MOA vs. MRAD in Scope Adjustments
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- Gunsite Academy Range Master, Cory Trapp explains the key differences between MOA and MRAD and how to make adjustments in your scope. Check out Gunsite Academy to learn more about long range shooting and other shooting courses: www.gunsite.com/
Why does it seem like this guy would be a great math teacher
as a mathematician, i have to disagree. not mentioning that the "magic number" is 2000*pi is cringeworthy
@@itellyouforfree7238 Eh, depends on the purpose. I teach physics, math, and engineering courses. In this situation, I would mention that a circle is 2pi rad just as he mentioned that a circle is 360 degrees. However, for an audience that is using this information in a purely practical application in which for more of them these numbers are just numbers and for nearly all of whom their thinking about angles is and has always been exclusively in degrees, I don't see not mentioning the relationship to pi to reduce the practical educational benefit.
@@Ryan....... They will forget the magic numbers the very same moment they leave the classroom, unless they understand where they come from.
@@itellyouforfree7238 The intention here was not to have them remember the numbers.
@@Ryan....... My first comment was intended as a reply to "Why does it seem like this guy would be a great math teacher". I do not believe his teaching method would be suitable for teaching math, neither to mathematicians, nor to engineers. I'm not saying that his teaching wasn't appropriate for this particular class. It's good enough to shoot deers or whatever
Little disappointed in this video. I was really getting interested with this guy and then all of a sudden... THE VIDEO IS OVER! This guy is great!
I agree, I was hoping for much more in depth explanation.
What are MRAD's and MOA's and why am i just hearing about them now, Jesus guides my bullets.
Just don't piss off Jesus.
Jesus may guide your bullets, but you still have to aim your rifle.
With your knowledge base he would pretty much have to. Don't worry I'm in the same boat.
Thank you for being a teacher, I'm trying to learn and you have shown me more in 5 minutes than I have learned in a hour with other people trying to explain the scope and math that I really suck at but you keep teaching there are many people like me that learn from people like you, thank you,
By far the most clear and concise way that I have ever heard this explained. Bravo.
agree 110 %
With one ear
this old man looks serious - I gave him a thumb up after 5 secs.
Same here! He speaks with conviction.
Opposite experience for me. I usually like part way through if I'm enjoying a video, but I was so drawn into his presentation that I didn't remember to till the end!
Once he said math I was screwed
He is serious. He's a Gunsite instructor. The best.
Same.
0.1 mrad = to 1 cm @ 100 meters and 1 mrad =10 cm @ 100 meters and so on . For example @ 500 meters 0.1 click is = 5 cm. its a piece of cake no need to get confused
Very easy to calculate
MOA is better to use with inch measurements
I learned MOA/MIL for marksmanship. When I started learning artillery planning I was introduced to MRADs and wondered why I ever used MOA! Lol
@@colinsanders9397 i like MRAD alot more also. i dont think in inches or cm when shooting. i think in MRADs lol
Yes, it's quite frustrating clicking on a video like this and seeing that they are still trying to tie in MRAD with Imperial measurements when it makes much more sense to use metric.
@@highland-oldgit It's funny, because he never mentions meters or centimeters. Then he says MRAD has nothing to do with the metric system. Seems like it's based off the metric system to me.
@@HideSeek_Soje111 You could argue that MRAD is not part of the Metric system, but like the sensible Metric system it's a decimal system and that's why they work together so well.
I find it baffling that manufacturers would produce an MOA reticle scope with MRAD knobs or vice versa. Is there any reason for this at all?
Ya.. Dogshit
There are a multitude of reasons to have a mil reticle and MOA dials.MOA dials support a more accurate initial zero, as well as wind favors using the simple in head MOA wind constant math. The wind favor solution can be directly applied to windage dial or be converted to inches and applied to mil reticle from range card notice of inch favor need at distance in mils. The mil reticle is preferable to an MOA scaled Reticle since the range finding formula for mils is less math than the MOS formula, just known target size in yards times 1000 divided by target size in mils equals target distance in yards.
Yeah it’s like measuring something built in metric using calipers that only read in inches, but you need to do math conversions to make sense with the metric tools you have.
@@charlesludwig9173 Sorry this just doesnt stack us as logical, at to me anyway. Why does MOA support a more accurate initial zero? And why would the windage calculations be easier to do in your head than mils? Surely any decimalised focused system (like mils) is simpler?
@@BennyH11 simple math that was given will tell you 1/4 MOA (0.26" @ 100 yds) is finer adjustment than 0.1 mils (0.36" @ 100) because those are the commonly manufactured scope adjustment click values.
This is a discussion that negates any consideration for mathematical origin for radians, as the number of radians in a circle is actually that of 2 times Pi, as a radian is the angle that will give a length of circular arc equal to the radius, approximately 57.3 degrees. The MRAD system, whilst yes, being completely unrelated to the metric system, does allow for a simpler series of conversions thanks to its coincidental relation of 1/1000th measurement. It also just so happens that in the usage of the metric system with MRAD calculations with metric units you get a much more refined value of distance at target.
MRAD basically is metric… call it 1 to 1000 relationship if you wish but it certainly is way more metric than imperial.
Mixing MRAD with imperial measurements like you did won’t do you any favours. It will only worsen the fractals you have to deal with.
Once you start using MRAD in combination with metric measurements the advantages become clear. Much easier calculate things on the fly dealing with metric.
MRAD and MOA might do the same but they certainly aren’t the same.
So, MOA is the American way. All I needed to hear.
Yep. In metric. 0.1mRad is 10mm at 100m.
Rounded well enough that other factors are the bigger issue at 1km.
MOE is so much faster and easier for me since it’s all in my brain already. Lol
My right ear feels neglected
I've been trying to figure out wtf was going on with the sound! Thought something was wrong on my end!
Dude I was so confused! Thought my AirPod was trying to connect to someone else in the office! Haha
Thanks, you just let me realize my headphones were backward. XD
😂😂
I thought it was my headset, i got scared
They are both good and both work, damn thats what I needed to hear, so basically use personal preference
At the end, he said MRAD has nothing to do with metric. That's not true, Mrad is a (SI) unit and is used directly with the metric system. There's not much point using a Milliradian scope and ranging with yards and calculating drop in inches because yes, then it still seems imprecise.
However, if you use metric for those measurements you see that 1 mil adjustment is 1cm at 100 metres. 2cm at 200m, 3cm at 300m and and so on. That's really easy and precise to quickly figure out holdover or clicks.
If you know your bullet drops 10cm at 200 metres, you'd simply dial in 0.5 mil adjustment (5 clicks of 0.1mil) to get zero, since 1 MRad would be 20cm to at 200m you simply halve it.
Easiest way to do it in the field to calculate your exact mil adjustment with complicated distances and ranges (if you already know your bullet drop at ranges), is drop the last digit from the range in metres and divide your drop in centimetres by that distance. E.g 950cm drop at 900m becomes 950cm ÷ 90 which is 10.5, therefore 10.5 mils of adjustment are needed (105 clicks at 0.1mrad a click).
458 cm of drop at 700 metres? 458 ÷ 70 = 6.54 mils adjustment (65 clicks)
1341 cm drop at 1000m? 1341 ÷ 1000 = 13.4 mrad (134 clicks)
So on and so forth, with whatever distances you want, that formula holds true as long as you use centimeters for drop and metres for range.
Of course if you don't have a dope sheet and are just going off previous hits, you just dial in the appropriate mils of drop and drift.
I've always used MOA. I got a MRAD on good deal and this guy just cleared up so much confusion for me.
How was the adjustment to mills now that it’s been a year?
not the guy you asked the question too, but i did the same thing and honestly i have a much easier time with mrads rather than MOA, also if you havent yet, i would recommend picking up a book called The Long Range Shooting handbook by Ryan Cleckner@@Crt5
Cory Trapp is one of the premier long range shooting instructors in the US.
as soon as I saw the 1911, I smiled. I've ordered my very first 1911 and I am just waiting for it to arrive.
Excellent video!
Yeah but , in a practical sense, knowing that 0.1 mil =1cm @100m and 1moa= 1" @100y shows Milliradian DOES work evenly with the metric system even if it's not based on metric system same as moa works better if you are used to think in inches and feet.
it also works flawlessly in imperial, but only when you stay in the exact same measurement unit
1 mil = 1 yard @ 1000 yards
the big plus of metric is that just like Mil it also is base 10, so doing conversions using these 2 systems is alot faster than anything else
with MOA you still need to know the rough conversions between all the units, and know that at larger ranges you get a error that isnt there with mil.
You aren't using imperial or metric if your using the system properly. It's not easier or harder. Its irrelevant. You aren't going to miss a target and then think how many inches left/down you are. Your .5 Mils low or 1.75 MOA low. That's it. Done. Do the inverse. Come .5 Mils or 1.75 MOA up. Inches has absolutely nothing to do with anything in the course of a solution.
If your busy sweating how many inches are in a Mil or MOA at a given range....your bench racing for the sake of bench racing. Your path to a solution does not require that math at all.
The further shove the point home....the system works without even knowing how far away the target is. Pretty hard to backtrack that stupid math when you dont even know the distance it is away. But thankfully if I'm 1 mil low at 1 inch or 1 kilometer away....its just 1 mil up. Done. Metric or Imperial is irrelevant.
Radians are an SI unit of measurement.
Milliradians are derived from Radians, hence Milliradians are an SI unit of measurement (Also known as metric).
MOA is derived from degrees which are an extremely ancient unit of measurement. And is the official unit of measurement for angles under the Imperial Measurement System.
@@garretgang8349 Radians are only SI because that is what SI uses. A true metric angular system would divide the circle into 10 or 1000 units rather than 2*pi*1000 units. The same goes for metric time which uses 60s/60m/24hr etc.
More like 0.1mil is 0.9cm.. 10% off being “even” 😝
65 people found out they had a mismatched scope
Ha.
Hahaha yeah dogshit
I'm kind of disappointed he neglected to mention that MRAD number is really 2 * PI * 1000. This is really all geometry at the end of the day.
I thought so.. but his numbers are off then. it should be 6283.1 not 6283.4 even rounding should shouldn't give you four.
To be fair though it's about .0048% off so their may be some reason
@@Okidata29 Yeah, that's why I'm disappointed they just don't start with the geometry. It's good to see where all these numbers are *really* coming from.
I just be so stupid cause I still don't quite get what he said or what you couple of guys are talking about. But I am going to keep trying to understand. I'm 60 yrs old and still want to take some math classes. I always wanted to be good at math but have been only a basic learner,by choice I guess because I never really put the time in. I should have studied more as a youth. Good comments and video though. It's just me I guess. Don't want to believe you can't teach an old dog new tricks
Isn’t this trigonometry? Not geometry.
@@dilligafmofoker I would lean towards biplanar Triangulation. But that's just Ballistics.
Great video, and if you are a person with a short attention span, listening at 1.5 speed is wonderful!
The real question is- why do some scope manufacturers insist on using a mil reticle & moa knobs and vice versa?
The point here is the best Scope to Hunting is first focal plane FFP with MiliRadiales Metric system. 100 % easy in the field. MOA is History
waiting for Jeff Spicoli to walk in with a pizza
To do a quick conversation from M-rads to MOA's just multiply the M-rads by 3.44 to get a close result.
Say if your spotter says to move windage 1 Mil. 3.44 x 1 = 3.44 then round to the nearest MOA on your scope. My scope has ¼-MOA adjustments. 3.44 is close to 3.5. Move the turret to 3.5 and shoot.
Here is proof of the 3.44 calculation factor. For yards: 3.6 ÷ 2.047 = 3.438395415, round to 3.44. For meters: 10 ÷ 2.91 = 3.436426116, round to 3.44. Whichever distance measurement you choose, yards or meters, use 3.44 to convert.
For those accuracy fanatics the difference between Mils or MOA's is less than the diameter of the bullet. Here's the proof of concept. Three clicks of a Mil based turret using yards for the measurement is 1.17" and one MOA is 1.047". 1.17 - 1.047 = 0.123. Less than the diameter of a .30 caliber bullet. Now for meters. Three clicks on a Mil turret is 3-cm. One MOA in 100 meters is 2.91-cm. Doing the math, 3-cm - 2.91-cm = 0.09-cm. Once again less than the diameter of a bullet.
Been using a mixed system for years. The US Army did it this way for decades. I will say that a first focal plane scope has certain advantages over a second focal plane scope. But, not in all accounts.
Or just show up at range with a range card, making conversion unnecessary.
I think you might be the reason this video was made.
Yup, shut up and Shoot...LoL
It is indeed 100x easier to operate in base 10 than degrees and inches. It has been for hundreds of years
Thank you, the best explanation I’ve heard so far. I finally understood better the concept.
if youre scope looking between two scopes with one adjusting in 1/4 MOA and the other in 1/10th MRAD, for precision shooting the MOA scope would technically be superior because your adjustment sizes are smaller, so you could potentially sight it in better (although your gun is probably too inaccurate for it to matter).
To be honest 1/10mrad is quite fine adjustment and it is all about the shooter not the gun. You can have the best scope out there and the guy next to you with 200$ scope can still beat you.I have seen people expression as I was blowing tight groups at 250 yards with "budget scope and rifle" as they say and guys going mad with 3-5 thousands bucks eqiupment.My adjustment against any 1/10 Mrad scope is my breathing technic and concetration. As I said it's more about the shooter then the scopes.
Typically mrad (mil Scopes) Scopes are "classically" defined so the width of a reticle dot is 1mrad ect..... But there are better Scopes anyway.....but correct mix'n match...moa with mrad is dumb... As long as you know your bullet drop at 300 meters you will be within 1 moa as a sniper... Bullet error is extremely low... You shooting ability is the weakest link
He was close on miliradians saying its 6283.4 its 2pieR (circle with radius of 1) so 2 x (3.141592653589793238) = 6.283185 Radians in a circle.
And 1000 milirad per rad so we have 6.283185 x 1000 or 6283.185 radians (not 6283.4) in a circle
NATO and gun scopes do not really use an actual milliradien. They are almost a 2 percent error they thought was acceptable to make it easier to use.
milliradians = mils (NATO) × 0.981748
During World War I the US adopted what is now the NATO mil to replace degrees and minutes for use in artillery sights. They opted to round mils to 6,400 per circle for simplicity at the time. Today, the mil is commonly used to measure adjustment of sights and scopes of firearms.
