Is there anyone who prefers MOA vs MIls for hunting purposes?

[wind gypsy]

I have a trijicon 5-25x50 tenmile MIL scope I would love to trade for something in MOA. Hit me up all you people switching to MILs

The SFP one with reticle true @ 12.5x magnification? If so, the folks who choose MILs based on merits would likely avoid such a config.

 

[Billy Goat]

There's always the Huskemaw.

1/3 moa turrets (really mils I'm certain but they don’t say that)
MOA reticle, but its not laid out in 1/3's.

Just get those custom turrets anyways.

 

[xsn10s]

Me too, that was a joke. Theyre almost useless when you look at their intended function.

honest question...

How do YOU use it?

I had one also, using MOA, the dials obviously work.
The reticle in Mils serves no function outside of giving you a point of aim and making corrections IF you accurately spot your hit.
I did the math for mine, at max power, it came out to be 3.48 MOA per Mil. Knowing that was ok, but I still trued actual drop data and made a drop card using the reticle as hold over references. It worked pretty well out to around 700.

What I can tell you now is, without a doubt, Mil/mil is 100x easier and faster when reticle/dial/mental math are all the same.

I agree mil/ mil is easier. I generally use it the same way you are. I dial all of my dope and use the reticle for adjusting misses. In the past when the drops work out to whole numbers I tape in a cheat sheet in the lens cover caps for quick Kentucky windage using the mil reticle. Right now it's on a 7mm RM for LR elk, but I might switch it to my 260 AI for coyotes. Same concept of use with the only difference being calculate leads on running game at the lowest magnification. If the leads are better on the 7mm RM then it'll stay on there.

 

[nephewjephew]

I killed my bear this spring doing exactly that. 298yds, (quick drop average gun, yardage -2 =dial) 298yds-2 =1MIL.
I saw the bear headed toward an opening. I ranged the opening just as he came out sooner than I expected. I was sitting on a stepped ledge. I had just enough time to turn around, grab my pack, plop it in front of me upright, dial 1 MIL, flopped the rifle over the pack and got the crosshairs on him. just as I did, he stopped and stood up. I shot him in the chest and hit him about 2" right of poa.
I saw the shot was good in the scope and he went down. He moved a little and I put a second shot in him but he was dead.

From when he came out to the second shot was about 25 seconds, maybe 30.

I could have just held one MIL and saved a few seconds.

That scenario seems awfully familiar…

 

[longrangelead]

That scenario seems awfully familiar…

maybe...

 

[The Harbor Master]

For those using quick drops, do they hold true when shooting at angles? I plugged my load data into a calculator (168gr Berger @ 2700fps) and got mil solutions that are dead on for quick drop to 600yds. If im using a RF that factors angle into the yardage reading and I get, say, 482yds, my quick drop is going be 2.8mil even at angle right?

In my head I dont see how it would matter but I feel like I might be missing something...

 

[SteveAndTheCrigBoys]

For those using quick drops, do they hold true when shooting at angles? I plugged my load data into a calculator (168gr Berger @ 2700fps) and got mil solutions that are dead on for quick drop to 600yds. If im using an RF that factors angle into the yardage reading and I get, say, 482yds, my quick drop is going be 2.8mil even at angle right?

In my head I dont see how it would matter but I feel like I might be missing something...

Recently learned about the Rule of 15 myself. This video was pretty solid at explaining it.

Tried applying it to my golf game last weekend....didn't work

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

For those using quick drops, do they hold true when shooting at angles? I plugged my load data into a calculator (168gr Berger @ 2700fps) and got mil solutions that are dead on for quick drop to 600yds. If im using an RF that factors angle into the yardage reading and I get, say, 482yds, my quick drop is going be 2.8mil even at angle right?

In my head I dont see how it would matter but I feel like I might be missing something...

The yardage is still the yardage. The range finder is already giving you a corrected yardage, factoring in the angle compensation (if it's a properly functioning unit with that feature set).

