Thread: Mil/Mil vs MOA/MOA

Originally Posted by Rushy

I have one of my scopes with a mil dot reticle and MOA adjustments. She’s a hoot and a holler when you haven’t used it in a while.

Shit that might drive you to drink @ Rushy ; Waikato of course?????

Originally Posted by Rushy

I have one of my scopes with a mil dot reticle and MOA adjustments. She’s a hoot and a holler when you haven’t used it in a while.

Rushy, did someone slip you a real beer (not Waikato) to make you buy that? if it is SFP it really doesn't matter much anyway, as at some zoom level it will likely be an MOA reticle.

Depends what you are using the scope for. A good reticle for shooting targets ( for me ) was a MIL / MIL one with proper hash marks on a FFP scope.
Drift / elevation was easily matched to the fall of shot. So adjustment was either holding off by the number of hash marks or by dialing them in. ( look up GD 2 reticles)
It would be far to "busy " for a hunting scope though.

For me it MIL's for the simple fact that as @ANTSMAN pointed out they are 10 based like our metric system and that's easier on my brain. But as long as the reticle and turret are the same it does really matter. I reckon they need to match for 2 reasons.

(1) When I Zero my rifle I fire a 3 shot group, go up to the target and put a bright orange sticker right in the center of that group then go back to rifle and measure from point of aim to point of impact (sticker) using the scope, then adjust as required. Shoot another group to confirm and usually job done. I have lost count as to how many people I see chasing there tails trying to sight in using a ruler and trying to work out how many clicks to adjust (Especially with MOA scope's and our metric range)

(2) When shooting at distance if you can spot your shots and have a miss you can measure this with scope and adjust aim accordingly. Easier with no math if MIL/MIL or MOA/MOA.

When I was first trying to learn about MILs it was confusing because most info was written by Americans who use MIL with yards/inches, which IMO ruins its simplicity. (not much of an issue if using a ballistics calculator where you just follow whatever it tells you)
They will tell you that a MIL = 3.6" at 100y (which is technically correct but more difficult than it needs to be)
I will tell you a MIL is a 10cm circle at 100m, and each .1mil click = 1cm

Use Mils and meters to make it as simple as possible if not relying on a ballistic app-
For example distance to target with MILS and ranging in Meters = Target size in CM, divide by Target size in MILS, x 10 = distance to target in meters
If you used MIL and yards, then distance to target = Target size in Inches, divide by target size in MILS, x27.7 = distance to target in yards.
Trying to work that out off hand is much easier in MILS / Meters

If you gave me a scope in ether it wouldn’t worry me, it’s just a matter of dialing the drop from drop chart or ballistic app.
I’m a old dog and the 15+ years since I have had dial up scopes I’ve been using MOA and know the system well. My next scope will probably be a Mil/Mil scope because smaller numbers to remember as dial that much shooting at long range.

Eg is was on the hill yesterday shooting goats. I setup for the shot, range 860m and get MOA dialup solution needed 19.66 MOA but dial 19.5 MOA and hold 7 MOA for wind.

If it was a Mil/Mil scope 5.7 Mil and 2 Mil for wind, smaller numbers but the same.

We should never have moved from pounds, shillings and pence. That ruined everything.

Originally Posted by Tahr

We should never have moved from pounds, shillings and pence. That ruined everything.

Even luddites like you

Have to admit that metric makes more sense

At 433m 1 click on a Mil/Mil scope will be 4.33cm (this took me longer to write than to work out)

At 433 yards 1click on a Moa/Moa scope will be............. I honestly have no idea. There is a baby climbing on me and I can't be arsed working it out. I have had 7 MOA LR scopes and One Mil scope.

Both do the same thing. If you have a Mil/Mil or Moa/Moa reticle, match it to a meters or yards range finder. This is the main thing. You want to be able to measure the fall of the shot on the retical and wind that straight onto the turret. If it is not set up this way, in my not so humble opinion (please don't over state the value of opinions) it is not an LR scope. Its just a scope.

My Schmidt and Bender never required a second round when sighting in. Shoot one, measure, wind it on, spot on.

If you have imperial math down, then go Moa/Moa but if not, don't bother. There is simply no argument to justify the more complex math of imperial.

Mil/Mil is so easy and simple to learn, you would be mad not to. The whole idea is not having to think about it too hard so you don't stuff up.

The shootings not so tough. Its the wind and not making fuck ups that is the challenge. Mil gives less scope for fuck ups.

I use MOA and yards but if I was starting over again I’d buy MiL scopes.

my brain has been wired for moa over years of doing the math in my head & you certainly get a finer adjustment in moa than mils.
Having said that mil/mil will work just fine too.
Have both, but most moa/moa.
@Tussock the answer is real quick & easy... 1 inch or if you're really fussy & super accurate shooter you might try to argue 1.14 inches.

Gravity and wind always exert the same dimensions at any one point in time. Mils, inches, MOA, potatoes give it any number you want. It still does the same thing. I don't get the hang-up, especially for hunters. A hits a hit, a miss is a miss. It's just the target usually fucks off after your first go so if you're not shooting stationary targets I struggle to see the difference.
I'd dial 3 potatoes up and an aubergine right if thats what was needed.

Originally Posted by kiwijames

Gravity and wind always exert the same dimensions at any one point in time. Mils, inches, MOA, potatoes give it any number you want. It still does the same thing. I don't get the hang-up, especially for hunters. A hits a hit, a miss is a miss. It's just the target usually fucks off after your first go so if you're not shooting stationary targets I struggle to see the difference.
I'd dial 3 potatoes up and an aubergine right if thats what was needed.

A MIL is one fist. Simple enough and saves carrying around the potatoe.

I'm sure hes asking for advice that will allow him to keep his options open.

If you don't think this helps with follow up shots, is it possible there are a few techniques you are not aware of?

Sent from my CPH1701 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Tussock

A MIL is one fist. Simple enough and saves carrying around the potatoe.

I'm sure hes asking for advice that will allow him to keep his options open.

If you don't think this helps with follow up shots, is it possible there are a few techniques you are not aware of?

Sent from my CPH1701 using Tapatalk

There's ample shit I'm not aware of. That's why I like simple. It suits me well, and potatoes, I like potatoes.

We still use Imperial to measure heads ( Douglas score ) to the closest 1/8th of a inch , the math seems tricky at first but like anything you do it a bit you get used to working it out .