Mrad and MOA, can you use both?

[markm]

We started to talk in mils Sunday.

[Failure2Stop]

We started to talk in mils Sunday.

The first time I taught a 15 year old to drive a manual transmission it was pretty miserable as well.

[M4Fundi]

Now this is how discussions on M4C should go! Well done guys!

Orkan I have used the Mildot Master and what I also call HickMath to get hits....and completely get how your method works... and last big training session was with a LRF and Range Card

aoCake I have really wanted to try mil/mil as I am mathematically dyslexic and easier is really appealing and you have convinced me to buy a mil/mil scope next time around.

Thanks to you both and as always to F2S for his experienced and always clear perspectives.

One of the LR wizards I do LR shooting with told me once the reason he uses MOA still is you can break it down to smaller units??? I think I am remembering how he said it. He said you could with the click units on an MOA turret and the MOA math get smaller units of adjustment so you could dial in a more precise dope. Is this true and if so is it actually applicable?

I know why most still use MIL/MOA in the US is because how would we know how to do the math to fix things in our house I am so sick of everything I work on in the house is a mix of cm & inches MIL/MOA is the Griswold Method

[orkan]

I'd challenge anyone to consistently show me the difference between 1/4" and 1/3" at 100yds.

In short, the argument that 1/4 moa clicks are somehow superior to 1/10 mil clicks due to the coarseness/fineness of adjustment is not valid.

[Jippo]

It might be worth to remember that 1 MRAD is not only 1 meter and 1000 meters. It is also 1 foot at 1000 feet, 1 yard at thousand yards, etc. etc. I don't know if helps you guys stuck with imperial system, but it might. I struggle with imperial system when ever I need to use it and can't readily do conversions from inches to yards, but it could be useful.

Metric system is just a simpler way to measure nature as it is only based on multiplier of 10 on all things. But MRAD system is in no way limited to metric system. 1 MRAD is just a right triangle where the long side is thousand times longer than the short side, no matter what units are used.

[orkan]

MOA is not imperial.
MIL is not metric.

Yard is imperial.
Meter is metric.

MOA and MIL are angular units of measure... just like degrees.

[Failure2Stop]

MOA is not imperial.
MIL is not metric.

Yard is imperial.
Meter is metric.

MOA and MIL are angular units of measure... just like degrees.

Yes, but the practical application forces the shooter to do the math to convert inches to feet/yards and possibly meters if using imperial measurements. Using the metric system, one is always working with meters/fractions of meters, which is a lot easier (if you understand meters).

I'm not disagreeing with you, simply using your comment as a discussion point.

[orkan]

Yes, but the practical application forces the shooter to do the math to convert inches to feet/yards and possibly meters if using imperial measurements.

I don't see that it does.

What's easier and more reliable to carry in the field?
1) Calculator
2) Mil or MOA relation chart

If I know target size in inches, then I have a range. Math is math. The formula for target size in centimeters is no easier or more difficult than the formula for target size in inches.

The argument is often presented by MOA shooters, that they don't have to do hard math because their reticle is in inches, and so is target size. This is predicated on one being forced to do math in the first place.

On whole values, this works pretty good.

Lets do an MOA scenario.
12" target, which reads 2 moa in size.
12 / 2moa x 100 = 600

That's damn easy to do in your head. Now suppose instead of a whole value you have to break it down.

18" target, which reads 2.5 moa in size.
18 / 2.5 x 100 = 720

So who here can divide 18 by 2.5 in a split second in your head? If you can, you are among less than 0.05% of the population that can readily convert a decimal into a whole number.

So, the idea that using MOA relieves you from having to do math is not correct. In fact, it's exactly the same as with a mil system with the exact same difficulty to get an exact reading.

Point in fact, I could argue that it is easier with mils, for many reasons... but one of the most obvious being that the formula for MOA ranging to multiply by 100 is incorrect. The actual formula is:
size of target in inches / target size in moa X 95.5

X100 only works precisely with scopes calibrated in IPHY. So if you do the above calculation of the 18" target again, only using 95.5 instead of 100... you get a distance of 688yds instead of 720. If you are shooting a 308... that's a pretty big deal.

As these things are talked about in forums... the actual real world application of them really becomes skewed. We can talk about them in the academic capacity until we are blue in the face, but the real world application is where the rubber meets the road. Not here on the forums.

So what then is the real world answer if you want range to target? Here it is in the order which I deploy them.

1) LRF
Range finders are one of the biggest factors to getting 1st round on target at distance. My vectronix LRF is treated as a holy item in my kit. It has its own compartment in my pack, inside of which its case, inside of which it rests when I'm not using it.

2) Mil relation chart
Taped to the side of my rifle for instant use, or easily accessible in my databook. Some matches don't allow LRF's. So when I need to mil-range... I go to a chart. VERY fast and reliable results.

3) Mildot master or whiz wheel.
Slower than mil relation chart, but I've got one on me just in case I lose my databook AND rip the chart off my rifle on a barricade or something. (has never happened)

4) Calculator.
Slowest and shittiest method. Bring out a piece of electronics with shiny shit all over it, with little buttons that I have to take my gloves off to use, which I can accidentally poke the wrong button and have to start over. I never use it, but its there.

My point being, if you find yourself having to do math in your head... you have already had shit go wrong, 4 levels deep. So I disagree with your assessment on its face. Never am I thinking about the 1+2=3 type shit when engaging a target, and I have no need to start.

[AR15barrels]

The first time I taught a 15 year old to drive a manual transmission it was pretty miserable as well.

hahaha, soooooo true...

[Failure2Stop]

Orkan- I can see how my post could be taken as something other than I intended, and when I am back in front of an actual computer I will rephrase my statement.

I agree with everything you are saying, so the issue is obviously my clarity of purpose.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2