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

[HuntHarder]

If you didn't have a moa or mil based reticle in whatever you used for spotting then I suggest this. Before hunting work out a system with your hunting partner. Use target total length or height. For height it might be easier for belly to back. But whatever it should be decided prior to hunting and practiced. My buddies and I practiced while hunting rock chucks.

This is exactly what we/I do. Mils or Moa really doesn't matter as long as you both have an understanding if not using a reticle in spotter. Using the animals body with some sort of measurement is typically what you will hear, however I usually will throw out some sort of measurement in conjunction. (Left and right good, 5" below belly. ) This at least gets the shooter to understand generally where they missed. The spotter has the hardest job on the hill if the first shot misses. Accurately judging misses without a reticle is very difficult.

 

[Lawnboi]

Understanding angular measurements is infinitely easier than spotting exactly where your bullet goes in field shooting scenarios.

What’s being argued is a skill that I would guess less than 10% of shooters are proficient at.

 

[xsn10s]

This is exactly what we/I do. Mils or Moa really doesn't matter as long as you both have an understanding if not using a reticle in spotter. Using the animals body with some sort of measurement is typically what you will hear, however I usually will throw out some sort of measurement in conjunction. (Left and right good, 5" below belly. ) This at least gets the shooter to understand generally where they missed. The spotter has the hardest job on the hill if the first shot misses. Accurately judging misses without a reticle is very difficult.

Everyone is different so use what works for you and your hunting/ shooting partners. As long as it works for you all then I'd stick with that.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

20 yard increments equal 1/2 MOA for most rifles in that 300 to 600 yard range. If you read the prior post 400 yards = 2.5 MOA, 500 yards = 5 MOA, and 600 yards = 7.5 MOA.

Quick!! Buck going over the ridge at 540 yards what’s the hold?!? Depending on a guy’s short term memory, that’s 6 MOA knowing nothing other than what I’ve said in this post. That is simple. Quick!! What’s 420?!? Even you thought 3 MOA, after glancing up at the 400 yard hold.

Okay so they are still holding MOA via some sort of reticle. Got it.

I thought maybe you were trying to equate MOA to inches for wins holds as well. Thought maybe you had shooters holding “inches” for both elevation and wind. I’m not smart enough to do that haha.

 

[5811]

Everyone is busting your chops for the typo, but every one of them knew what you ment.

It's not just a typo. It's what people do when they have to convert a linear measurement to an angular measurement in their heads under time and pressure. It's the perfect example of why you shouldnt convert linear measurements to angles and that the conversion is a bad justification for moa.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Everyone is busting your chops for the typo, but every one of them knew what you ment. Every single person here has a hand about 5” across, so to say they have no idea how far 5” is on an animal or rock is silly.

If you can consistently “hold” 5 inches from POI on an elk target, painted like an elk looks, at 500 yards, and make accurate/consistent hits from a hunting position, I’ll delete my Rokslide account and you’ll never have to hear from me again haha.

I’ve had a good chuckle at a hard core MIL guy when his wife was shooting and didn’t know MILs - he didn’t know how to communicate, got frustrated with her, and she really got frustrated with him for being an asshat. That dude is probably single now and has “woman must know MILs” in his dating profile. Lol

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I have both and prefer moa.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Hitting 5” below my aim point at 500 will kill any animal I’m shooting at or have shot in the past. No follow up shot required.

Nice! You’re quite the shooter then. I’m not that good.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

You dont call misses in pecker lengths like i do?! come on

I think I’d have to switch to millimeters, make the number look huge

 

[PredatorSlayer]

First off, in a hunting situation it doesn’t matter. Very few going to be calling out misses in inches or mils from binos or a spotter. I know people are going to say they spot their shots through their scopes…maybe depending on the terrain. If you have a solid set up you should only be missing due to wind holds…if you are spotting your shots its just as easy to hold the reticule more or less with moa as it is mils

 

[TaperPin]

Okay so they are still holding MOA via some sort of reticle. Got it.

I thought maybe you were trying to equate MOA to inches for wins holds as well. Thought maybe you had shooters holding “inches” for both elevation and wind. I’m not smart enough to do that haha.

