+- 6.5 Grendel Forum (https://65grendel.com)
+-- Forum: GENERAL FIREARMS DISCUSSION (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+--- Forum: Optics, Accessories, Parts, and Equipment (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Thread: Mill or MOA (/showthread.php?tid=1926)
Pages:
1
2
Mill or MOA - mlmiller1 - 01-11-2012
stokesrj Wrote:For hunting I actually prefer 1/3 MOA scope turrents because I can get 0-1000 yards on one revolution of the Turrents which greatly reduces the chance of getting lost through the transition of a complete revolution. The Huskemaw 5-20 is what sits on my 6.5 STW. http://www.longrangehunting.com/store/uskemaw-blue-diamond-series-5-20-rifle-scope.html
Bob
Let me preface this with the fact I'm not well experienced in scopes, mil or moa. However, I've never heard of a scope turret that is labeled 1/3 MOA clicks . Interesting to me, though, is the fact that 1/10 Mil clicks are very close to 1/3 MOA. I wonder if your 1/3 MOA click scope turret is actually a Mil turret with a different label? A rose by any other name is still a rose, right?
MLM
Mill or MOA - stokesrj - 01-12-2012
mlmiller1 Wrote:Let me preface this with the fact I'm not well experienced in scopes, mil or moa. However, I've never heard of a scope turret that is labeled 1/3 MOA clicks . Interesting to me, though, is the fact that 1/10 Mil clicks are very close to 1/3 MOA. I wonder if your 1/3 MOA click scope turret is actually a Mil turret with a different label? A rose by any other name is still a rose, right?
MLM
No, this is a purpose built hunting scope with custom turrets calibrated to a specific load. The designer picked 1/3 MOA specifically so that with only one revolution the shooter could reach any range up to 1,000. 1/4 MOA clicks will only reach 600 yards with one revolution and 1/2 MOA clicks are to imprecise. Here is an exert from the owners manual.
Huskemaw Optics | 5-20 Long Range Owner’s Manual
wIndage and elevaTIon adjusTmenTs
The standard elevation turret has markings and numbers that indicate clicks. The
scope adjustment is calibrated to provide 1/3 MOA per click with 60 clicks or 20 MOA
total adjustment per revolution. This allows simple compensation when your Range Card requires a certain number of click adjustments (for example 43 clicks at 800 yards). This turret is temporary and will only be used to collect True BC data for your custom RFBC compensator. The windage adjustment turret is marked in MOA from 0-10-0. Turning three clicks left form zero will show one MOA and turning three clicks right from zero will also show one MOA.
You replace the standard turret cap with one calibrated in yardage for your particular load. You then set it for the distance to the target, such as 6 for 600 yards and hold dead on for elevation.
Bob
Mill or MOA - LR1955 - 01-12-2012
Leadfarmer Wrote:Hi guys, I am new to this whole world of long range shooting and 6.5G. I am looking at buying a Vortex Viper PST 4-16X50 Ill. Ret. Scope for my new Grendel. Gun will primarily be used for hunting deer, hogs and coyotes in SC. It will have a 20" SS Satern Barrell and usually hunting deer will be under 200 yards, hogs and coyotes, could be out to 500 on farmers fields. However, I would like to have the capabillity of doing some long range shooting just for fun without having to switch out optics. So, should I get the Mil or MOA reticle or does it matter?? I was practicing with a Mil reticle on a simulator and have learned already how to calculate distance by the size of the target. Just want to know before I spend another $1k on scope and mount.
Thanks,
Kevin
Kevin:
Read the post by Drifter a couple of times as he has it right. The mil relationship formula is a relationship that applies to inches, feet, yards as it does to meters. Target size in yards divided by mil reading X 1K = distance in yards. Target size in meters divided by mil reading X 1K = distance in meters. Target size in Arshins divided by mil reading equals distance in Arshins.
Understand though, that the mils that equate to one meter @ 1K meters are Artillery Mils and not true mathematical mils. The military basically invented the mil increment used by sighting systems in order to get a fit one 1 mil = 1 meter @ 1K meters.
However, let me suggest to you that if your brain is hardwired to use inches and yards when looking at an object or estimating range by eye, you will probably be better off with a reticule pattern calibrated in minutes. Similar to the mil relation formula, target size in inches divided by moa read off the reticule X 100 = distance in yards. Just note the mil relation formula uses 1K as a multiplier. When you use MOA and inches to determine range you use 100 as a multiplier.
I prefer the English system because despite my career plus in the Army, I still measure things in inches and yards more precisely than centimeters and meters. I have optics with mil reticules but am faster and more precise with a reticule indexed in increments of MOA. Elevation and windage are in MOA but it really doesn't matter as I know how many MOA I need for holds and use the optic the same way a guy uses a mil pattern for holds. Just divide the target size in inches by minutes seen via the reticule and you get distance in yards.
Mils are a bit harder to transfer when you get into wind doping. If you are better at estimating wind in terms of meters per second as opposed to miles per hour, then a mil reticule may be better. Since Americans learn to estimate wind using MPH and not Meters per second, the use of a MOA reticule is easier and more precise. The reason isn't because of the metric system but because a guy tends to use a wind doping process that goes from MPH and value to a MOA adjustment and then to MILs if he is using a mil reticule. A MOA reticule pattern simply means that for most (not necessarily all) Americans who are more used to doping wind in terms of MPH, it is easier to use a MOA pattern for wind holds.
My decision would be made based on how comfortable I am using the English verses the Metric system. Most Americans are far more comfortable with the English system as that is how we learned to estimate sizes. There is absolutely nothing wrong in using yards instead of meters. Particularly if you are hardwired to use the English system.
LR55
Mill or MOA - Leadfarmer - 01-15-2012
Thanks guys for all of your input. I think I will go with MOA since I have no concept of conversion of inches, feet and yards into mm, cm, m, and km. It does seem to me though, by looking at the Vortex Viper FFP MRAD scope, that it would be more accurate. When I say that I know it is not correct per say but it seems that the increments are smaller and math easier. That is if you know and understand the conversion. I think I will go with the Vortex Viper FFP in MOA with 30mm tube 6-24x50. What about mounts and rings?
Mill or MOA - Variable - 01-15-2012
Leadfarmer Wrote:I think I will go with the Vortex Viper FFP in MOA with 30mm tube 6-24x50. What about mounts and rings?
Larue!
Probably something like a LT-158: http://www.laruetactical.com/larue-tactical-spr-s-mount-lt-158
Buy once, cry once. It'll also give you back 10moa of your elevation travel for long range.
Mill or MOA - bwaites - 01-15-2012
2nd Larue!!