Why do 99% scopes have MOA knobs and Mil reticles?

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lucky

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
2,919
Location
Calgary, near Rocky Mountains - Canada
I can understand they'd have money invested in the machines to make MOA clickers. So why not just make MOA reticles to match? Nightforce has one or two, but do people really enjoy doing extra redundant math? Is it that important to copy something the militaries use, even if it makes less sense?
 
Lucky,

I am not sure what you mean...

Mil Dots are usually used to help range est. MOA is used to measure group and/or correct POI. Two very different task. (Yes you can use Mil Dot for hold over marks but as far as I know that is not its primary job.)

If you had a scope that had MOA markings in the Reticle you would have way too many marks.

For example if you had a scope that had a 10' feild of view at 100yards and it was marked in MOA you would have 120 marks... that would be a little too busy (at least for me).
 
First of all moa and mil dots are just 2 different units of measuring the same thing and they are not that different from each other in magnitude. Also there are things called fractions (turrets clicks are generally a fraction of an MOA) so just because some cannot wrap their head around it does not mean it would not make more sense :evil: Here is a moa reticle from nightforce and to me it looks very logical in layout:

http://practicalrifler.6.forumer.com/a/new-moa-reticle-in-nightforce-scopes_post262.html

To the OP yes it would make more sense and yes it would cut out a step of math and I have no idea why more scopes are not setup that way. It is probably just a traditional thing but it makes way more sense to a lot of people I would guess.
 
Last edited:
If you had a scope that had MOA markings in the Reticle you would have way too many marks.
Click to expand...

Nope, just different spacing of the lines that would exactly equate to the adjustments on the knobs, minutes instead of mils. I found a scope, eventually, that had mil turrets to match the reticule, but you'd think reticules like the NF one would be the rule, not the exception.

You could use minutes to measure stuff too.
 
It's because of "legacy thinking."

It makes way more sense to have matching angular systems on the knobs and reticle.

Most of the LR shooters I shoot with have gone either MOA/MOA or mils/mils. Nightforce and USO have MOA/MOA and mil/mil options. S&B and Premier have mil/mil options.

IMO, mils/mils make more sense.

Mil Dots are usually used to help range est. MOA is used to measure group and/or correct POI. Two very different task. (Yes you can use Mil Dot for hold over marks but as far as I know that is not its primary job.)
Click to expand...
If you spot a miss (yours or your partner's) in your mil reticle and then want to give a correction, they're not that different after all. There are a number of tasks one accomplishes using the reticle features and knobs, and they are almost all easier if the systems match.

-z
 
Probably logistics. I guess you've mainly been looking at military/tactical type scopes, since the majority of "hunting/sporting" scopes seem to just have plain old crosshair reticles. Standardized MOA clicks for all the scopes, even the mil-dot ones, means they're cheaper to make.

And mil-dots can work fine for holdover, just takes a bit of math and a lot of luck with your ammo's trajectory. Like here's a reference chart I made for my AES-10B.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Copy of reticle RPK.gif
    Copy of reticle RPK.gif
    8.1 KB · Views: 499
RyanM - That was the point I thought of the thread. They all work, its just more math and more time consuming. I would love to have a scope with MOA marks on the reticle. It makes a lot of sense since I have a good understanding of MOA. I wouldn't mind if the scope manufacturers moved to mils either, it would just take a little bit more effort to get used to the conversions before I was decent with the scope. I would absolutely love to have MOA hash marks on a scope, without having to spend NF money.

EDIT: Zak Smith - I can't divide by 3.43 in my head though maybe by 3.5 and hope its close enough.
 
Well, the point is if the systems match you don't have to. Old data can be converted over (once) easily.

In any case, in the practical long-range shooting scope market, the manufacturers do offer matching systems of your choice (some even IPHY as well)
 
Zak, what are the benefits of Mil/Mil vs MOA/MOA or vice versa? I would think that a MOA reticle would be quite "busy". Out of interest, do you see more Mil/Mil scopes ... I would think so?

All of my Mark 4 scopes have Mil reticles and MOA knobs but it's not a problem for me yet since I'm not lucky enough to have a long-range practical shooting club near me. For the "long-range" matches that I shoot my set up is fine since I have plenty of time to dial in any necessary adjustments. In fact, my setup would probably work quite well in a practical scenario given the bullet drop in Mils below. Rounding to the nearest 1/2 or 1/4 Mil would work quite well if the objective is to stay under 2 MOA.

100 yards = -0.44 mils
200 yards = O mils
300 yards = 0.63 mils
600 yards = 2.99 mils
800 yards = 4.93 mils
1000 yards = 7.22 mils

:)
 
There are more mil reticles out there than MOA reticles, so the chances someone will be spotting your shots with a mil reticle is higher. 0.1 mil is slightly more coarse than 0.25 MOA (typical click values), but finer than 0.5 MOA (actually it's 0.34 MOA). Mil dope numbers are in "decimal" fractions and the fraction is a number of clicks (ie, 3.4 is to 3 mils and 4 clicks past); whereas MOA dope numbers typically end in 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 which correspond to 1, 2, or 3 clicks (ie, some conversion necessary). Mil dope numbers are also less digits. A mil is a "unitless" fraction which is easy to remember (1 part transverse in 1000 parts length).

MOA reticles aren't necessarily busy. They key is that the features are based on MOA-based intervals, not necessarily "every MOA."

Another thing to think about is windage. In field-style matches, it is uncommon for people to dial wind-- we hold it with reticle features based on our wind call and the "full value" on our data sheet.

