Thread: Poll metric or imperial

So it would seem that the awnswer to @gimps question in another thread "who uses MOA in this day and age" or words to that effect is "the majority of hunters and shooters"

Ignorance is bliss, if they don't know any better then they might as well carry on with MOA.

Short range what does it matter anyway?

But mil is far superior.

Originally Posted by Savage1

Ignorance is bliss

But mil is far superior.

Clearly MOA is far inferior because no one uses it, at all, anywhere, ever, because mil is far superior ........

The pole clearly shows this fact.....

The only reason people want to run mils now is cause that's what the "snipers" use just look at the people in the states the most backward country in the world and they run metric scopes I wonder why how is something that is pretty much 1.5 times per click going to be as accurate at long range . You can't just say it's easier cause all you are doing is punching numbers into an app to get your solution

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

I prefer the finer (therefore some would say more accurate) imperial measurement

Originally Posted by stub

I wonder why how is something that is pretty much 1.5 times per click going to be as accurate at long range .

The maximum error that can possibly be ascribed to click value is half of one click, as perfect data will put point of impact within that margin of point of aim.

For a scope that adjusts .1mil, this is <5cm at 1000m

For a scope that adjusts .25moa this is <3.45cm at 1000m

If that 1.55cm potential additional maximum aiming error at 1000 metres is responsible for a miss, there was never going to be a meaningful hit anyway.

Double the numbers for 2 kilometres if you wish and it's still utterly insignificant

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

So it would seem that the awnswer to @gimps question in another thread "who uses MOA in this day and age" or words to that effect is "the majority of hunters and shooters"

Some light reading: Rhetorical question - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This explains things pretty well

MIL vs MOA: An Objective Comparison | PrecisionRifleBlog.com

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

Clearly MOA is far inferior because no one uses it, at all, anywhere, ever, because mil is far superior ........

The pole clearly shows this fact.....

Just like the imperial system, like I said, ignorance is bliss

Actually
What this poll clearly shows is that, in round figures, 52 percent of people who are members of this forum use moa for windage and elevation correction.
It also clearly shows 48% don't.
Where the guessing game starts is .
What would be the result of say an equivalent poll ten years ago, and also one in 10 years hence.

Then if you bought country of origin into it.???
I wonder, knocking on the door of Europe, what would the results a similar poll in England be.
Be interesting anyways.

Originally Posted by jakewire

Actually
What this poll clearly shows is that, in round figures, 52 percent of people who are members of this forum use moa for windage and elevation correction.
It also clearly shows 48% don't.
Where the guessing game starts is .
What would be the result of say an equivalent poll ten years ago, and also one in 10 years hence.

Then if you bought country of origin into it.???
I wonder, knocking on the door of Europe, what would the results a similar poll in England be.
Be interesting anyways.

No 67.19% use MOA (including those who use both MOA and Mill) and 32.81% do not use MOA and 9.37% do not use MOA OR Mill.

But yes interesting and would be more so to see parts of the world votes, tho we have quite a cross section on here.

I can picture an inch of hold on a rabbit, or 2 if I'm game.

I am happier with a centerfire being 2 inches high @ 100 m than 5.8 cm high @ 110 yards...

Cm's are for dress makers anyway.

I have had a cashed up fitter stop by at work with after market parts for his Harley, made in the U.S. metric fine.

Dude at work welded up a Detroit diesel block (big) my punt was unf, turns out it was 16 by 1.5....

The argument we all don't own euro glass hold's water, I can't blame yank's for holding onto fractions (imagine that cost of replacing all the socket sets...)

Finally FK fractions, a thou is only.025 of a mill

My "8thou" cents

yes cm is for dressmakers, that's why its 50.something milimeters not cm

And yes in machining terms a thou is fuckin huge.

As my tutor used to tell us. "5mm is the fucking grand canyon"

Here's 1 for ya, had a customer turn up @ 4 with a rush job "km nut won't fit on damaged thread"... Linished shaft, needle filed start, thread gauged them both, measured od of shaft to make sure not bulged - ID of new nut is .15 under min size thanks china. Picked out our "test" one - straight on...

Fk I hope you missed a decimal and a 0 Toby, even then your rough ��

MOA, is dead!