Pete! You missed the biggest advantage of MRAD! a 950 hold in MRAD is 8.9 mil so 1.5 revolutions of turret, where the MOA is 30.7 moa which in the same scope would be 2.2 revolutions
Great video! Just wanted to add a quick breakdown for anyone who's curious about the difference between MOA and MRAD in Australian measurements: MOA (Minute of Angle): 1 MOA equals about 29 mm at 100 meters. So, adjusting 1 MOA on your scope moves your point of impact by 29 mm at 100 meters. MRAD (Milliradian): 1 MRAD equals 100 mm (10 cm) at 100 meters. Each click on an MRAD scope is usually 0.1 MRAD, which means 1 click moves the point of impact by 10 mm at 100 meters. Both systems are accurate, but MRAD can be easier to work with if you're using the metric system, as we do here in Australia.
I have always shot MOA. I got my first MRAD scope and slapped it on my Rem 700 just so I can learn to use it for range estimation. I like picking up new skills.
I use MOA and my buddy who I shoot with uses MRAD. Since we spot for each other, while confusing at first, it allows us to both learn each others system.
It constantly amazes me how this most simple concept is made so totally unnecessarily complicated by so many people. It's simply two different ways of expressing the sizes of angles. One is in terms of degrees and portions thereof, which is base:60. The other is in terms of radians, which is base 10, referred to as decimal. By the way, some wrongly say that radian scopes are metric. They are not. They are decimal. Metric is simply a type of decimal. A radian scope works the same with yards as it does with meters. An angle of 1 milliradian subtends to 1/1000 of the length of it's base. That's true no matter what units the base is measured in, whether meters or yards or any other unit of length or distance. Edited for correction of "right angle" to simply "angle."
I have four rifles. Two with MOA scopes and two with MIL scopes. I don't calculate anything, I just get the range and then refer to a drop chart for each one. Nice and easy.
Best explanation of MOA vs. MRAD I've ever seen. The yard vs. meter measurement distance actually makes twice as much difference than the 0.047 above an inch you get with rounding down MOA though. Between the 2, I could really go either way. The greater determining factor for me would be the design of the reticle and which my eye picks up better. It's usually the MRAD design, but sometimes the MOA design is laid out better (for me) with certain brand scopes.
I have switched to 1/8 MOA, scopes. For what I do I like to get quite precise and fine adjustments count. I just picked up a March Majesta and have never been happier! Cheers.
Love the debate. You both had one of the best conversations about this subject (martyr/soldier) as a Christ follower I struggle with the most. I want to do both, and it reminds Me of Luke 22:36-38. We are to protect others and our selves, but there is a fine line between defending righteously or killing needlessly. Awesome job gentlemen, thank you for letting me apart of the society.
Great video! More of a "tactical" long range shooter here. I actually prefer MRAD precisely because, as an American, the inches and yards of the MOA system is TOO familiar; it coaxes me into making calculations in my head. The MRAD system, while not complicated, encourages me to just memorize my rifle's dope. I don't even spin turrets, just estimate the range, hold the elevation and shoot. Sure, other ways are far more precise...but I'll hit what I need to. And fast.
I started shooting MIL 5 years ago. I found it easier to use when dialing out to distance as you said. The only time I've had any issue is in F-Class competition where everyone else is running MOA. We had a funky thing with the electronic targets where we had to add 1MOA so we were grouping above the X, simply to keep the actual X on the paper targets clear and visible through the match. Little bit of math and I got it dialed right in.
Really good, solid info. I used to use MOA and switched to MIL for the same reasons you mentioned. Communication between shooters and more simple numbers made it easier.
I was trained using MOA but I have recently made the switch to MRAD. MRAD is superior in my opinion. Easier to remember dope and faster to dial in. Makes for faster engagements and faster transition between different distances.
A milliradian scaled reticle is indeed best for ranging since in head math can quickly discern distance to target using the formula: target size in yards times 1000 divided by target size in mils. But, sight movement in MOA better describes the distance in inches the sight adjustment will make at target distance. For example, a 1 MOA sight adjustment would move bullet impact approximately 1 inch at one hundred yards, 2 inches at two hundred yards, 3 inches at three hundred yards, and 10 inches all the way out to one thousand yards. So, consider a scope with mil scaled reticle and MOA elevation and windage adjustments.
Great info Piet thanks! My older rifles (hunting) are in MOA. My new rifle with ACC chassis with Strike Eagle is in Mils. Bit of a learning curve but I’m enjoying the journey! Thanks 🍻
I am a older MOA shooter and trying to convert to MIL and it certainly is difficult when you have been programmed to MOA all your life , I haven’t given up since I committed to a MIL scope by Vortex , l was using a MK4 Leupold before and also switched from a Second to a Front focal , old habits are hard to break
The advantage of MRAD talks by itself 04:02 Using MOA and relating it to units of the so-called imperial system you needed more than 20 seconds and a caliper to find the solution. (probably some guys would need even a calculator) Using MRAD you only want to multiply or divide by 10. 07:43 Let´s take the 600m correction; How could you enter 14.6 MOA when the turret corects in quarters? The explanation of the two systems is very good and I hope no one is bothered by my comments, which are not intended to offend anyone.
