You are Here:
Mil vs. moa

Author (Read 3701 times)

Mil vs. moa
« on: January 14, 2016, 06:00:55 AM »
 

Tandemdooley

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 2
    Posts
  • Karma: 0
  • FNG
Wondering what the benefit of switching to mills would be. I've been using moa for several years and have no issue shoot prairie dogs out to 800 with it but going to try and stretch out to the 1400 range and was debating learning mills (I know it's not that hard) or just sticking with moa. Main reason to switch is one of my shooting,hunting, and completion buddies is there already so it would make calls easier. Thanks just looking for some input.
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2016, 10:15:12 AM »
 

gebhardt02

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 12
    Posts
  • Karma: 0
  • FNG
I switched over to mils a couple years ago when I started getting into shooting more competitions.  Nearly everybody else was talking in mils, so making the switch made sense.  I also find the numbers easier to manage; 7.2 mils compared to 24.75 MOA for same distance.

Geb
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2016, 11:06:07 AM »
 

29aholic

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 42
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
I like MOA personally, probably because I am used to it. My first decent scope had a mil reticle but moa turrets. I dial for elevation and hold for wind so I would build my range cards in moa for elevation and mils for wind.

I recently got a MK 4 Leupold that had a TMR reticle but still had moa turrets. The reticle was canted so when I sent it off I asked them to change the reticle to the new TSMOA reticle which they did...for free. I really like it so far but haven't had a chance to really get it out yet. It is kind of like a Horus but in moa.
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2016, 04:59:11 PM »
 

Raptor005

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 24
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • Raptor
The main difference between MILs and MOA would be the ease of the math (see below), however, with today's technology (ballistics calculators, LRFs, scopes with matching turrets and reticle- what a concept!), it is really up to the shooter and personal preference.  You'll find debates for one or the other anywhere you look, but it comes down to what you are comfortable with.  The biggest thing to look for, is a scope with matching turrets and reticle so you can make your own corrections without any math!

MIL Conversion
1 MIL @ 100 yards = 3.6 inches
1 MIL @ 1000 yards = 36 inches/1 yard
1 MIL @ 100 meters = 10cm
1 MIL @ 1000 meters = 100cm/1 meter

MOA Conversion
1 MOA @ 100 yards = 1.047 inches
1 MOA @ 1000 yards = 10.47 inches
1 MOA @ 100 meters = 29.1cm (or something close to it)
1 MOA @ 1000 meters = 291cm (or something close to it)
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2016, 09:08:47 AM »
 

Kanem

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 45
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
use what you feel comfortable with.  I personally switched to mils to have a wider selection of reticles available with finer sustentions.  Also you nailed it at a match it is one less thing to do as to always be converting wind calls from mils to Moa.  There is a lot of time to be focused and if trying to do math as you are walking to the line is your thing run what you want.  There is at least 1 top 15 shooter who shot moa all last year.  most shoot mils out of convince not because is better or worse.  I personally have been running a Kahles with the SKMR2 reticle and love the ability to get a wind hold down to 1/10 of a Mil.  I am simply not aware of a moa reticle that is finer than 1/2 moa.  mk
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2016, 09:20:41 AM »
 

crowdog7

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 17
    Posts
  • Karma: 0
  • FNG
Last year I bought a Burris XTR II (5-25) in MOA and am very happy with it. I've been using MOA for a lot of years & am comfortable with it. It's also a finer graduation downrange with 1/4 moa being .25" and 1/10 mil being .36". The only downside as mentioned earlier is having to do the math when comparing come-ups with other shooters.
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2016, 02:43:06 PM »
 

Captacademy

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 6
    Posts
  • Karma: 0
  • FNG
I also just switched over to Mils, as everyone else that shoots competitively was shooting Mils and I wanted to be on the same page.  If I were just hunting or shooting I would have stayed with MOA.
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2016, 03:40:23 AM »
 

pfiddy

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 4
    Posts
  • Karma: 0
  • FNG
I switched over to mils a couple years ago when I started getting into shooting more competitions.  Nearly everybody else was talking in mils, so making the switch made sense.  I also find the numbers easier to manage; 7.2 mils compared to 24.75 MOA for same distance.

Geb

Im in the process of switching for the same reasons. The transition is easier than I expected.
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2016, 10:11:16 PM »
 

Alpine

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 38
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
They are both an angular unit of measure, so don't get worked up about the math.  Just dial the number that your DOPE card or Ballistics Program tells you.  It's that easy!
 

Re: Mil vs. moa
« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2016, 11:07:03 PM »
 

TBACRAY

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 10
    Posts
  • Karma: 0
  • FNG
Alpine hit the nail on the head. Doesn't matter. I have both, I just dial what the dope card tells me.