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
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
POLL: Preferred Combination of Turrets and Reticle?
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="Hard Cast" data-source="post: 1577800" data-attributes="member: 69073"><p>I use both only because I started with MOA so I still have MOA scopes on some rifles. I will be honest and admit that I started with MOA scopes because I didn't take the time to really learn the MIL system. Now that I have taken the time to learn the MIL system I am starting to understand why most of the world including most competition shooters use MIL (including in America) and any new scope that I purchase from here on out will probably be MIL/ MIL.</p><p></p><p>Here is why I decided to change: Since the MIL system is based on 10, it is easier than fractions (MOA) to calculate and faster to dial turrets with less numbers to remember. I am not the sharpest tool in the shed so that appeals to me. I also now realize that my belief that the MOA system is more precise is practically not accurate. At 1000 yards, there is only about 1" difference between the systems comparing the ¼/ click MOA turrets vs .10/ click MIL turrets. So, if someone can shoot better than 1" groups at 1000 yards – he should go for the MOA scope. For the rest of us the MIL system is slightly easier to use. My guess is that these are the reasons that the MIL/MIL system is vastly more popular for most shooters and why there are way more MIL option scopes than MOA scope (referring to tactical long range scopes - not hunting scopes).</p><p></p><p>Lastly, some folks tout the MIL system as being better because it is easier to use as a ranging reticle. Personally, I don't believe this is practical. There is so much error in using any reticle to range with and we all have laser range finders now. Personally, I don't know anyone that uses reticles to range with. In fact, I read there have been studies that have shown that even folks that practice this frequently are not able to repeat it so it is not ethical for hunting and not accurate for target shooting making this reticle ranging argument moot IMHO.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hard Cast, post: 1577800, member: 69073"] I use both only because I started with MOA so I still have MOA scopes on some rifles. I will be honest and admit that I started with MOA scopes because I didn’t take the time to really learn the MIL system. Now that I have taken the time to learn the MIL system I am starting to understand why most of the world including most competition shooters use MIL (including in America) and any new scope that I purchase from here on out will probably be MIL/ MIL. Here is why I decided to change: Since the MIL system is based on 10, it is easier than fractions (MOA) to calculate and faster to dial turrets with less numbers to remember. I am not the sharpest tool in the shed so that appeals to me. I also now realize that my belief that the MOA system is more precise is practically not accurate. At 1000 yards, there is only about 1” difference between the systems comparing the ¼/ click MOA turrets vs .10/ click MIL turrets. So, if someone can shoot better than 1” groups at 1000 yards – he should go for the MOA scope. For the rest of us the MIL system is slightly easier to use. My guess is that these are the reasons that the MIL/MIL system is vastly more popular for most shooters and why there are way more MIL option scopes than MOA scope (referring to tactical long range scopes - not hunting scopes). Lastly, some folks tout the MIL system as being better because it is easier to use as a ranging reticle. Personally, I don’t believe this is practical. There is so much error in using any reticle to range with and we all have laser range finders now. Personally, I don’t know anyone that uses reticles to range with. In fact, I read there have been studies that have shown that even folks that practice this frequently are not able to repeat it so it is not ethical for hunting and not accurate for target shooting making this reticle ranging argument moot IMHO. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
POLL: Preferred Combination of Turrets and Reticle?
Top