Thread: Who would still buy MOA over MIL and why?

Herd of, a Country Mile, now there s a country inch

What next a bakers dozen?

Might as well throw this in as well -

For instance there are artillery sights and compasses with 6,400 NATO mils, 6,000 Warsaw Pact mils or 6,300 Swedish "streck" per turn instead of 360° or 2π radians, achieving higher resolution than a 360° compass while also being easier to divide into parts than if true milliradians were used.

Ive changed two scopes over to mill mill and i love it. the reticles are better imo. With the .2 mrad sub tensions. the maths is very simple coming from a metric. I like moa for target shooting but its not impossible to work out the distance. no reason you cant run both. i havnt stuffed up yet.........

I myself like moa for hunting because it's what I know. And in the event of quick math and quick setup I will be much better with moa . Also moa is smaller per click than mills . It's not much but at 1000 yards it works out to be 1 inch per click different. And for hunting I would rather take out every little bit of error out of the equation.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

The 3 main reasons I prefer MOA are
- is the same reason people still use feet and inchs for height. Inchs are way easier to imagine than millimeters or centimeters
- The math is simpler to do in your head instantly and apply partially due to above
- most cheaper scopes come in MOA and i would prefer all my scopes use the same measurements

unless you intend to twiddle n fiddle/dial up it matters not a flying fig ...once you are sighted in and rifle is zeroed.....its zeroed.if you dont stuff around with it all will be fine.

The less you play with your scope,the less ammo you waste.Moa or mil.

Originally Posted by Moutere

.... Say a cheaper dial-able scope for a .22 that isn’t offered in a MRAD option. The Nikko Stirling Diamond Long Range comes to mind.

According to Scopeuout's page, at least some of the Diamonds are MIL scopes, although one reticle option is a half mildot which is a great way to confuse things.

Mils is easier math.
Moa and iphy (inch per hundred yards) is not the same, and often incorrectly marked on moa scopes.

Meters is what most people are used to for distance, mils is easier math.

Who gives a fuck?

Strelok tells me how many “clicks” to dial. So do my little laminated drop charts. So I count my clicks. I can divide by 10 and I can divide by 4, so a value in one or the other is easy to convert to clicks. I flip-flop between the two, often on a daily basis, and it doesn’t matter. For example, my .22LR is Mil and my .223 is MOA, and I often carry them together when varminting, and dial both.

So I know where I’m at no matter whether it’s Mil, or MOA. Maybe I’m superhuman. Or maybe it’s not very hard…

If it is a long range shot I will adjust my elevation using the cheat sheet taped to my rifle('x' clicks for 'y' range), according to my rangefinder. That way it doesn't matter what the increments are so long as you follow the sheet. After that it is all done by observation and Kentucky windage. If it is 400 metres or less I just use Kentucky (and a little bit of experience). I have both MOA and Mil scopes on different rifles and the system works equally well for both.

Originally Posted by mimms2

Yes. Most people know an inch. A hundred yards (rugby field) 6 foot (man) 8 foot (stud) 3" (cigarette length)...
Went to building supplier the other day, and I'm calling out 2x4 and 2x12 and novvie computer jockey was like "woah woah woah, speak metric", and i was like...fuck.

And somehow 4x2 became 90x45 (8% less tree wood) and somehow even MG can come off the plant at 5mm under THAT...




Ha. hahahah. Hah. No. What's 19/32ths and eleventy-five fourty seconds (of an inch)?
12 to the foot and 36 to the yard... nah...

Base 2. Pretty retarded. Decimal wins there.

That's because 90x45 is ex 100x50 its been dressed down . If you buy 4x2 its usually rough sawn . But stupidly enough on site we still call 90x45 by the name of 4x2 or 4 by twice if your from taihape

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

Whatever you do, avoid a MIL reticle and MOA turret scope (looking at you Leupold Mk4..., although some S&B PMII's had this 'feature' too!)

It's a hangover from early 2000's US military doctrine, and has aged about as well as early 2000's fashion trends...

Greetings All,
Anybody who has grown up in NZ and is under the age of about 60 has had their entire education in SI metric. At 70 plus I started in the UK units, used SI metric at school for physics in the mid 60's and then back to the old units until 1974 when we started using SI metric in architectural draughting. While still fluent in both I vastly prefer SI metric and all of my measuring kit other than my powder scales are metric. Once you work in metric the old UK units look archaic, especially when scrambled with US units. Only two of my scopes have 0.1 mrad clicks, one only approximate (1/3MOA). Any new ones from here will be 0.1 mrad. Some seem to have got mil and milliradians scrambled in their minds, one milliradian (mrad allways all lower case) is 100mm at 100 metres where one mil is 98 mm at 100 metres. Scopes are likely all mrad regardless of what is engraved on the dial.
Regards Grandpamac.

or 2 by 4 if you're from 'merica