I agree that the best part of a mil scope it's ranging ability but IMO, ranging from a reticle in the hunting field is pretty useless past mid range and even then, fairly inaccurate. It's however very useful for tactical use. I prefer mils because the numbers are smaller and the reticle is less cluttered. The scope I use now is moa cause that's the only way it came and it was on sale. Pretty much everything else I have is mil.
MRAD vs. MOA
- Thread starter shooter22
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Black Hat
Well-Known Member
When it's time to shoot its time to shoot not do math.
I have both, and hunt with both, but do find target acquisition, range estimations and real time feild adjustments easier with Milliradian, using complete metric system however.
Mil is a coaser adjustment than MOA especially if you have a 1/8" adjusments on your MOA scope, but that will be useless in the feild, who can accurately call wind under 3.6" at 1000 yards without a sighter shot.
I have both, and hunt with both, but do find target acquisition, range estimations and real time feild adjustments easier with Milliradian, using complete metric system however.
Mil is a coaser adjustment than MOA especially if you have a 1/8" adjusments on your MOA scope, but that will be useless in the feild, who can accurately call wind under 3.6" at 1000 yards without a sighter shot.
Ernie
SPONSOR
Love it Bravo 4!
I use both too...
In the BR game and F-Class scope turrets with 1/8 MOA clicks are common place.
Depends on the games you play, and it depends on your preferences
I use both too...
In the BR game and F-Class scope turrets with 1/8 MOA clicks are common place.
Depends on the games you play, and it depends on your preferences
Ernie
SPONSOR
The issued scopes we have to instruct with are a hodgepodge of MOA and mil: mil/mil & moa/mil, in FFP & SFP (and a variety of reticles) so I just gotta make do.
Still dealing with that? That's to bad...
nksmfamjp
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2004
- Messages
- 3,200
IMO, it really comes down to 1/4 moa vs 0.36 MOA adjustments or measuring.
in my world, ranging by mil scale is rare and wind is called in mph. Ranging is done by laser. The next step is looking at the range card on the scope and dialing.
For example my deer this year...look at deer, find good rest, laser range at 350 yds, check wind at near 0, confirm clear shooting range, check range card, set to max magnification, align bdc, bang, dead.....count deer to make sure I dropped one as they didn't run.
That is my Vortex Viper SFP 4-16x44. I have a mil scope to, but I dial it.
To me, it really doesn't matter as long as the system is efficient.
i hated my old mildot moa reticle scopes, but it just required another column or 2 on the range card.
in my world, ranging by mil scale is rare and wind is called in mph. Ranging is done by laser. The next step is looking at the range card on the scope and dialing.
For example my deer this year...look at deer, find good rest, laser range at 350 yds, check wind at near 0, confirm clear shooting range, check range card, set to max magnification, align bdc, bang, dead.....count deer to make sure I dropped one as they didn't run.
That is my Vortex Viper SFP 4-16x44. I have a mil scope to, but I dial it.
To me, it really doesn't matter as long as the system is efficient.
i hated my old mildot moa reticle scopes, but it just required another column or 2 on the range card.
Some of my friends, whom I don't talk with much since I've moved away don't concern themselves with either. They shoot 3 gun. I think one guy sites his in at 100 yards, and he hits a metal silhouette. The woman I knew who shot 3 gun zero'd hers at 50 yards and said it's also zero's for 200 yards as the bullet goes up before it goes down.
My initial plan was to get a swaro with the laser printed turrets with distances etched right on. I've read swaro isn't a very good option because it's not "tactical" and won't hold a zero when abused, and the reticles and turrets aren't good for tactical.
I'm not allowed to see a hundred scopes and make a choice, the last gun store I went to just gave me the hard sale on Vortex and Nikon since that's what they carry. Having never heard of vortex I was apprehensive, but the glass was relatively bright compared to nikon and it left a good impression. My friend who knew me fairly well said the swaro 1-6x illuminated is the one I'd want. He was right, that scope is amazing, but now I want something with more magnification.
My initial plan was to get a swaro with the laser printed turrets with distances etched right on. I've read swaro isn't a very good option because it's not "tactical" and won't hold a zero when abused, and the reticles and turrets aren't good for tactical.
I'm not allowed to see a hundred scopes and make a choice, the last gun store I went to just gave me the hard sale on Vortex and Nikon since that's what they carry. Having never heard of vortex I was apprehensive, but the glass was relatively bright compared to nikon and it left a good impression. My friend who knew me fairly well said the swaro 1-6x illuminated is the one I'd want. He was right, that scope is amazing, but now I want something with more magnification.
Ernie
SPONSOR
For under $600, the Holland Game-Getter scope (2.5x15x55) is a best buy in my opinion. Depends what you are looking for of course.
https://www.hollandguns.com/31m7/rifle-scopes/holland-s-game-getter.html
