actually seeing the light on the mil/mil system. Once you get that conversion dilemma out of your head, it's so easy you'll wonder why you took so long to make the switch.
I would recommend the mil/mil system although there are guys who use moa/moa with equal ease. The only reason I recommend mil/mil is because it is much more common than the moa version by a wide margin, based on my experience shooting matches and training down at Rifles Only. Frank, Jacob, or Lindy may be able to comment on the percentage of one over the other based on their experience.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Why do you have to convert anything, there is a ruler in front of your face, it's called a reticle... there is absolutely no need to know how many "inches' or anything else if you are using mils, it's a mil. Look at the reticle, if it shows 1 Mil, the distance is 1 Mil, doesn't matter if its 832.3656 yards away, the answer is still 1 mil. That is all you ever need to know when shooting and correcting the impact.
If you shot at 100 yards to zero your rifle and it hits "somewhere" off the center, simply look through the scope and read the reticle, you don't even have to get up. You seen you .5 Mils right and .8 mils up to move to center you dial 8 clicks up and 5 clicks right, what could be easier. You don't have to measure, you don't need a grid on the paper, you don't need anything but a central aiming point in the middle of a blank sheet of paper... end of story.
Just because someone doesn't understand the concept that the reticle is a calibrated ruler, and that a Mil is a Mil doesn't mean it takes any form of extra effort.
Maybe take a lesson then comment on the "difficulties" of a system.
Why do you have to convert anything, there is a ruler in front of your face, it's called a reticle... there is absolutely no need to know how many "inches' or anything else if you are using mils, it's a mil. Look at the reticle, if it shows 1 Mil, the distance is 1 Mil, doesn't matter if its 832.3656 yards away, the answer is still 1 mil. That is all you ever need to know when shooting and correcting the impact.
If you shot at 100 yards to zero your rifle and it hits "somewhere" off the center, simply look through the scope and read the reticle, you don't even have to get up. You seen you .5 Mils right and .8 mils up to move to center you dial 8 clicks up and 5 clicks right, what could be easier. You don't have to measure, you don't need a grid on the paper, you don't need anything but a central aiming point in the middle of a blank sheet of paper... end of story.
Just because someone doesn't understand the concept that the reticle is a calibrated ruler, and that a Mil is a Mil doesn't mean it takes any form of extra effort.
Maybe take a lesson then comment on the "difficulties" of a system.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Tony,
I hear what your saying regarding the reticle and adjustment knobs the same whether it is mil or moa. I have a NF NXS with moa reticle and turrets. I find the moa reticle and adjustments easy to use but the general consensus here seems to indicate the mil reticle and turret easier to use than the moa system. Is there an easy explanation?
Tony,
I hear what your saying regarding the reticle and adjustment knobs the same whether it is mil or moa. I have a NF NXS with moa reticle and turrets. I find the moa reticle and adjustments easy to use but the general consensus here seems to indicate the mil reticle and turret easier to use than the moa system. Is there an easy explanation?
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
I have an SN3 with IPHY knobs and the PCMOA reticle. I have a falcon FFP with 1/10th mil knobs and an ML16 reticle. I have a Nightforce with 1/4MOA knobs and NP-R2 reticle. All these are matched turrets to reticles.
My issue is just purely a ranging thing. Take a clay pigeon for example. I roughly guessed it's size at 4". It's actual size is 4.25". I wouldn't be able to guess it's size in cm. If I did, I'd probably be way off and guess between 7-9cm. When it's actually 10.7cm. Because of this lack of accuracy in size judgment, I feel more comfortable using mils with yards and inches. Then there is some conversion factor involved. Because of this, I was annoyed with the Falcon and found myself wishing for it in IPHY.
If I was using the reticle and knobs purely to make corrections, and I knew my dope based off those measurements, than I don't see why it would matter what angular measurement I was using. Just as long as both the turrets and the reticle matched.