I switched over to MILs because at the time from what I can remember 99% of scopes were coming in MIL reticle with MOA turrets, dialing for misses and not getting close on my first adjustment simply because I forgot to math or I math'd wrong just didnt make sense to me anymore, over the last 5-10 years MIL-MIL, MOA-MOA scopes are the norm now. Now I own both, for my long range rifles I use MILS on my more "precision" closer range rifles I use MOA, A plus for MIL is its easier to remember and relay 8 or 9 MILs of adjustment rather than 24 or 31 MOA for those longer range calls
Thanks for the breakdown, this video came out at the right time. I just switched to a MIL based scope and didn't know how it compared to all the MOA optics I've used.
I have always used MOA simply because I am from America and had a ton of hunters and such around. In my head I always thought MIL was confusing because I was trying to convert yards to meters and figuring out what is between centimeters and meters and such. More recently though I bought a MIL based scope for a .22LR that I shoot out past 300 yards and farther on a regular basis. I have to say after practicing a bit and sort of 'slapping myself on the hand' every time I try to convert measurements and 'just go with it', MIL to me is much easier. Eventually I will replace some optics to become MIL based and will buy MIL going forward. I think with a lot of American shooters in particular they do stuff equivalent to trying to figure out the wind drift of a Barrett 50 cal at 100 yards when it simply doesn't matter. For most shooters the variation shot to shot in ammo as well as changing environmentals such as wind or temperature more than offset a perceived 'fine adjustment' gains. Just simply having a 10 based system overall keeps it easy especially when you get out to farther distances. I think the hunting crowd in the US won't change any time soon but for anything long distance related I think MIL will take over even more than it already has. Also when you are dialing up and trying to count clicks MIL is way easier too. Say if your scope has 6 MIL per revolution you literally have to count to less than 10. With an MOA scope you are going 'was that 31 MOA or 30.5?
MRAD just makes more sense to me and so does the metric system as it's all I've used in school, work and other hobbies. I even use the metric measurements when reloading.
Agreed with you.. both can give the same results.. i love that people argue but can hit a 10” target at 1000yrds.. practice makes way more of a difference than moa or mil
I prefer MOA for quicker range estimation in the field (e.g. a coyote being 9" from bottom of hair on belly to top of hair on back), if you measure that as 3 MOA, you know the yote is around 300 yards out. Measured at 2 MOA, 450 yards, 4 MOA read = 225 yards, etc. But, I can use an MRAD/MIL optic by converting the MRAD/MIL reading to MOA simply by dividing the MRAD/MIL reading by 3 (basically every 3/10ths MIL/MRAD = 1 MOA (minutely larger)). There's 3.434 MOA per 1 MRAD/MIL. You can convert MOA to MRAD/MIL by multiplying the reading by 3. For field expedient use not one hole, ten shot groups at 2 miles!
as a NONE shooter I found this very helpful I understood what you was talking about. I think a good video to make (for idiots like me! being a NONE wantabe shooter) is to show on a target what the drop is over a set distance (I know it depends on MANY factors) but video show with "X" load "X" weight of bullet "X" barrel length that scope dialled in at 100 metres is centre at 300 it's "X" cm or inches low if you don't dial (????) NOT SURE if you understand what I mean???? it not about the numbers but about understanding the drop
Milliradians is not dependent on using the metric system. 1 milliradian is simply 1/1000th of a linear distance. It works with yards just like it does with meters
I shoot MOA because that is what the store had for the scope that I wanted but that is on my plinking rifle. I am leaning towards MRAD for my next scope but the next build I am going for a mile shot so I need some bigger arc radians to reach out to that distance. My MOA scope maxes out before I can compensate for the drop. Works great for a 1000yd shoot though.
The ideal scheme is mil reticle and MOA dials for a multitude of reasons. If you were schooled in USA then you relate/use/think imperial measurement (inches) to describe the size of objects, and thus MOA measuring about one inch per hundred yards can be used to quickly describe the distance in inches a sight adjustment will make at target distance. Example, what is 9 inches in MOA at 300 yards and what is 9 inches in mils at 300 yards? If you need to pull out the calculator to figure in mils then you'd be better off selecting a scope adjustable in MOA. MOA also accommodates an in head math wind formula based on a bullet's efficiency described as an MOA constant where target distance in yards di vided by 100 times wind in mph divided by MOA wind constant equals MOA of bullet drift. Now, on the other hand, since a mil reticle can be used to quickly discern target distance using in head math when target size in yards is known using the formula, target size in yards times 1000 divided by target size in mils equals target distance, it is the ideal reticle. Creds: NRA Long-Range HIgh Master, US Distinguished Rifleman, CMP-USAMU cert. Military Rifle Instructor assisting USAMU deliver SDM, TTT, and SAFS training
Great explanation, you cleared up a lot of questions I had on what format my next purchase would be and why! I'm new to the long distance / PRS scene and use a MOA optic. I feel my next optic purchase will be in MRAD. Thanks for posting!
With the use of Ballistic Calculators does it even matter which method of scope you use or buy. I use Hornady’s 4DOF Ballistic Calculator and you can select between MOA or MRAD. So as Piet said, using an MRAD scope would mean memorizing smaller numbers could be the benefit and less twisting of the turrets. As long as I have Distance, Wind Speed, and Direction, the calculator tells me everything. Yes I am still a new shooter, starting my second season of Long Range PRS, maybe I am relying to much on the Calculator instead of manual calculations.