This normally makes Rokslider heads explode when it’s mentioned, but it is quite easy for someone to combine MOA calls and estimate the impact in inches without a reticle. That 10 mph wind call at 400 yards for example. You don’t like this system, but you remembered it’s 2 MOA, that’s good. Without a reticle, estimating 8” on target is a hand and a half wide. See, you’ve just used your first Kentucky windage MOA to inches wind hold and lived to tell the tail. The old timer rule of thumb is to hold to the upwind edge of the vital zone for 10 mph, which isn’t bad advice for 400 yards and under.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

This normally makes Rokslider heads explode when it’s mentioned, but it is quite easy for someone to combine MOA calls and estimate the impact in inches without a reticle. That 10 mph wind call at 400 yards for example. You don’t like this system, but you remembered it’s 2 MOA, that’s good. Without a reticle, estimating 8” on target is a hand and a half wide. See, you’ve just used your first Kentucky windage MOA to inches wind hold and lived to tell the tail. The old timer rule of thumb is to hold to the upwind edge of the vital zone for 10 mph, which isn’t bad advice for 400 yards and under.

If you only knew how many animals I’ve killed using this exact system you describe haha. I shot this way for decades. I’m dumb and suck so I switched to a much easier and more accurate way about 4 years ago now.

 

[TaperPin]

If you can consistently “hold” 5 inches from POI on an elk target, painted like an elk looks, at 500 yards, and make accurate/consistent hits from a hunting position, I’ll delete my Rokslide account and you’ll never have to hear from me again haha.

I wouldn’t think of it - it’s nice having you around.

I tried reaching onto the taxidermied elk at Scheels to show what a hand width low looks like, but was told to not touch the elk or I’d have to leave.

 

[JohnJohnson]

The idea that someone using mils is somehow able to magically figure drop in their head as if gifted from birth doesn’t match what I see

Notable exception to this would be the 6.5 Creedmoor rule. Divide range by 100 and then subtract 2. Should get you within 0.1-0.2 MRAD of your elevation drop at that range (from like 300-800 or so), if not completely on. How close it is depends on your muzzle velocity but it's pretty forgiving.

 

[Jhconnected]

I wouldn’t think of it - it’s nice having you around.

I tried reaching onto the taxidermied elk at Scheels to show what a hand width low looks like, but was told to not touch the elk or I’d have to leave.

Some things are worth it!

Just get it on camera so we all can enjoy!

 

[Jordan Smith]

If dope says 6.43 I’m using 6.5, and everyone should use 6.5 in that situation. Without more than grade school math in my head that’s a 560 yard shot.

Quite honestly I can’t help if rounding like that is too difficult.

Of course, on a screen it's easy to casually round. But when you're in a stressful situation with lots to think about and execute flawlessly, simpler, even minutely, is advantageous.

Aside from having to round, the number of clicks should line up with the number you need to dial.
- 0.62 MOA -> rounds to 0.5 MOA -> corresponds to 2 clicks
- 0.8 mrad -> 8 clicks. No translation between the angular correction and the number of clicks. Simple.

 

[Jhconnected]

I’ve messed up inches to MOA at distance at the range and I do the maths for a living. It can happen to anyone unless you practice a lot.

 

[TaperPin]

It's not just a typo. It's what people do when they have to convert a linear measurement to an angular measurement in their heads under time and pressure. It's the perfect example of why you shouldnt convert linear measurements to angles and that the conversion is a bad justification for moa.

You’re not wrong that shooters need to simplify and make their system as idiot proof as possible.

 

[SDHNTR]

Most of this thread is over complicating things. Stay in mils or moa, don’t convert to linear measurements ever. Zero at 100 with 10+ shots (because a “zero” at 200 or 300 is less precise) and dial to what you need beyond that. Simple. Thats it, regardless of mils vs moa.

For someone starting out, start in mils as it’s easier to learn and more intuitive. For those who learned in MOA, there are advantages to switching to mils for making quick adjustments, but it’s not a GameChanger for hunting IMO. It may be for shooting games, but I couldn’t care less about that stuff personally.

 

[wapitibob]

Nice! You’re quite the shooter then. I’m not that good.

It has nothing to do with being good, and you knew that. Aim 1/2 way up and inches behind the crease, hitting 5" low will kill Antelope to Elk, and most likely Coues.