Vote - MOA or MIL

[id_jon]

Shoot, measure with reticle, adjust. It’s just that simple, mils or moa.

It seems to me like the desire to stick with moa is that it's easier to do things the hard way with moa. There's no need for converting mils to or from inches, so the difficulty in converting is not necessary. This is all predicated on having a reticle that you can measure with of course, so with simple duplex reticles I can see why people don't care or want to stick with moa.

 

[Lawnboi]

It seems to me like the desire to stick with moa is that it's easier to do things the hard way with moa. There's no need for converting mils to or from inches, so the difficulty in converting is not necessary. This is all predicated on having a reticle that you can measure with of course, so with simple duplex reticles I can see why people don't care or want to stick with moa.

How much drop is 11.75 moa at 568 yards?
How bout 3.5 mrad?

The correct answer is 11.75 minutes and 3.5 mrad.

People like to make things harder than they need to be.

This is the long range forum. I’d venture to guess guys doing it consistently have a ruler as a reticle.

 

[Justin Crossley]

So your calling wind, and plugging it into your rangefinder, basically you have an electronic dope card in the rangefinder? Or taking the reading off the kestrel?

I know shooting long range competitively dosnt fully translate, but it’s hard to argue what works. I hope nrl hunter takes off closer to home for me.

About half the time I judge wind based on what I'm seeing and feeling. The other half of the time I measure it with my Kestrel. I only use the Kestrel for getting conditions. I enter the wind speed and direction into the rangefinder.

For comps with known yardages, I enter all the info into Applied Ballistics and write down my dopes for each target prior to starting the stage. Again, using the Kestrel only for getting conditions.

 

[Lawnboi]

About half the time I judge wind based on what I'm seeing and feeling. The other half of the time I measure it with my Kestrel. I only use the Kestrel for getting conditions. I enter the wind speed and direction into the rangefinder.

For comps with known yardages, I enter all the info into Applied Ballistics and write down my dopes for each target prior to starting the stage. Again, using the Kestrel only for getting conditions.

I can wrap my head around that. I also only use my kestrel for conditions, since I got it it’s mainly lived in the wind screen, just to get me an idea of what I’m feeling and seeing where I am.

I just don’t have a rangefinder or binos that have a solver in them. I fight the urge to get a set of rangefinder binos , but not sure If I’d be willing to mess with wind in them all the time. Would eliminate some time looking at a dope chart for sure.

Being that’s the way you do it, I can see how either form of measure is irrelevant.

 

[Justin Crossley]

How much drop is 11.75 moa at 568 yards?
How bout 3.5 mrad?

The correct answer is 11.75 minutes and 3.5 mrad.

People like to make things harder than they need to be.

This is the long range forum. I’d venture to guess guys doing it consistently have a ruler as a reticle.

Totally correct. The problem is that binoculars and spotting scopes don't have a reticle which leaves the spotter guessing the correction in the case of a miss.

Let's say we are shooting a 10" square target at that example of 568 yards and your buddy misses to the left by 5 inches. An exact error of 10 inches to the left of the point of aim. That error equals about 1.75 moa or .51 mils.

As the spotter (without a reticle) you will need to estimate how far from the center the hit was. I believe it's much easier for most of us to estimate that error in inches. If the spotter estimates the error correctly and comes up with the correction of 10 inches to the right, it's easy to convert that to moa.

If the shooter is using moa the spotter converts the estimated 10-inch error into moa knowing it's about 1 inch per hundred yards. That is a fairly easy calculation for most of us since we know one moa is equal to about 5.7 inches at 568 yards.

If the shooter is using mils the spotter converts the estimated 10-inch error into mils by guessing because they don't have a reticle and they were told on the internet to think in angles. What angle equals a 10-inch error at 568 yards?

Instead, if I was giving that correction in mils my thought process would be: 1 mil equals 3.6 inches per hundred yards, so 1 mil equals 18 inches at 500, so I need about .5 mil correction for a 10-inch error at 568 yards.

Both moa and mil can be figured out in your head but I believe it's simpler to use moa.

 

[Lawnboi]

Totally correct. The problem is that binoculars and spotting scopes don't have a reticle which leaves the spotter guessing the correction in the case of a miss.

Let's say we are shooting a 10" square target at that example of 568 yards and your buddy misses to the left by 5 inches. An exact error of 10 inches to the left of the point of aim. That error equals about 1.75 moa or .51 mils.

