dale guthormsen
Well-Known Member
Personally ownt the strike eagle, i moveed to viper ps gen 2 snd prefer it.
look through them both and decide if its good enough or uou want to save a bit more
MRAD vs MOA. Which one?
- Thread starter MTbackwoods
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
look through them both and decide if its good enough or uou want to save a bit more
Smurky
Member
Possibly is in another post but thought I'd share anyway. I have a number of scopes in both MIL and MOA and find it easier for me to use MOA. It was reinforced when i attended a precision rifle course at The Site. The author and instructor is a retired SEAL with a lot of experience and his opinion is highly regarded by me and others as his was formed when first shot and quick corrections really matter.
alphamunitions.com
Just A Minute (Of Angle) | Alpha Munitions
alphamunitions.com
Yep. Argument over. I'm buying the Strike Eagle in MOA. Thank you gentlemen
Lee Goodwin
Well-Known Member
Smurky
Member
I believe you won't be disappointed.
That's the one. I'll order it up soon along with Vortex rings. I've never done a review of any sort but I can sure report back on my feelings. Just bear in mind, the highest quality scope I've used to date is a Nightforce SHV 4-14x56. But I'll get it sighted in and take it out to distance on steel and work back and forth at ranges and see how well it tracks that way. Plus a tall target test I suppose. I'll post results on this thread in a few weeks ish
zach_destroys
Well-Known Member
Since I switched from moa to mrad I also started talking with a British accent and describing my weight in stones.
In all seriousness, I learned on moa because I was still thinking in inches, once I started thinking in angles, it was easier to do the base 10 math of mrad in my head
In all seriousness, I learned on moa because I was still thinking in inches, once I started thinking in angles, it was easier to do the base 10 math of mrad in my head
I will try MRAD in the future. Definitely. But for now, it's gonna remain MOA. I barely got a GED so simple math based in inches is gonna be my cup of tea for a bit
[QUOTE="arch408, post: 1937567, member: 59036
Yes, I agree that the Razor and even the Viper series are better scopes, but to tell the truth, I haven't noticed the washout with the sun behind me and I don't hunt at night, so I'll plead ignorance to the faults Brad7348 alluded to with the Diamondback. I thought he had a scope budget and the Diamondback scopes definately are in the budget and I believe they also have Milrad reticles and once again, I use both MOA and Milrad reticles, but I also use a range finder and a ballistic app, but if I don't have time use them both, the MOA and Milrad reticles canbe used to estimate range in a pinch. And once again, I still the prefer the MOA because the math is easier(for me).
Yes, I agree that the Razor and even the Viper series are better scopes, but to tell the truth, I haven't noticed the washout with the sun behind me and I don't hunt at night, so I'll plead ignorance to the faults Brad7348 alluded to with the Diamondback. I thought he had a scope budget and the Diamondback scopes definately are in the budget and I believe they also have Milrad reticles and once again, I use both MOA and Milrad reticles, but I also use a range finder and a ballistic app, but if I don't have time use them both, the MOA and Milrad reticles canbe used to estimate range in a pinch. And once again, I still the prefer the MOA because the math is easier(for me).
speedengineer
Well-Known Member
Contrary to what some have implied, the difference between a 1/4 MOA click and a 0.1 MIL click is quite negligible, and wouldn't be a good reason to choose one over the other for most shooters.
Since you'd always select the turret click that is closest, the maximum amount you'd ever be off is by half of the distance between clicks. On most scopes, this works out to 1/8 MOA or 0.05 MIL. That 0.05 MIL converted to MOA is 0.172.
So with a MIL scope, you could be off from your intended point-of-aim by as much as 0.172 MOA
And with a MOA scope, you could be off from your intended point-of-aim by as much as 0.125 MOA
Thus, a 1/4 MOA/click scope has a benefit over a 0.1MIL/click scope by the difference, 0.047 MOA. I don't know anyone that shoots 0.05 MOA groups. That's around a half inch at 1000 yards. Unless you're shooting competition and trying to hold 0.1MOA accuracy/precision, this isn't something to worry about.
