Mil is probably better.... If you can judge distance in millimeters or centimeters. I struggle looking at something and thinking " that looks like 13cm". But I naturally think "ok that's about 4 inches". I just never use metric in day to day life but still use imperial for everything except driving. For me MOA is easier but that's due to a lack of experience in metric. Their might be techniques for getting around that.
MRAD vs MOA
- Thread starter Donster 125
- Start date
- Location
- Sherwood Park. AB
Both are units of angular measure.
Don't assign a linear value for compensation.
Use the calibrated ruler in the opric to call corrections.
Some say MOA is finer. Over practical application shooting you cannot out shoot your corrections. Mils is the way to go as base 10 works easiest.
For ranging with the reticle, know the size of the target in. Millimeters then read of the value for mils as read in the optic. Target size divided by mils as read gives range.
I shoot and adjust off the reticle as required.
Frank galli explains why you cannot out shoot your corrections in mils in one of his vids. At practical ranges under realistic conditions Mis reading wind will cause impact variations rather than the variations in mil /moa
Don't assign a linear value for compensation.
Use the calibrated ruler in the opric to call corrections.
Some say MOA is finer. Over practical application shooting you cannot out shoot your corrections. Mils is the way to go as base 10 works easiest.
For ranging with the reticle, know the size of the target in. Millimeters then read of the value for mils as read in the optic. Target size divided by mils as read gives range.
I shoot and adjust off the reticle as required.
Frank galli explains why you cannot out shoot your corrections in mils in one of his vids. At practical ranges under realistic conditions Mis reading wind will cause impact variations rather than the variations in mil /moa
Doesnt matter as lomg as your reticle and adjustments are in the same units ie: Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA
MOA is a finer adjustment than Mils.
They are just two different ways to measure so use what you want and frankly are most comfortable with.
MOA is a finer adjustment than Mils.
They are just two different ways to measure so use what you want and frankly are most comfortable with.
Northaways
Regular
- Location
- Northaways
Own both. Prefer mrad. But if you plan to shoot and share info with buddies that use one or the other suggest you pick what they use to simplify things.
If you scour the EE, most of the mid-higher end stuff that's used and for sale for there are lots of FFP MOA... or asking to trade for MIL/MRAD.
..bench shooters will prefer SFP due to known distances and finer 'less cluttered' reticle fully zoomed. You have to figure out what you want to do with the rifle and buy the optic to match.
Now we have 2 completely different directions in target shooting that have 2 completely different technologies of optically engaging a target. That's just target shooting, not even consider 'hunting' which will probably have BDC reticle, hate to see that market in 2 years from now that scope manufacturers are just getting up to speed with decent performing product.
I'm no professional, just observation.
..bench shooters will prefer SFP due to known distances and finer 'less cluttered' reticle fully zoomed. You have to figure out what you want to do with the rifle and buy the optic to match.
Now we have 2 completely different directions in target shooting that have 2 completely different technologies of optically engaging a target. That's just target shooting, not even consider 'hunting' which will probably have BDC reticle, hate to see that market in 2 years from now that scope manufacturers are just getting up to speed with decent performing product.
I'm no professional, just observation.
Last edited:
This guy has it figured out. If your scope is FFP, look at the correction on the reticle and apply that to your turret, if the scope is SFP then crank it to the predetermined magnification level (most often max power) and treat it like a FFP. I NEVER think of corrections in inches or centimetres, I use MRAD for all my target scopes so I think of my corrections in mils (MRAD=mils, not mm).
If you have to think in inches or cm, use this...1 MRAD is 1/1000 of the distance to your target REGARDLESS of the unit of measure. So you are sitting at 1000 metres, one MRAD is 1 metre, most scopes in MRAD use a 1/10th click adjust so one click is equal to 1/10th of 1 metre, or 10cm, at 1000 metres. If you prefer yards then one MRAD is 1 yard or 36 inches, one click is 1/10th or 3.6 inches. But I question why you would do this when the ruler in front of you eye (reticle) is either in MRAD or MOA, so why say it looks like it is 5.5inches low? Use the ruler (reticle) and measure it in the units of the ruler-either MRAD or MOA and apply that correction to your turret. It is so easy even I can do it.
Bingo.
Shooters love to over complicate stuff to look smarter to non shooters or to other shooters. Like giving a first time shooter a heavy recoiler. Its mostly just over compensation for an inferiority complex.
Shooters love to over complicate stuff to look smarter to non shooters or to other shooters. Like giving a first time shooter a heavy recoiler. Its mostly just over compensation for an inferiority complex.
