MRAD or MOA?
- Thread starter pat84
- Start date
The key is to have the reticle and the adjustments in the same unit of measure...either Mrad or MOA. That is key. The unit of measures are slightly different with .1 milrad being slightly more course that .25 MOA. Either will work but I personally perfer mils....
The First focal plan means that the reticle will change with the power so that the width of the reticle (in mrad or MOA) remains constant at any power setting. If you have a particularly slim reticle, it could be a little more difficult to use at the lower settings or if it is too course...then at full power, it is hard to see with a large reticle. On a second focal plan...the reticle remains constant however you can only use it for ranging at certain power settings. I personally have FFP for all my scopes.
The First focal plan means that the reticle will change with the power so that the width of the reticle (in mrad or MOA) remains constant at any power setting. If you have a particularly slim reticle, it could be a little more difficult to use at the lower settings or if it is too course...then at full power, it is hard to see with a large reticle. On a second focal plan...the reticle remains constant however you can only use it for ranging at certain power settings. I personally have FFP for all my scopes.
MOA are a little easier to understand in you think in Imperial, if you were raised with metric then Mill Rad is probably easier. I personally like the MOA system better, specifically for using the reticle to range. My main hunting rifle has a Mill-Dot reticule but MOA turrets, and I find it very easy to use as long as I remember that 1 Mill= 3.6 MOA. Easy peasy.
As far as FFP is concerned, I like the FFP... unless I have to pay for it. really, if your gonna be shooting very far you scopes gonna be cranked to max magnification anyways, so it doesnt really matter. just my .02.
Ohh if you want to learn about Mill/MOA calculations and how it all works there is a free game called ShooterReady online and it is good to get you started. Hope I've helped.
As far as FFP is concerned, I like the FFP... unless I have to pay for it. really, if your gonna be shooting very far you scopes gonna be cranked to max magnification anyways, so it doesnt really matter. just my .02.
Ohh if you want to learn about Mill/MOA calculations and how it all works there is a free game called ShooterReady online and it is good to get you started. Hope I've helped.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
Most LR shooters converse in MOA comeups and ballistics program default to this.
Mrad to me is a very coarse measue and not easy on the mental computer if you have to do some math.
I agree, that if the reticle and the adjustments are the same, it is so much easier to dial the turrents WHEN using your reticle for adjustments.
But with an MOA turrent and mildot reticle, you can still get it done very quickly by either knowing each space is 3.6min or adjusting the variable mag so the reticle indexes in MOA (2nd focal plane scopes make this easy - kind of).
My drop charts are in MOA, my turrents are in MOA, the reticles are typically mildot so kind of MOA if you consider the fractions. Works very well cause I use the MOA chart to handle the dial up and the reticle for wind doping. I rarely change my windage on my scope unless there is a very steady condition.
I would love to see picket fence reticles with 1 or 2 MOA spacings in the Sightron line up.
I really don't see why we need to have fraction/decimal math in scope adjustments.
Jerry
Mrad to me is a very coarse measue and not easy on the mental computer if you have to do some math.
I agree, that if the reticle and the adjustments are the same, it is so much easier to dial the turrents WHEN using your reticle for adjustments.
But with an MOA turrent and mildot reticle, you can still get it done very quickly by either knowing each space is 3.6min or adjusting the variable mag so the reticle indexes in MOA (2nd focal plane scopes make this easy - kind of).
My drop charts are in MOA, my turrents are in MOA, the reticles are typically mildot so kind of MOA if you consider the fractions. Works very well cause I use the MOA chart to handle the dial up and the reticle for wind doping. I rarely change my windage on my scope unless there is a very steady condition.
I would love to see picket fence reticles with 1 or 2 MOA spacings in the Sightron line up.
I really don't see why we need to have fraction/decimal math in scope adjustments.
Jerry
This is just my opinion but I think to much is made of having to use Mils(or MOA) in BOTH reticle and turrets. I don't see the problem in using the mil-rad reticle to determine distance, the math is really not that hard, like anything just a bit of practice. Once you've determined the distance just dial in your calculation for that distance. Where's the problem? Using the dots for holdover just means you have to go out and actually do some shooting(oohh, not that again, the pain) to find out what the dots coincide with for distance and windage as well. So what if your dial is in MOA, you have to figure what that corresponds to for your load anyway. Just for the scopes I've looked through, I wouldn't bother with the FFP. Sure the calculations are the same no matter the mag. but if you dial to a high power, the reticle is so thick it makes accurate calculations difficult for the longer ranges the real reason you're using a mil-dot scope in the first place. This is just me though.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
Not always true and really depends on the reticle installed.
I did a review of a USO scope recently and they set their reticle at full mag to look 'normal'. When you dial back, it gets itty bitty and essentially becomes a 'black' crosshair.
Worked very nicely.
So it is possible to have FFP work but for the money....
Jerry
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
I'm not a fan of FFP scopes as I don't like the changing reticle. Not that they're a bad idea, but they're not right for me. I'm more likely to be using a rangefinder than doing math in my head anyways. Mental math would give me about as accurate a result as simply estimating the range visually.
TheGamerXxX
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- North of the 49, Manitoba
