Mil (MRAD) scope
- Thread starter tangolima
- Start date
Mil or moa indeed has nothing to do with metric or imperial per se. It is just a bit more convenient to use mil in all metric environment. Our military has been using that, perhaps because NATO. It isn't that hard when I put my mind on it.
No problem with dope table as I can easily make one in 0.1mil clicks. I design and print my own practice targets. They have grids in inches. I have started converting them to cm grids. Some of them need more doing as I have lost the original files.
Small problem with the range distance though. It is still in yards. I need to take 10% off for meters. 100yd is 90m, 500yd is 450m etc.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
No problem with dope table as I can easily make one in 0.1mil clicks. I design and print my own practice targets. They have grids in inches. I have started converting them to cm grids. Some of them need more doing as I have lost the original files.
Small problem with the range distance though. It is still in yards. I need to take 10% off for meters. 100yd is 90m, 500yd is 450m etc.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
reynolds357
New member
4.5 x 30 x 56 Trijicon Tenmile at EuroOptic.
Best way is to not convert mil to and forth moa. Now I just keep in mind the range in hundreds of inches. 100yd is 36 hundred inches. One click (0.1 mil) is 1/100 of that is 0.36 inch or 1/3 inch.
It works the same way in metric. 100yd (our range doesn't have 100m) is 90 hundred cm. One click is 0.9cm.
For corrections, FFP with Christmas tree reticle make it very easy, if you can spot your own shots. Just count the ticks on the reticle. No conversion needed. It would be complicated if you have a spotter who calls out moa while you are working mrad.
Not that hard really.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
It works the same way in metric. 100yd (our range doesn't have 100m) is 90 hundred cm. One click is 0.9cm.
For corrections, FFP with Christmas tree reticle make it very easy, if you can spot your own shots. Just count the ticks on the reticle. No conversion needed. It would be complicated if you have a spotter who calls out moa while you are working mrad.
Not that hard really.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Don't over think Mils, just remember it works equally with yards or meters. 1 Mil equals 1 yd at 1000 yds or 1 meter at 1000 meters. MOA isn't as easy to use with meters and requires more math.
.
.
Theoretically yes. But live targets don't tend to sit at nice round number of yards. Say a deer at 346yd. 1 click is 0.0346 yd. It is rather hard to visualize in inches.
I would do this. 346 yd is about 320 m (10% off), or 32000 cm. 1 click is 3.2cm, somewhere between 1" and 2". It is easier for me. The only thinking is taking 10% to convert yards to meters.
Ideally a spotter calls out corrections in shooter's clicks. That requires same reticle on the spotter scope. Or the corrections are in target sizes. The shooter has to convert that into number of clicks or ticks.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
@tangolima,
You're way over complicating things, FORGET THE MATH. Once you've done the initial work at the range (established zero, velocity,and confirmed drops the math is done) in the field Mils are Mils, and MOA is MOA. You should never go to a match or hunt in the field if you and your spotter are not using the same form of measurement.
In this situation regardless of Mils or MOA you dial in for the closest range on your dope card. It all depends on how you've broken down your chart. Most would dial for 350 yards and send a round, or hold the appropriate Mil or MOA mark on the reticle.
No need to convert if you're working in meters look at your charts and dial or hold the appropriate Mils. There is no need for math if your zeroed in your scope using meters as your setup. Remember meters or yards Mils is an angular measurement that works equally well with both. you just won't have the same click values.
Ideally a spotter calls out something like 1/2 Mil/MOA low/high or right/left, then the shooter uses the reticle for correction to send the second shot. That's much faster way to get things relayed. That's why I say you should never go afield competition or hunting with a spotter who isn't using the same unit of measure as you.
You're way over complicating things, FORGET THE MATH. Once you've done the initial work at the range (established zero, velocity,and confirmed drops the math is done) in the field Mils are Mils, and MOA is MOA. You should never go to a match or hunt in the field if you and your spotter are not using the same form of measurement.
In this situation regardless of Mils or MOA you dial in for the closest range on your dope card. It all depends on how you've broken down your chart. Most would dial for 350 yards and send a round, or hold the appropriate Mil or MOA mark on the reticle.
No need to convert if you're working in meters look at your charts and dial or hold the appropriate Mils. There is no need for math if your zeroed in your scope using meters as your setup. Remember meters or yards Mils is an angular measurement that works equally well with both. you just won't have the same click values.
Ideally a spotter calls out something like 1/2 Mil/MOA low/high or right/left, then the shooter uses the reticle for correction to send the second shot. That's much faster way to get things relayed. That's why I say you should never go afield competition or hunting with a spotter who isn't using the same unit of measure as you.
We are talking about the same thing. Well mostly.
If I get to work in meters and nothing else, we wouldn't have had this discussion at all. I also found the spotter ideality was mostly beyond my affordability. Spotting scopes with mrad reticle are rather expensive. They are available in formal matches. Other than that I got feedback like "6 inches to the right". Better ones are like "one and half targets to the left". I will have to do my own things, I'm afraid. It may sound complicated to some, but it is really simple to me.
-TL
PS. For practice, my range buddies are my spotters. I was hoping my they could do the conversion and give me the clicks directly. Only a few could it correctly. Too complicated.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
If I get to work in meters and nothing else, we wouldn't have had this discussion at all. I also found the spotter ideality was mostly beyond my affordability. Spotting scopes with mrad reticle are rather expensive. They are available in formal matches. Other than that I got feedback like "6 inches to the right". Better ones are like "one and half targets to the left". I will have to do my own things, I'm afraid. It may sound complicated to some, but it is really simple to me.