Learn to understand both moa and mrad and how they can even be mathematically interchangeable and never look back. Its not as complex as it seems really
I'm new to the question, MRAD or MOA. Ive scopes of both persuasions and have given little thought to either. Having delved into it more I'm inclined towards MRAD. Mostly because MOA scope tick marks for MOA measurements are like bees around a hive having a variable range of distancing between one and another. MRAD delineations are lined up like solders on parade. I've no inclination to switch to the Christmas tree sort of scope. PA ACSS HUD DMR incorporates a rough MRAD ranging scheme into their FFP scope that will be of significant value; provided I'm able eyeball the whole divisions down to tenths accurately. A 500 yd shot could mean a 50 yd miss for sake of 0.1 Mil off. When you're lobbing in 7.62x39 shells, its a big deal. :) I'll need to convert target inches to yards but multiplying by 1000 is easier; versus X 27.78.
At 100yds 1moa is approximately 1inch. At 100yds 1mil is 3.6 inches. At 800 yards, 1moa is 8 inches. Half an moa is 4inches super easy, quarter is 2". 100m 1mil is 3.9 inches which may be better than 3.6, but even rounding it to 4 makes everything weird. At 800m 1mil is 32inches that way, which makes .5 mils 16", and .1mil 3.2 inches which is a weird af number still. If you think in inches, moa is far more intuitive. If you think in cm, mil is vastly superior for obvious reasons. I was in a sniper team in the US Marine Corps and we all literally kept calculators in our sketch kits. As much as I wish I thought of object measurement in cm, I dont. I see distance in yards based on football fields, and see width in inches based on rulers. Its way less trouble for me to range hold and call using quarters of a measurement I think with than do decimals of weird numbers I hate lol. 0.47" at 1000 yards also isn't realistically going to be noticed by rounding down to 10 instead of 10.47
I shoot MOA, for 1 I just understand it better and comes easier to me. Also I can relate things to imperial units much easier than I can the metric system.
@DBCopper-qf3wc 0.1mil at 100 meters is 1cm. 0.1mil at 100 yards is 0.36inches. 1moa at 100 yards is 1.047inches. 1moa at 100 meters is 1 inch or 2.9cm. Seems to me the mrad associates quickly with metric and moa associates quickly with imperial.
MILS maybe more precise and it definitely has a place but here in SW Pennsylvania where there ain’t a lot of long ranges, MOA is just easier to use but if you want a good bolt action or semi auto to use for range, MILS is definitely more plentiful
Dude I actually got used to that setup back before they started making them same/same we had a Mil-Dot reticle with MOA turrets, you got real good at converting back and forth and now I can use either or and I’m good
The areas we hunt are about 200-500 yards. I'm assuming that "Precision" calculations are really not one of my concerns? Simply use holdovers? Pieter, this has to be one of my favorite videos.
Great job. I use both. Stay off the bike as you will pay when older. back in the day I motocrossed then did it with a bicycle.Take your vitamins and heal fast so u can make more videos mate...
I just bought a scope in mrad without checking before hand because I figured it didn't matter. I want to get into long distance shooting so the mrad seems better for how I'm going to use my gun
I live In America here's my question. so your posted up, semi urban area you see a target next to a building at an unknown Range, but you see a door on that building you know that door is more than likely around 7 feet tall so why should you use metric and convert I order to find a distance of something measured in inches, feet, yards, acres and miles.
Yeah but the more distance the more that comes into play. So of course if your shooting at 100 yards it’s not going to make a huge difference in between MOA, MRAD or MIL but you should explain that when shooting in long distance competition matches or something like that it starts to get down to an exact science using Trig, wind speed, climate, Sea level, spin of earth, cross winds and what kind of ballistic coefficients in the ammunition that your using which makes a difference anyways but still makes a bigger difference then. It’s when you get more into depth with using Match Grade ammunition which is almost always tailored specifically to your weapon of choice imbuing more to the weapons strengths and making up for any kind of potential weaknesses. Even categorically breaking down and or making up for environmental stressors when long distance shooting and stuff like that. It’s why I reload my own ammo so I can match it up better when you buy a weapon yes it takes a specific caliber/round but each weapon can have some play in the chamber when it comes to the caliber ammunition your using i.e. the Round might have to some play in the chamber which is fine for the regular shooter it won’t take that much away from normal shooters. But long range/Distance yeah every little bit counts and if your going all out and trying to get as much out of a precision Rifle/ precision build you can take it much farther then people realize by learning about what makes it tick and what you can do to get more accuracy, power and distance out of your weapons. A lot of these videos never go into depth into all that and that’s okay but sometimes I would like to hear someone actually talk about when these instrumental options start to really come into play and make more of a difference. Otherwise it’s just some guy on a video talking about how the Optics don’t make much of a difference when you get right done to it. Which forgive my French but that’s bullshit guys he may be read on this optic or doing a video to get money or free gear from the company but make sure you do more research on your own rather then relying on content creators who are either getting paid by sponsors to promote products Or trying to get paid by sponsors by speaking favorably about their product lines. I’m not saying that’s what this guys doing all I’m saying is this is a job for a lot of people and their job is to sell things just in a different way then you see at the store. Dont just take peoples word for it find someone who isn’t bias and really knows there shit. Like a Maybe a Vet. Who’s into this Or A Vet Sniper or a club pro at a match grade range who doesn’t sponsor products. Or someone you know who really isn’t going to sell you anything.
