Mill or moa

[jackin brass]

I'm looking at a nightforce nxs 22x. I dont know if I should go moa or mill. It will be used mostly for hunting with some long range shooting for fun. Gonna mount on a custom 700 300rum

 

[rscott5028]

They both work.

So, it usually comes down to personal preference.

I find it easier to with with MOA.

-- richard

 

[isaaccarlson]

MOA is easier for me too.

 

[AJ Peacock]

MOA is easier for me as well. I also think they re-sell better.

AJ

 

[Broz]

Another vote for MOA, just easier for me at any distance and is a slightly smaller / finer adjustment. But what ever you go with I suggest you go with a reticle to match. For example .25 moa turrets with either an NP-R1 or a NP-R2 reticle so the hash marks match the unit of measure on the turrets.

Jeff

 

[lovdasnow]

MOA!

mil needs to go away. i don't know of one advantage of going with mil over moa. i can think of a handful of advantages to moa.

 

[Azprc]

Mil only. Wont go into the debate but have been with mils for over 5 years and don't see myself going backwards to moa. Here is one example. Lets say 338 edge with 300 gr, 100 yds zero, one mile takes apprx 17.2 mils. That is one full turn(10mil) and then go to 7.2 with NF scope. Now same shot but with moa scope, it takes apprx 58.5 moa to get to same mile target, that is almost 3 full turns of the turret on NF scope. So you get the question, is that 2 or 3 full turns when you are turning the elevation turret. Now lets make it more interesting. Let say same rifle but shooting to 1975yds. Mils is 28 (2.8 turns) and moa is 96.32 (almost 5 full turns). Now that is with NF scope and other manufacturers are actually worse. Leu is 15 moa per turn, not 20 like NF and would be 6.42ish turns to get to same target at 1975.

Just my .02 and let the bashing commence.

 

[brentc]

Mil only. Wont go into the debate but have been with mils for over 5 years and don't see myself going backwards to moa. Here is one example. Lets say 338 edge with 300 gr, 100 yds zero, one mile takes apprx 17.2 mils. That is one full turn(10mil) and then go to 7.2 with NF scope. Now same shot but with moa scope, it takes apprx 58.5 moa to get to same mile target, that is almost 3 full turns of the turret on NF scope. So you get the question, is that 2 or 3 full turns when you are turning the elevation turret. Now lets make it more interesting. Let say same rifle but shooting to 1975yds. Mils is 28 (2.8 turns) and moa is 96.32 (almost 5 full turns). Now that is with NF scope and other manufacturers are actually worse. Leu is 15 moa per turn, not 20 like NF and would be 6.42ish turns to get to same target at 1975.

Just my .02 and let the bashing commence.

I personally don't think it matters all that much. Most ballistic programs work both ways, and range calculation is easy for both once you understand the calculations.

The only reason for the added turns is because 1/4 MOA is a more precise adjustment than 1/10th mil. Some MOA scopes are built with looser adjustments similar to 1/10 mil to accomodate the need for faster adjustments.

 

[sp6x6]

I prefer mil on milgun)

 

[theflyonthewall]

I've been looking at new scopes for a while----waiting for the budget to catch up...lol.

I really wanted to go mil/mil, but the problem that I am running into is that there just aren't as many scopes in my miniscule price range that offer a lot of features when looking at mil/mil scopes.

So I'll probably be buying MOA since there's more scopes than you can shake a stick at available in MOA......*sigh*

 

[brentc]

I've been looking at new scopes for a while----waiting for the budget to catch up...lol.

I really wanted to go mil/mil, but the problem that I am running into is that there just aren't as many scopes in my miniscule price range that offer a lot of features when looking at mil/mil scopes.

So I'll probably be buying MOA since there's more scopes than you can shake a stick at available in MOA......*sigh*

What price range are you looking at? There are several good mil/mil choices between $500-$1000. A few I know of are Weaver tactical, Bushnell Elite Tactical, Sightron SIII LRMD/CM, Super Sniper, and Vortex Viper PST. Some are even FFP.

 

[steelshooter]

I prefer mil/mil. Only because its so much easier with the metric system, and everyone in Australia is familiar with that. With the mil reticle, if a target is say, 847 meters away, then 1 mil is 847 millimeters. Its that simple. I was brought up in metric and often get confused converting to imperial measurements.

 

[Broz]

I prefer mil/mil. Only because its so much easier with the metric system, and everyone in Australia is familiar with that. With the mil reticle, if a target is say, 847 meters away, then 1 mil is 847 millimeters. Its that simple. I was brought up in metric and often get confused converting to imperial measurements.

This must be why I like MOA, if a target is 847 yards one MOA is roughly 8.47" Guess a lot of the time it is just what you are use to.

Jeff

 

[dirtball]

It IS a matter of personal choice, and all depends on which method of measurement your mind is most familiar with.
If you are like me and have used inches and feet all of your life then the choice is easy, MOA. If you were indoctrinated with metric in school or were trained to use Mil Dot in the military then Mil Dot should be easy. Just DON"T buy a scope with a Mil Dot reticle and MOA adjustments, bad combination.

1 MOA = 10.47" at 1,000 yds, easy for us inch guys, 1" at 100, 2" at 200, 3" at 300 and so forth.
1 MIL = 32.83" at 1,000 yds or 36" at 1,000 meters, the size of a human torso.
Scope adjustments are usually 1/10 Mil or roughly .36" per click @ 100 yds

Just my 2 cents

Dave