Scope turrets scaled in MOA and reticle scaled in mrad - why is this?

[Cassidy]

My scope turrets are scaled in MOA but the reticle is scaled in mrads - it came from the mfr that way. Anyone know why is this? My impression is having both in MOA makes more sense. I called the mfr, Leupold, and they indicated that the US military specifies the reticle this way. I called them first then sent the scope back the mfr to change the reticle to MOA but they returned it and said they cant do it (they don't have a MOA reticle for this scope).

 

[dkhunt14]

I don't know why they do it. It doesn't seem to bother me though because I just click the minutes of angle to hit where I want. The only time I use the reticule to hold is maybe for a quick follow up shot.

 

[CatShooter]

My scope turrets are scaled in MOA but the reticle is scaled in mrads - it came from the mfr that way. Anyone know why is this? My impression is having both in MOA makes more sense. I called the mfr, Leupold, and they indicated that the US military specifies the reticle this way. I called them first then sent the scope back the mfr to change the reticle to MOA but they returned it and said they cant do it (they don't have a MOA reticle for this scope).

It is because of the way they are used. We think of moa in this country when sighting in scopes and adjusting them.

But military shooters have spotters that work with them in the field, and the spotter will call corrections or misses in "mils", because that is how their spotting scopes or bins are set up.

So when the shooter misses, the spotter will see a puff of dust inn his scope or bins, and it will be measured with the reticle in the scope or bins IN MILS.

He will instruct the shooter to hold right 1-1/2 mil, because 1-1/2 of a mil is ALWAYS 1-1/2 of a mil at any range, but 5 moa is not.

You have a very well thought out and designed scope, but it is not designed for your application.

 

[mikecr]

I don't know or care why the military does whatever. But there is no benefit to MILs over MOA, as both can be used just the same.
If you have a cross hair among the mess, and it doesn't subtend to obscure your target, you can aim with it still. That's all that matters.

 

[CatShooter]

I don't know or care why the military does whatever. But there is no benefit to MILs over MOA, as both can be used just the same.
If you have a cross hair among the mess, and it doesn't subtend to obscure your target, you can aim with it still. That's all that matters.

The benefit is that all the other military equipment is in mils - it makes no sense to have one piece be moa.

 

[Erud]

1-1/2 of a mil is ALWAYS 1-1/2 of a mil at any range, but 5 moa is not.

Can you tell me at which ranges 5 moa is not 5 moa?

 

[brian427cobra]

MOA's are not inches, and MIL's are not metric, they are angular measurements, there are 21600 MOA's in a circle, and 6283 MIL's or MRAD's in a circle, MOA's are perfect for static fixed position shooting, the adjustments are finer than MRAD's, MIL's are better suited for fast action shooting at any distance with little time, one nice feature of MIL's is every scope manufacture makes scopes with a Mil-Dot or Mil hash reticle, and most offer matching .1 MRAD knobs, on the MOA side, no two scope makers offer the same reticle, and then the shooter must figure out if the scope is TMOA(true), SMOA(shooter), or mis marked IPHY, both systems can be used to measure distances, and with practice can be very precise, and both can be used for holds, I own both systems, and while I can shoot a F-Class match with one of my MRAD scopes, my TMOA Nightforce is a better tool for that, I only use MRAD scopes for precision rifle matches, I did a couple with my NF when funds were limited. A MRAD reticle with MOA knobs is about as smart as using a yard stick and calling out centimeters, it doesn't make sense, my advice is only buy scopes with reticles that have matching knobs, and pick the right tool for the job.

 

[CatShooter]

1-1/2 of a mil is ALWAYS 1-1/2 of a mil at any range, but 5 moa is not.

Can you tell me at which ranges 5 moa is not 5 moa?

MOA does not relate to any military equipment. If your spotter calls a 2 mil right correction, I behoove you to make that correction with a moa scope at ANY range!

 

[brian427cobra]

5moa is 5moa at any distance, and 1.5mils is 1.5mils at any distance, that is the point Thud was trying to make.

 

[mikecr]

Well you make a good case for calling misses in MILs,, if a spotter is calling them in MILs.
This fixation on misses seems part of a tactical charter. I see a lot of chatter about shooting steel and walking shots into rocks at stupid distances...

But back to reality
The finest resolution to take it all to is IPHY, and given that most scopes adjust at neither MOA or MILs regardless of generalized, it usually comes down to reality in IPHY.
For instance NF scopes are marketed as MOA, but those I've tested all adjusted at greater than 1.047 IPHY per MOA increments. And there is no reason to think most MIL scopes actually adjust at 3.6 IPHY per MIL increment -until verified as such.
On the flip side there are scopes that actually do adjust in MOA(like Leupold Mk4), and a simple med-fine crosshair is all needed with them.

As far as ranging of anything but fixed size targets, I'm pretty sure it's easy to demonstrate that reticle ranging is nowhere near 'precision', especially compared to laser ranging. And turret adjustment, when known to it's actual value, is more accurate than holdover on game.
So the best accuracy comes from laser ranging, and dialing elevation.
Hash marks in any value are good for wind hold-off only.

 

[wwbrown]

A couple of things:

But military shooters have spotters that work with them in the field, and the spotter will call corrections or misses in "mils", because that is how their spotting scopes or bins are set up.

So when the shooter misses, the spotter will see a puff of dust inn his scope or bins, and it will be measured with the reticle in the scope or bins IN MILS.

Having shot a fair amount with USMC scout sniper teams here in CONUS I understand their CONOPS somewhat, and I question the logic of what you are saying I tink in support of milRads on a spotter and MOA adjustments/turrets on a scope. Why is it logical to give someone adjustments in milRads when the scope has MOA turrets? Imagine you have someone shooting at you and your spotter gives you adjustments in milRads and you have to make the conversion to MOA. The scout sniper teams are very sharp and capable and they can make that conversion but why does it make sense to require them to make that conversion in a hot exchange, when a simple change of turrets could fix it? At ranges beyond 800 yards with a brake or suppressed 308 Win you can mark you own shots with your reticle, so you can call your own adjustments accurately, having a mix of units between the reticle and the turrets makes no sense in this case either. Enough said on the rads vs MOA issue.

The other thing that I think needs to be brought up is that the reticles on most scopes used by civilians in the US are only accurate at one magnification, this includes and of the BDC-type reticles. Most of the scopes used by civilians in the US have their reticles in the second focal plane (SFP) and measurements on the reticle are only correct at one magnification. The magnification that is to be used with the SFP scopes is usually marked on the zoom/power ring with a hash or a red number. Scopes that have reticles in the first focal plane (FFP) are accurate at all ranges because the reticles is magnified at the same value the scene is.

To determine whether your scope is FFP or SFP is easy, look through it and adjust the power, if the reticle remains the same size it is a SFP scope.