MRAD vs. MOA

[shooter22]

Looking at getting into long range shooting with a Vortex scope. I Have always had MOA scopes but have thought about getting an MRAD scope. Thoughts, concerns, comments on either one??

 

[gr8fuldoug]

MIL is the way most folks go, however, if everything you have and have used is MOA and you think in MOA, then stick with MOA

 

[User4302021]

My take on it is this: Dialing elevation is a wash as long as your scope adjusts true. Moa scopes have more history of being wrong due the past practice of factories labeling "moa" but actually adjusting in "inches per 100 yards".

That issue aside, it is no harder to dial 34 moa than 10 mils.

If you intend to use some sort of wind formula to deal with wind in real time, then the mil formulas are easy enough to do quickly in your head.

 

[cjl2010]

Waiting for someone to bring up thinking in inches or centimeters

 

[KyCarl]

I have this cool little slide rule conversion thing that changes it fast
Mil Dot Master or something like that? It works and is fast. I have both kinds of scopes
and I think I like Mils better.

 

[FEENIX]

MIL is the way most folks go, however, if everything you have and have used is MOA and you think in MOA, then stick with MOA

^^^This!^^^

 

[milo-2]

I used to tell people to use what they are comfortable with or know. Today I'd give way more consideration to what people around me are using, if by chance you miss and need a correction.
There has been a big push towards mils, shooting moa and being unique is cool, but that usually just means you are odd man out.
I myself would just as soon shoot moa, if target size is known, I can do calcs right now w/o using a reticle and followup. But there are only 2 people left that I shoot around that use moa, so I made the switch to mils on high rd count rifles, and it was easy. GAUGE OFF THE RETICLE, no math, no conversions, no thinking about it, lol
If you are under 50, go mils, it is the future. If you are over 50 and can adapt to change, go mils.

 

[Whiskey_Tango]

I see a big shift towards MIL and these guys know what they're doing. BUT, isn't there less resolution with MIL?

1/10 MIL = .3477 MOA
That's 37.5% larger than 1/4 MOA.
Maybe this is insignificant.

 

[milo-2]

I see a big shift towards MIL and these guys know what they're doing. BUT, isn't there less resolution with MIL?

1/10 MIL = .3477 MOA
That's 37.5% larger than 1/4 MOA.
Maybe this is insignificant.

First, I will say I may not be the expert here, but the only time this should play is with zeroing the scope. Being the adjustments are coarser, you may not be able to take your POA out. But is that really an issue? Most apps allow for offset if you feel the need.
Going farther, on dopes, even in MOA, you may get a 5.65 up, you round either way, or dial high or low and adj your hold by an inch. Same in mils, you may get a 1.85 up, once again you decide.

 

[User4302021]

I see a big shift towards MIL and these guys know what they're doing. BUT, isn't there less resolution with MIL?

1/10 MIL = .3477 MOA
That's 37.5% larger than 1/4 MOA.
Maybe this is insignificant.

It is insignificant for elevation.

Again, going back to wind, most people call wind in 1 moa increments. They might possibly break it down to 1/2 moa increments.

In mils wind is called in tenths. So as far as how they are actually used for wind in the real world, mils is finer.

 

[milo-2]

It is insignificant for elevation.

Again, going back to wind, most people call wind in 1 moa increments. They might possibly break it down to 1/2 moa increments.

In mils wind is called in tenths. So as far as how they are actually used for wind in the real world, mils is finer.

I thought about this for a minute, you are talking just to talk. 1/4 moa is less than .1mil. Vertical or horizontal.
Who calls in 1 moa increments? It'd be the same guys who call every shot a half mil miss, they shouldn't be calling.

 

[User4302021]

I thought about this for a minute, you are talking just to talk. 1/4 moa is less than .1mil. Vertical or horizontal.
Who calls in 1 moa increments? It'd be the same guys who call every shot a half mil miss, they shouldn't be calling.

So when you are calling wind in the field, you call it to the nearest .25moa?

You would be in rare company then.

 

[milo-2]

So when you are calling wind in the field, you call it to the nearest .25moa?

You would be in rare company then.

Never thought that way, most I have been around do or did. If center target is desired, no other way.
If wind is building, calling to center becomes futile, mils or moa.
Being realistic, target needs to be quite minute for .1mil or 1/4 moa will result in either hit or miss.

 

[User4302021]

Never thought that way, most I have been around do or did. If center target is desired, no other way.
If wind is building, calling to center becomes futile, mils or moa.
Being realistic, target needs to be quite minute for .1mil or 1/4 moa will result in either hit or miss.

The difference between the increments is academic. Most can't call wind that accurately to begin with.

A more salient point is that doing math and percentages in increments of 10 and moving a decimal is somewhat easier than say, taking a base wind call of 5.25 moa, then adjusting it 30% for actual wind speed, then taking 70% of that to adjust for wind angle. Then rounding to the nearest .25moa.

For the hunter that stays under 500 yards, there is a simpler way.

Just take the wind speed in mph, and multiply by yardage in hundreds and divide by 3 for 30-06 class cartridges or 4 for magnum cartridges.

This gives drift in inches. It falls apart pretty quick past 500 yards, but will be within a couple inches out to 500.

Ex: 5mph x 5(hundreds)=25, 25/3=8.3 inches of drift.