Mil (MRAD) scope

[tangolima]

Ventured into "long range" shooting lately, and found everybody is having scope in mil, or MRAD, instead of MOA.

It is pretty convenient in metric environment. 1 mil is 1 meter out of 1km and so on. However I don't have access to military facilities, and all ranges I shoot at have yards, not meters. It is not that convenient, is it? Not the end of the world really. 1 mil = 3.6 MOA. I can handle that. However the turret clicks makes hesitate.

Better mil scope actually have 0.1mil per click. That is 0.36 MOA. Isn't it more coarse than the traditional 0.25 MOA per click? Why do I want to do that? But first, do I understand it correctly?

Thanks.

-TL

PS. Most scope models have both mil and moa versions. The latter is usually a bit cheaper. Cheap scopes usually have mil reticle and 1/4 moa clicks, which is silly.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[zeke]

That's the way i understand it. If you use the turret for elevation adjustment, the courser clicks translate to significantly fewer clicks as the distances increase.

While you may not zero exactly on at 100 yds with the mil-mil, that's not really what they are for. IMO, depending on scope, it may also mean less chance for error in elevation adj with fewer click adjustments.

 

[tangolima]

That kinda makes sense. But I still think finer click is a "good virtue" for a scope.

I think it is a matter of tradition. Long range has root from military sniping. Mil is the language of the trade. I want to get in the game, I'd better start talking in their language, or I'd become a outcast.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Polinese]

If you're doing a lot of shooting at varying distances you'll appreciate the coarser adjustments. I cut my teeth on a Leupold Mk 4 10x which had full 1 moa elevation adjustments. I was still able to get a good 100 yard zero and very rapidly dial to different distances. Counting fewer clicks and rotations was def an advantage during certain courses of fire we did in the classes I took.

Have to consider the general size of the targets you'll be engaging as well. Are you trying to shoot little itty bitty things where that .1 moa is going to matter or are you shooting ipsc and animal silhouettes where shooter error is going to make more of a difference than .25moa vs .36moa

 

[tangolima]

Interesting perspective. I haven't thought of that.

0.36MOA or 0.25MOA a click probably doesn't matter much in reality. But when the spotter calls out correction in 0.1mils, it would be inconvenient if you have to convert that in 0.25MOAs.

Thank you guys. I am going with mil.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[taylorce1]

But when the spotter calls out correction in 0.1mils, it would be inconvenient if you have to convert that in 0.25MOAs.

Well I doubt the spotter will ever give you a .1 MIL adjustment. They're going to be course adjusments matching what their reticle in the spotting scope is telling them and it'll never be .1 MIL. Simply because thier scope reticle subtensions won't be that fine.

It really doesn't matter what you use to learn long range shooting, but having the adjustments on the turret and reticle match shortens the learning curve. A lot of the first mil-dot scopes had MOA adjustments and that took a bit of a learning curve. MIL-MIL or MOA-MOA just makes it easier to make adjustments on the fly faster.

 

[tangolima]

Well I doubt the spotter will ever give you a .1 MIL adjustment. They're going to be course adjusments matching what their reticle in the spotting scope is telling them and it'll never be .1 MIL. Simply because thier scope reticle subtensions won't be that fine.

It really doesn't matter what you use to learn long range shooting, but having the adjustments on the turret and reticle match shortens the learning curve. A lot of the first mil-dot scopes had MOA adjustments and that took a bit of a learning curve. MIL-MIL or MOA-MOA just makes it easier to make adjustments on the fly faster.

"0.3 right. .2 up". I heard that a lot. Not necessarily 0.1mil, but multiple of. Imagine translating into 1/4moa. Times 6 is about right.

Even at 500 meters, 0.3mil is 15cm, or 6".

Christmas tree reticle in a 50mm scope can tell 0.1mil. A bigger spotting scope shouldn't have much difficulty. In a pinch spotting even uses scope on another rifle to spot and call out corrections.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[zeke]

approximately 50 vs 70 clicks for .1 mil adj vs 1/4 moa adj at 600 yds for slower 168 308 out of 16 barrel.

Aside from what was previously mentioned, there is an adjustment in longer range shooting from hitting little dots at 100 yds. Differing purposes/methods and skill sets. For my purposes, am "bracketing" the target. Course everyone's purposes be different.