As the spotter (without a reticle) you will need to estimate how far from the center the hit was. I believe it's much easier for most of us to estimate that error in inches. If the spotter estimates the error correctly and comes up with the correction of 10 inches to the right, it's easy to convert that to moa.

If the shooter is using moa the spotter converts the estimated 10-inch error into moa knowing it's about 1 inch per hundred yards. That is a fairly easy calculation for most of us since we know one moa is equal to about 5.7 inches at 568 yards.

If the shooter is using mils the spotter converts the estimated 10-inch error into mils by guessing because they don't have a reticle and they were told on the internet to think in angles. What angle equals a 10-inch error at 568 yards?

Instead, if I was giving that correction in mils my thought process would be: 1 mil equals 3.6 inches per hundred yards, so 1 mil equals 18 inches at 500, so I need about .5 mil correction for a 10-inch error at 568 yards.

Both moa and mil can be figured out in your head but I believe it's simpler to use moa.

Both require more mental math than I think most are going to use in a follow up shot situation on something alive. But I can guess 10 inches of open space on my scope too just as the spotter without a reticle. Just have to ignore the hash marks.

I’m not disagreeing that they don’t work I just think I mils work better for calling wind the way I do. My brain also works better in tenths. I grew up on minutes, started my long range learning on minutes and now don’t have a minute scope. I did so cause it’s easier for me. Familiarity makes it easy. I don’t have to guess at a rough mil elevation hold out to 500 yards on most of my rifles that are in that 2750-2900fps range. I couldn’t stand pulling out my minute scope and having to look up drops all over on targets I know in mrads.

I know they can both be made to work. Just most of the arguments I see for minutes are bologna.

It’s a good topic and good discussion, one that will still get argued in 10 years. We will see if then I’m full on drinking the mph gun Koolaid, but so far it’s been easier and faster for me to call wind in mrads without any doubt in my mind. Prior to this year Iv done the same as many on here and had a generic chart, or needed to plug it in my solver. I do think a solver still has a place but I havnt made a wind chart since going to this method.

 

[BlackTail]

For those shooting moa, how are you determining your wind hold in the field? Chart? Gun number?

Lawnboi,
I do essentially the same thing you Mil guys do. I’ve always appreciated the simplicity of the Mil wind holds and wondered why that couldn’t work with MOA. The problem I noticed was people were trying to make 1/4 work in a 1/10 system. I won’t try to explain how I got here because I think it would get lost in translation but only give the cliff notes. I figure out which wind value moves my bullet 1.50 MOA (6 clicks) at 600 yards. DONE! Now you’re 1 click for that wind every hundred yards. This has worked with every rifle I have out to 700-800 yards then I’ll start adding 1 click. Here’s my 6.5 Creed for example. A 5 mph full value wind moves my bullet (140 Berger Hybrid @ 2750) 1.41 MOA (6 clicks) at 600 yards.

100 yards = .21 MOA = 1 click
200 yards = .43 MOA = 2 clicks
300 yards = .65 MOA = 3 clicks
400 yards = .89 MOA = 4 clicks
500 yards = 1.14 MOA = 5 clicks
600 yards = 1.41 MOA = 6 clicks
700 yards = 1.70 MOA = 7 clicks
800 yards = 2.02 MOA = 8 clicks

Again, this has worked for every rifle I shoot (6.5 Creed, 6.5 PRC, 7 SAUM, 30-06, 30 Nosler) out to 700-800 yards.

 

[Lawnboi]

Lawnboi,
I do essentially the same thing you Mil guys do. I’ve always appreciated the simplicity of the Mil wind holds and wondered why that couldn’t work with MOA. The problem I noticed was people were trying to make 1/4 work in a 1/10 system. I won’t try to explain how I got here because I think it would get lost in translation but only give the cliff notes. I figure out which wind value moves my bullet 1.50 MOA (6 clicks) at 600 yards. DONE! Now you’re 1 click for that wind every hundred yards. This has worked with every rifle I have out to 700-800 yards then I’ll start adding 1 click. Here’s my 6.5 Creed for example. A 5 mph full value wind moves my bullet (140 Berger Hybrid @ 2750) 1.41 MOA (6 clicks) at 600 yards.

