MIL vs MOA

[Mute]

Those are sort of mixed units (not really but sort of). If you work in miliradians, you want to work in meters. From Wiki: "One mil approximately subtends one metre at a distance of one thousand metres."

Work in whatever units you are comfortable with, I'm an old due that works in MOA, I don't need to switch to a new unit system.

Actually it doesn't matter if you work with yards or meters. People need to stop mixing their linear measurements with their angular measurements where it is unnecessary.

[Merc1138]

Actually it doesn't matter if you work with yards or meters. People need to stop mixing their linear measurements with their angular measurements where it is unnecessary.

It kinda does, unless you intentionally like making the math harder than it should be. You can't just convert meters into yards as 1:1, the roughly 10% difference between the two will add up(500 yards being a little over 455 meters... that can become a big miss). Regarding the math... if you stick with meters when using mils, you get to just divide things by 10. If you go with yards and moa, it's close enough to be able to count 1 moa as 1 inch at 100 yards(even though being that rough can still add up to a huge error the further away you get as well).

Now if you like having to unnecessarily convert units back and forth instead of just using some quick math for mils or moa, or like using some odd calculation to convert straight from one to the other(maybe if you're a human calculator?), it wouldn't matter.

edit: It's the same reason having something like moa turrets and a mildot reticle or some other mismatched combo is kinda dumb. You're just giving yourself extra math to do.

[Mute]

It kinda does, unless you intentionally like making the math harder than it should be. You can't just convert meters into yards as 1:1, the roughly 10% difference between the two will add up(500 yards being a little over 455 meters... that can become a big miss). Regarding the math... if you stick with meters when using mils, you get to just divide things by 10. If you go with yards and moa, it's close enough to be able to count 1 moa as 1 inch at 100 yards(even though being that rough can still add up to a huge error the further away you get as well).

Now if you like having to unnecessarily convert units back and forth instead of just using some quick math for mils or moa, or like using some odd calculation to convert straight from one to the other(maybe if you're a human calculator?), it wouldn't matter.

edit: It's the same reason having something like moa turrets and a mildot reticle or some other mismatched combo is kinda dumb. You're just giving yourself extra math to do.

Why are you doing conversions? The formula doesn't change regardless of whether you use yards or meters:

Height of Target in yards / mils x 1000 = Distance to Target in yards

Height of Target in meters / mils x 1000 = Distance to Target in meters

[Merc1138]

Why are you doing conversions? The formula doesn't change regardless of whether you use yards or meters:

Height of Target in yards / mils x 1000 = Distance to Target in yards

Height of Target in meters / mils x 1000 = Distance to Target in meters

That's great, you've ranged it. No one said that was impossible to do. Read the whole thread and you'll notice part of the discussion shifted to having the turrets match the reticle.

[Mute]

That's great, you've ranged it. No one said that was impossible to do. Read the whole thread and you'll notice part of the discussion shifted to having the turrets match the reticle.

No where did I say one should not match turrets. What does that have to do with yards vs meters? The wisest thing anyone can do when it comes to this particular decision is going to get a scope that has reticles that match the turrets. With all the choices available nowadays, there is no reason to have a mismatched whether you choose MIL or MOA. Again, MIL works just fine in yards or meters. Hell, you can be a Star Wars geek and measure in parsecs and MIL will still translate just fine. Shooters should try to learn to move away from the need to translate everything into linear measurements where it is not needed. They need to stop buying into the false idea that if you are more comfortable with inches, feet and yards that, somehow, MOA is a better choice for them.

[Merc1138]

No where did I say one should not match turrets. What does that have to do with yards vs meters? The wisest thing anyone can do when it comes to this particular decision is going to get a scope that has reticles that match the turrets. With all the choices available nowadays, there is no reason to have a mismatched whether you choose MIL or MOA. Again, MIL works just fine in yards or meters. Hell, you can be a Star Wars geek and measure in parsecs and MIL will still translate just fine. Shooters should try to learn to move away from the need to translate everything into linear measurements where it is not needed. They need to stop buying into the false idea that if you are more comfortable with inches, feet and yards that, somehow, MOA is a better choice for them.

And as a result there's no reason to mismatch your distance, target size, turret adjustments or holdovers either. Or is the metric system and the difference betwene imperial a mystery to you? Not everything regarding target size(or any windage or elevation adjustments) happens in meters or yards. Again, it's not impossible to convert inches to cm, but wtf would you want to, if you don't have to?

[Mute]

And as a result there's no reason to mismatch your distance, target size, turret adjustments or holdovers either. Or is the metric system and the difference betwene imperial a mystery to you? Not everything regarding target size(or any windage or elevation adjustments) happens in meters or yards. Again, it's not impossible to convert inches to cm, but wtf would you want to, if you don't have to?

Are we having two different conversations? How are your distance, target size and turret adjustments mismatched regardless of whether you choose MIL/MOA or choose to think in terms of yards or meters? What I'm saying is it's erroneous to believe that if you are using MIL that you HAVE to think in metric or somehow you're "mismatched." All this converting talk is unnecessary.

[Merc1138]

And again for like the 4th time now, I'm not saying you have to, or that converting anything is impossibly difficult. I'm saying that it can be avoided as it just adds needless complexity.

[Mute]

And again for like the 4th time now, I'm not saying you have to, or that converting anything is impossibly difficult. I'm saying that it can be avoided as it just adds needless complexity.

And I agree 100%.