MRAD vs. inches vs. MOA

No, your math is all wrong.

Actually, if you were as smart as you are tying to prove you are, you'd realize that my math is perfect. The word math is defined as the process for manipulating numbers, I did that perfectly.

So if you want to quibble over things that's OK, I don't do the math anyways, I use a range finder that calculates the drops for me so I don't have to screw things up dividing in my head with multi-decimal numbers.
 
12 (as in 1200 yards) ×1.047 (1MOA at 100 yards)=12.564.
425 inches of drop ÷ 12.564=33.826806.
Looks like 33.8 was pretty dang spot on to me.

You realize that you just calculated the number MOA drop at 1200 yards don't you?

In words you wrote twelve times the number of inches in a MOA at 100 yards, that equals 12.564 inches per MOA at 1200 yards.

Then you said how many times will 12.564 (one MOA at 1200 yards) divide in to 425 (the drop at 1200 yards), and the answer is 33.826806 (the number of MOA drop).
 
You realize that you just calculated the number MOA drop at 1200 yards don't you?

In words you wrote twelve times the number of inches in a MOA at 100 yards, that equals 12.564 inches per MOA at 1200 yards.

Then you said how many times will 12.564 (one MOA at 1200 yards) divide in to 425 (the drop at 1200 yards), and the answer is 33.826806 (the number of MOA drop).

Yes. The OP had his drop in inches, then MIL and MOA. Several folks said the MOA figure was off. I disagreed. Hence my post.
 
Actually, if you were as smart as you are tying to prove you are, you'd realize that my math is perfect. The word math is defined as the process for manipulating numbers, I did that perfectly.

So if you want to quibble over things that's OK, I don't do the math anyways, I use a range finder that calculates the drops for me so I don't have to screw things up dividing in my head with multi-decimal numbers.
Dude, you should really stop talking, haha. Dividing the inches of drop by the range is WRONG. TOTALLY WRONG, LOL.

Your 35.4 MOA "solution" results in a miss. The actual answer is 33.8 like several of us posted. You missed by over 20 inches, haha.

The conversion from MILS to MOA IS NOT 3.6, haha. Your confused yet again.

1 mil is 3.6 INCHES (not MOA) at 100 yards.

You multiply MILS by 3.438 to convert to MOA

Math isn't for everybody.
 
Please check my sanity.

If my app said the bullet needs to come up 425inches at 1200 yards then this would be 9.8 MRAD and 33.8 MOA?

I am using (drop in inches/3.6)/(distance in yds/100). = MRAD

Is this correct?


Thanks!
Absolutely correct.

1mil=3.6in @100 x 12(hundreds)=43.2in. is 1mil at 1200 yards
425in. drop at 1200 yards/43.2in=9.83mils
9.83mils x 3.438(#of moa per mil)=33.82moa
 