Hello, I want to start my long range shooting adventure with 7.62x54, what's better to calculate distance a shoot a deer at 500meters, mrad/moa scope or a fancy binoculars with infra red, range meter up to 1K Meters and other fancy options, I'm in Europe, the riffle is pretty loud with a suppressor, Im considering making my own suppressor from a long thick steel pipe filled with acoustic absorbing material to bring the muzzle flash and the voice down so not to scare away the animals, are there experience guy in this topic over there in the US to give advice about my issue, also did you hear about the heat detector blanket that makes you invisible to heat and infra red or is it a joke?
I often mil targets at LR competitions to find out unknown distances. And I have never bothered with anything but the metric system (Swede). So it would be very silly for me to use anything but mil. And most of the world would be like me when it comes to the metric system.
I just learned about MOA I just learned about m i l s.. and now I'm here and you just got my subscription with this video. Excellent job and presentation. Thank you. 🙏🏴🏴🏴🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I'm trying to figure out MIL.....so if I was say 5 inches high at 500. It's easy, that would be 1 minute adjustment. So if I had a MIL scope and was approximately 5 inches high at 500....how would you do the math in your head? Like what unit would you use? Centimeters? I'm 15 centimeters high which is "x" amount of MILs adjustment... how do you do this?
Great point A lot are trying to wrap thier head around this. Like it ain't metric based , O K ,fine. Now since mead is based on tens or tents, We need to see many examples of ,this because we are measuring in yards to target 690 550 877 635,etc etc Just give us an animated vid with reticle overlays and the language to match the adjustments . To me ,that's really the only real,stumbling block I still remember a d.i. Saying don't confuse yds with meters ,just add 10 percent to each hundred yds and you will be good, Any way Thanks 11.29.2023
Much respect for not making it about the superiority of one measuring system over another. That said, remember that the metric system is for those who suck at math.
I'm confused. 1 MOA at 1000yds is 10.47 inches which even when using the rounded math of 1 inch every 100 yards means you are only off by 0.47 inches but in MILs your clicks can be an inch bigger at 1000 yards which he said is no problem, so how is 0.47" a problem at 1000 yards? and wghere did he get 5.2 inches? is he shooting 10000 yards?
@@IMPACTSHOOTING It is what was clearly implied when you alluded to the .047 inch MOA fraction adding up to effect a zero. That is total nonsense which demonstrates you do not have the credentials to profess on this matter.
Never the less, I wouldn't use MOA scopes... And yes, metric system makes it so much easier for me to use MRAD. All those inches conversions are absolutely ridiculous, becaus and it's so much easier and faster to calculate your correction. Decimals are much much easier! At 100m, 1click (0,1 MRAD) is 1cm. Not some strange numbers like in MOA. At 500m, 1 click is 5cm, at 1000m it's 10cm. It's fast and accurate.
Pete! You missed the biggest advantage of MRAD! a 950 hold in MRAD is 8.9 mil so 1.5 revolutions of turret, where the MOA is 30.7 moa which in the same scope would be 2.2 revolutions
@@honeybadger4883 yea but a viper in mrad would take just over half a turn
@@honeybadger4883 theres roughly 3 moa in each mrad
@@honeybadger4883 do you?
faster to do sec's do count in some situations
Dude! Lol please explain more!! Make a video please! Lol
Great video! Just wanted to add a quick breakdown for anyone who's curious about the difference between MOA and MRAD in Australian measurements:
MOA (Minute of Angle):
1 MOA equals about 29 mm at 100 meters. So, adjusting 1 MOA on your scope moves your point of impact by 29 mm at 100 meters.
MRAD (Milliradian):
1 MRAD equals 100 mm (10 cm) at 100 meters. Each click on an MRAD scope is usually 0.1 MRAD, which means 1 click moves the point of impact by 10 mm at 100 meters.
Both systems are accurate, but MRAD can be easier to work with if you're using the metric system, as we do here in Australia.
I have always shot MOA. I got my first MRAD scope and slapped it on my Rem 700 just so I can learn to use it for range estimation. I like picking up new skills.
I use MOA and my buddy who I shoot with uses MRAD. Since we spot for each other, while confusing at first, it allows us to both learn each others system.
It constantly amazes me how this most simple concept is made so totally unnecessarily complicated by so many people. It's simply two different ways of expressing the sizes of angles. One is in terms of degrees and portions thereof, which is base:60. The other is in terms of radians, which is base 10, referred to as decimal. By the way, some wrongly say that radian scopes are metric. They are not. They are decimal. Metric is simply a type of decimal. A radian scope works the same with yards as it does with meters. An angle of 1 milliradian subtends to 1/1000 of the length of it's base. That's true no matter what units the base is measured in, whether meters or yards or any other unit of length or distance.
Edited for correction of "right angle" to simply "angle."
I have four rifles. Two with MOA scopes and two with MIL scopes. I don't calculate anything, I just get the range and then refer to a drop chart for each one. Nice and easy.
Is this because you’re using ffp? He he mostly referring to using sfp? I’m super new to this. Thanks.
Best explanation of MOA vs. MRAD I've ever seen. The yard vs. meter measurement distance actually makes twice as much difference than the 0.047 above an inch you get with rounding down MOA though. Between the 2, I could really go either way. The greater determining factor for me would be the design of the reticle and which my eye picks up better. It's usually the MRAD design, but sometimes the MOA design is laid out better (for me) with certain brand scopes.
I have switched to 1/8 MOA, scopes. For what I do I like to get quite precise and fine adjustments count. I just picked up a March Majesta and have never been happier! Cheers.
Love the debate. You both had one of the best conversations about this subject (martyr/soldier) as a Christ follower I struggle with the most. I want to do both, and it reminds
Me of Luke 22:36-38. We are to protect others and our selves, but there is a fine line between defending righteously or killing needlessly. Awesome job gentlemen, thank you for letting me apart of the society.
Great video! More of a "tactical" long range shooter here. I actually prefer MRAD precisely because, as an American, the inches and yards of the MOA system is TOO familiar; it coaxes me into making calculations in my head. The MRAD system, while not complicated, encourages me to just memorize my rifle's dope. I don't even spin turrets, just estimate the range, hold the elevation and shoot. Sure, other ways are far more precise...but I'll hit what I need to. And fast.
I started shooting MIL 5 years ago. I found it easier to use when dialing out to distance as you said. The only time I've had any issue is in F-Class competition where everyone else is running MOA. We had a funky thing with the electronic targets where we had to add 1MOA so we were grouping above the X, simply to keep the actual X on the paper targets clear and visible through the match. Little bit of math and I got it dialed right in.
Really good, solid info. I used to use MOA and switched to MIL for the same reasons you mentioned. Communication between shooters and more simple numbers made it easier.
I was trained using MOA but I have recently made the switch to MRAD. MRAD is superior in my opinion. Easier to remember dope and faster to dial in. Makes for faster engagements and faster transition between different distances.
I'm going with mrad too because I like the idea of range calculation. The more I learn about it the more I'm liking it
A milliradian scaled reticle is indeed best for ranging since in head math can quickly discern distance to target using the formula: target size in yards times 1000 divided by target size in mils. But, sight movement in MOA better describes the distance in inches the sight adjustment will make at target distance. For example, a 1 MOA sight adjustment would move bullet impact approximately 1 inch at one hundred yards, 2 inches at two hundred yards, 3 inches at three hundred yards, and 10 inches all the way out to one thousand yards. So, consider a scope with mil scaled reticle and MOA elevation and windage adjustments.
@@charlesludwig9173 Thank you for the information 👍
Great info Piet thanks! My older rifles (hunting) are in MOA. My new rifle with ACC chassis with Strike Eagle is in Mils. Bit of a learning curve but I’m enjoying the journey! Thanks 🍻
I am a older MOA shooter and trying to convert to MIL and it certainly is difficult when you have been programmed to MOA all your life , I haven’t given up since I committed to a MIL scope by Vortex , l was using a MK4 Leupold before and also switched from a Second to a Front focal , old habits are hard to break
why change when MOA and SFP is perfectly fine and is what you know?
Excellent video. Thanks for taking the time to film and edit it and of course for positing it for our benefit. Keep up the good work! -Migs
The advantage of MRAD talks by itself
04:02 Using MOA and relating it to units of the so-called imperial system you needed more than 20 seconds and a caliper to find the solution. (probably some guys would need even a calculator)
Using MRAD you only want to multiply or divide by 10.
07:43 Let´s take the 600m correction; How could you enter 14.6 MOA when the turret corects in quarters?
The explanation of the two systems is very good and I hope no one is bothered by my comments, which are not intended to offend anyone.
great video man i use MOA everyone i shoot with uses that and for me it makes more sense than mrad. I see the advantages to both though.
Thank you so much for your explanation between MOA & MRAD.
I am new in the Long Distance Shooting.
Subscribed.
I switched over to MILs because at the time from what I can remember 99% of scopes were coming in MIL reticle with MOA turrets, dialing for misses and not getting close on my first adjustment simply because I forgot to math or I math'd wrong just didnt make sense to me anymore, over the last 5-10 years MIL-MIL, MOA-MOA scopes are the norm now. Now I own both, for my long range rifles I use MILS on my more "precision" closer range rifles I use MOA, A plus for MIL is its easier to remember and relay 8 or 9 MILs of adjustment rather than 24 or 31 MOA for those longer range calls
Thanks for the breakdown, this video came out at the right time. I just switched to a MIL based scope and didn't know how it compared to all the MOA optics I've used.
I have always used MOA simply because I am from America and had a ton of hunters and such around. In my head I always thought MIL was confusing because I was trying to convert yards to meters and figuring out what is between centimeters and meters and such. More recently though I bought a MIL based scope for a .22LR that I shoot out past 300 yards and farther on a regular basis. I have to say after practicing a bit and sort of 'slapping myself on the hand' every time I try to convert measurements and 'just go with it', MIL to me is much easier. Eventually I will replace some optics to become MIL based and will buy MIL going forward. I think with a lot of American shooters in particular they do stuff equivalent to trying to figure out the wind drift of a Barrett 50 cal at 100 yards when it simply doesn't matter. For most shooters the variation shot to shot in ammo as well as changing environmentals such as wind or temperature more than offset a perceived 'fine adjustment' gains. Just simply having a 10 based system overall keeps it easy especially when you get out to farther distances. I think the hunting crowd in the US won't change any time soon but for anything long distance related I think MIL will take over even more than it already has.