I could use a gradian scope. Or I could have one in RCPHBE(Rubber chickens per hundred busts of Elvis). Or maybe we could do it using a measurement of light, HzPkHz. (Hertz per Kilo-Hertz)
I have an SN3 with IPHY knobs and the PCMOA reticle. I have a falcon FFP with 1/10th mil knobs and an ML16 reticle. I have a Nightforce with 1/4MOA knobs and NP-R2 reticle. All these are matched turrets to reticles.
My issue is just purely a ranging thing. Take a clay pigeon for example. I roughly guessed it's size at 4". It's actual size is 4.25". I wouldn't be able to guess it's size in cm. If I did, I'd probably be way off and guess between 7-9cm. When it's actually 10.7cm. Because of this lack of accuracy in size judgment, I feel more comfortable using mils with yards and inches. Then there is some conversion factor involved. Because of this, I was annoyed with the Falcon and found myself wishing for it in IPHY.
If I was using the reticle and knobs purely to make corrections, and I knew my dope based off those measurements, than I don't see why it would matter what angular measurement I was using. Just as long as both the turrets and the reticle matched.
I could use a gradian scope. Or I could have one in RCPHBE(Rubber chickens per hundred busts of Elvis). Or maybe we could do it using a measurement of light, HzPkHz. (Hertz per Kilo-Hertz)
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...general consensus here seems to indicate the mil reticle and turret easier to use than the moa system.</div></div>
Well, I'm not Tony, and I don't play him on TV. If I tried, I suspect he'd sue me for defamation of character. But, I digress...
I think a MOA/MOA, IPHY/IPHY, or mil/mil system are all equally easy to use. The key is that the adjustments are in the same system the reticle is graduated in.
I've just never found a MOA or IPHY reticle I prefer to Gen II mildots.
And, I think you should have consistency, i.e., all of your scopes should be in the same system, even if the reticles are a little different. Learn one system, and learn it well.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...general consensus here seems to indicate the mil reticle and turret easier to use than the moa system.</div></div>
Well, I'm not Tony, and I don't play him on TV. If I tried, I suspect he'd sue me for defamation of character. But, I digress...
I think a MOA/MOA, IPHY/IPHY, or mil/mil system are all equally easy to use. The key is that the adjustments are in the same system the reticle is graduated in.
I've just never found a MOA or IPHY reticle I prefer to Gen II mildots.
And, I think you should have consistency, i.e., all of your scopes should be in the same system, even if the reticles are a little different. Learn one system, and learn it well.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
The easy explanation as the ease of the Mil system over the Moa system is simple.
There is no standard reticle for MOA or standard subtension, you get reticles with 1MOA lines, 2 MOA lines, 5 MOA lines and yet the scopes are usually 1/4MOA adjustments, so the reticles and the turrets match, but they don't.
You can't break an MOA reticle down far enough to be correct,(.25MOA) and every one has a different MOA type reticle, no two are really the same across the board.
Mils are consistent, both in European scope, US scopes, regardless, of who makes it or what type, (Except for the dumbasses at Leupold) so that the reticles are 1 Mil so you can break it up into 1/10th with both the reticle and turrets. Even if it has .5 Mil hash marks, it still works in 10ths.
MOA scopes don't work like this... as well many don't even know if they have IPHY or MOA, or if they are correct, so the errors are built in. We see it all the time, guys show up with one type and then when they actually go to use it, find out they have the other.
Consistency across the spectrum with Mil, not so much with MOA, its usually the catch all for either IPHY or TMOA.
The easy explanation as the ease of the Mil system over the Moa system is simple.
There is no standard reticle for MOA or standard subtension, you get reticles with 1MOA lines, 2 MOA lines, 5 MOA lines and yet the scopes are usually 1/4MOA adjustments, so the reticles and the turrets match, but they don't.
You can't break an MOA reticle down far enough to be correct,(.25MOA) and every one has a different MOA type reticle, no two are really the same across the board.
Mils are consistent, both in European scope, US scopes, regardless, of who makes it or what type, (Except for the dumbasses at Leupold) so that the reticles are 1 Mil so you can break it up into 1/10th with both the reticle and turrets. Even if it has .5 Mil hash marks, it still works in 10ths.