 

[tangolima]

approximately 50 vs 70 clicks for .1 mil adj vs 1/4 moa adj at 600 yds for slower 168 308 out of 16 barrel.

Aside from what was previously mentioned, there is an adjustment in longer range shooting from hitting little dots at 100 yds. Differing purposes/methods and skill sets. For my purposes, am "bracketing" the target. Course everyone's purposes be different.

That brings out a good point. Unless the shooter can't take his eye off target, he shouldn't be counting 50 or 70 clicks. Turret has graduations for multiple clicks; 1mil (10 clicks) on MRAD scope, 1moa (4 clicks) on MOA scope. That narrows the difference.

Also if a rifle is meant to shoot farther away targets, it would be more efficient to have zero beyond 100yd or 100m. Less clicks from zero.

Can't shot little dots at long range. 0.1mil at 500m is 6".

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Bart B.]

A good rule of thumb for most shooters is to make angular adjustments of the LOS no smaller than one-third the size of a 10-shot group you can shoot.

 

[tangolima]

Make sense based on single miss. For 2 or 3 misses with similar corrections, I would adjust.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Bart B.]

As virtually all USA NRA's high power rifle target rings are sized in inches, it's best to use MOA units in inches.

Metallic rear sights leade screws typically have 40 tpi threads and 12 clicks per turn. A 30 inch sight radius made exactly 1/4 inch LOS change for every hundred yards of range.

 

[Shadow9mm]

Rather than yards vs meters, it feels more like Fahrenheit vs Celsius, a total different way of measuring things, or a foreign language. I bought a mil scope, having watched several videos on it and feels i had a good understanding. I regret it. Way too much thinking and math involved to convert units.

 

[tangolima]

Have been shooting with the new scope in mil. So far ok. One click is 0.36" for 100yd, instead of 0.25". About 3 clicks for an inch instead of 4. No problem. It will become instinctive with practice.

I quite like the Christmas tree reticle.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Nathan]

The reason for mil is a bit elusive. It is related to Bart B’s post although I suspect most do not understand this point.

Mil is often not understood well. It is not metric. It is a base 10 ratio. Like 1 yard per 1000 yards….or 1 m per 100m. Essentially a tangent ratio for an angle.

So, mil vs MOA. MIL is great for field use because the ratio yields a fine adjustment without being too fine. Also, turrets adjust at 0.1 mil and reticles generally read to 0.2 mil…possible to split in half.

MOA adjustments are down to 0.25 MOA usually, although 0.125 and 0.5 MOA exist. The reticles can be base 10, base 4 or base 2. It can get a bit confusing

 

[Jim Watson]

Base 10 so it is more convenient to work with it in the French System.
Easier to think of 0.1 mil as being a centimeter at 100 meters than to fudge it to .36" at 100 yards.

 

[Nathan]

All depends what 1cm means to you….0.36” means more to me…..I’m old.

 

[reynolds357]

All depends what 1cm means to you….0.36” means more to me…..I’m old.

Me too. I hate metric.

 

[reynolds357]

Ventured into "long range" shooting lately, and found everybody is having scope in mil, or MRAD, instead of MOA.

It is pretty convenient in metric environment. 1 mil is 1 meter out of 1km and so on. However I don't have access to military facilities, and all ranges I shoot at have yards, not meters. It is not that convenient, is it? Not the end of the world really. 1 mil = 3.6 MOA. I can handle that. However the turret clicks makes hesitate.

Better mil scope actually have 0.1mil per click. That is 0.36 MOA. Isn't it more coarse than the traditional 0.25 MOA per click? Why do I want to do that? But first, do I understand it correctly?

Thanks.

-TL

PS. Most scope models have both mil and moa versions. The latter is usually a bit cheaper. Cheap scopes usually have mil reticle and 1/4 moa clicks, which is silly.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I understand Milrad, but I think in MOA. I just bought me a new mil has scop. It was on sale for $900 and the same scope with MOA hash reticle was $2700. I will suck it up and think in milradians for that cost savings, but it is not my choice.

 

[zeke]

Doesn't really matter if your range is in meters or yards. What a lot of people go off of is their trajectory (hold over) table, and what you plug into it for distance measurement. Ususally the result is in inches, and you need to do some basic math using moa or mil. And even your table is a guestimate till you check it, although some get really close.

Not really that difficult. And mils are not metric .1 cm = .0394 in

If i can figure this out, please rest assured anyone else can.