NATO - Real numer
10 mil =9.8175 mrad
They rounded the real number to 6400 and then taught people wrong for years. But most scopes are made by people that know better.
Before we get started down this road, I need to go over a few numbers related to using a Mil adjusted scope. Now, over the years there has been some confusion in how to term a Mil adjusted scope. For the record, it is not a “Metric” scope or calibrated in meters, nor does it require conversion to yards. By definition a Radian is, “the angle subtended at the center of a circle by an arc that is equal in length to the radius of the circle.” So, a Milliradian is 1/1000 of a radian. When applied to a circle the number we use is 6283.2, and while it has been taught and discussed at length that the number is 6400, that is not correct for a riflescope. Our scopes are calibrated using 6283 and only one scope on the market was ever built using the wrong number, that is the Leupold M3A, who’s reticle is based off the 6400 number… don’t let that fool you, the number we use is the true number of 6283, just because someone did it another way, or has taught 6400, doesn’t mean they are right either.
I realized that nothing was really explained clearly... This story makes me sick... naturally, I disliked it...
Does he feel so unsafe to wear a side arm while giving this instruction.
It's it's being prepared
So,...having a click value of 1rad = 1cm@100m/10cm@1000m and Milliradian is based on the Latin word Millle = 1000. Maybe, he's thinking of French, NATO, Russian mils or Swedish Streck in artillery sights? Based on 360° or 2π.
as far as i understand:
rad is from a circle being 2 pi, so a full circle has about 3,14*2 radian
one Minute equals about 3,44 milirads (360° * 60' = 21600 vs 2 * pi * 1000 = 6283 (1000 bc it's MILIrad)
If mils have no relationship to meters, then why is the relationship 0.1 MRAD at 100 meters = 10mm, in the same way that 1 MOA is 1” at 100 yards. If you want to us an MRAD dial, and have distance in meters and ballistic drop in mm or cm, then the math is easy. But if you have distance in yards and ballistics in imperial (inches) then the calculation for an MRAD dial is much more complicated.
Well maybe mrads have nothing to do with metric measurements, but for us , living in metric countries it is easy way to set up our scopes. Why? Because we do not use inch and yards. We do not shoot for 100yars. If we do, we do it for 100m. It is mean that for that distance one 0,1 MRAD means 10mm on target. And the best thing is that if we cut a half of distance it is mean half of result on target and so on. For 50m 0.1mrad means 5mm and for 200m it is 20mm. This is why we calling it is better for us and we called it metric :)
the combination couldn't have been better. Shooting the zinc plated Daisy Precision MAX BB's ...
One MOA is 1/60 of 1 degree. The cord measurement for an angle of 1/60° at 300 yards is exactly PIE π 3.141592654 rounded off to 17 digits in excel. "Weird" or what.
I've had learned that one mrad is one centimeter (in my country we've used on that like you on inches) and one centimeter has 10 millimetres, thats 10 clicks. 0.36 inches is 9.144 millimeters but 0.856mm is like a thickness of the fingernail..so were good here 😂 But I doubt there are all zeros after .36, and .37 is 9.398mm that would be an eyelash away from perfect
My scope adjust to inches ! 4 clicks up for 6 inch drop between 200 and 300 yards ! Sound like algebra all over again ! Ive never been able to add or multiply numbers !!!!!!!! Sorry.... Never happened yet. States knowing the distance... Hmmmm so he never explained how that happens????? Cardinals ? They sit outside at my bird feeder !
I always laugh when people say using one inch equals one moa at one hundred yards is only good for short distances then proceed to say that at 1000 yards it is a considerable variance. If your calculating MOA using the 1 inch method, 1 MOA at 1000 yards is 10 inches. If your using the 1.047 method, 1 MOA at 1000 yards is 10.47 inches. So at 1000 yards, the difference is less than 1/2 inch. Also, when you are taking the difference between your POA and POI and dividing it by the minute of angle at that particular distance to get the turret adjustment in MOA's, it rarely ever changes the actual amount of turret adjustment whether you are calculating using 1.047 or 1.0 inches.
I believe the idea stems from 1MRAD being @ 1 kilometer being exactly 1 meter (unless rounded off)
.. or 0.1y at 100y
MOA feels less direct
Actually, it refers to a milli-radian being exactly 1/1000 of a radian, so that if your 6 inch target covers 1 mil in your scope, the range is 6,000 inches, or 500 feet. Because 1 km is also 1000 metres, it also works as you've described, but it works with ANY measurement unit, provided you use the same unit for both target and range.
Great Presentaion👍🏻
Question, why or who would produce an optic that the retical wasn't married to the turret?
+1
I'm confused by this as well.