100 yards = .21 MOA = 1 click
200 yards = .43 MOA = 2 clicks
300 yards = .65 MOA = 3 clicks
400 yards = .89 MOA = 4 clicks
500 yards = 1.14 MOA = 5 clicks
600 yards = 1.41 MOA = 6 clicks
700 yards = 1.70 MOA = 7 clicks
800 yards = 2.02 MOA = 8 clicks

Again, this has worked for every rifle I shoot (6.5 Creed, 6.5 PRC, 7 SAUM, 30-06, 30 Nosler) out to 700-800 yards.

Have you found it translates up? As in a 10mph wind is 2 clicks per 100 yards? That I think is the beauty in the mil system. Within reason obviously wind number goes down based on what your shooting at that 5-800 yard range. With the mil mph gun number if I have a 5mph gun, I know my wind hold for 5,10,15,20,25. Those can easily be halved for different values as well and you can really go nuts and break out a wind rose if you want.

Cool way to figure it out for yourself. I’ll stick with mils though!

 

[BlackTail]

Have you found it translates up? As in a 10mph wind is 2 clicks per 100 yards? That I think is the beauty in the mil system. Within reason obviously wind number goes down based on what your shooting at that 5-800 yard range. With the mil mph gun number if I have a 5mph gun, I know my wind hold for 5,10,15,20,25. Those can easily be halved for different values as well and you can really go nuts and break out a wind rose if you want.

Cool way to figure it out for yourself. I’ll stick with mils though!

Yeah it holds up well! Double wind value, double the clicks. Half wind value, half as many clicks.

And no, I fully realize this won’t convert anyone to MOA. Just a way to keep you Mil guys from having all the fun!!

 

[Justin Crossley]

For those guys using the mph wind method, how much of a difference do you see with a 3 o'clock wind vs a 9 o'clock wind?

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

For those guys using the mph wind method, how much of a difference do you see with a 3 o'clock wind vs a 9 o'clock wind?

There is absolutely no difference when using my ballistic app (iSnipe), atleast when looking at 1,000 yards and in. I havnt verified that in real world shooting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wind gypsy]

According to the poll, it would appear moa would sell faster....

A lot of people answering the poll on this forum are probably shooting with MOA hunting scopes and not buying an ATACR either

I haven't personally seen a difference in price or speed at which something sells based on moa vs mil.

Most FFP scopes do cost more than most SFP scopes though for sure. That's another debate for another day though.

Used to be notable difference when i was buying/selling more scopes on sites like snipers hide where these type of scopes were more common. Now everyone in western hunting wants to shoot long range and they have grown a ton in popularity with the hunting crowd who still have a fair bit of folks using MOA.

 

[Lawnboi]

For those guys using the mph wind method, how much of a difference do you see with a 3 o'clock wind vs a 9 o'clock wind?

While I can’t say that it matter or not, I split the difference. I’m not shooting or calling wind to the tenth. For those who don’t use applied ballistics or Hornady 4dof you have spin and aerodynamic jump effecting both elevation and wind at distance. I view the difference in 9-3oclock wind similar to if I’m looking at a chart trying to decide if aerodynamic jump will be a factor. So guys say it’s all bologna but I have seen aerodynamic jump in action. Wind I can’t say because it’s such an unknown.

I also think there is a time and place for a solver. When it gets complicated that is when I’ll pull it out. From 3-700 I’m not touching anything to determine wind. Past that I’ll be a little more picky in regards to angle as well.

If I’m shooting a distance beyond my guns number, where 1mph means 1 tenth. It turns a lot more into a guess.

 

[Justin Crossley]

These two screen shots are pulled from AB shooting my comp rifle at 600 yards. The bullet is a 147 ELD-M at 2985 fps. Notice that I'm getting a difference of .2 mils when the wind switches from left to right. That means 4.32" at 600 yards. Does that really matter in a PRS match? Probably not. But I think it matters for hunting. Estimating wind is one of the hardest parts of long range shooting. Seems like you would want to reduce as many variables as possible instead of introducing more and stacking tolerances.

 

[BRTreedogs]

These two screen shots are pulled from AB shooting my comp rifle at 600 yards. The bullet is a 147 ELD-M at 2985 fps. Notice that I'm getting a difference of .2 mils when the wind switches from left to right. That means 4.32" at 600 yards. Does that really matter in a PRS match? Probably not. But I think it matters for hunting. Estimating wind is one of the hardest parts of long range shooting. Seems like you would want to reduce as many variables as possible instead of introducing more and stacking tolerances.

