MOA or MRAD at the ranges?
- Thread starter thirdeye462
- Start date
back40sniper
CGN Regular
- Location
- South east Sask.
Somewhere an old teacher of mine is shaking their head in shame. Also, I feel no guilt in confusing thousand with thousandth. It's their fault for not teaching me marksmanship theory... if only
You ever watch King of the two miles? Aint none of them using mils. All of their wind calls are in MOA. They both have theyre pros and cons but it comes down to what the users comfortable with. Im old and use both but I grew up during the change from imperial to metric so i was taught in both. Metric is so much more sensible, like most European things.
I would argue that ELR is a different beast again one of the discipline specific things. In F Class I use MOA because the target rings are in MOA and you get sighters. In PRS Gun number wind calls work very well 900M in and are very quick.
ICFRA ( International Confederation of Fullbore Rifle Associations) is the World wide governing body of fullbore, and I'm pretty certain they use target based on MOA.
1/2 MOA Vbull, and a 1MOA bull, 2MOA inner, 3MOA Magpie, etc.
Cat
How so? Both MIL and MOA are just angular measurements. A "system" that would work for one would work for the other.
I would think MOA would be better for most people to adjust misses. NOBODY would ever say, "15 cm right".
You are correct in that you would not call misses in cm but rather in mils. But gun number is a quick method of calculating initial wind holds. For instance a .308 at sea level is a 4 mph gun in that with a full 4 mph wind value you would need .4 mills at 400. .5 at 500 etc. works well with a .308 out to 800 where you have to start adding .1 or .2 to it. With 6mm and 6.5s it works even better out further. They are generally considered 5 mph guns. The mental math for MOA is just not as clean and harder to do it does not align the same way to your distance. This is for your initial wind call after that you are using your reticle to measure and apply corrections in mils. Once you know what it takes to hit it is easy to back calculate to get the true effective wind in that position.
Its a moot argument
Most of you are using Kestrel or technology to give you your compensations
For distance you are eventually only going to be working off DOPE anyway
Your reticles have hash marks in your unit of choice anyways
In the action you adjust wind by target widths, not an angle
Everyone judges/rates their guns in MOA, and yet we all recomend MRAD because "thats what everyone else will be using for wind calls"
Target sizes are dictated by MOA
Canted rails are in MOA
Youre own personal performance is in MOA ("I can shoot 4moa standing")
Its also somehow the only metric unit we decide to use in shooting? Where are the 5.58mm PRS Rimfire divisions?
And then you learn more and the real long range guys are all using MOA because the subdivision is a physically smaller amount.
Im starting to think this whole MRAD thing was something carried over from the military that we got advertised into thinking was the newest slice of bread!
Most of you are using Kestrel or technology to give you your compensations
For distance you are eventually only going to be working off DOPE anyway
Your reticles have hash marks in your unit of choice anyways
In the action you adjust wind by target widths, not an angle
Everyone judges/rates their guns in MOA, and yet we all recomend MRAD because "thats what everyone else will be using for wind calls"
Target sizes are dictated by MOA
Canted rails are in MOA
Youre own personal performance is in MOA ("I can shoot 4moa standing")
Its also somehow the only metric unit we decide to use in shooting? Where are the 5.58mm PRS Rimfire divisions?
And then you learn more and the real long range guys are all using MOA because the subdivision is a physically smaller amount.
Im starting to think this whole MRAD thing was something carried over from the military that we got advertised into thinking was the newest slice of bread!
Mrad does work well when using the system to its capacity to actually do measurements, either distance or target size
the math is much easier in decimals and turrets/reticles are in 1/10ths instead of 1/4s or 1/8ths
but we get fed target sizes and distances in US measurements in the games like NRL and BCPRL and CRPS
so yes, a moot point, but maybe mrad is more Canadian, I'll go with that
the math is much easier in decimals and turrets/reticles are in 1/10ths instead of 1/4s or 1/8ths
but we get fed target sizes and distances in US measurements in the games like NRL and BCPRL and CRPS
so yes, a moot point, but maybe mrad is more Canadian, I'll go with that
I don't understand why it matters what linear unit of measurement target distances are given in. Nobody is calculating target size or wind corrections in inches/cm during a PRS match. And almost everybody is using some sort of ballistic calculator rather than a hard dope card.
I see MOA generally more popular in target sports that have known target sizes and distances. Often they use second focal plane scopes, so knowing the target size/rings is important for dialing.... Otherwise, with FFP scopes, it doesn't matter, but typically MRAD is used in most sports where FFP is common.
