#12 Annoying Debate Topic for fun: MOA vs. MIL --my take

[Timberline001]

That's because you must be the ultimate hunter. Over and out. lol.

Not sure what you meant by that?

 

[repins05]

This particular situation - my buddy's shot appeared to be good vertically (dead on pretty much). Told him that and then I called out how many feet he was ahead of it (which was about two feet). I let my friend try to figure out the rest as the bear walked off.

Same scenario when my group shoots rock chucks and rats. Will call out miss vertically and horizontally based on feet since we are all using MOA. Obviously, if you don't see your shot, you are only as good as your spotter at that point. I am usually able to see my shot...but not always. There are a few friends that I would not use or count on as a spotter because they have poor judgement in measuring by eye. Same friends that if their GPS goes down I am going to have to call search and rescue.

Swaro rangę binos (no reticle).

 

[wind gypsy]

Honest inquiry here:
How many people spot for their hunting partner with a reticle optic? It’s always through the binos or spotter, rarely if ever with an etched reticle.
I’ve spent plenty of range time where everyone is on the same system with the same ruler in their face and it works, but that isn’t reality in the field hunting.
if you’re looking thru your bino's or spotter, how are you calling corrections to the shooter if they don’t see their miss?

I don't get into many such situations but it likely wouldn't be in angular measurements.

 

[ID_Matt]

This particular situation - my buddy's shot appeared to be good vertically (dead on pretty much). Told him that and then I called out how many feet he was ahead of it (which was about two feet). I let my friend try to figure out the rest as the bear walked off.

Same scenario when my group shoots rock chucks and rats. Will call out miss vertically and horizontally based on feet since we are all using MOA. Obviously, if you don't see your shot, you are only as good as your spotter at that point. I am usually able to see my shot...but not always. There are a few friends that I would not use or count on as a spotter because they have poor judgement in measuring by eye. Same friends that if their GPS goes down I am going to have to call search and rescue.

Swaro rangę binos (no reticle).

Regardless, MIL or MOA, why the need to try and convert anything to a linear measurement when there is a ruler in your scope?

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Regardless, MIL or MOA, why the need to try and convert anything to a linear measurement when there is a ruler in your scope?

Same point, regardless of units, what else can a spotter say to a shooter other than approximate feet/inches through binoculars? I’m sure as hell not gonna convert it to angular, but I’d be happy to hear “1 foot in front of the chest”, then use that as a reference on the reticle to offset from where I was and send again.

(If you meant to say angular then we’re on the same page already)

 

[ID_Matt]

Same point, regardless of units, what else can a spotter say to a shooter other than approximate feet/inches through binoculars? I’m sure as hell not gonna convert it to angular, but I’d be happy to hear “1 foot in front of the chest”, then use that as a reference on the reticle to offset from where I was and send again.

(If you meant to say angular then we’re on the same page already)

I think we are on the same page. Someone says you hit a foot in front of his chest, you measure in your scope how far that was from your aim point, move your point of aim based on that and shoot. No need to do any sort of conversion of inches/feet to mils/moa.

 

[repins05]

I think we are on the same page. Someone says you hit a foot in front of his chest, you measure in your scope how far that was from your aim point, move your point of aim based on that and shoot. No need to do any sort of conversion of inches/feet to mils/moa.

Totally agree.

He was shooting just past seven hundred yards and using a turret (no measurable wind with the kestrel). I would have adjusted my turret since I am calculating in moa lol......but if I couldn't figure out the conversion (or for that matter even if I had to think about it) I would have just moved my crosshairs back from the vitals accordingly. His automatic response (I think) was to adjust his turret. He was pretty upset with his first shot and it caused him to fumble around more. He probably ran it in his calculator at least 3 times.

In the meantime I watched the bear through my binos telling him it's starting to walk away. The bear was foraging and living life like there wasn't a bullet a moment ago that was trying to kill him. I bet it went another 40 yards plus before he disappeared into some brush. Yardage never changed much either with the path he took.

Back at camp he did the typical my scope must be off and shot it at 100 yards. It was pretty much right on. Later that night he started doing the ballistic calculations out loud and trying to figure out what happened while we were all standing around the fire drinking beer. To his credit, after the season was over, he decided he needed to scale back and not shoot that far.

 

[eric1115]

I switched from MOA to MRAD pretty recently (after last hunting season), and here's my takeaway so far...

1.7 mil at 450 is easier to remember than 5.75 MOA. I have AB ballistic solver in my RF, but if I'm on a different profile it's way easier to shoot with just a range and not a solution. I have not even really worked on quick drop process very much yet, but I can do it in my head if I have a little bit of time.

Wind is way way easier and faster. I don't even reference the wind in my solver for most shots anymore since gun number is so easy.

Making corrections with others using a spotter/binos is no factor. Spotter is estimating a measurement in inches, and shooter is not converting that to angular whether using MOA or MRAD. Shooter estimates what looks like that number of inches and sends next round regardless of reticle.

Two challenges that I've found are as follows: shooter and spotter both have reticles, one MOA and one MRAD. Spotter has fairly precise correction to give, shooter can't utilize it effectively. Rare, but not never. Falls back to offering an estimated linear correction same as if spotter has no reticle. Obviously this challenge cuts both ways, and sticking with MOA only eliminates it if you never shoot with mil guys. If it's a mix you're going to be speaking different languages at some point regardless.

Second, milling a target size is still less intuitive to me with MRAD than with MOA. I've found shooting rocks to be a little rougher determining target size, though I've simply adjusted my frame of reference to largely make this irrelevant. A .5 mil target is approx 1.5 MOA and is a good "small-ish" rock to try to hit. The math is easy enough from there if I care to do it... At 600 yards, a .5 mil rock is going to be 10" give or take.

Zeroing is a tiny bit less intuitive as well since the targets I use have 1" grids, but that is such a minor inconvenience that I consider it to be no factor in the decision process. Center of group is easier to determine on paper rather than through the optic for me, so I have to do a little math. ⅓ of an inch per click, and round up since it's actually .36 is easy enough and close enough to get me there just as fast as .25" per click.

At this point, my only regret in the switch is not doing it sooner. The benefits have far outweighed the challenges for me.