It's not about who can hold better.
To compensate for the bullet drop you could end-up with lets say 20 MOA, the error will be ~ 10 inches in this case.

No, check your math.

At 2000 yards it is close to 9.4 inches.

Anyway, your question was asked and answered.

You are right it is not about who can hold better. It is about doing quick math.

Last edited by JackinSD; 11-20-2012 at 06:48 PM.
Reason: addition

I do understand that MOA is not exactly 1" at 100 yds, 2" at 200, etc. I know it's slightly more than that. but to start out it really isn't going to make that much of a difference. besides, if i'm shooting at a target with an 8-10" vital area and not a bulls eye the size of a dime, being that precise with MOA isn't going to matter-especially if only out to 500 yards. When I get comfortable being able to shoot that far without any troubles, I will increase my skills by learning to be as exact as possible. But, like said before, for all intensive purposes, it isn't necessary to be that exact starting out. But I am aware and eventually I will put those into my calculations. When I make a solid dope chart, exact MOA with be used in the calculations. but that will be a while.

I do understand that MOA is not exactly 1" at 100 yds, 2" at 200, etc. I know it's slightly more than that. but to start out it really isn't going to make that much of a difference. besides, if i'm shooting at a target with an 8-10" vital area and not a bulls eye the size of a dime, being that precise with MOA isn't going to matter-especially if only out to 500 yards. When I get comfortable being able to shoot that far without any troubles, I will increase my skills by learning to be as exact as possible. But, like said before, for all intensive purposes, it isn't necessary to be that exact starting out. But I am aware and eventually I will put those into my calculations. When I make a solid dope chart, exact MOA with be used in the calculations. but that will be a while.

I saw you reference metrics in the first post. Do not think that mils are metric. They are not. It is simply breaking down a circle into 1000 points. It has nothing to do with a unit of measurement. It is an angular measurement. One yard at 1000 yards. If you convert it to inches, 36 at 1000. 3.6 at 100. The only metric measurement would be 1 meter at 1000 meters. It has nothing to do with thinking in yards or meters. I believe it is most useful if you are ranging with your scope reticule. A lot of guys do this for ranging and shooting, or in competitions. moa, mils, or iphy (Iches Per Hundred Yards), are all ways of doing essentially the same thing. Pick one, use it, learn it, and shoot stuff.

__________________
I think, therefore I am, conservative.

Kids are great, beer is good, and people are stupid.

Ok so I think I understand how this ranging thing works IF you know the size of the target. If I had an MOA reticle scope and my target size is x, then using the reticle, however many MOA covers the target, I take that number and plug it into the equation to come up with the distance in yards (HOT in inches/moa x 100 = distance in yards) same deal with the MIL reticle (HOT in inches/mils x 27.78 = distance in yards). and if you miss and see where you missed, you can just hold over that equal amount using your reticle subtentions. yes? but...how does ranging work if you don't know your target size? all of this is assuming you aren't using a range finder, which of course i DO plan on having one. i'm simply asking because I want to know!

I don't know of a way to range without at least an estimate of target size. You have to have something to give you a value. Most things you shoot at are a fairly known size. Rocks would be one that is unknown, and it would be quite a challenge to range them at long distances and get it right the first time.

__________________
I think, therefore I am, conservative.

Kids are great, beer is good, and people are stupid.