Also when you are dialing up and trying to count clicks MIL is way easier too. Say if your scope has 6 MIL per revolution you literally have to count to less than 10. With an MOA scope you are going 'was that 31 MOA or 30.5?
MIL all the way. Keep up the great videos and heal quickly to get back out and shoot.
Holy cow this was helpful. I finally understand the pros and cons of each. Thanks!
MRAD just makes more sense to me and so does the metric system as it's all I've used in school, work and other hobbies. I even use the metric measurements when reloading.
This guy is always so funny. Great sense of humor.
Agreed with you.. both can give the same results.. i love that people argue but can hit a 10” target at 1000yrds.. practice makes way more of a difference than moa or mil
Duisend dankies Pietman!
Waarde volle inligting, dankie vir al jou moeite en tyd kwagga👌👏💪
I prefer MOA for quicker range estimation in the field (e.g. a coyote being 9" from bottom of hair on belly to top of hair on back), if you measure that as 3 MOA, you know the yote is around 300 yards out. Measured at 2 MOA, 450 yards, 4 MOA read = 225 yards, etc. But, I can use an MRAD/MIL optic by converting the MRAD/MIL reading to MOA simply by dividing the MRAD/MIL reading by 3 (basically every 3/10ths MIL/MRAD = 1 MOA (minutely larger)). There's 3.434 MOA per 1 MRAD/MIL. You can convert MOA to MRAD/MIL by multiplying the reading by 3. For field expedient use not one hole, ten shot groups at 2 miles!
My new scope is Mil so this video has helped me thanks.
as a NONE shooter I found this very helpful I understood what you was talking about.
I think a good video to make (for idiots like me! being a NONE wantabe shooter) is to show on a target what the drop is over a set distance (I know it depends on MANY factors)
but video show with "X" load "X" weight of bullet "X" barrel length that scope dialled in at 100 metres is centre at 300 it's "X" cm or inches low if you don't dial (????)
NOT SURE if you understand what I mean???? it not about the numbers but about understanding the drop
Sterkte met jou arm/hand Pieter.
Hoop dit raak gou gesond en dat jy beter as ooit sal skiet👍💪
Yes Piet, like die blooper reel.
Milliradians is not dependent on using the metric system. 1 milliradian is simply 1/1000th of a linear distance. It works with yards just like it does with meters
Any musicians like me who shoot will definitely use moa. We subdivide 4 all the time while counting as we play music.
I shoot MOA because that is what the store had for the scope that I wanted but that is on my plinking rifle. I am leaning towards MRAD for my next scope but the next build I am going for a mile shot so I need some bigger arc radians to reach out to that distance. My MOA scope maxes out before I can compensate for the drop. Works great for a 1000yd shoot though.
A drawer full of optics at 1:23. 👏👏
The ideal scheme is mil reticle and MOA dials for a multitude of reasons. If you were schooled in USA then you relate/use/think imperial measurement (inches) to describe the size of objects, and thus MOA measuring about one inch per hundred yards can be used to quickly describe the distance in inches a sight adjustment will make at target distance. Example, what is 9 inches in MOA at 300 yards and what is 9 inches in mils at 300 yards? If you need to pull out the calculator to figure in mils then you'd be better off selecting a scope adjustable in MOA. MOA also accommodates an in head math wind formula based on a bullet's efficiency described as an MOA constant where target distance in yards di vided by 100 times wind in mph divided by MOA wind constant equals MOA of bullet drift. Now, on the other hand, since a mil reticle can be used to quickly discern target distance using in head math when target size in yards is known using the formula, target size in yards times 1000 divided by target size in mils equals target distance, it is the ideal reticle. Creds: NRA Long-Range HIgh Master, US Distinguished Rifleman, CMP-USAMU cert. Military Rifle Instructor assisting USAMU deliver SDM, TTT, and SAFS training
Great explanation, you cleared up a lot of questions I had on what format my next purchase would be and why! I'm new to the long distance / PRS scene and use a MOA optic. I feel my next optic purchase will be in MRAD. Thanks for posting!
Thanks it's much clearer now. It's funny the voice sounds like it's a sped up voice.
Awesome video! I've checked a lot of videos about moa vs mrad and none of them compare to this onen
With the use of Ballistic Calculators does it even matter which method of scope you use or buy. I use Hornady’s 4DOF Ballistic Calculator and you can select between MOA or MRAD. So as Piet said, using an MRAD scope would mean memorizing smaller numbers could be the benefit and less twisting of the turrets.
As long as I have Distance, Wind Speed, and Direction, the calculator tells me everything. Yes I am still a new shooter, starting my second season of Long Range PRS, maybe I am relying to much on the Calculator instead of manual calculations.
Learn to understand both moa and mrad and how they can even be mathematically interchangeable and never look back. Its not as complex as it seems really
I understand what you're saying about remembering your distances but that's why you tape your range cards and laminate them to the buttstock my man.
I'm new to the question, MRAD or MOA. Ive scopes of both persuasions and have given little thought to either.
Having delved into it more I'm inclined towards MRAD. Mostly because MOA scope tick marks for MOA measurements are like bees around a hive having a variable range of distancing between one and another. MRAD delineations are lined up like solders on parade. I've no inclination to switch to the Christmas tree sort of scope. PA ACSS HUD DMR incorporates a rough MRAD ranging scheme into their FFP scope that will be of significant value; provided I'm able eyeball the whole divisions down to tenths accurately. A 500 yd shot could mean a 50 yd miss for sake of 0.1 Mil off. When you're lobbing in 7.62x39 shells, its a big deal. :) I'll need to convert target inches to yards but multiplying by 1000 is easier; versus X 27.78.
At 100yds 1moa is approximately 1inch. At 100yds 1mil is 3.6 inches. At 800 yards, 1moa is 8 inches. Half an moa is 4inches super easy, quarter is 2". 100m 1mil is 3.9 inches which may be better than 3.6, but even rounding it to 4 makes everything weird. At 800m 1mil is 32inches that way, which makes .5 mils 16", and .1mil 3.2 inches which is a weird af number still.
If you think in inches, moa is far more intuitive. If you think in cm, mil is vastly superior for obvious reasons. I was in a sniper team in the US Marine Corps and we all literally kept calculators in our sketch kits.
As much as I wish I thought of object measurement in cm, I dont. I see distance in yards based on football fields, and see width in inches based on rulers. Its way less trouble for me to range hold and call using quarters of a measurement I think with than do decimals of weird numbers I hate lol.
0.47" at 1000 yards also isn't realistically going to be noticed by rounding down to 10 instead of 10.47
I shoot MOA, for 1 I just understand it better and comes easier to me. Also I can relate things to imperial units much easier than I can the metric system.
Mils are not part of the metric system bud.
So what, if in practical terms one click gives cm adjustments per 100 meter.@@Dave-qf3wc
@DBCopper-qf3wc 0.1mil at 100 meters is 1cm. 0.1mil at 100 yards is 0.36inches. 1moa at 100 yards is 1.047inches. 1moa at 100 meters is 1 inch or 2.9cm. Seems to me the mrad associates quickly with metric and moa associates quickly with imperial.
Thank u for clear my choice for a scope im going mil
MOA here. I have 1/8 MOA scopes also.
MILS maybe more precise and it definitely has a place but here in SW Pennsylvania where there ain’t a lot of long ranges, MOA is just easier to use but if you want a good bolt action or semi auto to use for range, MILS is definitely more plentiful
I laughed way too hard at turrets in one format reticle in the other. That's diabolical 😂😂
Dude I actually got used to that setup back before they started making them same/same we had a Mil-Dot reticle with MOA turrets, you got real good at converting back and forth and now I can use either or and I’m good
The areas we hunt are about 200-500 yards. I'm assuming that "Precision" calculations are really not one of my concerns? Simply use holdovers? Pieter, this has to be one of my favorite videos.
Great job. I use both. Stay off the bike as you will pay when older. back in the day I motocrossed then did it with a bicycle.Take your vitamins and heal fast so u can make more videos mate...
Got the info I needed thanks. May I suggest you work to improve your audio recording and do some EQ.
Massive pie joke opportunity missed here 🤣
Great vid, thanks for sharing
I find 1 in 4 is easier to work out in my head because I’m use to working on imperial lathes even though New Zealand is metric
Going to ahititi this weekend bro?
Its basically the same as 6 egs or half a dozen
I have too many of both and swapping to all mil .
I just bought a scope in mrad without checking before hand because I figured it didn't matter. I want to get into long distance shooting so the mrad seems better for how I'm going to use my gun
Thanks for a very helpful video.
I had to check the playback speed and was surprised that it wasn't running at 1.25x 😀
Thanks
Excellent review 👏 👌 👍
Thank you! Cheers!
I live In America here's my question. so your posted up, semi urban area you see a target next to a building at an unknown Range, but you see a door on that building you know that door is more than likely around 7 feet tall so why should you use metric and convert I order to find a distance of something measured in inches, feet, yards, acres and miles.
Thank you!! Subscribed.
Excellent video
Don't estimate, be precise!! Uniformity equals precision!
Thank you Sir great job
Yeah but the more distance the more that comes into play. So of course if your shooting at 100 yards it’s not going to make a huge difference in between MOA, MRAD or MIL but you should explain that when shooting in long distance competition matches or something like that it starts to get down to an exact science using Trig, wind speed, climate, Sea level, spin of earth, cross winds and what kind of ballistic coefficients in the ammunition that your using which makes a difference anyways but still makes a bigger difference then. It’s when you get more into depth with using Match Grade ammunition which is almost always tailored specifically to your weapon of choice imbuing more to the weapons strengths and making up for any kind of potential weaknesses. Even categorically breaking down and or making up for environmental stressors when long distance shooting and stuff like that. It’s why I reload my own ammo so I can match it up better when you buy a weapon yes it takes a specific caliber/round but each weapon can have some play in the chamber when it comes to the caliber ammunition your using i.e. the Round might have to some play in the chamber which is fine for the regular shooter it won’t take that much away from normal shooters. But long range/Distance yeah every little bit counts and if your going all out and trying to get as much out of a precision Rifle/ precision build you can take it much farther then people realize by learning about what makes it tick and what you can do to get more accuracy, power and distance out of your weapons. A lot of these videos never go into depth into all that and that’s okay but sometimes I would like to hear someone actually talk about when these instrumental options start to really come into play and make more of a difference. Otherwise it’s just some guy on a video talking about how the Optics don’t make much of a difference when you get right done to it. Which forgive my French but that’s bullshit guys he may be read on this optic or doing a video to get money or free gear from the company but make sure you do more research on your own rather then relying on content creators who are either getting paid by sponsors to promote products Or trying to get paid by sponsors by speaking favorably about their product lines. I’m not saying that’s what this guys doing all I’m saying is this is a job for a lot of people and their job is to sell things just in a different way then you see at the store. Dont just take peoples word for it find someone who isn’t bias and really knows there shit. Like a Maybe a Vet. Who’s into this Or A Vet Sniper or a club pro at a match grade range who doesn’t sponsor products. Or someone you know who really isn’t going to sell you anything.
