MIL or MOA? MOA Sucks And Here's Why. Part I

I understand the idea that MIL is better than MOA, especially from former military that has used it all over the world, and I agree, for most of the world, MIL would be better, since it is based on the metric system and easily multiplied or divided by 10. Here are the issues, though. First, it doesn't matter if you get more "MIL" adjustment than "MOA" adjustment. The actual distance you are going to be able to adjust the same scope in different formats is the same. It is just using a different nomenclature, and in reality, you get a finer adjustment out of MOA than MIL, .25 vs .36, respectively. Second, in this country, the vast majority of people THINK in inches, not decimeters. When you say, "You're an inch left, everyone knows that you are 4 clicks out, because each MOA is approximately 1" at 100 yards. That doesn't noticeably change until you get out to 1000 yards. Now you get to MILs. Same scenario, and how many MILs in 1 inch. Well, 1 MIL at 100 yards is approximately 3.6 inches. 1/10 would be .36 inches. So now you have 3 clicks, or 1.08. now extrapolate that out to 200 or 300 yards, and the math starts to gets progressively more complicated, when with MOA, you are dividing inches (what you think in) by quarter of inches, which is much easier and faster to do. Just my .02.

I'm an old hunter, you didn't convince me. But then my shots are almost all well under 300 yards

Other than providing a long-winded explanation for why competitive precision rifle shooters use Mils (short answer: it's because that's what everyone else is using so it's easier to speak the same language), you didn't explain why MOA actually sucks vs. MIL. The short answer is that there isn't really a gnat's ass worth of difference between the two other than MOA scopes generally have slightly finer amounts of elevation and windage adjustment. They're both just an angle of measurement. What does matter, as highlighted by your comparison of reticles, is that some reticles have a marked advantage over others when it comes to rapidly measuring a miss and making a corrected follow up shot. A crappy Mil-based reticle could underperform against a superb MOA-based reticle, and vice-versa.

I, by no means have your level of experience, but to me the 2 are equivalent. The one argument I agree with is the sharing data portion if you're around others who are using mils. Your analogy of dialing 8 mils vs. 24 moa, you are basically dialing ~80 clicks for both so I don't see an advantage for either. It, more than anything, else comes down to personal preference or what you have experience with. Coming from your military background and a desire to only have to deal with one in your classes, I can see that you would prefer mils because that's what you have the most experience with.

As a new shooter, I went directly to a mil scope. I’ve always hated fractions, but I could always work with decimals. I also convert yards to meters to make the math much easier. I can calculate the distance of a mil at any range in about 2 seconds, and I can ascertain the range in about 5 to 10 seconds if I know the size of the target.

I liked the vid. You were also right on the money when you talked about why a lot of people - myself included - went to MOA rather than MIL for my first bigger scope. It was what I was already kind of familiar with. The more I delve into this subject, the more I see that I should buy MIL scopes from this point forward.

Another outstanding video. Keep up the good work. If you don't mind me asking, what is the material you have in your background your rifles mounted on? I will never clean my gun like I used to after watching your video. You definitely have it dialed in

Thank you for explaining the wheeler equipment and how to use it. Feels great! Its no longer a mystery. William

Good video. My friends and I always have this same argument. AAANNNNNNDDDDDDDD, I still shoot with MOA. Lol. One funny thing is when we are all shooting and I make a good wind call, when someone ask what my hold was and I reply 1 3/4 MOA, they hate it. But they do it to me to. To me, it is six on one, half a dozen on the other. You can use the reticle to hold over on both of them. You can estimate range with both reticles. You can use the reticle to correct your miss. And there are certainly some times when the one inch = one MOA is very handy. You may not always know the size of your target, but there are times when you will know.

As a civilian shooter? All I know is MOA and Kentucky Windage. I sight my rifle into 100 yards using three shot groups and adjusting the scope onto bullseye using my choice bullet weight that I am going to hunt with. Once zero’d to 100 yards? I am done. I memorize my bullet drop of my cartridge and bullet weight and if the animal is 300 yards away? I will hold over as a guesstimate based on the size of the animal. If I am in wind? I will hold accordingly based on the size of the animal. Deer are this tall and this wide so I will hold here. This is how my father taught me how to do it. That’s how his father taught him how to do it. And it’s tough to walk away from something so old and tried. But I welcome it. Thank you for this video!

I didn't get a whole lot of time with either but I'd been introduced more to MILs while in the corps. I went with that in the first place for that reason. I'm not a christmas tree reticle guy, but the explanation of the typical use makes absolute sense. Adjusting the turrets is not a fast process so quick follow up shots are going to be dependent on the reticle. I've got some stuff to think about.

I like how you explained how they're the same as far as use case goes but then said the less accurate system was better

Great explanation. Like you discussed, I was introduced to rifles by my roommate in college. Growing up hunting, using MOA, he convinced me that’s the way to go. 5 MOA scopes deep, I have no qualms switching to MIL after heeding your advice. I swore there was too much math with MIL scopes. Myth debunked. Appreciate it.

Other than for sharing data I agree but no matter which radical you choose they are a mechanical. Range your target use your turret to dial than any and all follow-up shots use the radicals. When time is crucial. Then note in your dope book what the proper hold is for future references at known distance and known environmental factors.

This is the most concise and helpful explanation of MIL of all the videos I’ve watched. Thanks very much!

Thanks for this video. I'm a new competition shooter. I just participated in my first competition, which was a Civilian Marksmanship Program EIC rifle competition. The max range was 600 yards. Since I didn't expect to do good, I used my M16A4 clone with a Trijicon ACOG for fun. I ended up scoring a 378/500. But I'm looking at getting a real competition scope now and have been wondering about mils vs moa. Nearly all scopes available in my area at the big sporting goods stores are mils scopes. So thank you!

Tremor 3 is only in mil too. Of course you need to have the self discipline to be able to handle the busiest reticle on the market, but built in wind holds, moving target holds, and so much more once you learn how to use it. It's amazing.

Your video convinced me to buy all future scopes in MOA 😂. I think the only benefit would be if others were using MILs but nobody I shoot/hunt with shoot MILs.

Excellent. Well explained. I started with a standard mildot and it has always made sense.

Thk u 4 being so precise on explaining da difference n now I belive I can learn alot faster on how 2 use my scope align it so I can b a better shooter.