I am just happy that the optics world has embraced both. The people who want to say "my way is the best" can pissoff. They want external validation. Look at both, pick your favorite, the end.
That guys videos are long-winded and click baity. But Eagleman's explanation of MIL vs MOA is also not great either. The difference between 0.25MOA and 0.1MRAD at 1000 yards is 0.8" so the idea that the fine adjustments make any real difference is a bit much. At that range that tiny level of difference is lost in any wind call.
@@jimothy-johnson thats why we use 1/8 or 1/10 MOA adjustments. and yes it matters. at least at the top tier of score shooters. moving a 4 inch group 1 inches left or right means the difference between a 50 or 49 score. let alone X count. Its probably better to say that to MOST people its moot.
@@McgSpook You're correct world record BR shooters would benefit from very fine MOA adjustments. Everyone else will benefit from MILs. Especially any form of practical long range shooting. Not saying it translates perfectly to everything but if you look at PRS shooters everyone is using MILs. There's a reason for that. I'm not even going to make an appeal to the military (who also use MILs) because the civilian competition shooting scene is way more advanced/optimized. Whether it's PRS, NRL, NRL Hunter, KO2M, ELR competitions, etc.
@@jimothy-johnson agreed that most people wont be able to use it even if it is more precise. Even the Average BR of F Class shooter benefits. But saying those guys are average is misleading. They all shoot ridiculously well. PRS peeps, like my PRS rifle, uses MIL. I use it because its less cluttered and easy to remember holdoffs. That translates into speed. I'm shooting bigger targets faster. MIL makes sense. If i had more time, id use MOA personally but to each his own.
The difference in MOA and MILS at 1000 yards is only a difference of 1.1 inches. That's HARDLY enough to say that MOA is better for smaller adjustments. That argument doesn't hold water for me. So you're saying that MOA makes a difference is hitting a 4 inch clay pigeon at 1000 yards. Na, that doesn't hold water for me. MIL guys using Mil scopes can hit the same small targets.
Yes, it makes a difference. 10 ring in BR is 6 inches at 1k. Think of it like this, your rifle is capable of shooting 6 inches at 1k, you now have to place that 6 inch pattern on top of a 6 inch target. The finer you can adjust that 6 inch group the more overlap will exist and more hits will occur. If i can only get 5 inches of my group over that pattern I'll have a 9. While on steel thats no biggie, for score it matters a LOT. Its not a 1 shot thing, its a group of shots thing. Generally speaking the smallest PRS target is 1 MOA and most are 2-3 MOA. Shooting 1 MOA at a BR competition is not competitive.
@@McgSpook This is all true of course, but we're talking about hunting rifle accuracy. For matches 1/8 MOA scopes would be much more helpful so it if comes down to that, then why don't we see every BR shooter running only 1/8 MOA scopes?
@@Rico11b Didnt know we were talking about hunting rifles exclusively. As to why you dont see every BR shooter using 1/8 MOA scopes... Well, if my memory serves me well I'd guess about 9/10 do. At least in IBS and Freedom Benchrest. If you see something thats in MILS or 1/4 moa then its usually a temp scope or what they had on hand for an emergency. Most of us shoot multi sports or hunt. The VAST majority of the scopes i see are NF Benchrest and NF competitions in 1/8 MOA clicks. Others do pop up though. Just not often. The only time i think that isnt true is hunter class where they are limited to 8x power. Now PRS is a different ballgame all together. Fast shots at bigger targets is where MIL really excels. I keep MIL glass on my PRS rifle also.
@@McgSpook Exactly. The difference in MOA and MIL at 1000 yards is only 1.1 inches. Sure for BR and serious competition that could matter, but for what James is teaching in his courses 1.1 inches isn't going to make a bit of difference. He has is preference for his own reasons and I respect that, but for me it's Mils all the way.
The author prefers MOA because he is smart, as well as credentialed in the matter. The guy who has the why MOA sucks videos apparently does not know that MOA is the unit of measurement used to describe inches at distance to adjust sights on the M1, the M14, the M16, the M4, and military rifles fitted with an ACOG, meaning most firearms out there today.
Are you thinking of IPHY? Basically every military scope on the planet is MRAD, including the US military. It's easier to remember and has a really good wind bracketing system that there is no equivalent of in MOA.
The Military ONLY uses MILS. The guy with the 3 hour waste of time video is correct. MOA sucks, he just sucks at explaining why. Shouldn't take 3 videos or even 3 hours to explain it. NATO Military uses MILS, I'm gonna use MILS. That's what I learned on and I'm not changing it. It's simpler and faster, and that counts when hunting.
Thats gary at @paramounttactical. His problem with MOA scopes is more about the mechanics of teaching it and that the variance is so small that most shooters can't take advantage of it. MIL definitely has advantages to a military or PRS person. He also says that specialty shooters are a different game ie BR, F class peeps. I promise you he knows a LOT more about military rifles then you do. But he shoots MIL glass because it has some definite advantages to the average shooter. Never thought id be out here on internet defending him, but there it is lol.
@@Rico11b thats not true exactly. Fair to say they use MILS on current sniper and ranging optics. Although that's fairly recent. It is easier to teach and less clutter on the scope. they are shooting at large targets. Personally i dont have a problem with either and think that as long as your reticle and turrets match its a moot point.
I am just happy that the optics world has embraced both. The people who want to say "my way is the best" can pissoff. They want external validation. Look at both, pick your favorite, the end.
Took 1.5 minutes. That one guy took 3 videos to explain why MOA sucks. Thanks for this.
