yep totally agree.
MRAD vs MOA. Which one?
- Thread starter MTbackwoods
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I got a good deal on 2 Vortex Diamondback Tacticle 3-9x40 with MOA scopes with external turrets at optics planet. They were less than half price. I think you could buy 3 for what I paid for them with your $700 and have change left. Also free shipping. Obviously higher powers were more expensive. Not a Razor or Viper, but they work.
MoaFlat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2017
- Messages
- 78
It's a Purely a preference thing...agree PRS talk a lot of MIL...although seen some great PRS shooters loving MOA. I'm old school; foot per second, 100yard = 1" or 4 clicks.... so I can quickly Mind correct both turrets for wind and elevation only for a rapid "Keep it Simple & Stupid" as a double check to what app solution is telling me.... a couple of my new Sig BDX Scopes are digitally Instantly switchable to either MIL or MOA....Whatever blows your hair back....
They do work, the do track ok, the turret clicks are mushy, but that's just a feel thing. Where you will notice big difference between a $300 Vortex scope and a $1000 Vortex scope is when the sun is setting in front of you, or even worse, you are hog hunting at night with the moon over the top of you. I had one of the entry level Vortex scopes on an AR10 several years back set up for hog hunting at 100 yards (didnt need anything fancy right?) Wrong. It was like looking through a milk jug at night. The moonlight washed out the sight picture so bad it was completely useless. I was lucky enough to have a hunting partner beside me that had a much nicer scope so I could compare them on the spot... The result...I moved up the chain to much better glass (went with a Trijicon AccuPower 2.5-10X56) and a bit larger objective and it is night and day different. Great scope for the money if you don't need the exposed turrets BTW. No white wash effect, perfect clarity edge to edge and on a night with decent moonlight we dont need any artificial light to hunt.
XSIVSPD
Well-Known Member
Well I think we have our answer...Go with MOA
Wasn't trying negate anything you were saying, just trying to show why it's the easiest thing for me. And I'm lazy so easier is better lol.
If somone tends to think in metric then mil/mrad is definitely the way to go.
If people aren't using it to get hard numbers, just correcting wind/elevation then pick your poison, so long as the turrets match the reticle and its either a ffp scope or you're using it at its accurate magnification, it doesn't matter which one you pick.
PNWdude67
Well-Known Member
If you don't have experience with either and want to invest in a scope with turrets capable of tracking and dialing elevation to engage targets out to 1000 yards. I would suggest considering a milradian system and FFP. Why? Most of the calibers and projectiles we use in LR hunting are capable of velocities and BC that will have a dial up of less than 8 mils at 1000 yards. The 109 berger moving at 2800 FPS is 8.2. Dial up From a 6 BRA chambered barrel. The 150 grain class bullets and the 180 class in my 6.5 and 7 short mags have about a 6.5 mil come up. (100 yard zero). Wind holds with the milradian reticle are at .10 increments and calculating wind hike based on a 10 MPH baseline for any distance between 300-1000 and beyond is pretty easy to do in your head. Finally, and this is for old guys like me who need readers to see things less than a yard away. The engraving on the milradian turret is bolder and easier to see simply because it can be larger. There is no logic to the fallacy milradian works better with meters than yards and the opposite is true for MOA. Both systems are easily applied with meters or yards. The only time that would be a consideration is measuring a known size target with your reticle. Even then it's still mental gymnastics to convert inches, feet to centimeters or meters to make the milradian system work out too I meter is 1 milraidian at 1000 meters distance. Why?? If you look at a target and think, hey that's 36" or a yard Tall. Guess what? 36"/1 milradian x 27.77 = 1000 yards (999..72). Yep, a 1 yard target at 1000 yards measure 1 mil just like a 1 meter target at 1000 meters does. MRAD works fantastic with meters or yards. Either system is accurate and effective, my preference is milrad.
MRAD, a lot quicker and less work.
dfanonymous
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
- Messages
- 2,001
I don't get it. Let's say you have a target at 731 yards away. How does 1 inch at 100 or 3.6 at 100 or 12.9 inches at 700y help you hit that target? Let's say you miss, and you try to guess distance. How do you know what a yard or an inch is at 731y are...accurately? I'm just saying... if you do know what a inch looks like at 731 yards away, then I suppose you can multiply 3.6x(whatever100y's) and magically get legitimate the same corrections or math or whatever the 1.047@100 does for you.
But back to how things really work:
The solutions are in moa, mils or iphy.
The corrections are in moa, mils or iphy.
"The math" is not things people use or seem to know about much on here ie; quick wind and speed drop.
The reticle is your measuring tool. If you miss, measure how many mils, and correct. Don't guess, start trying to figure out how many millimeters go into cm to mils based off it "looked like you missed by 4.25 inches" at 1300y. There's nothing to get.
Your dope is still your dope.
even if you zero, say you look in the reticle and you measure our needing to come up .2 mils and over right 1.2 mils. Umm....just do that. We don't need to start metricing or imperializing angle to get what we need. It's a non linear number in nature.
But back to how things really work:
The solutions are in moa, mils or iphy.
The corrections are in moa, mils or iphy.
"The math" is not things people use or seem to know about much on here ie; quick wind and speed drop.
The reticle is your measuring tool. If you miss, measure how many mils, and correct. Don't guess, start trying to figure out how many millimeters go into cm to mils based off it "looked like you missed by 4.25 inches" at 1300y. There's nothing to get.
Your dope is still your dope.
even if you zero, say you look in the reticle and you measure our needing to come up .2 mils and over right 1.2 mils. Umm....just do that. We don't need to start metricing or imperializing angle to get what we need. It's a non linear number in nature.
brentc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,635
If you use a ballistic calculator to provide a solution, it doesn't matter what you use. Just dial to what it says and send it down range. The calculator will spit out exactly what you tell it to. If you like smaller numbers in wholes and tenths, go Mil. If you don't mind larger numbers with "in between" click solutions, go MOA. The most important thing is to use what you're comfortable with.
basinman
Well-Known Member
Check out Black Hound Optics. The only negative is they sell out of the MOA scopes as soon as they get them. Use "basinman" as the discount code to save an additional 5% off.
xsn10s
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2016
- Messages
- 7,294
SOLD/EXPIRED - Bushnell Tactical hunter LRHS 4.5-18x44mm
I have 1 of these in the above header in the illuminated version for sale in the box with all that came with it. I have another that I use and all can say about these scopes is that they are excellent all the way around. Been using 1 for several years and this is an extra that I am not going to...
Mrad is a more coarse adjustment. There will never be a case where that isn't true.
Last edited:
