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

[Jordan Smith]

I use moa on everything. To me it’s much simpler.

IME, only those who haven’t given mrad a fair chance prefer MOA. Those that have, stick with mrad and recognize its advantages.

 

[06 SB]

Not everyone. I actually started with mils but just did not like the less precise graduations. It seemed I always was a .1 mil off. When using MOA, I do not notice this as much. It could be just my weird math brain though.

 

[The Guide]

Not everyone. I actually started with mils but just did not like the less precise graduations. It seemed I always was a .1 mil off. When using MOA, I do not notice this as much. It could be just my weird math brain though.

I think with Mils it is even more important to have a good zero from a large shot group and using the actual median middle for your zero point. Far too many people find it hard to accept that on their zero there will be shots above, below, and to each side of their zero point so the zero gets put a little higher than it should be.

Jay

 

[JohnJohnson]

Not everyone. I actually started with mils but just did not like the less precise graduations. It seemed I always was a .1 mil off. When using MOA, I do not notice this as much. It could be just my weird math brain though.

Either you're a world-class benchrest shooter or it's your brain.

 

[Brock63]

Used MIL in military but all of my scopes from a kid through adulthood have been MOA for hunting. Thats all we had. MIL is easier to learn as is base 10...especially for calculations and using reticle to range known/average sized objects. It is important that if using a spotter or ballistics calculator, range finder, etc...that everything is set to same system.
For hunting situations...not sure there is an advantage using MIL over MOA. If you are a hunter and have your range finder ballistics calculator, and scope reticle/adjustments all in MOA.....I find it hard to believe you are at disadvantage in any way as it is just a form of measurement. I am lazy and cheap and dont want to change all my scopes over to MIL and even buying new scopes for new rifles...I keep it all MOA as that is what my 30-06, 7mm RemMag and 300 WinMag were set up with in highschool, college and early years of military in 80s. So I just choose to keep it all consistent... I dont use a spotter to call out impacts or to help walk bullets on target...is just me determining distance. Wind is a much bigger factor in my opinion and the hardest to learn to judge....and feel more time shooting and learning to judge wind is a bigger advantage than whether using MOA or MIL.

 

[Harvey_NW]

IME, only those who haven’t given mrad a fair chance prefer MOA. Those that have, stick with mrad and recognize its advantages.

When you have a ballistic solver in hand and only rely on solutions to shoot past practical distances, there is no advantage.

 

[Jordan Smith]

Used MIL in military but all of my scopes from a kid through adulthood have been MOA for hunting. Thats all we had. MIL is easier to learn as is base 10...especially for calculations and using reticle to range known/average sized objects. It is important that if using a spotter or ballistics calculator, range finder, etc...that everything is set to same system.
For hunting situations...not sure there is an advantage using MIL over MOA. If you are a hunter and have your range finder ballistics calculator, and scope reticle/adjustments all in MOA.....I find it hard to believe you are at disadvantage in any way as it is just a form of measurement. I am lazy and cheap and dont want to change all my scopes over to MIL and even buying new scopes for new rifles...I keep it all MOA as that is what my 30-06, 7mm RemMag and 300 WinMag were set up with in highschool, college and early years of military in 80s. So I just choose to keep it all consistent... I dont use a spotter to call out impacts or to help walk bullets on target...is just me determining distance. Wind is a much bigger factor in my opinion and the hardest to learn to judge....and feel more time shooting and learning to judge wind is a bigger advantage than whether using MOA or MIL.

I get it guys. I was in the same boat. I spent years hunting and shooting at distance with MOA scopes, a ballistic solver (anybody remember Exbal on a Palm Pilot?), and a state-of-the-art rangefinder (crap by today's standards). When I started experimenting with MIL with an open mind, the advantages were clear. I reluctantly switched my entire MOA fleet over to MIL, over time.

There's no question that judging wind is a higher-value topic than deciding between MIL and MOA, but we're discussing the minutia here. "It's just a form of measurement" is a bit of an oversimplification, and not all metrological systems are created equal, from a utility and pragmatism perspective.

When you have a ballistic solver in hand and only rely on solutions to shoot past practical distances, there is no advantage.

There is, even if some don't want to admit it to themselves (or they haven't worked with MIL systems enough to appreciate the small advantages over MOA). BTDT, and we've discussed it here previously.

 

[Brock63]

I get it guys. I was in the same boat. I spent years hunting and shooting at distance with MOA scopes, a ballistic solver (anybody remember Exbal on a Palm Pilot?), and a state-of-the-art rangefinder (crap by today's standards). When I started experimenting with MIL with an open mind, the advantages were clear. I reluctantly switched my entire MOA fleet over to MIL, over time.

There's no question that judging wind is a higher-value topic than deciding between MIL and MOA, but we're discussing the minutia here. "It's just a form of measurement" is a bit of an oversimplification, and not all metrological systems are created equal, from a utility and pragmatism perspective.

There is, even if some don't want to admit it to themselves (or they haven't worked with MIL systems enough to appreciate the small advantages over MOA). BTDT, and we've discussed it here previously.

I hear you...but not heard anyone really express the advantages outside of competition or military application.....since I am assuming, maybe wrongly, that most here are hunters first. Would you mind, seriously, explaining what you found that shows that MIL is better for hunting? I am more than willing to talk on phone too if too much....trying to learn as would need to be a visible improvement and advantage for me to swap everything I got in my two safes over to MIL....LOL