MOA or MilDot for Shooting From Bench?

[Phil3]

While it seems that mildot reticles are all the rage in scopes these days, it appears to me that mildots are primarily used for ranging a distance. At the local 100 and 200 yard range, I have no need for that function. It would appear to me that since bullet trajectory tables are in MOA and/or inches, it would make sense to use adjustment knobs in MOA and also have a reticle with MOA markings so one could see how far off a bullet hit is. I recognize that if a bullet hits say 1.5 mils off, you can dial in 15 clicks of a .1 mil knob and be dead on. But, I can do the same with a MOA reticle and adjustment knobs, albeit MOA normally being just 1/2 or 1/4 MOA, coarser adjustment. I am not sure what works best for shooting at the range with wind blowing and having to make adjustments.

What am I missing here? Must be something since scopes under $1000 with MOA adjustment turrets AND MOA reticle are quite rare if looking to stay under $1000. Sightron and Vortex have scopes with MOA on turrets and reticle.

- Phil

 

[mikecr]

I don't see where you're missing anything really. Mildots ARE for ranging, and NOT needed for benchrest or hunting.
Markets follow fools with less sense than money..

 

[2dogs]

I can answer your question. First, let me say that yes, while your drop tables and wind charts are in MOA it is a simple matter to convert them to MIL. For the longest time, scopes were MIL/MOA and that required that conversion. Now that scopes are MIL/MIL its less math, thus faster, thus very handy for a FIELD shooter. A bench guy who has all the time in the world can take his time and adjust. But say for me, if Im shooting at 1000 yards and my drop is 7.2 mils, I can either turn the knob and adjust up, or simply hold for the distance. Now, take that same shot, BUT the wind is 15 to 25 mph. With my MIL/MIL optic I can hold for either wind speed without touching my knobs.

With a MIL/MIL scope then, one needs to think about his drop and wind adjustments as it applys to the MIL scale. Your best Mil scale scopes break down the MIL itself into smaller increments and are extremely accurate.

 

[Leaddog]

MOA/MOA here in Nightforce and March. MOA is a finer adjustment than MILS. Do the math.

Although I shoot F Class at 600-1000 yards mostly, there are several times a year that I need to range targets when shooting unknown distance. Mil-Dots are yesterday's news. There is a lot of visual clutter with the Mil-Dots compared to the newer ranging reticles.

 

[brian427cobra]

MRAD scopes are made by every single scope manufacture on the the planet, 1mil is 1mil, on the MOA side no 2 companies make the same reticle, Mildots are not yesterdays news, and to think so is very narrow minded, both are measurements of an angle, this is hard to do but stop thinking in inches feet yards and start using what angle do I need to dial\hold to hit my target, from a static position like F-Class I perfer a SFP MOA scope, in Practical\Tactical matches I perfer a FFP MRAD scope, that doesn't mean I can't knock the X-ring out with a MRAD scope, or hit a mover at 425 then engauge 5 targets from 125 to 780 then back to the mover in less than 40 seconds with a MOA/MOA scope, there different tools for different tasks, one system is not better or worse than the other, and most importantly Mils ARE NOT METRIC, and MOAs ARE NOT INCHES.

 

[2dogs]

Well said Cobra.

 

[zipollini]

For ranging practice with both mil dot and MOA reticles - check out this game. It's very very usefull for practice and training. Try the demo.

http://www.shooterready.com/

 

[louielouie]

MOA is roughly 0.25" adjustments @ 100yds while 0.1 mil is roughly 0.36" @ 100 yds. Another interesting item that is explained in the Vortex manual for the Viper PST line of FFP scopes is that MOA has an inherent 5% inaccuracy that only becomes noticeable beyond 500 ~ 600 yds.
I would suggest reading the manuals as a reference since they are written very well. http://www.vortexoptics.com/uploads/web_manual_rfl_viper-pst_r-416f1-a2.pdf

 

[mikecr]

You're completely taking the Vortex information out of context..
Is that really what you got from it?

 

[louielouie]

Yes, my post was not very well written at all. I was alluding to the tendency of some people to equate 1 MOA = 1 in. @ 100 yds but I think brian427cobra said it better.

 

[mikecr]

Well Americans take things back to IPHY because we can all look at it & see just what it is.
For example, I can see that I'm off by 8" with a glance, I can hold off by as much just as easily.

Benchrest takes us to IPHY because it's the finest of adjustments, and I 'think' its a standard in target sizes and group measurements.

I see neither MIL nor MOA as better for target shooting than IPHY.

 

[Hedge]

If you're going to use the reticle to measure or range, consider the distance between graduations relative to turret clicks. With the Vortex reticles the MOA requires you to divide the the distance between ticks by 8 to match the turret. With the MRAD, you divide by 10.

Easier to see in 10ths than eighths for me.