Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Why are so many shooters afraid of a mil/mil scope

Many here have came to believe shooting at moving game is unethical.

I've never had anyone explain to me what is so complicated about MOA. Of course, I have no trouble understanding feet and inches either. GD

I hear you. I was just going to point out there are likely some instances where FFP mil/mil scopes would be out of their "comfort zone", and perhaps standing timber/mostly closer ranges would be one of them. I'm guessing running deer in this timber even moreso.

I honestly don't see what the fuss is about if all that is being discussed is a unit of measurement. In the end, one can call it what he wants and it is still a unit of measurement. If you have a scope on which the adjustments are marked in "glorps", with twelve glorps making a "fliggle", the end result is the same. Only the name has changed.

I was in a local shop the other day and they showed me a new scope. It was MOA so I asked if they had the same thing in mil/mil. They said the don't order mil/mil because no one will buy them.

I have no problem running moa or mil but I also started shooting a mil dot reticle with moa knobs back before there were affordable laser range finders. It always bugged me that manufacturers couldn't seem to match the turrets to the reticle so things have improved much now that most of them do.

I just don't understand the fear of going mil/mil. At a basic level it's all just turning numbers on a dial to what your chart or app says. I prefer mil just because its decimal and a .1 mil is a little coarser than 1/4 moa. I think mil reticles are a little less crowded and more intuitive than moa.

Another thing I think manufacturers get wrong is bragging on 4 or 5 times magnification on a ffp scope.
I think ffp is better at 3 times magnification because the reticle is easier to work with on the extremes. I really prefer to hold my windage off from the reticle. For example I think a 5-15 ffp makes more sense than a 3-15. Five power being plenty low enough.

I actually think a 5-15 would do nearly everything I'd ever do hunting. Any higher than 15 and you get heat distortion and poor low light.

If I owned a scope co I'd probably go 3-9, 4-12, 5-15 and maybe a 6-18 for dual purpose varmint rigs all ffp and mil/mil with smaller capped windage turrets. All though personally I could do it all with 3-9 and 5-15

And of course my flagship model would be a fixed 8 with a 42 or 45 mil objective, mil/mil, small capped windage, and parallax down to 10 meters or even lower so it could also run rim fire and airgun.

Bb

As someone who actually hunts with a mil reticle, I haven't found that to be true at all. A decent mil reticle points just as well as a duplex or #4 or whatever other older reticle you care to use, but it also has advantages at longer distance that the others don't.

I've honestly never understood the guys who claim a mil dot reticle is too busy to hunt with. If they were talking about something like a Horus reticle with lots of little lines, sure, but a simple mil dot reticle is pretty basic and never has caused me any confusion for quick shots.

I hunt with them too, and exactly what did I say that you quoted that you disagree with? You pretty much made my point.

Please read my post again, I said my experience is pretty much the opposite of what you stated, so I'm not sure how that "makes your point". A mil/mil scope is no more out of it's comfort zone in the woods than a duplex reticle is, in my experience.

If we're only considering FFP then your comment is valid, especially for the higher zoom factor stuff like a 3-15x, but this discussion is not about FFP it's about mil/mil scopes. I see no reason to confuse the discussion further by adding FFP vs SFP into the mix.

My point was it is pointless to use a FFP mil/mil reticle in dense woods when you may shoot 100 yds or less, especially at running deer. Argue with that.

As someone who actually hunts with a mil reticle, I haven't found that to be true at all. A decent mil reticle points just as well as a duplex or #4 or whatever other older reticle you care to use, but it also has advantages at longer distance that the others don't.

I've honestly never understood the guys who claim a mil dot reticle is too busy to hunt with. If they were talking about something like a Horus reticle with lots of little lines, sure, but a simple mil dot reticle is pretty basic and never has caused me any confusion for quick shots.