Thread: Who would still buy MOA over MIL and why?

Doesnt bother me, currently use Mil, doesnt sound as cool in meters though yards sounds furtherer

MOA because im too long in the tooth to be bothered learning new tricks

I shoot both.
Hunting rifles are moa.
Comp guns are mil.
Only because thats what the majority of competitors use and makes shot calling easier.

I did my apprenticeship in an engineering shop on old machinery with imperial dials so I understand MOA, and until recently I've generally bought older quality scopes second hand (so they tend to be MOA). That said, I'd be equally happy with mil but in the interests of consistency across my rifles I just stick with MOA. It works for me so I see no need to change, but I've pushed my son down the mil path as he's most decidedly a product of the metric age (and if I use his rifle I can do the conversions in my head after years of doing it at work).

Any scale would work for me as long as the look-up table, corrections, and reticle subtensions were consistent. I don't use scopes for ranging though - or determining the size of targets. If I did then metric would surely be the more straightforward.

I can better the above-mentioned 0.85 error; how about 0.68x on a MOA Leica? Again, I could have worked with it, but it made me wonder what else could be wrong, so the scope was replaced.

I just bought my first imperial scope
after being a devout milrad fan for 10 years.
The reason, i bought a red dot for my
45-70 takedown (holosun 510c). It clicks at .5moa and im
absolutely fine with that. Basically
A full bullet hole per click for this cal.
I can manage about 15-20 shots of this thing
before im done for the day so im just
happy to be on the orange 1" sticker.