How many ml is 3 in at 650 yd? I haven't the slightest clue. MOA 19 1/2 inches just that quick. My brain is just unable to comprehend meal
Probably already in the comments but milrads come from multiplying Pi * 2 to get ~6.2834 and then multiplying that by 1000 to get 6283.4
Remember from high school math that there are 2Pi Radians in a circle.
"Whats the difference? None at all!" Ha ha ha!
"Which one is better? There's no difference!" Ha ha ha #2!
Start calculating sight corrections at uneven distance and the differences will show.
Also how much of a circle at a given distance is one unit and the other does not matter much as a miliradian is based on a thousands, which means it is one unit width at a thousand units distance. So it is 1 cm at 1000 cm, 1 inch at 1000 inches, 1 mile at 1000 miles, 1 km at 1000 km, 1mm at 1000 mm. It does not matter. It is not metric, it is not imperial. It is just easy and intuitive.
English/American measurements requiring recalculating inches to feet to yards to miles (and acres and ounces and stones, quarts, dozens, 😱 ) are anachronic and were state of the art when people neeeded to calculate with their fingers (carpentry at tops). Now smart people use dozens when buing eggs, and modern systems for everything else.
I prefer Mils because I am not sure how to estimate range with MOA’s using an MOA reticle.
It’s pretty simple with MILS.
One method: Height of target in yards x 1000/height in Mils= estimated range to target in yards
If I could give this heat packing Santa two thumbs up I would 👍🏻👍🏻
Milirads are more convenient for metric though, 0.1 MRad is 1cm at 100m or 0.9999cm to be exact. So if you're metric Milirads does make more sense, like MOA makes sense for America units.
Actually the speaker is quite wrong about the milirad. It is actually a derived SI unit of angular measurement. 1 milliradian = 10 centimeters at 100 meters. A speaker failing to grasp such a simple concept is not an expert on this topic, thumbs down and moving on.
Saying 0.1 mil is .36 inch at 100 yards is insane! It works better with metric. 0.1 mil (mrad) is 1cm at 100 metres, 10cm at 1000m, etc.
(0.9817cm @ 100m to be exact)
Actually, Radian is derived from the metric system and is therefore considered part of the "SI" system (metric). MRAD corresponds very closely to distances measured in metres (meters) and not so much yards.
A reasonable explanation, but you left out an important consideration. MOA scope reticles with MOA adjustment knobs are commonly IPHY (inch per hundred yards). Scope manufacturers do this to eliminate any rounding errors and make adjustments and use extremely simple, math free and easy for those of us who like feet and inches.
Great... teacher. Never saw in six minutes such simplicity !!! Thank you.
It's pretty miraculous that mrad has nothing to do with the metric system, but when used with METRIC units of measure, it lines up perfectly with them.
I don't think that an mrad shooter should think in yards and inches. 😅
Defeats the purpose of mrad doesn't it?
Thanks so much!. Bought a scope that has MRAD on the turrets and at the range I was like wtf is this and WHY didn't I notice it before mounting the dang thing? LOL @ me!
This is a very good tutorial, and a lot of good info, but whoever told you that Mils are not metric was simply flat out wrong. Radians (and by extension milliradians) simply are the formal metric unit of angle. They're what's called a derived unit, and don't have a meaningful direct relationship to meters, but they are absolutely an SI unit.
mrad is just 2pi or 360 degrees so 6283.4 is not that crazy of a number. its just 2pi * 1000, or milli-radians.
He fxxxed up in the last bit where he says "..it so happens to be 1000.." no it doesn't.. It's in its name `mill` IS 1000 (or shorthand for if you want to be precise) so 1000 is by design.
I know this is an old video.... no it is not just a coincidence that there is a 1//1000 relationship and yes MRad or rather radians are the metric term used for angular measurements... one complete "turn" as you on a normal compass would call 360 degrees is in the metric system 2*Pi radians.
The ratio of the MRad is 1/1000 of any measurement and the ratio of an MOA is 1/3438.4 of any measurement.
Eg, @ 1000 yards, 1 MRad = 1 yard, therefore with ten clicks per MRad, over 36 inches, each click is 1.10th of a yard, therefore: 3.6 inches.
@ 1000 meters, 1 MRad = 1 meter. With ten clicks, each click is 1/10th of the meter = 100mm (4 inches-ish)
In MOA, the maths is more difficult:
@ 1000 yards = 3000 feet = 36000 inches / 3438.4 = 10.469 inches. Over four clicks, each click is 2.6 inches.
OR @ 1 MOA at 1000 yards / 3438.4 = 0.29th of a yard. 36" x .29 = 10.469 inches.
Using MRads make the maths very easy. 1/1000 simples.
John X, I am so glad to find that I'm not the only one to appreciate the simplicity afforded by this 1000 to 1 relationship. And, as I've remarked elsewhere on this thread, the benefits of MRAD do not end there, as that ratio can be applied with complete accuracy at ALL ranges and with ALL units of measurement. Once the shooter understands this, MRAD can be used even by those who have previous
how old were you when you realized "MINUTE" of angle was refering to 60 minutes like a clock ..
