Should I switch to MOA?

[SteelBanger]

First, I don't want this to be a MOA vs MIL debate since that's been hashed out many times over, but I'm looking for feedback on whether you all think I might be better off switching to MOA scopes. My first intro to shooting years ago was with a Primary Arms 1-6x scope which was MOA, it took practically nothing for me to learn that system having grown up with the Imperial system it just makes sense to me. 1" at 100y, 2" at 200y, and so on and so forth. Yes I know it's not a "perfect" 1" at 100y, but for simplicity purposes it's good enough until you're shooting out really far.

However, when I recently got a little more serious about shooting I bought into the MIL system as I know it is much more common / standard in the shooting community. I figured I'd just make myself learn it but that hasn't gone so well, possibly because I just don't get out to shoot often enough to make anything stick. Either way, I can't help but wonder if I should just switch back to MOA. Also if I'm not mistaken, isn't MOA more precise using .25" clicks vs .36" clicks?

Here's the example that made me really start thinking this over ... or maybe over thinking it? I was out shooting yesterday with a friend who is a new shooter with a new rifle who had not yet sighted in his MOA scope and we had setup at 150y ... the 150y wasn't by choice, it's just what we were limited to. He shot a group that was about 3" high and 4" right. It was very quick and easy for me to think through, "1 moa is 1.5" at 150y, give me 8 clicks down and 10 clicks left" and we had it set. Even now, sitting here with time to think about it, the thought of coming up with that correction in Mils isn't terrible at that range but it takes way more thought than the MOA correction. Knowing that 1 MIL at 100y is 3.6" I can come up with 1 MIL = 5.4" at 150y (past a few hundred yards I'd probably need to get my phone out to use the calculator) and I'd call an estimated correction of .6 down and .8 left and see where that got me. Should be close, but without pulling out my phone to use a calculator it's tough. I do have a dope sheet stuck in my wallet that I list the MIL size in inches in 25y increments to use for quick corrections.

Sorry for the long post, but would I be better served in the long run by switching to MOA since it works easier for me, or am I better served by sticking with MIL's and getting more familiar with it? I know either works and the general recommendation is "use what you're comfortable with" but I'd also like to use what's most commonly used if possible. It seems that the MILs guys also understand MOA and can call corrections for that easy enough, but not necessarily visa versa. I do plan on fixing the "not shooting enough" problem so maybe with more practice I'll come around on MIL's ... otherwise I have a gen 1 Viper PST 6-24x50 and a gen2 Viper PST 3-15x44 for sale! lol

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I say go with what you are comfortable with. I grew up on MOA, so thats what I roll with. Same as you, it just makes sense to me. I have owned mil scopes and I can use them just fine, but to make everything easier on myself all I own is MOA now.

 

[Jud96]

I'm sure I'll get roasted by the MIL fans, but I say stick with MOA and what you're comfortable with and what's easier for you. I think a lot of people buy into MILs because that's what the military and tacticool guys use. I, like every other American, grew up learning everything in inches and quarters. We measure everything in inches, feet, and yards. When you miss something by a few inches, like you demonstrated, it instantly registers in my mind what range I'm at and I simply do the quick math in my head and call out the correction. If you're shooting 300 yards and you miss by 3", it's as simple as saying one minute left, right, high, or low. When you miss 3" with MILs you have to now turn that 3" into MILs and not just continue using a system based in inches. MOA is just so much simpler to me and I don't get why MILs are considered to be easier or simpler. Maybe if that's the only way you know and how you've always done it, then I get that.

I also hear the argument that you use less MILs to make an adjustment so that makes them better. Whether I dial up 20 MOA or 5.8 MILs, that extra second to turn my turret a little more isn't going to kill me when I'm just hunting or punching paper. I will say, 1/4 MOA is the only scopes I will get. I don't like 1/3 MOA or 1/8 MOA scopes. They make the math over complicated, and again going back to what we grew up with, it's not as natural to think of things in thirds or eighths as it is in quarters. Again, this is all just my opinion and experiences with using MOA and trying to understand the hype of MILs for the last few years.

 

[MOOSE39465]

After reading your post I'm pretty sure you answered your own question. Go with what is comfortable to you.

 

[dfanonymous]

I think that your failing yourself by over thinking it in the first place. Linear numbers shouldn't be a deciding factor in your long range shooting. If it's 5.6 mils of elevation then dial 5.5mils+1 click. Easy. If you are using moa and your drops is 20.20 moa, dial 20 moa and 1 click. Or leave it 20 and don't worry about the round off. Easy. The only time linear numbers comes into play is with formulas, ranging and hand written drop and wind, which I'm not sure anyone on here knows how to do that. Either way, that kind of linear math is just as hard either way.
In other words, it only matters what your drop is in a angular measurements. Who cares how many inches it is in practical dope?
I can send you cheat sheets on all of them.

 

[dfanonymous]

For anyone who wants it.

 

[User4302021]

At 150 yards you can see the bullet holes.

Assuming your friend had an actual MOA graduated reticle, you could have just used the reticle in either scope to see that you were X number of MILS or MOA high, and X number of MILS or MOA left or right.

