MILS vs MOA

[ENCORE50A]

Just some info.............




They're different units of angular measure used to graduate scope adjustments.
One is not inherently better than the other, but there are differences. Here are some things to consider...

* A single 0.1 MIL click is 'bigger' than a 1/4 MOA click, 38% bigger to be exact. Based on that, some make the argument that MOA is better because the adjustment is finer. OK, but how practical is that difference? Usually doesn't matter in application but there are some cases where it might.
* When deciding which to select, consider what others shooters in your discipline are using. If everyone on your F-class team is using MOA and you show up with MILS, there are going to be communication errors.
* Due to MILS being larger subtensions, holding reticles tend to format better with MILS vs. MOA.
* 1 MIL is defined as 1/1000 of the distance. For example, 100 yards is 3,600 inches. 1/1000 of that is 3.6 inches, which is exactly what a MIL is at 100 yards. Likewise, 1 MIL at 100 meters is 0.1 meters, or 10cm, making each click 1cm at 100m.
* When dealing with iron/aperture sights, the click value (MILS or MOA) is dependent on the sight radius, which is usually different from one rifle to another due to differences in action length, barrel length, and where the front and rear sight are mounted. No matter how expensive your aperture sights are, the click values won't be true unless your sight radius is exactly as intended for the screw threads.

 

[BuckDoeHunter]

Make's my head hurt thinking about it, but I really do need to understand it better.

 

[ENCORE50A]

Make's my head hurt thinking about it, but I really do need to understand it better.

Myself, I'm remaining with MOA

 

[Marksman1941]

Mils always made more sense if you ran metric, and MOA for imperial. For whatever reason I have a hard time making mental mil adjustments, probably due to lack of practice, but moa math is with and easy for me to pull off. I don’t think either is better, unless the exact situation you mentioned comes up and you have multiple shooters. Mixing measurement methods is bound to lead to confusion, so shoot what your team/group have all decided on.

 

[ENCORE50A]

Mils always made more sense if you ran metric, and MOA for imperial. For whatever reason I have a hard time making mental mil adjustments, probably due to lack of practice, but moa math is with and easy for me to pull off. I don’t think either is better, unless the exact situation you mentioned comes up and you have multiple shooters. Mixing measurement methods is bound to lead to confusion, so shoot what your team/group have all decided on.

It just seems to me that the finer adjustments of MOA, are better for our 1,000yd shooting.

 

[Marksman1941]

It just seems to me that the finer adjustments of MOA, are better for our 1,000yd shooting.

Technically true. Most folks, unless they’re legitimate f class shooters, can’t hold the difference at 1000 yards though. With 1/4 moa adjustments, one click is 2.65”. With .1 mil adjustments, one click is 3.6”. I know of very few people or rifles that would even notice 1” of variance at 1000. Too much other stuff coming into play to make an accurate shot at that point.

 

[ENCORE50A]

Technically true. Most folks, unless they’re legitimate f class shooters, can’t hold the difference at 1000 yards though. With 1/4 moa adjustments, one click is 2.65”. With .1 mil adjustments, one click is 3.6”. I know of very few people or rifles that would even notice 1” of variance at 1000. Too much other stuff coming into play to make an accurate shot at that point.

There's the......... possibility ....... that we'll be able to find out, or come close, if we can do it, later this year. We're again shooting 1K at Camp Atterbury in June but, its off cross sticks. There's a new range being built about an hour from me that will stretch to 1,300yds. Off a bench with a rear bag, or even prone with a bipod and rear bag, and shooting SML, we might find out
The owner of the new range is wide open about supporting different matches. But you're right. 1K is a long way...........

 

[Marksman1941]

There's the......... possibility ....... that we'll be able to find out, or come close, if we can do it, later this year. We're again shooting 1K at Camp Atterbury in June but, its off cross sticks. There's a new range being built about an hour from me that will stretch to 1,300yds. Off a bench with a rear bag, or even prone with a bipod and rear bag, and shooting SML, we might find out
The owner of the new range is wide open about supporting different matches. But you're right. 1K is a long way...........

