Will your next rifle scope be MOA or MIL? **OLD POLL**

[lrhmolson]

moa,,,because I use a kestrel meter

 

[Tikkamike]

Although the metric system makes the most sence I am accustomed to inches so I prefer MOA/MOA but I dont think it would be hard to convert to MIL/MIL. I hate dots so the mil DOT would be my biggest hurdle since they are so popular

 

[Outlaw6.0]

Although the metric system makes the most sence I am accustomed to inches so I prefer MOA/MOA but I dont think it would be hard to convert to MIL/MIL. I hate dots so the mil DOT would be my biggest hurdle since they are so popular

I found Mil/Mil very easy to use... until shooting with Moa guys... calling errors/wind for each other really sucks. So MOA it is for me Out of necessity rather than preference. The Mil Dot reticles are by far & away my least favorite, thankfully there are about a hundred more that use standard hash marks.


t

 

[MMERSS]

MOA seems to be the most understood if a person is accustomed to measurements in yards, feet and inches. MIL seems to be the most understood if a person is accustomed to measurements in meters and decimals.

How many hunters in America are accustomed with the metric system and associated estimates without too much thought?Unfortunately not many. Therefore, it's MOA for ease of instruction with the hunters in the second to last country to adopt the metric system.

 

[Jaxdialation]

Mil all the way.

It isn't rocket surgery lightbulb

 

[dukedurham]

Have two MIL ret / MOA knob scopes and like them for what they were intended for, but, think i will go MIL/MIL for the next one. IF a correction is needed on a miss it's a quick dial and dump.

 

[Ernie]

MOA

 

[JungleBoogey]

[FONT=&quot]Looking at a Leupold VX-R 3-9x40 FireDot to mount on my Blaser R93. It is based on traditional Mil Dot [/FONT]

 

[Browning300]

Just getting into to long-range game and bought a vortex viper in moa/moa because I already understand moa. So no real reason but I'll pry stick with moa just to keep all my rifles the same.

 

[JungleBoogey]

MOA seems to be the most understood if a person is accustomed to measurements in yards, feet and inches. MIL seems to be the most understood if a person is accustomed to measurements in meters and decimals.

How many hunters in America are accustomed with the metric system and associated estimates without too much thought?Unfortunately not many. Therefore, it's MOA for ease of instruction with the hunters in the second to last country to adopt the metric system.

Exactly right. Fortunately, I live in Germany and quickly learned to think in metrics. The hard part is 'unthinking' in yards, feet, inches etc.

 

[Oregonpharmer]

MOA, but it is a use specific choice. I use both, but for picking varmints out of the fields at 300 yards or better I find the MOA leaves me more sight picture with less of the target covered. But, I also have more time to acquire the target as they generally are busy eating my crops.

The MIL is great for larger game on the move, and difficult weather, but when reaching out to 400 yards and more you are limiting your effective accuracy to good boiler room shots because of sight picture coverage by the dot and reference marks.

I suspect that most experienced small game folks would prefer the MOA, while the target and big game shooters would most likely prefer the quick target acquisition and added accuracy achievable with the MIL scope once they get a feel for the inherent differences between the two types of scopes.

Both definitely have their place in the sport.

Just my two cents and rationale with 50 plus years of hunting in the bag.

 

[theo98]

If...When I update or purchase new optics for a rifle, I'll probably continue with the MOA. However, depending on the application, I'd consider crossing over to the Dark Side!

Ted

 

[Packrat 6]

As an ex Military surveyor Am used to working in Meters I find the mil is easier to calculate in my head when making adjustments, particularly windage, off of the range.

 

[cummins cowboy]

but wait mil is what the military uses so it must be cooler. there is alot of group think in optics, even the manufactures have bought into it. keep in mind optics companies are pushing 3# scopes with main tubes the size of baseball bats. The tactical community is alot about looks, show and group think. the same could be said with the FFP fad that is so pervasive. if the reticle is not usable at low power what is the point of it subtending the same through the power range?

the point I am making is use what works for YOU.