What system do you use and why ? MOA or MRAD .

[One on top of two]

So what do you favour and why ?

personally I have always used SFP MOA and it’s always served me well. And still think it’s a great system, however i always tend to get myself in a bit of a pickle when trying to range find or more importantly try to work out the size of something, granted more down to having unmatched turrets/reticule on lower end scopes .

Over the years I have been playing with FFP MRAD scopes and seem to get on sooo much better , I have put it down to the fact of being a bricklayer every day I’m working in mm/ meters so I think im just wired up in metric. ( yes I know MRAD is not metric in the same way MOA is not imperial, but they both correspond well to each system) 

anyway I have just taken the plunge and bought Two vortex 5x25x50 PST gen 2 scopes in FFP and with MRAD turrets and reticules , one for the tic tac .308 and the other for the other tic tac 6.5 creedmoor.

so like I said what and why do you use , 

[Catch-22]

MIL/MIL

I prefer metric as I find it's easier for conversion tables, quickly referencing in drop sheets (dope cards) and just plain remembering whole numbers.

Using the fine hash marks on the H2CMR on the S&B 5x25-56 FFP, I'm able to spot the 'splash' or even bullet holes then use the reticle to accurately measure the number of MILs needed to correct the shot. No guess work, no placing the scope on a certain power or doing silly mathematic conversions. Count the MILs and dial them. 

Only slight downside is 1cm clicks (@100m) can be slightly too course for fine adjustments on targets at distance. But for me and my non F class or competitive shooting, it suits me just fine.

[Re-Pete]

I prefer MOA. I used both for a short while, but I tended to over correct with the mil scope.

The electronic targets where I shoot (Stickledown & Century at Bisley) give me all the shot to shot info that I need..............apart from the wind, which can change dramatically from shot to shot.

Pete

[TJC]

I went to a course in the US. I was the only one shooting a SFP MOA. Learnt the hard way and now only run FFP MIL. 

[Chanonry]

11 hours ago, Catch-22 said:

Using the fine hash marks on the H2CMR on the S&B 5x25-56 FFP, I'm able to spot the 'splash' or even bullet holes then use the reticle to accurately measure the number of MILs needed to correct the shot. No guess work, no placing the scope on a certain power or doing silly mathematic conversions. Count the MILs and dial them. 

Which is exactly what I do with my MOA/MOA system, using the reticle as a ruler.

Why MOA? That was what was for sale at an attractive price.  The only benefit I can see are that remembering the 10mph wind numbers are really easy for my hunting load as they correlate directly to the 100 yard multiple. Not the biggest reason,  eh.

I look at the equivalent MIL model and think the turret is a lot less noisy and would be easier to read, with my worsening eyesight. Maybe not, out of focus is out of focus. Not paying £2k+ to find out.

An angle is an angle is an angle. 

[One on top of two]

2 minutes ago, TJC said:

I went to a course in the US. I was the only one shooting a SFP MOA. Learnt the hard way and now only run FFP MIL. 

Have to admit I’m now a big fan of Mils. 

Also find ffp MRAD for hunting /varmint shooting to be a game changer. Like I said both are great systems. And one is no better than the other. Just a case of what suits you better and for me it’s deffo MRAD 👍

[Chanonry]

8 minutes ago, TJC said:

I went to a course in the US. I was the only one shooting a SFP MOA. Learnt the hard way and now only run FFP MIL. 

Easier if everyone shoots the same thing right enough.

[Popsbengo]

I can't see any advantages one over the other for target shooting.  I have both and swap between - this does cause me a little brain ache for 5mins.  In the military we used mils which are useful for ranging  (but not easy to be accurate in reality). These days just light 'em up with your laser R.F.   I have FFP and SFP scopes, I prefer the SFP reticle for precision on my .308 as it's nice and fine at max mag.  The FFP is useful for very long distance with my .338 as I can measure and translate POI errors onto the turrets without thinking.

I feel for those with mil reticles and MOA turrets (or vic-versa) !

[ejg223]

I mostly use FFP MRAD for hunting. Great for zeroing rifles too, mostly done with 2-3 shot. My spotting scope is also in MRAD and can be set to similar mag as the scope.

I have a few MOA scopes but made drop charts in m for them so the rangefinder stays on m.

edi

[palo]

I always use moa and can't see myself changing. I never liked ffp reticle scopes either.  All my hunting scopes have custom turrets so I just range and dial as needed. 

[David will]

I prefer MOA but I was brought up thinking in pounds shillings and pence, ie an old codger🤣

[gyr]

FFP and mil/mil. 
for me much easier to use, straight conversions from angle to distannce other way around.