-TL
PS. For practice, my range buddies are my spotters. I was hoping my they could do the conversion and give me the clicks directly. Only a few could it correctly. Too complicated.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Thanks for the info. I wish I knew about this earlier. Money has gone to a cheapy champion choice spotting scope (no reticle of course). Will wait for the next round of funding.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
A for what it's worth.
Last winter while shooting in our league I had a target at 200 yards that had a .5MOA Bull. I was shooting a MRAD scope. First shot was just left of the bull so adjusted 1 click right, .1m. Next shot placed exactly the same distance away from the bull directly across from the first shot. Result 2 misses. One left one right, no score. 1/4MOA might have scored.
Last winter while shooting in our league I had a target at 200 yards that had a .5MOA Bull. I was shooting a MRAD scope. First shot was just left of the bull so adjusted 1 click right, .1m. Next shot placed exactly the same distance away from the bull directly across from the first shot. Result 2 misses. One left one right, no score. 1/4MOA might have scored.
0.5 moa at 200yd is 1" or 2.5cm.
200yd is 180 meters. One click is 1.8cm, or 0.7". It should have hit, although 1/4moa would have better chance. Maybe better to hold half a click equivalent with reticle.
0.5 moa bull at 200yd is as hard to hit as a 6-foot bull at 1000yd plus ballistic uncertainty and wind. It is not too shabby to miss.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
200yd is 180 meters. One click is 1.8cm, or 0.7". It should have hit, although 1/4moa would have better chance. Maybe better to hold half a click equivalent with reticle.
0.5 moa bull at 200yd is as hard to hit as a 6-foot bull at 1000yd plus ballistic uncertainty and wind. It is not too shabby to miss.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
tangolima said:
Or how about 1 mil at 200 yards is 7.2" (36"X.2 or 3.6"X2), so 1/10 MIl adjustments move .72" per click. There is no need to convert yards and inches to meters or centimeters with Mils. Mils is not a metric measurement, and why I say you're making things too complicated.
It is the same.
The way I follow is easier for me. Not saying it is the only way. Taking 10% off is easy. Divide by 100 is even easier. Much easier than multiplying 36 by whatever. It is just me with a simple mind.
The point is, I believe you agree, it isn't that hard, either way.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
The way I follow is easier for me. Not saying it is the only way. Taking 10% off is easy. Divide by 100 is even easier. Much easier than multiplying 36 by whatever. It is just me with a simple mind.
The point is, I believe you agree, it isn't that hard, either way.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
MOA is easier for me.
I still think in inches, feet, yards & miles.
I can convert to metric without too much difficulty.
I also prefer MOA for long range shooting for the finer adjustments. IE roughly 2.5" at 1,000 yards.
And 1,000 yards being 914.4 meters, your MILadjustment is going to take some figuring.
Plus my long range scope is adjusted in 0.125" per click.
In an interview with Dan Smichko of Cutting Edge Bullets on their gear used for King Of 2 Miles, he listed a Leupold VX5 in MILs that they didn't care for as the adjustments were too coarse.
I still think in inches, feet, yards & miles.
I can convert to metric without too much difficulty.
I also prefer MOA for long range shooting for the finer adjustments. IE roughly 2.5" at 1,000 yards.
And 1,000 yards being 914.4 meters, your MILadjustment is going to take some figuring.
Plus my long range scope is adjusted in 0.125" per click.
In an interview with Dan Smichko of Cutting Edge Bullets on their gear used for King Of 2 Miles, he listed a Leupold VX5 in MILs that they didn't care for as the adjustments were too coarse.
std7mag said:
I get MOA is easier for a lot of people and there is nothing wrong with using MOA. While a ¼ MOA scope move 2.6" (10.47÷4) at 1000 yds a .10 click Mil scope is 3.6" (36÷10) at 1000 yards. What is there to figure?
Once realized Mils are Mils, and stop thinking of it as a metric unit of measure it becomes way easier to use. The only reason you need to convert is if you built your dope card different from the unit of measure you're using to estimate range. So if you shot your dope in yards and your laser range finder is stuck on meters this is the only time you'll do math in the field for elevation adjustments.
I am with taylorce1 that mil or moa doesn't matter if everything is in clicks. No conversion is needed.
1/4 MOA does have better resolution. That's the start of this thread. A few good points on that from the discussion.
Mil has less number of clicks to count. Makes sense, but a bit weak. The issue can be easier overcome.
Targets are bigger. Long range matches have target sized in meters, and multiple shots are to walk to a hit. That makes finer resolution not necessary.
Rifle's group size. Rifle that shoots 0.5moa at 100yd easily becomes over 1moa at 1000yd. Ballistic uncertainties and wind amplify the group with distance. Finer clicks don't help much as it is within "margin of error". I could be wrong, scopes with finer clicks are for silhouette shooting at mid ranges (200-300yd) where rifle's group is still small.
Conclusion after some trial and error in real use: mil is ok. Occasional conversion is not hard if necessary.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
1/4 MOA does have better resolution. That's the start of this thread. A few good points on that from the discussion.
Mil has less number of clicks to count. Makes sense, but a bit weak. The issue can be easier overcome.
Targets are bigger. Long range matches have target sized in meters, and multiple shots are to walk to a hit. That makes finer resolution not necessary.
Rifle's group size. Rifle that shoots 0.5moa at 100yd easily becomes over 1moa at 1000yd. Ballistic uncertainties and wind amplify the group with distance. Finer clicks don't help much as it is within "margin of error". I could be wrong, scopes with finer clicks are for silhouette shooting at mid ranges (200-300yd) where rifle's group is still small.
Conclusion after some trial and error in real use: mil is ok. Occasional conversion is not hard if necessary.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk