# MRAD vs MOA. Which one?

#### XSIVSPD

##### Well-Known Member
Measure what? Are you mil’ing a target in moa? Where in your long range shooting is does inches it linear measurements come into play AT DISTANCE?

Rack width is a determination if a bull is legal in places up here. It's nice being able to range it and tell if it's legal or not with simple math.

Say a rack needs to be 40" minimum. You're looking at rack that measures ~10moa @ 405yds. Easy math says it's legal, or at least close enough to legal to be worth investigating further

#### dfanonymous

##### Well-Known Member
Rack width is a determination if a bull is legal in places up here. It's nice being able to range it and tell if it's legal or not with simple math.

Say a rack needs to be 40" minimum. You're looking at rack that measures ~10moa @ 405yds. Easy math says it's legal, or at least close enough to legal to be worth investigating further
Makes sense to me.
Just has nothing to do with PRS or the actual use of shooting the OP originally mentioned. They both share linear representation with simple math.
I will point out that you see that rack, it’s 2.8 mils wide @400, and that puts it at about 37 something inches. Simple math as you said. But that is so case specific. If you’re shooting PRS or steel, you don’t need to know such a specific measurement. Your target is X mils, your solution is x mils, the wind is X mils, and if you do it the way most do, split wind on edge of plate, depending because you’re shooting a 6mm loaded to mach million.

#### MTbackwoods

##### Well-Known Member
This new scope will be primarily for hunting. I may consider trying my hand in a match or two with the rifle/scope combo. Eventually I will build a dedicated match rig then that will be a different story. But let’s remember, we don’t have to agree on everything. MOA is super easy for me to convert to and from inches for corrections. Even though both are angular measurements and not linear, MOA does translate to inches very quickly and easily for me. But I have never tried MRAD and that’s why I asked

#### XSIVSPD

##### Well-Known Member
Makes sense to me.
Just has nothing to do with PRS or the actual use of shooting the OP originally mentioned. They both share linear representation with simple math.
I will point out that you see that rack, it’s 2.8 mils wide @400, and that puts it at about 37 something inches. Simple math as you said. But that is so case specific. If you’re shooting PRS or steel, you don’t need to know such a specific measurement. Your target is X mils, your solution is x mils, the wind is X mils, and if you do it the way most do, split wind on edge of plate, depending because you’re shooting a 6mm loaded to mach million.

Not disagreeing with you, just pointing out a specific use case where it makes a difference. Seems like 10x4 is easier math than using mills.

While it certainly is a specific use case, it's saved me many hours of stalking moose that were slightly undersized, and if you're going to shoot matches and all the practice that goes with that or even just LR steel, why not use the same reticle that you're so familiar with for hunting?

If the OP doesn't care, then there is no real *best* answer. If he cares, then you, I, and others have presented all the ways he can use either to their full potential, and he can make an informed decision on what works best for him

#### XSIVSPD

##### Well-Known Member
This new scope will be primarily for hunting. I may consider trying my hand in a match or two with the rifle/scope combo. Eventually I will build a dedicated match rig then that will be a different story. But let’s remember, we don’t have to agree on everything. MOA is super easy for me to convert to and from inches for corrections. Even though both are angular measurements and not linear, MOA does translate to inches very quickly and easily for me. But I have never tried MRAD and that’s why I asked
For what it's worth:
I was in the same place you are. I'm young enough to have learned metric and imperial in school so I picked up a primary arms mil/mil ffp 4-14 (great scope for the price) as a cheap way to see if I could wrap my brain around it. While I was able to, and it was a useful, fairly easy to use setup, every other ffp scope I've bought since then has been moa/moa. The PA is currently on my wife's rifle so I don't confuse the measurements lol. She likes it a lot, but doesn't really use the reticle for much other than the center lol. For me, moa was more natural, and both are capable of doing the exact same things, so I decided not to reinvent the wheel.

#### TheBoctor

##### Well-Known Member
Ironically, the 4.75 or the 5.0 may actually be closer to POI. The ballistics program rounded either up or down to 6.7, so it's literally a crap shoot either way. I've used both and have no preference either way. They both work equally well.
Definitely not disagreeing with you on them both working equally well. They're two measurements of the exact same thing. It hurts my brain when someone asserts one is better than the other, they're literally the same (unless you forced everyone to switch to ranging in meters which would seriously simplify everything, but I prefer using good ole 1/2 bald eagle wingspans).