Is that the 4.5-27 or 3.5-18 razors HD Gen ii?
Hello, I want to start my long range shooting adventure with 7.62x54, what's better to calculate distance a shoot a deer at 500meters, mrad/moa scope or a fancy binoculars with infra red, range meter up to 1K Meters and other fancy options, I'm in Europe, the riffle is pretty loud with a suppressor, Im considering making my own suppressor from a long thick steel pipe filled with acoustic absorbing material to bring the muzzle flash and the voice down so not to scare away the animals, are there experience guy in this topic over there in the US to give advice about my issue, also did you hear about the heat detector blanket that makes you invisible to heat and infra red or is it a joke?
Great information thanks
Hello Sheila!
I often mil targets at LR competitions to find out unknown distances. And I have never bothered with anything but the metric system (Swede). So it would be very silly for me to use anything but mil. And most of the world would be like me when it comes to the metric system.
Thanks, would you please make a video to explan ERB raticales, and what all numbers in pictures you shoeæwd mean?
I just learned about MOA I just learned about m i l s.. and now I'm here and you just got my subscription with this video. Excellent job and presentation. Thank you. 🙏🏴🏴🏴🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Hey Pete.
What do you think of the Element optics range of scopes?
I'm trying to figure out MIL.....so if I was say 5 inches high at 500. It's easy, that would be 1 minute adjustment.
So if I had a MIL scope and was approximately 5 inches high at 500....how would you do the math in your head? Like what unit would you use? Centimeters? I'm 15 centimeters high which is "x" amount of MILs adjustment... how do you do this?
Great point
A lot are trying to wrap thier head around this.
Like it ain't metric based ,
O K ,fine.
Now since mead is based on tens or tents,
We need to see many examples of ,this because we are measuring in yards to target
690
550
877
635,etc etc
Just give us an animated vid with reticle overlays and the language to match the adjustments
.
To me ,that's really the only real,stumbling block
I still remember a d.i. Saying don't confuse yds with meters ,just add 10 percent to each hundred yds and you will be good,
Any way
Thanks
11.29.2023
Thanks for this nice video !
What app do you use for the horizontal/ vertical adjustment charts?
Much respect for not making it about the superiority of one measuring system over another. That said, remember that the metric system is for those who suck at math.
Dankie vir die Videos hou so aan
Where do you find .308 moa drop charts?
Watse app gebruik jy daar vie jou dailing
I am still a litttle confused with the illustration of the MRAD and MOA Reticle display. What is th eincrements from line to line on each?
Whats that Rifle in the back wall?
I have recent gotten into long range shooting and started with MOA considering whether it would be worth changing to MRAD what are your thoughts?
Love it!
Question: what is the equivalent to 1 MOA in MRAD ?
also did you say 0.1 MRAD = 1 cm ?
Damn sounded like you were saying mull not mil. Lol thought I was losing my mind.
did you use helium before recording? sorry lol new to your channel. nice work. thanks for explaining
Let's do it
I'm confused. 1 MOA at 1000yds is 10.47 inches which even when using the rounded math of 1 inch every 100 yards means you are only off by 0.47 inches
but in MILs your clicks can be an inch bigger at 1000 yards which he said is no problem, so how is 0.47" a problem at 1000 yards? and wghere did he get 5.2 inches? is he shooting 10000 yards?
The out-takes make it,,,,,
Please help me understand how mrad is more precise when at 1000 yards 1/4 MOA = 2.5” and 1/10 mrad = 3.6”.
Don’t think that was said in the video
@@IMPACTSHOOTING It is what was clearly implied when you alluded to the .047 inch MOA fraction adding up to effect a zero. That is total nonsense which demonstrates you do not have the credentials to profess on this matter.
You are absolutely right. Only in an incidence where the zeroing need was divisible in .36-inch increments would mil adjustment be better than MOA.
What about a Tremor3 reticle?
What app is that you use for your calculations?
Never the less, I wouldn't use MOA scopes... And yes, metric system makes it so much easier for me to use MRAD. All those inches conversions are absolutely ridiculous, becaus and it's so much easier and faster to calculate your correction.
Decimals are much much easier!
At 100m, 1click (0,1 MRAD) is 1cm. Not some strange numbers like in MOA. At 500m, 1 click is 5cm, at 1000m it's 10cm. It's fast and accurate.
Hi,so for hunting moa will be ok 'cause its faster than mrad on a rooibok or kudu or eland than mrad?
No, its not faster