I suck at math. Kentucky windage for me I guess. The scope I wanted that was matte black is in mRad. The moa version is in the regular black with a slight sheen or whatever you'd call it. I wanted the matte black, but I dont understand mRad so I'll just get the moa and tape it up
Radians are definitely not metric by any means. Degrees and Radians are the same measurement of a circle, but radians have exact number representation vs degrees. Degrees measure angles by how far we tilted our heads. Radians measure angles by distance traveled. or angle in radians (theta) is arc length (s) divided by radius (r). A circle has 360 degrees or 2pi radians - going all the way around is 2 * pi * r / r.
is there really a background muzak track to this? I'm sure I can hear muzak - why would anyone DO such a stupid thing?
I guess I'll the people the USMC killed with the MOA/Mil scope deserve an apology.
or 2000 pi-dians if you're wondering... far more useful unit since it leaves the stupid repeating decimal off to the fucking end of the calculations
fine.... f**k the ace mod, i'll just play vanilla KOTH
Doesnt he realise that if you carry that big reticle into the battlefield for calculating, you literally have a target on your back....
O and as The saying go's beware the man with one weapon he is very proficient with it. !!
Still confused cuz I’m stupid. Gonna definitely need to get better with my bow.
Thumbs up solely on the beard and OG factor!
The MOA rounding error amounts to 0,47 inch (12mm) at 1000 yards! That's 0,05 MOA!... Don't tell me that you are able to shoot that accurate!!!... In fact a single click on your telescope amounts to 2,5 inches (64mm) at 1000 yards! At 1000 yards a single click on your telescope is just over 5 times the rounding error! Regardless how far you shoot, you can accept "1 MOA equals 1 inch at a hundred yards"!!! The same applies to Mildot "1 Mildot equals 100mm at a hundred meters"
Yep. Sometimes hair-splitting can be taken too far.
his hate for metric units at the end scared me as European
No hate. He just said MRAD is not metric.
Yeah, the guy in the video is wrong.
The radian (and therefore the milliradian also) IS a metric unit of angle. Of course it can also be used with imperial units of length e.g. 1 mrad = 1 inch @ 1000 inches, but it's not as practical. What on Earth does 1000 inches look like? People don't use inches for distances of that size, and converting to larger units is a pain with imperial units. How many yards is 1000 inches? Which random factor do I multiply with for that conversion?
Radians are easier to use with the metric system because the metric system allows easy conversion between units of different of magnitude e.g. 1 mrad = 1m @ 1000m e.g. 10cm @ 100m or 100mm @ 0.1km, etc.
Americans find MOA easier because it happens to be very close to 1 inch at 100 yards, and those units are reasonably sized for trajectory adjustments, but only with American units. 29mm @ 100m is not so fun.
In short - MOA suits inches and yards, mrad suits metric units.
MRAD has nothing to do with metric? But .1 MRAD is 1cm @ 100m range right?
Im american so i will stick to MOA and inches...cant see past 600 yds anyway...
Best and most concise explanation I've ever heard. Thanks
radians and MOA (or rather divisions of pi) are more of trigonometry thing. as a radian is standard divizion by the radius and radial circumference and a pi-angle is derived by the circumference and diameter. radians are often defined in terms of pi. use of mili-radians only relates to their base ten divisibility in simplifying calculations for more complex trajectories when used in compound with metric measurements such as with artillery which has an extreme arch and angled fire.
Correct, so in a simple words investing thousands in a scope for a range shooting to 800 yards is just waisting your money. I know this as a former artillery man. Investing in an average tactical scope shown in the video is more painless to your pocket, only if you know how to use it. Corrections on a usual range out there are overkill cause once done, it cost a money(bullets) to do reset again to a usual 100 yards targets.I like my "budget" Howa 1500 it makes other guys mad when they see what good shooter with average scope can do. Corrections are done trough mil dots on scope and not trough knobs which are set on default.👍
from the long range (competition style) shooting videos i have seen its usually people are only ever adjusting the elevation turrets not the windage. im sure the same application applies to hunting aside from moving the elevation turret since being quiet is a necessity in hunting.@@The_Touring_Jedi
well MRAD is metric bcs it is 1/1000 of the radiant of a Circle, which correlates to Pi
Basically nothing thank you breath relax aim stop squeeze
Ngl at 1000 yards I’m fine with a .47 inch error.
I'll Stick with MOA useless and very forgetful information..
It depends on what you're doing. If you're just going for an accurate shot then MOA will be fine. If you're working with artillery or air assets then MRADs can help. Either way, using the one you're familiar with will be best.
@@colinsanders9397
100%.
Give me a rifle, and I'll use MOA all day.
Give me a gun, and MRADs is is!
the music had me looking at all my other screens thinking I had a spam screen in the background.