MOA scopes don't work like this... as well many don't even know if they have IPHY or MOA, or if they are correct, so the errors are built in. We see it all the time, guys show up with one type and then when they actually go to use it, find out they have the other.
Consistency across the spectrum with Mil, not so much with MOA, its usually the catch all for either IPHY or TMOA.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
A Ranging issue is a pure cop out at best...
1. How often do you "range" with your reticle... and for what reason.
2. Where are you ranging where you're not given the size of a target ?
Ever hear of a Mil Dot Master, bone simple no conversion...
Basically it sounds like you invented a reason to have an issue... cause one doesn't exist.
A Ranging issue is a pure cop out at best...
1. How often do you "range" with your reticle... and for what reason.
2. Where are you ranging where you're not given the size of a target ?
Ever hear of a Mil Dot Master, bone simple no conversion...
Basically it sounds like you invented a reason to have an issue... cause one doesn't exist.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Salmonaxe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
My issue is just purely a ranging thing. Take a clay pigeon for example. I roughly guessed it's size at 4". It's actual size is 4.25". I wouldn't be able to guess it's size in cm. If I did, I'd probably be way off and guess between 7-9cm. When it's actually 10.7cm. Because of this lack of accuracy in size judgment, I feel more comfortable using mils with yards and inches. Then there is some conversion factor involved. Because of this, I was annoyed with the Falcon and found myself wishing for it in IPHY.
</div></div>
size of target in INCHES x 27.778 / size of target in MILS = distance in yards. No need to know the size of the target in metric equivilants.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Salmonaxe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
My issue is just purely a ranging thing. Take a clay pigeon for example. I roughly guessed it's size at 4". It's actual size is 4.25". I wouldn't be able to guess it's size in cm. If I did, I'd probably be way off and guess between 7-9cm. When it's actually 10.7cm. Because of this lack of accuracy in size judgment, I feel more comfortable using mils with yards and inches. Then there is some conversion factor involved. Because of this, I was annoyed with the Falcon and found myself wishing for it in IPHY.
</div></div>
size of target in INCHES x 27.778 / size of target in MILS = distance in yards. No need to know the size of the target in metric equivilants.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dk-1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">size of target in INCHES x 27.778 / size of target in MILS = distance in yards. No need to know the size of the target in metric equivilants. </div></div>
Size of target in meters x 1000 / size of target in MILS = distance in meters.
Multiplying by 1000 beats the hell out of mulitiplying by 27.778 if you don't have a calculator at hand. But hey, I'm not a math genius and others might not see notice the difference.
PS: Of course you can just use yards instead of meters, but then you have to know your <span style="font-style: italic">target size in yards</span>. That's where the ease of use comes from, using the <span style="font-style: italic">same unit for target size and distance</span>.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dk-1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">size of target in INCHES x 27.778 / size of target in MILS = distance in yards. No need to know the size of the target in metric equivilants. </div></div>
Size of target in meters x 1000 / size of target in MILS = distance in meters.
Multiplying by 1000 beats the hell out of mulitiplying by 27.778 if you don't have a calculator at hand. But hey, I'm not a math genius and others might not see notice the difference.
PS: Of course you can just use yards instead of meters, but then you have to know your <span style="font-style: italic">target size in yards</span>. That's where the ease of use comes from, using the <span style="font-style: italic">same unit for target size and distance</span>.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: David S.</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dk-1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">size of target in INCHES x 27.778 / size of target in MILS = distance in yards. No need to know the size of the target in metric equivilants. </div></div>
Size of target in meters x 1000 / size of target in MILS = distance in meters.
Multiplying by 1000 beats the hell out of mulitiplying by 27.778 if you don't have a calculator at hand. But hey, I'm not a math genius and others might not see even notice the difference. </div></div>
Why not do it Millimeters than, size of the target is the range... or size in CM X 10, etc...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: David S.</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dk-1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">size of target in INCHES x 27.778 / size of target in MILS = distance in yards. No need to know the size of the target in metric equivilants. </div></div>
Size of target in meters x 1000 / size of target in MILS = distance in meters.