MRAD is based upon 1000th of a radian. There are 6283.185 milradians in a circle. MOA is based upon Pi; literally. That is why 1 MOA = 1.047 and not 1 inch. Neither is more easy or more difficult to understand at a working level. The only way MRAD is easier is if you range in meters and not yards and you use metric sighting targets instead of American targets with 1" squares. Even then the difference is that you count full turns and tenths compared to counting each click as 1/4 MOA or 1/8 MOA.

Funny how grade school math sneaks it's way into life later. Had our teachers used hunting scope math, we all would have paid better attention and would have aced the test.
Oh come on! You can't say a degree (1/360th of a circle) has Pi tied up in it and then gloss over the fact that the radian is also directly defined by it There are roughly 6283.18530718 milliradians in a circle, more precisely 2000*Pi milliradians. The .047 in 1.047"/100yds comes from a degree being dimensionless and the arbitrary assignment (which i'm sure wasn't actually arbitrary but i don't know why they chose it) of 360 degrees in a circle. And it just so happened that 1MOA is roughly 1" at 100yds. Pretty sweet coincidence for being a system based off of some dead kings foot . The mrad to cm/meters conversions are so much easier because the metric system is much better thought out and co-defines itself.

All around we're definitely thinking the same thing. I thought I'd seen the end of radians after school... right up until I got more into shooting. I wish I'd started with mils because the only reason I'm holding out now is that I'm in too deep with thousands and thousands of dollars of MOA scopes and know i'd lose my *** swapping them out.

#### XSIVSPD

##### Well-Known Member
I wish I'd started with mils because the only reason I'm holding out now is that I'm in too deep with thousands and thousands of dollars of MOA scopes and know i'd lose my *** swapping them out.
Well, if you're just going to toss them, I'll pay the shipping so you don't have to pay the fees at the dump....

#### TheBoctor

##### Well-Known Member
Well, if you're just going to toss them, I'll pay the shipping so you don't have to pay the fees at the dump....
Nah I've got better ideas. Ever seen a nightforce lamp? I just punch all the lenses out with a screwdriver and run wires through them

#### Shane375

##### Member
Well this is getting kind of out of hand. Any recommendations for scopes in the \$700 range? And that’s a pretty hard limit. I had to beg and plead to get the fiancée to agree to \$700. So I can’t really go higher
Get a leupold mate you got 700 spend it on one the hole lot and don’t look back or at the last 50 posts

#### Kmccord

##### Well-Known Member
I’ve been eyeing Arken for a bit now. The lead time is a huge turnoff as well as they aren’t established. They could go out of business and then I have no warranty. I had looked at Athlon in the past but I’ll give them another gander
I am looking at the new Strike Eagle as well, I had been thinking of the Athlon before Vortex announced the Strike Eagle, but with Athlon you do not get the scope shade, no lense cover, and the strike eagle comes with a throw lever.

##### Well-Known Member
Well this is getting kind of out of hand. Any recommendations for scopes in the \$700 range? And that’s a pretty hard limit. I had to beg and plead to get the fiancée to agree to \$700. So I can’t really go higher
Athlon scopes would be my first choice!

##### Well-Known Member
I am looking at the new Strike Eagle as well, I had been thinking of the Athlon before Vortex announced the Strike Eagle, but with Athlon you do not get the scope shade, no lense cover, and the strike eagle comes with a throw lever.
Don't let the bling, bling extras sway you away from the better scope...better scope companies don't need the bling, bling extras to move their product, others do.

#### Dog Rocket

##### Well-Known Member
Rack width is a determination if a bull is legal in places up here. It's nice being able to range it and tell if it's legal or not with simple math.

Say a rack needs to be 40" minimum. You're looking at rack that measures ~10moa @ 405yds. Easy math says it's legal, or at least close enough to legal to be worth investigating further
This has nothing to do with trajectory, wind, or miss correction.

What if the target is at 287 yards? Is the math easy then? The math for determining size or distance requires equal effort in both systems and is not a consideration for the issue we are discussing.

#### Dog Rocket

##### Well-Known Member
MOA is super easy for me to convert to and from inches for corrections.
Why calculate misses in inches, then convert to MOA?

If you have an MOA reticle, you have a ruler right in front of your face. If you missed by 2 MOA, the dial or hold the 2 MOA correction. If you can see your miss well enough to guess the inches, then you can certainly see well enough to measure it with the ruler in your scope.