Got a old weaver scope on a game after 308 horizontal a thin line vertical thick line just ends after it crosses the horizontal line should I target at the tip of this line like iron sites?
Anyone else confused or just me?
Most are confused ! Thats why then never use his way of adjusting for distances!
Are people REALLY not able to understand/work this kind of very basic and COMMON SENSE stuff out for themselves? Maybe so...I took a college class (once I had retired and just wanted to learn and to know stuff for my own edification since I already had a BS degree) and had to sit through classes where we were subjected to what was basically how to measure things with a ruler and how to add and subtract fractions and decimals! THIS WAS a class at AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL!!! When I asked the prof why we had to waste time wading through all this stuff that most people learned in grade school, he told me that MANY, MANY people that are high school grads and even current college level students couldn't do a lot of this stuff! AMAZING, when one considers that any and all of this stuff is part of daily life. Amazing huh?
No not really. Probably 90% of people can not read a tape measure or ruler correctly! Kinda funny & sad. Dad thought me when I was 6.
I feel like this could have been explained in a 1-2 minute video. Disappointed.
RUclips messed with your audio. can't hear anything
6283.4 rounded to 6400 as opposed to 6300 is really weird
I take it this whole course isn't freely available on RUclips is it?
Decided to give my left ear a workout today
Well clear as mud! I just need this guy to come to the range with me and tell me how many clicks and I’ll do the rest! Lol
I'm a machinist with a PCP Airgun. Obsessed with accuracy shooting groups at over 100yds sub MOA. Regulated .25 cal Taipan veteran. LOVE THIS!
Work on breathing and trigger finger control..trigger pull at the near bottom of your exhale.. Watch Olympic single hole 10 shots at 25 meters
And here I am competing for the past 2 years with a Leupold Mk 4 scope with a TMR (mil reticle) and 1/4 MOA turrets. At my last competition with .22lr, I had to shoot 3 targets between 180 to 282 meters from 3 different positions (range changes), which after some mind boggling math session turned out a setting of 20 MOA up on the turret and -3 to +6 mils holdovers on the reticle. Great fun.
You should have just heldover/favored from reticle and not made any adjustment to dials. The dials in your case would just be used to get an ideal no-wind ZERO. That's what makes mil reticle and MOA dials mix so awesome. No conversions ever necessary when you have a range card synced to the mil scaled reticle.
If thats not metric what is ?
Actually, Radian is derived from the metric system and is therefore considered part of the "SI" system (metric). MRAD corresponds very closely to distances measured in metres (meters) and not so much yards.
Why american still work with inches , feet and shoulders 😄
The absolutely best description of Mils and MOA, breaking it down to the reticle scale .
For best results do mix mil scaled reticle with MOA windage and elevation control, whereby the reticle is used for range estimation and then used for a hold made known by range card. Use MOA windage and elevation controls to establish initial no wind ZERO and adjust windage as needed to counter wind from MOA Wind Constant formula. A mil reticle hold for wind can be made just discerning wind counter need in mils from a range card. The bottom line is no conversions from mils to MOA or MOA to mils is ever necessary. Here's everything anyone needs to know:
MOA (minute of angle) and mil (mil-radian) are angular units of measurement. A MOA equals 1.047 inches per 100 yards, while a mil equals 3.6 inches per 100 yards. Sights and scopes move in MOA or mils and scopes may have a reticle scaled in mils or MOA, which is a means to estimate distance to target and use the reticle for a bullet drop compensation function. Common to all functions, the amount of MOA or mil adjustment made to the sight describes the distance in inches a sight adjustment will make at target distance. For example, a 1 MOA sight adjustment would move bullet impact approximately 1 inch at one hundred yards, 2 inches at two hundred yards, 3 inches at three hundred yards, and 10 inches all the way out to one thousand yards.
Mathematical formulas must be engaged to find the amount of MOA or mil movement needed for bullets to go in direction where aimed; yet the math is easy. Here’s the simple in head math MOA formula to determine up/down sight adjustment needed; and, doing the math again, determine left/right sight adjustment needed.
1. First, think what the value of 1 MOA is at target distance:
Distance to Target in Meters / 100 = Value of 1 MOA in Inches at Target Distance
2. Next, think how many of those MOAS will fit into inches of needed movement: Inches of Movement Needed / Value of 1 MOA in Inches at Target Distance = MOA Adjustment
3. Finally, figure out how many clicks to sight for needed movement: MOA Adjustment / Sight MOA Click Value = Clicks to Sight for Needed Movement
So, let’s say you have set your target out to 100 yards, and you have produced a group which is 2 inches low and 3 inches right of the target’s center. In this scenario your scope’s windage and elevation adjustment controls have a .25 MOA value per click.