Multiplying by 1000 beats the hell out of mulitiplying by 27.778 if you don't have a calculator at hand. But hey, I'm not a math genius and others might not see even notice the difference.
Why not do it Millimeters than, size of the target is the range... or size in CM X 10, etc...
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Last weekend I went out to some old logging roads where it's okay to shoot. My buddy placed a bunch of sporting clays at unknown distances. Terrain was rough. Lots of brush, high and low spots and different types of wood. If a shot was a miss, it usually was not seen at all. It was very hard to just "tell" how far away any of them were. Going with my gut didn't work on range estimation. So, I used my PCMOA(First 10 hashmarks are 1MOA) reticle to roughly estimate range. It worked and it was fast.
If I didn't know the size of a target...I'd probably bust out my laser guide.
IPHY is just my personal preference. That's all I'm saying. Everything you say makes perfect sense to me. You're the expert here, so I'm listening.
Last weekend I went out to some old logging roads where it's okay to shoot. My buddy placed a bunch of sporting clays at unknown distances. Terrain was rough. Lots of brush, high and low spots and different types of wood. If a shot was a miss, it usually was not seen at all. It was very hard to just "tell" how far away any of them were. Going with my gut didn't work on range estimation. So, I used my PCMOA(First 10 hashmarks are 1MOA) reticle to roughly estimate range. It worked and it was fast.
If I didn't know the size of a target...I'd probably bust out my laser guide.
IPHY is just my personal preference. That's all I'm saying. Everything you say makes perfect sense to me. You're the expert here, so I'm listening.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Yeah, what all those other guys said.
Salmon, do you know what a Mildot Master is? It's a neat little slide rule type thing that will tell you what your range is when measuring anything from a 1.75" target all the way up to a 20' target. No conversions are necessary at all. You know what the target size it, range it, line up the target size with the mil reading and the distance is displayed. It works much faster than a calculator too.
Here's a link to the Mildot Master. http://www.mildot.com/
Yeah, what all those other guys said.
Salmon, do you know what a Mildot Master is? It's a neat little slide rule type thing that will tell you what your range is when measuring anything from a 1.75" target all the way up to a 20' target. No conversions are necessary at all. You know what the target size it, range it, line up the target size with the mil reading and the distance is displayed. It works much faster than a calculator too.
Here's a link to the Mildot Master. http://www.mildot.com/
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why not do it Millimeters than, size of the target is the range... or size in CM X 10, etc...</div></div>
Of course that's what it boils down to, I just used <span style="font-style: italic">meters</span> to point out how going all the way with the <span style="font-style: italic">metric</span> system simplifies things compared to using inches for target size and yards for distance. Pushing around a couple zeroes in your head is no big deal.
Personally I just memorize target sizes of interest (in fact in millimeters) and have a fixed value in my head that I just divide by the number of mils in the reticle to get the distance. A roedeer for example is a "650", so if it ist ~2 mils wide in the reticle the distance is 325 meters. The calculation doesn't get simpler than that.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why not do it Millimeters than, size of the target is the range... or size in CM X 10, etc...</div></div>
Of course that's what it boils down to, I just used <span style="font-style: italic">meters</span> to point out how going all the way with the <span style="font-style: italic">metric</span> system simplifies things compared to using inches for target size and yards for distance. Pushing around a couple zeroes in your head is no big deal.
Personally I just memorize target sizes of interest (in fact in millimeters) and have a fixed value in my head that I just divide by the number of mils in the reticle to get the distance. A roedeer for example is a "650", so if it ist ~2 mils wide in the reticle the distance is 325 meters. The calculation doesn't get simpler than that.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tburkes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah, what all those other guys said.
Salmon, do you know what a Mildot Master is? It's a neat little slide rule type thing that will tell you what your range is when measuring anything from a 1.75" target all the way up to a 20' target. No conversions are necessary at all. You know what the target size it, range it, line up the target size with the mil reading and the distance is displayed. It works much faster than a calculator too.
