1 MOA: 1" = 95.5 Yards

the blur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2014
Messages
156
My son who is a math professor went through the MOA calculation. With the angle, and cosign of the angle.
He proved to me: the 1" we all use as a standard is really @ 95.5 yards, not 100 yards.
And if we shoot at 100 yards, it's slightly over an inch.

Tan 1/60 = x/3600"

and going out to 1000 yards is where it starts to show..
 

cohunt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
Yes, this isnt new news-- like s2s said- 1.047-- I thought most people on here knew that.

Lots of people shoot @ 100y as that is where they zero their rifles-- moa at 100y is "about" and inch (but actually 1.047" to be exact)

Gotta watch those scopes that are 1/4" adjustment clicks, and not 1/4moa also.

Mills is a whole different thing to learn.

I usually zero at 300 (ish) as I'm more of a mpbr kind of thinker.

If you use one of the target apps, it calculates moa for you.
 
Last edited:

A/C Guy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
193
Location
Apache Junction, Az
Yes, that’s why you have to multiply it by the correction factor (1.047) to get “actual MOA”. But 1 MIL is exactly 10cm at 100m:cool:
Yes, but most ranges in the USA are set up in yards, so you have more complex math making the necessary corrections. Using you mil scope is like setting your car's speedometer to Km/Hr and trying to do the math on the commute home each day.:cool:
When using the reticle to range for hunting, do you first convert the animal's measurement to cm or do you make the conversion later when trying to dial in the shot?:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

26Reload

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2016
Messages
2,272
Location
SE Idaho
like setting your car's speedometer to Km/Hr
Just make sure when you are driving in CannuckLand that you know where your speedometer is.....
Was being checked thru bc customs one evening....guy asked where we were heading with driftboat in tow...anchorage..."how long you plan on being in CannuckLand?"....oh..a few days.....we hit anchorage 36 hours later.......averaged 67mph....food and fuel......fish were awaiting my hook.....
 

mbaysinger89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
52
Location
Kansas
Its nothing like setting your cars speedometer to Km/h. Km/hr is a distance/time, so there is a conversion to be made. A milliradian is an angular measurement. A mil doesn't mean 3.6" at 100 yards, that is its corresponding linear measurement in inches. Use the measurement as its meant, as an angle, and you can range in yards using base 10.
 

A/C Guy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
193
Location
Apache Junction, Az
Its nothing like setting your cars speedometer to Km/h. Km/hr is a distance/time, so there is a conversion to be made. A milliradian is an angular measurement. A mil doesn't mean 3.6" at 100 yards, that is its corresponding linear measurement in inches. Use the measurement as its meant, as an angle, and you can range in yards using base 10.
Sure it is, Km/hr vs M/Hr, it was a good analogy.

Mil is an angular measurement and MOA is an angular measurement; unless you forgot and you think it is inches, which it is not.

Check out the article I linked in my reply. He explains the steps to convert both to useable information while target shooting and when hunting. There are fewer steps for people in the US. Maybe the Cannuck ranges are in meters, but not in the US (as a general rule).
 

mbaysinger89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
52
Location
Kansas
He points out why the math is easier with fewer steps in almost all scenarios using MOA.

He shows that while thinking in inches its easier. Not that its easier when thinking in MOA vs Mil. Without that target tell me how you're going to measure. By using your reticle. A mil is a mil at 125 yards or 76 meters or 12 feet. At that point it doesnt matter if you use MOA or Mil. Adjust to what your reticle says. Unless you paste a target on your game before you shoot it.
 

A/C Guy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
193
Location
Apache Junction, Az
He points out why the math is easier with fewer steps in almost all scenarios using MOA.

He shows that while thinking in inches its easier. Not that its easier when thinking in MOA vs Mil. Without that target tell me how you're going to measure. By using your reticle. A mil is a mil at 125 yards or 76 meters or 12 feet. At that point it doesnt matter if you use MOA or Mil. Adjust to what your reticle says. Unless you paste a target on your game before you shoot it.
An MOA is an MOA at 125 yards, or 76 meters or 12 feet as well.

Read his article, he explains why MOA is easier to use. He used Mil in the military as a sniper and he switched to MOA and explains why he switched.
 

mbaysinger89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
52
Location
Kansas
You're exactly right it is. So now we agree we are using our reticles to come up with the miss as an angular measurement. instead of having a target at a known range, and measuring with a ruler once we get close. If you can tell me the difference in 24" left and 12" left at an unknown amount of yards looking through a scope I'll be impressed, and honestly it doesn't matter because you should be seeing it as a measurement in moa or mil and directly adjusting instead of calculating inches to mil, or inches to moa.

So now look at the ranging formula because thats where mil is going to win.
 

Dog Rocket

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2018
Messages
481
Location
Washington State
He points out why the math is easier with fewer steps in almost all scenarios using MOA.

He shows that while thinking in inches its easier. Not that its easier when thinking in MOA vs Mil. Without that target tell me how you're going to measure. By using your reticle. A mil is a mil at 125 yards or 76 meters or 12 feet. At that point it doesnt matter if you use MOA or Mil. Adjust to what your reticle says. Unless you paste a target on your game before you shoot it.
I read the article, the error he makes is in the setup for the question.

He gives the target measurement in inches rather than mils. The spotter likewise gives a correction in inches...another mistake.

(You gonna tell me that the spotter has eyeballs calibrated well enough to count inches at 600 yards?). Once you have that gone that far down that particular rabbit hole, of course the only good answer is moa.

Measure the target in the reticle to get it's width in mils before you shoot, or train your spotter to give corrections in fractional target relation (e.g. 1/2 target high...or 1/4 target behind)...or use a spotting scope with a mil reticle.

Edit to add:
For every single MOA question...there is a MIL answer. The catch is that you have to learn to stop commingling the two. That is a training issue.
 
Last edited:

Trending threads

Top