|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 9,542
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 9,542 |
I'll be odd man out. I like MOA because I never have to count further than 3 past a whole number on a dial, as all my scopes are 1/4MOA adjustments.
I can walk on water.......................but I do stagger a bit on alcohol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,916
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,916 |
I never have to count past four on a half mil or mil mark.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2022
Posts: 1,950
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2022
Posts: 1,950 |
Since the young TacOps nut-washer thinks I ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/Ai3iYa8.jpeg) can’t shoot, and wallet groups matter, just for fun, here’s a pic of a group I shot this morning doing some load development:
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,499
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,499 |
What is the significance of 214 yards, in red? I had the same? PBR using a 5" vital zone radius.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,499
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,499 |
In my inquiry re MIL v MOA, there was much debate but it appeared to come down to personal preference to most and it appeared that MIL had a stronger following but nobody would come out and say MOA was not ok. It was more a matter of what others were using in group events, everyone wanting to use the same standard. I was on the fence but an instructor at a shooting school that I highly regard said they use MOA at the school now but had used MIL in the past, that was good enough for me to tilt slightly in the direction of MOA.
As others have stated, dialing with dope cards, the come-up is just as easy with either although I've noticed that the MOAs are less finite, ie 3.1, 4.5, 7.5 vs 0.9, 1.3 or 2.2 for MIL if that makes any difference for people who need to wear glasses to read but don't have them handy for hunting/shooting. Using MOA instead of Mils is like doing science stuff with Imperial measurements instead of metric. Base ten is more easier every time. My father had a stopwatch with 1/100th minute increments. Some people couldn't get their head around it.  This. Though, if you are using MOA, it is very nice to have your ballistic calculator output your DOPE in 1/4 MOA increments. Then you just dial exactly what your DOPE says, rather than having your calculator round to the nearest 0.1 and then having to round again in your head to the nearest 0.25. A little thing, but helpful in simplifying the process.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831 |
Thanks Jordan for the clarification!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,500
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,500 |
I'm not going to read all 22 pages (well, I might  ) but other than the fact it may be FFP (Not that I am sure a 10x really makes that much of a positive change), I am not sure I see the real benefit. I see other offerings that folks like such as the FFP variable from Tract (3-15ish?), but it doesn't offer anything really different than other similar scopes. Now some may prefer one brand of reticle over another and that is understandable, but it doesn't save weight or provide any other real characteristic improvement. So to me (and YMMV) many of these new scopes elicit a meh from me. That said it is good to see what seems like a positive increase in Leupold reliability.
Bob
Enjoy life now -- it has an expiration date.
~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,638
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,638 |
Through Premier Reticle I had custom reticles in MOA and adjustments in MOA long before you knew which end of a Red Ryder spit out the BBs.
You and girlz like you sit back with 30years of hindsight and whine but have no understanding of how and why the things you take for granted were pushed into production.
Zip those lips and enjoy what the PLAYERS have done to give you so many reticle and adjustment options. Epic. But not in the way you think it is. We get it. You’re old. Probably not as old as you look, though. I am somewhat surprised you made it through the AIDS epidemic.
I probably hit more elk with a pickup than you have with a rifle. I have yet to see anyone claim Leupold has never had to fix an optic. I know I have sent a few back. 2 MK 6s, a VX-6, and 3 VX-111s.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831 |
In my inquiry re MIL v MOA, there was much debate but it appeared to come down to personal preference to most and it appeared that MIL had a stronger following but nobody would come out and say MOA was not ok. It was more a matter of what others were using in group events, everyone wanting to use the same standard. I was on the fence but an instructor at a shooting school that I highly regard said they use MOA at the school now but had used MIL in the past, that was good enough for me to tilt slightly in the direction of MOA.
As others have stated, dialing with dope cards, the come-up is just as easy with either although I've noticed that the MOAs are less finite, ie 3.1, 4.5, 7.5 vs 0.9, 1.3 or 2.2 for MIL if that makes any difference for people who need to wear glasses to read but don't have them handy for hunting/shooting. Did they say why? In a follow up email yesterday, he said: "Finer adjustments for small things at long range. Moa is fine compared to to mil"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 58,514
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 58,514 |
The "difference" is basically 1" at 1000yds. Hint.
Hang a TTT and whirl on that bitch,then shuffle zoom a coupla times between pokes. Be curious to see how it do. Hint.....................
Brad says: "Can't fault Rick for his pity letting you back on the fire... but pity it was and remains. Nothing more, nothing less. A sad little man in a sad little dream."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831 |
The "difference" is basically 1" at 1000yds. Hint.
Hang a TTT and whirl on that bitch,then shuffle zoom a coupla times between pokes. Be curious to see how it do. Hint..................... Just received notice that UPS is delivering McM stock tomorrow, range time over the weekend hopefully but limited to 100 yards and these Kongsberg target systems at least for this session. ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/LccSf1W.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908 |
How about expressing bullet group size in mil in place of inch.
Shot a 0.09 mil group.
GOA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831 |
How about expressing bullet group size in mil in place of inch.
Shot a 0.09 mil group. Gonna have to enlist Mathman to do the cyphering on that one!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908 |
to be clear, milliradian. 0.09 milliradian group = 0.324 inch
GOA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,840
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,840 |
to be clear, milliradian. 0.09 milliradian group = 0.324 inch Let me indulge my pedantic urge: You're mixing units there. Angles don't equal linear measurements.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831 |
to be clear, milliradian. 0.09 milliradian group = 0.324 inch Based on your math, using target group in picture of 6.2 mm, (.244") = .07 MIL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,831 |
to be clear, milliradian. 0.09 milliradian group = 0.324 inch Let me indulge my pedantic urge: You're mixing units there. Angles don't equal linear measurements. No wonder I couldn't find any online calculators!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908 |
to be clear, milliradian. 0.09 milliradian group = 0.324 inch Let me indulge my pedantic urge: You're mixing units there. Angles don't equal linear measurements. Ok. So dialing elevation 0.5 mil is an angular unit? I suppose it is, but results in a linear displacement.
GOA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,908 |
I'm poking a bit of fun at the milliradian vs minute of angle thing. Mil vs moa. We state mils of optic dialing, then express distance as yards, 100, 300, etc. Then group size in inch, or millimeter. Mixed units of measure.
In the end it's units of measure. Float yer boat however it works for you.
GOA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,840
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,840 |
to be clear, milliradian. 0.09 milliradian group = 0.324 inch Let me indulge my pedantic urge: You're mixing units there. Angles don't equal linear measurements. Ok. So dialing elevation 0.5 mil is an angular unit? I suppose it is, but results in a linear displacement. But the linear displacement varies with distance for a fixed angular displacement.
|
|
|
|
|
543 members (2500HD, 222ND, 1OntarioJim, 257Bob, 1936M71, 59 invisible),
2,219
guests, and
1,373
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,934
Posts18,479,981
Members73,954
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