 

[LukeMc]

I use MOA for hunting

 

[Jordan Smith]

The yardage is still the yardage. The range finder is already giving you a corrected yardage, factoring in the angle compensation (if it's a properly functioning unit with that feature set).

Yup, if the corrected horizontal distance is 428, it doesn't matter what the angle nor the LOS distance to the target is (the LOS distance will vary with the angle, assuming corrected distance is always 428).

 

[wind gypsy]

Yup, if the corrected horizontal distance is 428, it doesn't matter what the angle nor the LOS distance to the target is (the LOS distance will vary with the angle, assuming corrected distance is always 428).

That's not what my ballistic calculators tell me.. Although it takes some extremes to make notable difference.

 

[atmat]

Although it takes some extremes to make notable difference.

^^^ this.

Running some scenarios through a calculator will lead you to just using the angle-compensated distance.

 

[The Harbor Master]

^^^ this.

Running some scenarios through a calculator will lead you to just using the angle-compensated distance.

I've had a couple chances at game in the mountains that were a decent angle but nothing too extreme. I'll probably practice some of those crazy angles just to see what happens, but in real world would probably try for a different angle if possible.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I've had a couple chances at game in the mountains that were a decent angle but nothing too extreme. I'll probably practice some of those crazy angles just to see what happens, but in real world would probably try for a different angle if possible.

I shoot at extreme up hill and down hill angles 4 or 5 days per week. Just use the angle compensated yardage from a good/known range finder and watch the hits come.

Caveats being...

1. You're a decent shooter.
2. Your gun/load information is correct.
3. Your ballistics profiles are good/known/trued when needed.
5. You've corrected for current "feels like" air (DA).
6. You can decently read/call/correct for the wind.
7. Nothing in your rifle or scope setup are causing POI shifts.
8. Nothing in your setup is introducing POI shifts once shooting "not on a bench" (from potentially awkward steep angle positions). Stock touching barrel, parallax in some cases (as a couple examples).

Go shoot and learn and have fun

 

[The Harbor Master]

Measuring a target using mils and thinking of the reticle as a ruler vs thinking linearly in inches is starting to make sense. I assume the issue with measuring a target while using a SFP scope is that it would have to be set to whatever magnification is specified for the reticle to be true...

 

[atmat]

I assume the issue with measuring a target while using a SFP scope is that it would have to be set to whatever magnification is specified for the reticle to be true...

Yep, sub-tensions are true only at one magnification.

 

[Jordan Smith]

That's not what my ballistic calculators tell me.. Although it takes some extremes to make notable difference.

Yes, in the extreme cases LOS distance will start to matter because drag will start to play a larger role.

I'm also talking about simple trigonometry, not Leica's "equivalent horizontal range," which actually factors atmospheric variables into the equation, as well.

In the simple case, horizontal distance = cosine(angle) * LOS distance. For any given horizontal distance, as the angle increases, so does the LOS distance, where cos(angle) and LOS distance are inversely proportional.

 

[SDHNTR]

Measuring a target using mils and thinking of the reticle as a ruler vs thinking linearly in inches is starting to make sense. I assume the issue with measuring a target while using a SFP scope is that it would have to be set to whatever magnification is specified for the reticle to be true...

Bingo. Usually max magnification. Ergo the negative of high mag SFP scopes and shrunken field of view in order to accurately do as you stated.

 

[JF_Idaho]

It doesn't really matter if the reticle is true if you're using the reticle as the ruler. As long as you don't change the magnification between spotting your shot and your follow up.

Edit to add: as long as you hold your correction vs dialing

 

[Jordan Smith]

It doesn't really matter if the reticle is true if you're using the reticle as the ruler. As long as you don't change the magnification between spotting your shot and your follow up.

Edit to add: as long as you hold your correction vs dialing

Bingo. Usually max magnification. Ergo the negative of high mag SFP scopes and shrunken field of view in order to accurately do as you stated.

He literally just mentioned the primary downside of SFP reticles used as rulers.