MRAD vs. MOA -- Click Value Discussion

[ISS]

I am an old geezer, 74.
1mrad = 3.9"
.1mrad =.39".

Why would any accuracy shooter use the comparatively coarse mrad click value scope?
MOA scopes mostly use 1/8th inch click values. One click (theoretically) moves the bullet 1/8th of an inch.
For instqnce: If I am shooting for score and the bullet strike is 1/2" outside the center of the X-ring. With moa I just click over four clicks and I am in the 10-ring. With mrad I cannot get there. .1mrad moves the bullet .39".

What am I missing here?

ISS

 

[Downeast]

Depends on your game. Combined with a first focal plane scope the mrad reticle is pretty handy for both quick dialing or ranging. For long range shooting at steel at various distances and under time they are the way to go. For BR or F Class shooting at a fixed distance then a second focal plane scope with the moa reticle is what you want.

 

[mattri]

+1 and I'll add hunting to the mix. I have a 2.5-10 mrad scope with no parallax adj that is ideal for medium sized game out to realistic hunting ranges- sharp and quick.

 

[JEFFPPC]

OP's post states accuracy shooting. Different game and requirements than steel or hunting.

 

[FeMan]

FYI, a MIL is 36" at 1k and an moa is 10.47, so the delta between the two is 3.44 to 1. But as you say, the adjustment is more course.

As stated, for field shooting in 1st focal plane scopes, the mil reticle really shines for me, especially for wind holds. Most MIL reticles are subtended into 0.2 MILs, which is finer than the 1 moa found in most moa scopes. For wind holds on small steel targets the MIL is much better than the moa reticles in my scopes. Measuring targets and doing math is easier and quicker too.

I still use moa for F Class but have moved to MIL for everything else.

 

[LuvDog]

You aren't missing anything as far as the amount of granularity in the adjustment.

But for multiple/unknown target distances on the clock, then MRAD can be faster.

 

[Downeast]

OP's post states accuracy shooting. Different game and requirements than steel or hunting.

That's why I did my best to distinguish between the two types of reticles and scopes. And who needs accuracy when you are shooting steel or hunting?

 

[NZ_Fclass]

There are MIL scopes with .025 clicks from Schmitt and Bender - maybe others. I'm not a fan of Mils, but I picked up a lovely VX3 6.5-20 recently, with a MIL reticle. Not sure where it will go yet, but I have always been a fan of the Vari-X version.

 

[nakneker]

I like MILs for hunting, it’s fast for me, I understand why so many in the military or LE use MILs. I don’t think it matters a lot though, Mils or Moa, pick your poison and get to know which ever you decide on.

Moa for F class makes sense to me though.

Just be glad they aren’t producing Moa turrets with Mil based reticles anymore or visa versa, it’s amazing how far dial scopes have come over the last decade. We’re spoiled.

 

[Krogen]

I'm a simpleton . . . . Give me a plain crosshair with a dot, 1/4 MOA or 1/8 MOA clicks and a 2nd focal plane reticle. 1st focal plane, screen door reticles don't appeal to me because I don't care if the hash marks have the same subtension at all magnifications. The dot doesn't care! I use my noggin to figure hold-off, not a reticle. I try not to over-think all this, because for me over-thinking leads to delay, error or inaction.

The one thing I try to remember about 0.1 mil clicks is that they're roughly 1/3 MOA; 0.344 MOA to be precise. That's helpful when assisting somebody with a mil dot scope at the gun club. To the OP's point, yes a tenth mil click is coarser than 1/4 MOA or 1/8 MOA. Like him, I have no good use for a mil dot scope. Again, I'm a simpleton!

 

[Will Henry]

A click is a click is a click. How far it moves the point of impact vs the point of aim doesn't matter as long as you realize that the click or the graduation is the thing. You can call the graduation whatever you want. As long as you know how many of them it takes to get to a given yardage, or compensate for a particular wind, you are good to go. Call them minutes, call them milrads, call them cats, as long as you can relate them to reticle movement, you should be OK. The problem arises when you have a bunch of different scopes using different values.
As far as FFP vs SFP is concerned, if you are using reticle hashmarks for wind compensation or elevation holding, it matters. If you like consistent relationship between target and reticle, you will like FFP. I you like the reticle to stay the same and the target change as you change power, SFP is for you. If you shoot with a fixed power scope, you don't have to care! WH

 

[hoz53]

FYI, a MIL is 3.6" at 1k and an moa is 10.47, so the delta between the two is 3.44 to 1. But as you say, the adjustment is more course.

As stated, for field shooting in 1st focal plane scopes, the mil reticle really shines for me, especially for wind holds. Most MIL reticles are subtended into 0.2 MILs, which is finer than the 1 moa found in most moa scopes. For wind holds on small steel targets the MIL is much better than the moa reticles in my scopes. Measuring targets and doing math is easier and quicker too.

I still use moa for F Class but have moved to MIL for everything else.

a mil is one meter at 1000 meters -a tenth mil is about 3.44" at 1000 yds- most moa scopes have clicks at 1/8 moa so that is approximately
1.25" at 1000 yds-- im

 

[hoz53]

a mil is one meter at 1000 meters -a tenth mil is about 3.44" at 1000 yds- most moa scopes have clicks at 1/8 moa so that is approximately
1.25" at 1000 yds-- im

 

[hoz53]

couldnt seem to edit the above-- isnt it correct.

