Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
Polls
NEW POLL: Will your next rifle scope be MOA or MIL
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="bearcat2" data-source="post: 1314973" data-attributes="member: 18832"><p>I noticed many of the proponents of mils here, most of whom also state they absolutely have to have the reticle and the turrets match, are still speaking in terms of yardage. Their most common reason for preferring mils seems to be the "easier math", but I fail to see how figuring mils per yard is possibly any easier than figuring MOA per yard? </p><p></p><p>Frankly it wouldn't really matter to me, I commonly have the drop in MOA in 25 yard intervals out to 1000 or 1200 yards taped to the stock of my rifle, and doing the same with it in mils would be just as simple if I had MRAD. But I can think quite easily in MOA if I need to, and converting yards to meters would seem to be an extra step if one had to do calculations in his head while in the field.</p><p></p><p>I'm actually very surprised that practically anybody uses their reticle, whether mildot, MOA, or the ridiculous "circle the size of a deer (what kind of deer? Whitetail? Mule deer? Blacktail? Coues deer? Reindeer?) chest" that so many brands of scopes are constantly trying to hype. While it isn't a bad idea to know how in case of emergency, an electric rangefinder is much more accurate, and doesn't exactly waste a lot time to point and click.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="bearcat2, post: 1314973, member: 18832"] I noticed many of the proponents of mils here, most of whom also state they absolutely have to have the reticle and the turrets match, are still speaking in terms of yardage. Their most common reason for preferring mils seems to be the "easier math", but I fail to see how figuring mils per yard is possibly any easier than figuring MOA per yard? Frankly it wouldn't really matter to me, I commonly have the drop in MOA in 25 yard intervals out to 1000 or 1200 yards taped to the stock of my rifle, and doing the same with it in mils would be just as simple if I had MRAD. But I can think quite easily in MOA if I need to, and converting yards to meters would seem to be an extra step if one had to do calculations in his head while in the field. I'm actually very surprised that practically anybody uses their reticle, whether mildot, MOA, or the ridiculous "circle the size of a deer (what kind of deer? Whitetail? Mule deer? Blacktail? Coues deer? Reindeer?) chest" that so many brands of scopes are constantly trying to hype. While it isn't a bad idea to know how in case of emergency, an electric rangefinder is much more accurate, and doesn't exactly waste a lot time to point and click. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
Polls
NEW POLL: Will your next rifle scope be MOA or MIL
Top