Here's a link to the Mildot Master. http://www.mildot.com/
</div></div>
And if have a MOA or even a IPHY scope, a MDM will still work, IPHY will require you to put a mark on it to range, MOA works off the rh side and range to target is read on the left.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tburkes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah, what all those other guys said.
Salmon, do you know what a Mildot Master is? It's a neat little slide rule type thing that will tell you what your range is when measuring anything from a 1.75" target all the way up to a 20' target. No conversions are necessary at all. You know what the target size it, range it, line up the target size with the mil reading and the distance is displayed. It works much faster than a calculator too.
Here's a link to the Mildot Master. http://www.mildot.com/
</div></div>
And if have a MOA or even a IPHY scope, a MDM will still work, IPHY will require you to put a mark on it to range, MOA works off the rh side and range to target is read on the left.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
I've been known to throw my $.02 in on every one of these discussions so why stop now!
As mentioned above, all three of IPHY, MOA, and Mrad are systems of angular measurements. All three will provide a reticle based means for making bullet impact adjustments by looking through the reticle and adjusting your turrets (which should match) to hit what you're shooting at.
The concern arises in how to use each system for linear measurements. Some say that angular and linear have no reason being in the same discussion but I personally feel that there is some merit to having some simple correspondence between the two. Therefore, mil/mil works much better with metric linear measurements. IPHY/IPHY works better for the US standard linear measurements. MOA/MOA are just the funky thing in the middle that doesn't work very well for this task (although they are "close" to 1" @ 100yds, there is enough of a margin with stacking to cause a problem down range). All of that said, once you're in the field with any of these, you are constantly dealing in fractional measurements so the math ends up being complicated anyway. But for those that round, mil/mil and IPHY/IPHY are superior for reticle based ranging in my opinion.
While I used to be a die hard IPHY user as of a month ago, there are a few things that have occurred recently that have made me rethink that decision and go the mil/mil route.
-There are simply more scopes offering mil/mil than IPHY/IPHY.
-There are lower cost options for quality optics with mil/mil
-I have really warmed to the idea of having adjustments in 1/10 values which easily corresponds to clicks in a mil/mil scope.
-There is more availability of quality spotters (both equipment and people) with mil based reticles.
I've been known to throw my $.02 in on every one of these discussions so why stop now!
As mentioned above, all three of IPHY, MOA, and Mrad are systems of angular measurements. All three will provide a reticle based means for making bullet impact adjustments by looking through the reticle and adjusting your turrets (which should match) to hit what you're shooting at.
The concern arises in how to use each system for linear measurements. Some say that angular and linear have no reason being in the same discussion but I personally feel that there is some merit to having some simple correspondence between the two. Therefore, mil/mil works much better with metric linear measurements. IPHY/IPHY works better for the US standard linear measurements. MOA/MOA are just the funky thing in the middle that doesn't work very well for this task (although they are "close" to 1" @ 100yds, there is enough of a margin with stacking to cause a problem down range). All of that said, once you're in the field with any of these, you are constantly dealing in fractional measurements so the math ends up being complicated anyway. But for those that round, mil/mil and IPHY/IPHY are superior for reticle based ranging in my opinion.
While I used to be a die hard IPHY user as of a month ago, there are a few things that have occurred recently that have made me rethink that decision and go the mil/mil route.
-There are simply more scopes offering mil/mil than IPHY/IPHY.
-There are lower cost options for quality optics with mil/mil
-I have really warmed to the idea of having adjustments in 1/10 values which easily corresponds to clicks in a mil/mil scope.
-There is more availability of quality spotters (both equipment and people) with mil based reticles.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
You get finer tuning with MOA adjustments than mil turrets. Esspecially if you have a 1/8 MOA turret.
You get finer tuning with MOA adjustments than mil turrets. Esspecially if you have a 1/8 MOA turret.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Doug Kelley</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You get finer tuning with MOA adjustments than mil turrets. Esspecially if you have a 1/8 MOA turret.</div></div>
What .11 of a inch ... thats the difference between .25 MOA and 1/10th a Mil
1/8 Minute adjustments have no business on a tactical scope what so ever.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Doug Kelley</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You get finer tuning with MOA adjustments than mil turrets. Esspecially if you have a 1/8 MOA turret.</div></div>
What .11 of a inch ... thats the difference between .25 MOA and 1/10th a Mil
1/8 Minute adjustments have no business on a tactical scope what so ever.
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
All this Mil/Mil talk has darn near got me ready to pull the trigger on a new scope . I have always used Leupold because its what I could afford . They have served me well but I see the need to move forward and a scope that has a reticle that matches the adjustment knobs seems like a pretty good idea no matter what you decide to use (mil/mil , moa/moa , whatever).
I may have to try out one of the Falcon Menace scopes just to get a taste of what its all about .
All this Mil/Mil talk has darn near got me ready to pull the trigger on a new scope . I have always used Leupold because its what I could afford . They have served me well but I see the need to move forward and a scope that has a reticle that matches the adjustment knobs seems like a pretty good idea no matter what you decide to use (mil/mil , moa/moa , whatever).
I may have to try out one of the Falcon Menace scopes just to get a taste of what its all about .
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
LOL, how about a scope with friction locking adjustments (no clicks) with a vernier scale so you could get 1/100th of an MOA. Make it a full 2MOA each turn, so you can get really precise. Make sure the vernier scale is on the forward side of the knob so that you have to use a mirror to read it. Oh yeah, and use Roman numerals just to be different.
(I keep meaning to get a mildot master... I'll bump it to the top of my list.)
LOL, how about a scope with friction locking adjustments (no clicks) with a vernier scale so you could get 1/100th of an MOA. Make it a full 2MOA each turn, so you can get really precise. Make sure the vernier scale is on the forward side of the knob so that you have to use a mirror to read it. Oh yeah, and use Roman numerals just to be different.
(I keep meaning to get a mildot master... I'll bump it to the top of my list.)
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
I run IPHY/IPHY, just because that was the first USO I got, then I got another.
If I were to do over I'd have gone GAP mil w/ .1 mil turrets.
(anyone have an SN3 and ST10 in mil that wants IPHY??)
I run IPHY/IPHY, just because that was the first USO I got, then I got another.
If I were to do over I'd have gone GAP mil w/ .1 mil turrets.
(anyone have an SN3 and ST10 in mil that wants IPHY??)
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Salmonaxe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, how about a scope with friction locking adjustments (no clicks) with a vernier scale so you could get 1/100th of an MOA. Make it a full 2MOA each turn, so you can get really precise. Make sure the vernier scale is on the forward side of the knob so that you have to use a mirror to read it. Oh yeah, and use Roman numerals just to be different.
(I keep meaning to get a mildot master... I'll bump it to the top of my list.) </div></div>
It's funny, I've been thinking about the same exact thing for a Benchrest scope. Why need clicks when you can dial it in to the 0.01 mil!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Salmonaxe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, how about a scope with friction locking adjustments (no clicks) with a vernier scale so you could get 1/100th of an MOA. Make it a full 2MOA each turn, so you can get really precise. Make sure the vernier scale is on the forward side of the knob so that you have to use a mirror to read it. Oh yeah, and use Roman numerals just to be different.
(I keep meaning to get a mildot master... I'll bump it to the top of my list.) </div></div>
It's funny, I've been thinking about the same exact thing for a Benchrest scope. Why need clicks when you can dial it in to the 0.01 mil!
Re: What's the difference Mil vs. MOA
Why do you need clicks? For 1 when you get to be my age (50ish) you cant see shit up close anymore...I count my clicks and the adjustment is always correct. 2 My eyes stay focused on the target-Quarry as I adjust the turret never losing track of it.
Why do you need clicks? For 1 when you get to be my age (50ish) you cant see shit up close anymore...I count my clicks and the adjustment is always correct. 2 My eyes stay focused on the target-Quarry as I adjust the turret never losing track of it.