Last edited:
Oh, man! Please, a little more respect here! Remember that this forum is for members to ask questions and get help from other members. It is not a vehicle for members to slag off on each other.
I always find that the whole subject of mils and moa is very poorly understood by the shooting community. Even the many "expert" videos on the subject do more to confuse than enlighten.
First, understand that a mil, or milliradian, is by definition a thousandth part of a radian. And a radian is an arc (or part of a circle) whose length is equal to the radius. So at a range (or radius) of 100 yards (3600 inches), 1 mil = 3.6 inches EXACTLY. And at 100 meters, 1 mil = 10 cm EXACTLY. To revert to the original example, there are 43,200 inches in 1200 yards, so at that distance 1 mil = 43.2 inches EXACTLY. And a correction of 425 inches is therefore 425 / 43.2 = 9.838 mils. Note that the value derived by TANGENT using the arctan trig function is ever so slightly different from this because we're dealing with spherical measurements here rather than perfect triangles. But at this level of precision we are stepping out of the real world and into the world of mathematical fantasy, for shooting purposes. So let 9.8 mils stand.
Just keep this 1:1000 relationship in mind and forget all the other formulas you've ever heard on the subject of mils.
Second, understand that the common use of 1 moa = 1 inch at 100 yards is an APPROXIMATION for convenience in the field. For practical purposes the approximation is useful and sufficiently accurate. A more precise value is 1.0476 inch, but let's not get anal here. For precise calculations, you need to be aware that the error of 0.05 inch per 100 yards may accumulate to something significant when you're shooting past your back fence. (My back fence is a long way out.)
Again, please mind your manners, folks. Trolls aren't welcome, and no one likes a wise guy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh, man! Please, a little more respect here! Remember that this forum is for members to ask questions and get help from other members. It is not a vehicle for members to slag off on each other.
I always find that the whole subject of mils and moa is very poorly understood by the shooting community. Even the many "expert" videos on the subject do more to confuse than enlighten.
First, understand that a mil, or milliradian, is by definition a thousandth part of a radian. And a radian is an arc (or part of a circle) whose length is equal to the radius. So at a range (or radius) of 100 yards (3600 inches), 1 mil = 3.6 inches EXACTLY. And at 100 meters, 1 mil = 10 cm EXACTLY. To revert to the original example, there are 43,200 inches in 1200 yards, so at that distance 1 mil = 43.2 inches EXACTLY. And a correction of 425 inches is therefore 425 / 43.2 = 9.838 mils. Note that the value derived by TANGENT using the arctan trig function is ever so slightly different from this because we're dealing with spherical measurements here rather than perfect triangles. But at this level of precision we are stepping out of the real world and into the world of mathematical fantasy, for shooting purposes. So let 9.8 mils stand.
Just keep this 1:1000 relationship in mind and forget all the other formulas you've ever heard on the subject of mils.
Second, understand that the common use of 1 moa = 1 inch at 100 yards is an APPROXIMATION for convenience in the field. For practical purposes the approximation is useful and sufficiently accurate. A more precise value is 1.0476 inch, but let's not get anal here. For precise calculations, you need to be aware that the error of 0.05 inch per 100 yards may accumulate to something significant when you're shooting past your back fence. (My back fence is a long way out.)
Again, please mind your manners, folks. Trolls aren't welcome, and no one likes a wise guy.
A radian is not an arc, it is an angle. We are not worried about arc lengths - we are looking at the correlation between angles, ranges and drops (i.e. trigonometry). The ArcTangent function is the correct application to determine the angle, which was the question posed by the OP. There are quicker conversions that I and many others have posted. There has also been some bad info given here too.
 
A radian is not an arc, it is an angle. We are not worried about arc lengths - we are looking at the correlation between angles, ranges and drops (i.e. trigonometry). The ArcTangent function is the correct application to determine the angle, which was the question posed by the OP. There are quicker conversions that I and many others have posted. There has also been some bad info given here too.
If a radian is an angle, rather than an arc...then how can there be 6.283 radians in a circle?

A radian is an arc. It is the portion of a circle equal in length to the radius.
 
If a radian is an angle, rather than an arc...then how can there be 6.283 radians in a circle?

A radian is an arc. It is the portion of a circle equal in length to the radius.
Your confusing two concepts. An arc is a portion of a circumference. Angles and arcs are related as follows:

S = R*Theta where S is the arc length, R is the radius, and theta is the angle.

The reason there are 2*PI radians in a circle is because pi is the ratio of circumference divided by diameter (this is true for all circles).

pi = C/D

A radius is 1/2 the diameter, so rearrange:

pi = C/(2R)

2*pi = C/R (this is also always true for every circle)

Combine these two aforementioned concepts to understand the following:

A radian is defined as the angle that subtends an arc that has the same length as the radius.
 
A radian is defined as the angle that subtends an arc that has the same length as the radius.
An angle is two rays sharing a common vertex.

Any specific angle is defined by that angle's arc of subtention.

It is the arc that defines the angle, or the angle wouldn't exist.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top