If you have systems that match, you can use a combination of reticle + knobs for any specification or correction (from spotted hit/miss).

-z
 
Here's how my .308 data looks when printed in both mils and MOA:
Code: 
308 155 LAP @ 2925
Z 100yd  6200'DA
RANGE  ELEV-  moa    mil     | WIND(10) moa   mil   RANGE
  50    0"    1.00   0.3mil  |   0"   0.25   0.1mil   50
 100    0"    0.00   0.0mil  |   0"   0.50   0.1mil  100
 150    1"    0.50   0.1mil  |   1"   0.75   0.2mil  150
 200    3"    1.25   0.3mil  |   2"   1.00   0.3mil  200
 250    6"    2.25   0.6mil  |   3"   1.25   0.3mil  250
 300   10"    3.25   0.9mil  |   4"   1.50   0.4mil  300
 350   16"    4.25   1.3mil  |   6"   1.75   0.5mil  350
 400   23"    5.50   1.6mil  |   8"   2.00   0.6mil  400
 450   32"    6.75   2.0mil  |  11"   2.25   0.7mil  450
 500   43"    8.25   2.4mil  |  13"   2.50   0.7mil  500
 550   55"    9.50   2.8mil  |  16"   2.75   0.8mil  550
 600   69"   11.00   3.2mil  |  20"   3.00   0.9mil  600
 650   85"   12.50   3.6mil  |  23"   3.50   1.0mil  650
 700  103"   14.00   4.1mil  |  27"   3.75   1.1mil  700
 750  124"   15.75   4.6mil  |  32"   4.00   1.2mil  750
 800  146"   17.50   5.1mil  |  37"   4.50   1.3mil  800
 850  172"   19.25   5.6mil  |  42"   4.75   1.4mil  850
 900  200"   21.25   6.2mil  |  48"   5.00   1.5mil  900
 950  230"   23.25   6.7mil  |  54"   5.50   1.6mil  950
1000  264"   25.25   7.3mil  |  61"   5.75   1.7mil 1000
 
I think the real advantage of a MOA reticle would be in the hunting field. Knowing that a 20 mph wind would push the bullet so many inches at 100 yards would translate instantly in my mind to the proper reticle mark to use. No math involved. Same would go for holdover 375 yard antelope that is only going to be standing still for the next 3 seconds.

Don't figure in would make much difference on the target range.
 
You shouldn't work in inches, because then you have to convert based on the distance. Always think in the native angular units your setup has (MOA or mils).

-z
 
I don't have a problem with the MOA adjustments and the mil reticle. When I am sighting the scope in at a certain range, I make my MOA adjustments based on the
POI, and then leave them alone. If I am utilizing the mil reticle, I use it for fast acquisition for range, windage,lead, etc. If I have time, and know the static distance to a target (say, when shooting hi power competition), then I mark my settings, use my "come ups" or "come downs" on the MOA turrets, and record such, so I can immediately reset to my sight in zero after the match. Works like a champ, even at the 1000 yards shoots. I have gone from my standing 700 yard zero on my long range rifle, A Rem 700 .300WM, and gotten sighted at 1000 yards with two shots. Then put it right back dead on at 700 by counting back my match adjustments. I basically use the mil scale for tactical (read that FAST) applications, and verifying ranging.
 
It works very well in the French System.
One centimeter at 100 metres is .1 mil.

I see reticles with half-mil marks, a 2 MOA graduation would be no "busier" to look through, if you are wedded to the system.
 
I think he means to say MOA reticles are not very common. And if you were to look at the scopes that have MOA or Mil reticles 99% have Mil Reticles. I would assume the greatest % of scopes have a duplex type reticle.
 
Where did mils come from? Is it just some archaic leftover like pecks, gills, and drachms?
 
Radians are the standard unit of angular measure, used throughout geometry. There are 1000 milliradians (mils) per radian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radian
The milliradian (0.001 rad, or 1 mrad) is used in gunnery and targeting, because it corresponds to an error of 1 m at a range of 1000 m (at such small angles, the curvature is negligible). The divergence of laser beams is also usually measured in milliradians.
Click to expand...
 
Where did mils come from? Is it just some archaic leftover like pecks, gills, and drachms?
Click to expand...

Archaic no... we are the using a the archaic "Imperial" measurements (inches) that don't work well with milliradian system so we instead use MOA. But if you were used to the metric system than milliradian works much better than MOA.

1 milliradian = 1 meter at 1000 meters
1 milliradian = 10 centimeter at 100 meters


lipadj46,

"moa and mil dots are just 2 different units"

#1. Incorrect MOA measures angle, but Mil-Dot is a reticle design.
#2. Even if you meant milliradian, I said that they are used for "Two very different taskes" I said nothing of what they actually measured

Would you measure the distance from your house to work in Inches/MM? No... Could you use it? YES... But why? Just use Miles/Kilometers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Why does the Leupold MK4 use a Mil reticle but MOA knobs?
Replies
6
Views
919
Lucky
L
E
  • Locked
JBM Ballistics website help! (drop chart)
Replies
6
Views
968
esheato
E
MCMXI
  • Locked
mil/mil vs. moa/moa
Replies
20
Views
2K
MCMXI
MCMXI
Legionnaire
  • Locked
  • Poll
MIL or MOA? Why? DATA, not a DEBATE!
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
4K
Chuck R.
Chuck R.
M
  • Locked
Which scope for M1A?
Replies
18
Views
1K
iamkris
I
Back
Top