Thread: Poll metric or imperial

I can't see the poll with tapatalk but while I can work with both systems as I'm in my mid thirties I never learnt that weird old imperial system at school so I don't use it for anything unless I have to

What does it matter if you can hit what your shooting at?
When in the Army I was taught metric but I am more comfortable with and use imperial now. Imperial still rules the reloading world.
Doesn't bother me either way as scopes still only have the same maximum amount of windage and elevation no matter what you use. Measuring distance is the same.

Its just a turn of a turret.
I navigate in metric if using a map and compass.

If the reticle matches the turrets, the ballistics chart and reading from the range finder, what does it matter?
I don't feel either is better or worse. Perhaps if trying to judge distance with the reticle it may help to be in metric, but then 1mil is equal to 4moa so it's not particularly difficult to use either.

I use MOA, I am young enough to have been brought up with the metric system but the last 30years or so has seen predominantly American or aimed at the American market scopes in MOA on the shelves.

Originally Posted by R93

Doesn't bother me either way as scopes still only have the same maximum amount of windage and elevation no matter what you use.

Its just a turn of a turret.

Not so, the MOA PMII only has around 65 moa in moa & around 95 moa in mil for elevation.

They only have so many clicks in their turrets, the mil click is a bigger/courser measurement.

I prefer the finer (therefore some would say more accurate) imperial measurement

Originally Posted by Beetroot

If the reticle matches the turrets, the ballistics chart and reading from the range finder, what does it matter?
I don't feel either is better or worse. Perhaps if trying to judge distance with the reticle it may help to be in metric, but then 1mil is equal to 3.6 moa so it's particularly difficult to use either.

Fixed it for you

That's why we use rangefinders.

Using a reticle as a rangefinder for hunting is dumb, unless all your targets are a know x amount in size

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

Not so, the MOA PMII only has around 65 moa in moa & around 95 moa in mil for elevation.

They only have so many clicks in their turrets, the mil click is a bigger/courser measurement.

I prefer the finer (therefore some would say more accurate) imperial measurement

Ha, didn't know that. Thought you could only wind a screw so far no matter how it was graduated.

I shoot MOA. I will never change. You see the day I lay several thousand on the counter to my first NF 5.5-22 with NP-r2 reticule that was the beginning of the end for me. At the time I just followed Tracey’s advice. It was good advice. I now have 3 NP-R2 and the new one turns up today with MORA? Whatever it is. Is it better than metric I don’t know you guys can argue that one out. All I know is it would cost thousands to change over now. I do find it much easier to make corrections from a bullet splash with the NP-R2 compared to the mil reticule though.

Originally Posted by Bugger That

I shoot MOA. I will never change. You see the day I lay several thousand on the counter to my first NF 5.5-22 with NP-r2 reticule that was the beginning of the end for me. At the time I just followed Tracey’s advice. It was good advice. I now have 3 NP-R2 and the new one turns up today with MORA? Whatever it is. Is it better than metric I don’t know you guys can argue that one out. All I know is it would cost thousands to change over now. I do find it much easier to make corrections from a bullet splash with the NP-R2 compared to the mil reticule though.

Have you tried the NP-R1 reticle ?

Originally Posted by 7mmsaum

Have you tried the NP-R1 reticle ?

No but I have looked through them. The hairs are very fine. I shyed away for hunting but then the NP-R2 is often too fine as well. Fortunately the NF illumination is excellent and seems to run forever and with that on you see into shadows no problem at all. In hind sight the NP-R1 may have been better for the shooting I am doing. The 2 moa ele and 4 moa wind is a little too much for making corrections at times.

Daily stuff metric. Shooting is moa, it just makes sense.

Originally Posted by Toby

Metric for anyone not living in the past. Nothing worse than working with imperial

Even the Americans gave up on using imperial to get man into space because the calculations were nigh on impossible. In the end they converted everything to SI for the calculations, ... then converted the results back to imperial.

Me? I'm happy with anything, a measurement is a measurement and it is the same distance whatever measuring system you use and converting between them is easy. I tend to use metrics to measure distances and error at target and just to a quick mental calculation, only takes a second, to convert to my MOA scope.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Even the Americans gave up on using imperial to get man into space because the calculations were nigh on impossible. In the end they converted everything to SI for the calculations, ... then converted the results back to imperial.

Except I think for their first Mars (if I remember correctly) shot where they mistakenly used a mixture of Imperial and Metric in their calcs and totally missed their target and blew several billion dollars

Let's not also forget the failed MBT-70 project which ended up being a complete (expensive) mismash of imperial and metric measurements. As for firearms, personally all my gear's in MOA so I use it. As long as the Americans continue to use the Imperial system, it's simply not going to go away anytime soon. Much like the aviation industry where one sees a lot of feet and pounds.

MOA for me! Most scopes & apps use it so i've just gone along for the ride.

And this only further sells it thanks Greg:

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

Not so, the MOA PMII only has around 65 moa in moa & around 95 moa in mil for elevation.

They only have so many clicks in their turrets, the mil click is a bigger/courser measurement.

I prefer the finer (therefore some would say more accurate) imperial measurement