 

[hoz53]

I am an old geezer, 74.
1mrad = 3.9"
.1mrad =.39".

Why would any accuracy shooter use the comparatively coarse mrad click value scope?
MOA scopes mostly use 1/8th inch click values. One click (theoretically) moves the bullet 1/8th of an inch.
For instqnce: If I am shooting for score and the bullet strike is 1/2" outside the center of the X-ring. With moa I just click over four clicks and I am in the 10-ring. With mrad I cannot get there. .1mrad moves the bullet .39".

What am I missing here?

ISS

that .39 may be a little off but i think you are right. the games where mrad scopes are an advantage a person doesnt need any better accuracy. the combination if a ffp reticle and a rad scope makes for the advantage. one thing ive found -dont convert back and forth in your mind when using either method- thats what i seem to do when going to a mrad scope and it just creates confusion

 

[Rank Amateur]

FYI, a MIL is 3.6" at 1k and an moa is 10.47, so the delta between the two is 3.44 to 1. But as you say, the adjustment is more course.

As stated, for field shooting in 1st focal plane scopes, the mil reticle really shines for me, especially for wind holds. Most MIL reticles are subtended into 0.2 MILs, which is finer than the 1 moa found in most moa scopes. For wind holds on small steel targets the MIL is much better than the moa reticles in my scopes. Measuring targets and doing math is easier and quicker too.

I still use moa for F Class but have moved to MIL for everything else.

Sorry, I think this is off by a decimal place.

There are 21,600 MOA in a circle. There are 6,283 MIL in a circle. MILs are larger angles at any distance than MOA. Put another way, 1 MIL = approx. 3.43775 MOA. At 100 yds, 1 MOA = approx. 1.047 inches, so, 1 MIL = 3.43775 x 1.047" = 3.59932 inches (3.6" is plenty close enough). At 1,000 yards, 1 MIL= 36 inches and 1 MOA=10.47 inches.

 

[jobhopper66]

I have a number of scopes with Mil adjustments mainly Sightron and SWFA and I make them work for my application. I do shoot for accuracy but not competitively. The turrets are still also marked up and down and left and right so while the adjustments are coarser the situation is really not all that bad. All of the Mil scopes I have were bought used so they would not have been my first choice but the price on most were significantly lower than MOA scopes so I can easily justify the slight inconvenience.

 

[Ranger188]

I am an old geezer, 74.
1mrad = 3.9"
.1mrad =.39".

Why would any accuracy shooter use the comparatively coarse mrad click value scope?
MOA scopes mostly use 1/8th inch click values. One click (theoretically) moves the bullet 1/8th of an inch.
For instqnce: If I am shooting for score and the bullet strike is 1/2" outside the center of the X-ring. With moa I just click over four clicks and I am in the 10-ring. With mrad I cannot get there. .1mrad moves the bullet .39".

What am I missing here?

ISS

An MRAD @100yds is 3.6 inch
So .1 is .36 of an inch
Some scopes turrets will do .05 MRAD which is .18 of an inch. This will get you closer
to the 1/8 turret on a MOA scope of .125

Two different scopes for two different needs.

 

[ShaunBrady]

I can't see any good reasons to use a FFP mil tactical scope for 100 yard benchrest.

It'd also be silly to use a fine crosshair SFP bench rest scope on a PRS rifle.

For everybody in between, the difference is smaller than it appears. Most MOA scopes are 1/4 moa clicks.

1.047"/4 =0.262"

For Mils, it's 3.6"/10 = 0.36

0.36" - 0.26" = 0.10"

The first catch is you'd never leave it 1 full click out. You'll adjust it to the next click if its over 1/2 click off. That makes the largest difference you'd likely see 0.10"/2 = 0.050". Most often, it'll be smaller than that.

For the case of the bench rest 1/8" click scope, it could be almost 1 full 1/8" click finer resolution than the mil scope but that is the most extreme case possible and won't happen often. For a dedicated 100 yard bench rest scope, it could sometimes be used to an advantage if you can only use a center quartering hold.

For the rest of the world, one of the things you find when you start using electronic target systems is the zero moves around more than you'd expect. More or less, kinda sorta, 1/4 the group size. And it's only that small if you shoot the groups from the same setup near in time.

As you move off of 100 yard bench rest with dedicated rifles, the real world error budget consumes any potential accuracy advantage pretty quickly.

 

[ToddKS]

As a PRS shooter, speed of adjustment is important. I shot a stage not that long ago where the difference between the two targets was around 3 mil. There were 5 positions with a shot at the near and far target from each. Were I using a scope with 1/8 MOA turrets, it would require 459 more clicks to complete the stage vs what is required using my .1 MIL adjustments.

9 scope adjustments total for the stage @ 3 MIL or 10.125 MOA per adjustment.

27 mil total travel @ 10 clicks per MIL: 270
91.125 MOA total travel @ 8 clicks per MOA: 729

FORUM Boss: This is the essential answer -- 0.1 Mil Clicks work better when rapid, significant up/down changes are required. That works for PRS/NRL and for hunting.