First, figure out adjustment needed to sight control up/down movement:
1. 100 yards / 100 = 1 Inch
2. 2 Inches / 1 = 2 MOA
3. 2 MOA / .25 = 8 click turn of elevation control in up direction for needed vertical movement of grouping on target
Now, repeat steps to figure out adjustment needed to rear sight drum controlling left/right movement:
1. 100 yards / 100 = 1 Inch
2. 3 Inches / 1 = 3 MOA
3. 3 MOA / .25 = 12 click turn of windage control in direction to move group left for needed horizontal movement of grouping on target
Now, when Mils or MOA are scaled to a scope’s reticle, the reticle will have a bullet drop compensation function and can be used to discern target distance through range estimation formula. Here’s the MOA range estimation formula.
Target Height in Inches X 95.5 / Target Height in MOA = Yards to Target
Shooting at a target 44 inches in height appearing to be about 4.2 MOA the equation would look like this:
44 X 95.5 / 4.2 = 1000 Yards
Now, here are the mil formulas:
Target Height in Inches X 27.78 / Target Height in Mils = Yards to Target, or Target Height in Yards X 1000 / Target Height in Mils = Yards to Target
Shooting at a target 36 inches in height appearing to be about 1 Mil the equation would look like this:
1 X 1000 / 1 = 1000 Yards
Finally, the MOA Wind Constant formula is a means to understand sight adjustment or hold needed to counter wind. After the shooter has appraised wind value, for example, a 10-mph wind from a quartering direction would be said to have a 5-mph value, a simple formula will allow the shooter to adjust for the distance that the wind displaces the bullet, when the MOA constant for the cartridge/distance has been gleaned from a ballistics calculation.
Distance to Target in Yards / 100 X Wind Value in MPH / Constant = Bullet Drift in MOA
For Example, here’s the formula using the constant of 7 which is correct when shooting 5.56 M855 ammunition from an M16-A4 at 600 yards:
600 Yards / 100 X 5 MPH / 7 = 4 MOA Bullet Drift
To get the drift in inches the shooter will take the distance to target in yards / 100 X Bullet Drift in MOA. Shooting at 600 yards, with wind appraised as having a 5-mph value, the formula would look like this:
600 Yards / 100 X 4 MOA = 24 Inches of Drift
So, which mil or MOA formulas best support sight adjustment, range estimation, and wind counter speed and precision needs? Trial of both to discern the best balance of speed and exactness for all needs might suggest a mil scaled reticle for range estimation, while zeroing exactness and wind counter speed might suggest sight adjustment in MOA. In other words, pairing a mil reticle and MOA elevation/windage control.
Wonderful explanation.... But I don't like mixed Scopes...I love both!! Just not mixed...and I like high power +24x
@@sarahconner9433 yeah, I understand how you could prefer not mixing for scenarios which are or are not going to require dialing for elevation or wind. If I am shooting in NRA LR I might prefer MOA Reticle and dials while PRS might suggest mils for reticle and dials. However the best outcome is ALWAYS mil reticle and MOA dials for ranging speed and aiming accuracy.
@@charlesludwig9173 always is a strong word...I do like strictly mil reticle where the dots are exactly 1 mil wide.... However there are so many superior reticles in 2022 that mil vs moa is irrelevant...i.e. Horus and laser beam and others....a good shooter /sniper will succeed with human talent alone.... either way each of my weapons has a bullet cheat card on the stock.... Velocity, drop, drop rate, .. And honestly my Scopes are zeroed...i don't rotate the turret...i just aim at the drop point....if we can agree practice make you better and $5/cartridge is to FN expensive to get any practice on..
@@sarahconner9433 ALWAYS is appropriate because it is factual. Ranging in mils is easier in head math than ranging in MOA and zeroing is more accurate in MOA than mils. Once zeroed hold can be set via mil reticle quickly and wind favor can be calculated using in head MOA wind constant math for either favor in mils or dialing in MOA because the in head math produces an answer in inches. At any rate, mixing might not be possible for some these days since scope marketers have been pressed by a confused market to produce only scopes with matching units of measurement in dials and reticle. This trend began back in the mid 2000’s lead by NF. They simply succumbed to desires of misinformed novice shooters who were taking advice from gurus like the one posting this video. My opinion BTW is based on experience as a Military Rifle Instructor assisting the USAMU deliver the Squad Designated Marksman Course and shooting in US Service Rifle and Long-Range Competition.
@@charlesludwig9173 your more qualified than me..... When you spend big money NIGHTFORCE , SCHMID BENDER ect... It has 0.1 mils/ click.... Convenient... Few civilians.. Me included have $3000 for a scope.... $200 Gun store Scopes are 1mil/ click ,1moa/click...I can't disagree with you...mil to mil is metric and base 10.. Easy head math... You do realize "Horus" and laser , Android phone Scopes/ rangefinders are better anyway... There are way Better reticle systems than mil or..or...or .. MOA
Smells arrogance in this guy on the video from thousands yards