View attachment 405488

View attachment 405489

4.3 " is definitely inside the vitals of any big game animal.

 

[Lawnboi]

If you cut it, and shoot for .5. Can you call/outshoot a tenth?

Hornady 4dof with my 6.5 shooting 140 hybrids at 2800 leaves me with a tenth. .6 and .7. The rifle is shot as a 6mph rifle.

I don’t split tenths either, 2.16” is a tenth at 600.

This is all for a guess at a fluid wind that is changing constantly.

 

[wind gypsy]

These two screen shots are pulled from AB shooting my comp rifle at 600 yards. The bullet is a 147 ELD-M at 2985 fps. Notice that I'm getting a difference of .2 mils when the wind switches from left to right. That means 4.32" at 600 yards. Does that really matter in a PRS match? Probably not. But I think it matters for hunting. Estimating wind is one of the hardest parts of long range shooting. Seems like you would want to reduce as many variables as possible instead of introducing more and stacking tolerances.

View attachment 405488

View attachment 405489

I think it matters in a match and in hunting.

Aiming with a built in error of 4.3" compounded with any error in the same direction and you can be off notably at 600 yards.

One of the reasons why the more i shot at long range and learned about the factors at play, the less confident i felt about shooting animals at extended distances.

 

[ID_Matt]

Totally correct. The problem is that binoculars and spotting scopes don't have a reticle which leaves the spotter guessing the correction in the case of a miss.

Let's say we are shooting a 10" square target at that example of 568 yards and your buddy misses to the left by 5 inches. An exact error of 10 inches to the left of the point of aim. That error equals about 1.75 moa or .51 mils.

As the spotter (without a reticle) you will need to estimate how far from the center the hit was. I believe it's much easier for most of us to estimate that error in inches. If the spotter estimates the error correctly and comes up with the correction of 10 inches to the right, it's easy to convert that to moa.

If the shooter is using moa the spotter converts the estimated 10-inch error into moa knowing it's about 1 inch per hundred yards. That is a fairly easy calculation for most of us since we know one moa is equal to about 5.7 inches at 568 yards.

If the shooter is using mils the spotter converts the estimated 10-inch error into mils by guessing because they don't have a reticle and they were told on the internet to think in angles. What angle equals a 10-inch error at 568 yards?

Instead, if I was giving that correction in mils my thought process would be: 1 mil equals 3.6 inches per hundred yards, so 1 mil equals 18 inches at 500, so I need about .5 mil correction for a 10-inch error at 568 yards.

Both moa and mil can be figured out in your head but I believe it's simpler to use moa.

I agree with this. Definitely makes it hard to do the mil math in your head vs moa. HOWEVER, wouldn't you be better off to avoid math all together. As in when the spotter says you missed 10" left, to already be back at your original POA and measure that quickly in your reticle. Oh look, that is 0.5 mils or 1.75 moa or whatever your reticle says, move that hash to center and squeeze.

Versus having to think, well he said 10"... what is our distance again? How many MOA is that and where is that in my reticle or how many clicks do i adjust and which way?

 

[Justin Crossley]

I think it matters in a match and in hunting.

Aiming with a built in error of 4.3" compounded with any error in the same direction and you can be off notably at 600 yards.

One of the reasons why the more i shot at long range and learned about the factors at play, the less confident i felt about shooting animals at extended distances.

Bingo. I continue to learn and continue to realize my true limits.

I agree with this. Definitely makes it hard to do the mil math in your head vs moa. HOWEVER, wouldn't you be better off to avoid math all together. As in when the spotter says you missed 10" left, to already be back at your original POA and measure that quickly in your reticle. Oh look, that is 0.5 mils or 1.75 moa or whatever your reticle says, move that hash to center and squeeze.

Versus having to think, well he said 10"... what is our distance again? How many MOA is that and where is that in my reticle or how many clicks do i adjust and which way?

It is way better to see your own miss, measure with your reticle, and send a quick and accurate follow-up.

In that instance, the unit of measure makes zero difference. Even a SFP reticle works because the actual unit is irrelevant since you are correcting with a scale.

The math comes in when you don't see your impact well or at all and are relying on help from your spotter who doesn't have a reticle.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

It’s interesting to see that MOA still has a sizeable lead when the “strictly MILS” camp seems to be much more “gatekeeper” about this topic based on comments.