I’m all for the long range game! We have a few spots we stretch out to 1900 or so (big center fires) and it is a whole different animal. I think it truly just comes down to what you know best and can manipulate accurately and repeatedly.

I’ve always shot MOA, and can do pretty fast range finding math with all my hunting scopes based on estimated target size and measurement with the reticle. I can’t wrap my head around the same math for mils even though it’s extremely similar. But it’s really just user preference

 

[GM54-120]

Basically if you got a MIL turret, you come up 3 clicks for an inch. 1/10mil each click. That will put you just a little over an inch up. Only reason i even have one is the SWFA SS MIL/MIL turret and reticle is so well done. Having a MOA turret and a mildot reticle is about the dumbest thing anyone ever used in a scope. Even SWFA and upper end Bushnells made some like that early on.

This is just simple when you look at it.

 

[ENCORE50A]

LOL.......... Heck, I shoot this and don't understand it.

 

[45-70]

I’m all for the long range game! We have a few spots we stretch out to 1900 or so (big center fires) and it is a whole different animal. I think it truly just comes down to what you know best and can manipulate accurately and repeatedly.

I’ve always shot MOA, and can do pretty fast range finding math with all my hunting scopes based on estimated target size and measurement with the reticle. I can’t wrap my head around the same math for mils even though it’s extremely similar. But it’s really just user preference

that is why I use Range Finder

 

[ENCORE50A]

that is why I use Range Finder

I'm never hunting without a range finder. I dial anyway.

 

[earlwb]

I used to just keep my notebook with the dope information in it. When I changed ranges I would enter the number of clicks needed for a particular rifle and load. Thus moa or mils didn’t matter to me much. Once I had the number of clicks needed I wrote it down for that distance. Windage of course varied a lot with the wind and if you changed shooting positions it might affect it too.

 

[AT743]

I went from MOA to MIL because all the spotters in the competitions at my local range called misses in MIL's, and if you had an MOA scope, you had to do the math on the fly while trying to line up your next shot. Frankly, MOA is easier and at times I wish I'd stayed there..

 

[Marksman1941]

that is why I use Range Finder

I have a range finder on me as well. But, things happen. Batteries die, electronics break. And sometimes it’s a quick shot at 450 that you don’t have time to range and dial for. Having alternate methods has always felt important to me

 

[ENCORE50A]

I have a range finder on me as well. But, things happen. Batteries die, electronics break. And sometimes it’s a quick shot at 450 that you don’t have time to range and dial for. Having alternate methods has always felt important to me

The longer distances you practice at, helps with determining yardage. Not perfect, but better than the average.
Dope chart taped to the stock.

 

[DavidAR10T]

MIL is perfect for the two way rifle range. Especially when you're trying to run off the range while gasping grid coordinates into the mic for an indirect fire mission.

 

[45-70]

MIL is perfect for the two way rifle range. Especially when you're trying to run off the range while gasping grid coordinates into the mic for an indirect fire mission.

shooting a rifle is way different than calling indirect fire

 

[DavidAR10T]

You must have lost your sense of humor somewhere between my 10 years in the Corps and my posting in this thread.
Or you were born with the same personality as one of my fellow Instructors, Sgt. Perry. He wanted to make 2nd MarDiv, 2nd Marine Division Schools, Scout/Sniper School, Stone Bay like Quantico's S/S Instructor School. We both came from there. I would call him Vernon... as in Dean Vernon Wormer.
[paulharveyvoice]Good Day.[/paulharveyvoice]

 

[45-70]

You must have lost your sense of humor somewhere between my 10 years in the Corps and my posting in this thread.
Or you were born with the same personality as one of my fellow Instructors, Sgt. Perry. He wanted to make 2nd MarDiv, 2nd Marine Division Schools, Scout/Sniper School, Stone Bay like Quantico's S/S Instructor School. We both came from there. I would call him Vernon... as in Dean Vernon Wormer.
[paulharveyvoice]Good Day.[/paulharveyvoice]

Golf Battery , 3rd BN , 11th Marines , 1st Div. Vietnam Hill 10 , 68 - 69. Gun #3, saw my share of mils and azmiths