INTERESTINGLY, utilizing the approximation that 1MOA equals 1" at 100 yards, rather than 1.0472", actually introduces the same amount of error as above! 0.047 MOA. Strange how stuff works out sometimes!
So, if you plan to use the 1MOA=1" approximation, you are actually introducing more error in all situations than you'd gain dialing precision due to choosing that MOA scope over a MIL scope. Either way, it's all negligible for 99.99% of shooters.
Since you'd always select the turret click that is closest, the maximum amount you'd ever be off is by half of the distance between clicks. On most scopes, this works out to 1/8 MOA or 0.05 MIL. That 0.05 MIL converted to MOA is 0.172.
So with a MIL scope, you could be off from your intended point-of-aim by as much as 0.172 MOA
And with a MOA scope, you could be off from your intended point-of-aim by as much as 0.125 MOA
Thus, a 1/4 MOA/click scope has a benefit over a 0.1MIL/click scope by the difference, 0.047 MOA. I don't know anyone that shoots 0.05 MOA groups. That's around a half inch at 1000 yards. Unless you're shooting competition and trying to hold 0.1MOA accuracy/precision, this isn't something to worry about.
INTERESTINGLY, utilizing the approximation that 1MOA equals 1" at 100 yards, rather than 1.0472", actually introduces the same amount of error as above! 0.047 MOA. Strange how stuff works out sometimes!
So, if you plan to use the 1MOA=1" approximation, you are actually introducing more error in all situations than you'd gain dialing precision due to choosing that MOA scope over a MIL scope. Either way, it's all negligible for 99.99% of shooters.
No feelings needed. Too many people getting bent out of shape lately over "feelings."
Just the facts, with your subjective opinion interlaced, please.
****. That's right. I'll be very dry and methodical then. I'll do my best to be as Ben Stein about it as I can. And I will be able to compare it to my buddies Vortex as well as his wife's. I forget their exact models but I'll get all that infoNo feelings needed. Too many people getting bent out of shape lately over "feelings."
Just the facts, with your subjective opinion interlaced, please.
archangel485
Well-Known Member
I'd say it depends on your discipline more than anything. Tactical crowd seems to heavily prefer MRAD, paper crowd seems to like MOA (although I know almost nothing about F-class and similar, but there may be some MRAD there too). So if you're thinking of shooting some PRS I'd recommend you find an MRAD scope. If you have spotter help every time you miss they'll be saying stuff like, "you were left about three tenths" and you'll have to either convert in your head or spot your own miss. I have MOA scopes, but when I shoot a match it's tactical, so my scopes moving forward will be MRAD.
Another nice thing about MRAD, is the scopes tend to come in 10mrad per revolution, vs 15 MOA per rev. So if you're shooting far enough to do more than one revolution, it's nice (not critical granted) to have the last digit of your dope line up with what you dial. For example, if you have to dial 27 MOA, your turret is on the 12. In a time limited engagement this is a challenge. Vs 10 mrad scope where if you have to dial 12mrad, your turret is on the 2. Even worse than a 15moa per rev scope is something like a 12moa per rev scope (had one of those once). Again if you're under 1 revolution none of that really matters. You can always mark your turrets with the next rev numbers too, which helps.
Another nice thing about MRAD, is the scopes tend to come in 10mrad per revolution, vs 15 MOA per rev. So if you're shooting far enough to do more than one revolution, it's nice (not critical granted) to have the last digit of your dope line up with what you dial. For example, if you have to dial 27 MOA, your turret is on the 12. In a time limited engagement this is a challenge. Vs 10 mrad scope where if you have to dial 12mrad, your turret is on the 2. Even worse than a 15moa per rev scope is something like a 12moa per rev scope (had one of those once). Again if you're under 1 revolution none of that really matters. You can always mark your turrets with the next rev numbers too, which helps.
Right. That was my whole debacle with choosing between the two. MRAD would get me more distance with one rev. But the Strike Eagle has 25 MOA per rev and a second set of numbers above for your second rev. So I think it'll do. Plus, if I buy and MOA scope and end up needing MRAD to compete, I guess I get to buy another scope
