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/
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/
By far the most clear and concise way that I have ever heard this explained. Bravo.
agree 110 %
With one ear
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!
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
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.
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,
Cory Trapp is one of the premier long range shooting instructors in the US.
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
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.
The absolutely best description of Mils and MOA, breaking it down to the reticle scale .
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.
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!
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
Best and most concise explanation I've ever heard. Thanks
Great... teacher. Never saw in six minutes such simplicity !!! Thank you.
They are both good and both work, damn thats what I needed to hear, so basically use personal preference
The simplest and most concise explanation of the difference between the two that I have seen. Great video!
Awesome video. Really well explained. Could listen to this guy speaking all day whilst still not having a clue what the segments in MRAD represent. I'll stick to MOA I think. Much simpler
You as re freaking brilliant, thank you for being one of the 1st people to explain this correctly 👏
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.
For the first time in 30 videos, I get it! Well done Sir. Excellent presentation.
the best video explaining the confusing world of MOA and MRAD
Excellent and quick explanation. You sir earned another subscriber today
I am new to shooting & scopes but highly impressed by the way you explained such complicated thing in very simple way, please make more videos like this, God bless you.
just don't mess too much with your scope. Learning how to correct it once in a while is not a big deal and moa tactical scopes helps when on a range with various distances without messing with your scope is the best deal.
Last 20 seconds were worth the whole video - also excellent and very helpful video, thank you
Great video. Thanks for posting this.
Loved this video. Awesome explanation. Hit me in the heart.
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.
Thank you for the great infos. I’m trying to understand the difference between the two before making a purchase on my next scope. So I guess I will be sticking to MOA as I always do. Once again, thank you!
Great video, and if you are a person with a short attention span, listening at 1.5 speed is wonderful!
This is the clearest and easiest explanation I've heard. Thanks so much
Yet he didn't ex plain that a randian is the length of theraidius wrapped around the circumference of a circle. An d that distance is divided into 1000 equal segments
@@danietkissenle For the sake of the explanation, it wasn't necessary to get into the theory behind the systems. Important part is to show that this is all about two systems to describe angular adjustment.
Awesome clarification. More please. Regards from the UK.
thank you for a very clear explanation.
Very easy to understand, well done
Excellent explanation Sir - Thanks.
That was some useful info. Basic and precise, a good jumping off point. Thank you.
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.
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.
This is pure and simple. I like it.
Now I was getting into this video and it cut short, oh well, have a blessed day sir anyway.
Very nicely explained 👍
Great video. Thank you Sir.
Well they had these type of sights for decades on Biathlon rifles and they are super precise. Adding an adjustable peep is of course another advancement that a biathlete does not need since they always shoot 50meters. Peep and globe fronts are the most accurate way to go for iron sights. well done!
love it works great. just the right size
Thank you for this, I’ll stay with MOA and make sure scopes purchased correspond.
Great instruction. 👏
best video i have seen yet
I was carving this up, like everyone else semi mocking this video, until I realized that this is probably the best video for the true novice.
this video was the easiest to understand and made me feel like i was in a class room with him.
Great information thanks
Well presented Thank You
Excellent! Thank You!
Good info. Thank you.
Thanks a bunch, you got my vote
A very good teacher
Great video
Probably the clearest and best explanation of the two systems. The most important part is make sure that your reticle is the same as the turret adjustments. Either MOA for both or MRAD for both. Neither system is technically better. MOA is slightly more precise for zeroing the firearm, but neither will affect group size, just point of impact. Only the tacticool guys (keyboard commandos) will argue one is better than the other. Pick the reticle style that you like and go with that. An easy to use reticle that allows easy corrections for wind shift adjustments or holdovers is all that is really important.
I switched from MOA to MRADs because the arty guys used MRADs in their firing solutions so it made things a little quicker. I'm going back to MOA as a civilian because nobody out here uses MRADs so MOA is easier to communicate.
@@colinsanders9397 MRAD dominates the precision shooting civilian sphere, MOA is still popular for casuals though.
this man is just awesome
Love the background music.
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.
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
Finally I understand moa best mathematical explanation
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
Thank you so much. If anyone wants the tldw as long as the reticle and knobs match mil to mil or mrad to mrad it doesn't really matter. Just different calculations.
Excellent information!! Especially for a rookie like me🤓
Good video, Im trying to figure out ---what is the moa at 8x, 10x, 12x, 15x, etc, etc, zoom at 100 yards given that at 6x zoom it is 1.50 moa? Im trying to figure out what the best reticle is? The dot at 100 yards at 6x is 1.50 moa.... This is a Second Focal Plane. Is there a formula? Thanks....
I use the metric system and have a hard time using yards feet and inches, hence the milrad being a x10 incremental scale makes more sense to me, great explanation, thanks.
Well, if you were schooled in USA where object size is described in yards or inches then you would frame (see) both mils and MOA adjustment as inches or yards and that in fact is the case, since MOA and mils are always used to describe the distance in inches (not centimeters) a sight adjustment will make at target distance.
@@charlesludwig9173 you're totally right man
Good points adressed here. How a scope comes out of a factory with a mil-reticle and moa-turrets boggles me. I’d like to add that using mrads comes into its own when you start using meters rather than yards.
That boggle me too. With the expense of the scope, and the acclaimed intelligence of the engineers, even the the most unaware would think that they would make the reticle graduations match the adjustments on the knobs? As long as there is no feedback in the market place, there is no need to change.
Thank you lot sir
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.
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.
thank you
I’m learning good video
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.
Good class
excellent
That’s pretty good stuff
The real question is- why do some scope manufacturers insist on using a mil reticle & moa knobs and vice versa?
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
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?
Badass channel.
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.
Well said
Thanks.
In life only a very small percentage of people should be teachers ; this guy is one !
If I could give this heat packing Santa two thumbs up I would 👍🏻👍🏻
This guy is a legend...and no idea who he is.
❤ Дуже круто, дякую!
the combination couldn't have been better. Shooting the zinc plated Daisy Precision MAX BB's ...
I take it this whole course isn't freely available on KZhead is it?
I think I still need to go to academy for this
Was this filmed on an iPhone? As the audio is audio
You kinda said MRAD was preferred for distance between 300/1000 meters. .300 Weatherby mag effective range 1100 yds/meters. Which would be your choice for Long distance Elk?
0.1 mil variation on your mil scope knob correspond to a 1cm drift @100m. milliradian system is on pair with the metric system.
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.
MOA =course adjustment, MRAD=fine adjustment. Got it. Best explanation yet.
Your Backwards lol
1/4 MOA is 0.25" at 100 yards, whereas the 1/10 mil is 0.36"
MRAD scale was designed with ranging in mind. That's why it's such a weird number for the angular divisions.
Extremely clear and easy to understand explanation. Thank you. Too bad I failed every math class I ever had to take. Great info
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
Best explanation I have been given. I seen the video heck now I want to take the class. Andrew you're not that smart.
It is indeed 100x easier to operate in base 10 than degrees and inches. It has been for hundreds of years