Your process made it harder than need be. You never needed to even leave the bench.

If he was using a duplex hunting scope, then you gotta do what you gotta do. But if you make your decision on that experience, then you would find yourself making your longrange scope decisions based on your buddies inferior equipment.

 

[dfanonymous]

At 150 yards you can see the bullet holes.

Assuming your friend had an actual MOA graduated reticle, you could have just used the reticle in either scope to see that you were X number of MILS or MOA high, and X number of MILS or MOA left or right.

Your process made it harder than need be. You never needed to even leave the bench.

If he was using a duplex hunting scope, then you gotta do what you gotta do. But if you make your decision on that experience, then you would find yourself making your longrange scope decisions based on your buddies inferior equipment.

yeah that's probably more direct to the OP scenario as far calling correction without counting inches.

 

[SteelBanger]

At 150 yards you can see the bullet holes.

Assuming your friend had an actual MOA graduated reticle, you could have just used the reticle in either scope to see that you were X number of MILS or MOA high, and X number of MILS or MOA left or right.

Your process made it harder than need be. You never needed to even leave the bench.

If he was using a duplex hunting scope, then you gotta do what you gotta do. But if you make your decision on that experience, then you would find yourself making your longrange scope decisions based on your buddies inferior equipment.

This is a great point and I'm kicking myself a little for not thinking of just measuring it with the reticle at the time. I was spotting for him using my 6-24 PST and could easily see the holes and easily gauge the miss in inches so that worked for us at least. He has the Vortex Diamondback Tactical but I don't remember / know which reticle it has. But using the reticle for measurement is definitely something I need to keep in the back of my head so thanks for that suggestion.

 

[SteelBanger]

For anyone who wants it.

Thank you for this!

 

[SteelBanger]

I think that your failing yourself by over thinking it in the first place. Linear numbers shouldn't be a deciding factor in your long range shooting. If it's 5.6 mils of elevation then dial 5.5mils+1 click. Easy. If you are using moa and your drops is 20.20 moa, dial 20 moa and 1 click. Or leave it 20 and don't worry about the round off. Easy. The only time linear numbers comes into play is with formulas, ranging and hand written drop and wind, which I'm not sure anyone on here knows how to do that. Either way, that kind of linear math is just as hard either way.
In other words, it only matters what your drop is in a angular measurements. Who cares how many inches it is in practical dope?
I can send you cheat sheets on all of them.

The fact that I'm not really sure I'm even understanding your post tells me I might have a lot to learn regardless if I stay with MILs or switch to MOA. lol

Are you saying the way I gauged the linear measurement of 3" high and 4" right and converted that to MOA is not the proper way to do it, but rather use angular measurements? If so I'm not really sure how to accomplish that. In my head it made sense to determine how many minutes off we were and then correct that many minutes. I'm very open to a better way of doing it though so please feel free to explain further if you don't mind. Using the reticle you measure it like Dog mentioned is probably the quickest / easiest I imagine.

 

[dfanonymous]

The fact that I'm not really sure I'm even understanding your post tells me I might have a lot to learn regardless if I stay with MILs or switch to MOA. lol

Are you saying the way I gauged the linear measurement of 3" high and 4" right and converted that to MOA is not the proper way to do it, but rather use angular measurements? If so I'm not really sure how to accomplish that. In my head it made sense to determine how many minutes off we were and then correct that many minutes. I'm very open to a better way of doing it though so please feel free to explain further if you don't mind. Using the reticle you measure it like Dog mentioned is probably the quickest / easiest I imagine.

MOA is angular, mils is angular. It's not linear. So yes, give the other shooter the angular correction. Yes using the reticle is the best way to do this. That was the point of my post. You don't need to switch to different scopes or over think it converting inches. Use the angular measurement.

The more direct explanation was dogrockets post to you're recent experience. That's one of the reasons the reticle is there, so you can say 2 mils high, .9 mils left based on what you see.

I'm not saying it's wrong to know that 1 moa is 10.47 inches at 1000y, 1mil= 36 inches @ 1000 or something. what I'm saying is, how often does it matter if you're not doing the more complex stuff.. Your solution is going to be whatever it is, you don't need to know how many inches to bring up.

Fire correction you're still going to want to measure in a reticle because I've been shooting a long time, and I can guess feet and inches at distance, but I know exactly my correction is if I measure using the reticle and index accordingly instead of chasing what 3 inches looks like at a mile. Works at distance or during zero. Saves time then counting inches and converting it to anything either way. Just a more practicle way of going about using a scope in general.

 

[Kansaswoodguy]

I swap back and forth between the two but I shoot more than most and have multiply people on the range at a time everyone of them running different scopes. I really don't care which system I'm using. My app swaps between the two and inches with a push of a button.

 

[KY_Windage]

This is like asking which is better, inches or millimeters? Metric is better in some ways but I'm not switching to it.

That, said, I certainly do not mind working in mm's etc.

But yes, to me the "1 moa = 1" at 100 yards" coincidence is just a little too handy to pass up.