That guys videos are long-winded and click baity. But Eagleman's explanation of MIL vs MOA is also not great either. The difference between 0.25MOA and 0.1MRAD at 1000 yards is 0.8" so the idea that the fine adjustments make any real difference is a bit much. At that range that tiny level of difference is lost in any wind call.
@@jimothy-johnson thats why we use 1/8 or 1/10 MOA adjustments. and yes it matters. at least at the top tier of score shooters. moving a 4 inch group 1 inches left or right means the difference between a 50 or 49 score. let alone X count. Its probably better to say that to MOST people its moot.
@@jimothy-johnsonthe difference is small but it is not .8” it’s 0.9825”
@@McgSpook You're correct world record BR shooters would benefit from very fine MOA adjustments.
Everyone else will benefit from MILs. Especially any form of practical long range shooting. Not saying it translates perfectly to everything but if you look at PRS shooters everyone is using MILs. There's a reason for that. I'm not even going to make an appeal to the military (who also use MILs) because the civilian competition shooting scene is way more advanced/optimized. Whether it's PRS, NRL, NRL Hunter, KO2M, ELR competitions, etc.
@@jimothy-johnson agreed that most people wont be able to use it even if it is more precise. Even the Average BR of F Class shooter benefits. But saying those guys are average is misleading. They all shoot ridiculously well. PRS peeps, like my PRS rifle, uses MIL. I use it because its less cluttered and easy to remember holdoffs. That translates into speed. I'm shooting bigger targets faster. MIL makes sense. If i had more time, id use MOA personally but to each his own.
What if the eagle man scope had 20th mil adjustments? :)
There are already 1/8th moa scopes, which will go back and beat your 1/20th in resolution
Nice try Diddy
The difference in MOA and MILS at 1000 yards is only a difference of 1.1 inches. That's HARDLY enough to say that MOA is better for smaller adjustments. That argument doesn't hold water for me. So you're saying that MOA makes a difference is hitting a 4 inch clay pigeon at 1000 yards. Na, that doesn't hold water for me. MIL guys using Mil scopes can hit the same small targets.
Yes, it makes a difference. 10 ring in BR is 6 inches at 1k. Think of it like this, your rifle is capable of shooting 6 inches at 1k, you now have to place that 6 inch pattern on top of a 6 inch target. The finer you can adjust that 6 inch group the more overlap will exist and more hits will occur. If i can only get 5 inches of my group over that pattern I'll have a 9. While on steel thats no biggie, for score it matters a LOT. Its not a 1 shot thing, its a group of shots thing. Generally speaking the smallest PRS target is 1 MOA and most are 2-3 MOA. Shooting 1 MOA at a BR competition is not competitive.
ps. very good BR people consistently group in the sub 4 inches at 1k. Not me, I suck :-). But i see it every match, from the same people.
@@McgSpook This is all true of course, but we're talking about hunting rifle accuracy. For matches 1/8 MOA scopes would be much more helpful so it if comes down to that, then why don't we see every BR shooter running only 1/8 MOA scopes?
@@Rico11b Didnt know we were talking about hunting rifles exclusively. As to why you dont see every BR shooter using 1/8 MOA scopes... Well, if my memory serves me well I'd guess about 9/10 do. At least in IBS and Freedom Benchrest. If you see something thats in MILS or 1/4 moa then its usually a temp scope or what they had on hand for an emergency. Most of us shoot multi sports or hunt. The VAST majority of the scopes i see are NF Benchrest and NF competitions in 1/8 MOA clicks. Others do pop up though. Just not often. The only time i think that isnt true is hunter class where they are limited to 8x power. Now PRS is a different ballgame all together. Fast shots at bigger targets is where MIL really excels. I keep MIL glass on my PRS rifle also.
@@McgSpook Exactly. The difference in MOA and MIL at 1000 yards is only 1.1 inches. Sure for BR and serious competition that could matter, but for what James is teaching in his courses 1.1 inches isn't going to make a bit of difference. He has is preference for his own reasons and I respect that, but for me it's Mils all the way.
The author prefers MOA because he is smart, as well as credentialed in the matter. The guy who has the why MOA sucks videos apparently does not know that MOA is the unit of measurement used to describe inches at distance to adjust sights on the M1, the M14, the M16, the M4, and military rifles fitted with an ACOG, meaning most firearms out there today.
Are you thinking of IPHY? Basically every military scope on the planet is MRAD, including the US military. It's easier to remember and has a really good wind bracketing system that there is no equivalent of in MOA.
The Military ONLY uses MILS. The guy with the 3 hour waste of time video is correct. MOA sucks, he just sucks at explaining why. Shouldn't take 3 videos or even 3 hours to explain it. NATO Military uses MILS, I'm gonna use MILS. That's what I learned on and I'm not changing it. It's simpler and faster, and that counts when hunting.
Thats gary at @paramounttactical. His problem with MOA scopes is more about the mechanics of teaching it and that the variance is so small that most shooters can't take advantage of it. MIL definitely has advantages to a military or PRS person. He also says that specialty shooters are a different game ie BR, F class peeps. I promise you he knows a LOT more about military rifles then you do. But he shoots MIL glass because it has some definite advantages to the average shooter. Never thought id be out here on internet defending him, but there it is lol.
@@Rico11b thats not true exactly. Fair to say they use MILS on current sniper and ranging optics. Although that's fairly recent. It is easier to teach and less clutter on the scope. they are shooting at large targets. Personally i dont have a problem with either and think that as long as your reticle and turrets match its a moot point.
@@McgSpook How you gonna try to tell me what's what, and I was there. The Military uses Mils... period..