MOA Sucks Part III - MOA Is NOT More Precise

In this video I discuss and debunk the idea that MOA provides more precision than Milliradian in any real practical application of ballistics.
Watch the full ​⁠‪@hornady‬ podcast episode 50 referenced in this video here: • Ep. 050 - Your Groups ...
And the follow on Hornady Podcast episode 52 here: • Ep. 052 - Your Groups ...
Support our work on Patreon: / paramounttactical
Join our Free Newsletter for upcoming events, exclusive sales and more.
paramounttactical.substack.com/
XP Long Range Academy Course Dates: www.paramounttactical.com/tra...
For more information and other upcoming courses go to, paramounttactical.com/
Get discounts on most items on www.paramounttactical.com just for subscribing to our channel!
Paramount Tactical Subscriber Discount Code: liberty1776
Join us on Wednesdays at 7pm for our LIVE Dangerous Liberty Podcast here on KZbin and Rumble.
For tested and recommended gear go to: www.paramounttactical.com/shop/
Get your Dangerous Liberty Shirts & Hats along with other Paramount Tactical Swag here!: www.paramounttactical.com/pro...
Contact Information: [e-mail]
Follow us:
Twitter: / paramounttactcl
Facebook Page / paramounttactical
Instagram: Paramount_Tactical
Rumble: rumble.com/c/ParamountTactical
Gary Melton is a former U.S. Army Special Forces Green Beret, Weapons Sergeant, and Sniper Team Leader with 4 combat tours. He has worked full time as a Unit Chief and Special Tactics Instructor at a federal agency, and is the owner and Lead Instructor for Paramount Tactical Solutions.
Paramount Tactical Solutions is staffed by Special Operations veterans and cadre that are required to have high level operational experience and to have worked full time as a tactical instructor for Federal Law Enforcement and/or the military. Paramount specializes in training Military and LE units as well as civilians in firearms, tactics, security, and tactical medicine.
Our courses are located at Summit Point, WV just 1.5hrs from Washington DC, near Winchester, VA. We are mobile and can provide onsite training as well.

[@czechmatetso7330]

I've watched almost all of your videos and this is possibly the best and most informative educational video yet. Keep up the great work!

[@paramounttactical]

Thanks man! Glad you enjoyed. -Gary

[@lucasrosenmiller4086]

I think this video and the Hornady video you referenced have showed me the most useful and factual information I have ever received for long range. Keep making great videos I appreciate you time an effort.

[@roblindberg9339]

I have all MOA scopes. But I completely agree with you.... it's the shooter, the gun, and the environment at the time of shot. I just use MOA because I'm used to it. Very informative video. Thanks

[@fordlaz7796]

Loved your synopsis. Makes a lot of sense, and very well presented. Keep up the great work!!

[@damonsmith71712]

Awesome video. Well detailed and presented. Helps me better relay the advantages to my students.

[@rotasaustralis]

Excellent vid. Refreshing to see guys like yourself with unquestionable experience getting this kind of info out there. This kind of info is slowly but surely making inroads into the shooter forums. Hopefully we'll see the day when shooters refer to their rifles shooting within a range of group sizes &, we may well see guys talking about the most important subject of matching POI to POA which, is the most important aspect of medium to long range shooting. Hopefully that will be in a future video.

[@Victor-xm]

The most common argument i hear against moa is "you need to make more clicks" or "you have to count each click" but every optic has large indicator numbers for every inch or every other inch, if it's every other inch there's a bigger line on the turret indicating the number 7 between 6 and 8. so if you're paying any attention to your adjustment, moa really isn't that much slower to adjust, in most cases not slower enough to make a difference

[@paramounttactical]

No, I don’t think dialing is a valid argument. There’s a lot of of advantages of mil over MOA but dialing speed isn’t a compelling one.

[@tomvanaalst5790]

I would love to see this video series put into a Playlist. It would make it so much easier to watch from start to finish.

[@paramounttactical]

Good idea. I will do that. In the meantime you can search MOA Sucks and all 3 will come up.

[@anthonyrem]

Amazing video! Thanks for this information. I wish you made this video before I bought my Optics. haha.

[@FieroGTXX]

MOA guy here with some math. 1/4 MOA has a smaller angular resolution than 10th MIL. I think we can agree there. This is a fact angularly proven by what MOA are MRAD at the core deriving from the 360 degrees of a circle. Basic 6th grade math. NOW, the ability to SHOOT consistently to that difference is extremely EXTREMELY unlikely due to other variables. One's best grouping is, as you said, one's best grouping. More decimal places in an angle doesn't make one a more precise or accurate shooter. Great video and Great perspective with this series. Thanks for putting in the hours to make it happen!!!

[@thepracticalrifleman]

The error could land you closer to your click on either system. Say perfect dope is half way between 1/4 MOA clicks, the 0.1 mRAD adjustment at 0.36 MOA would have been closer to the predicted correction. It’s really irrelevant for most shooters.

[@rextharp9804]

you and hornady keep breaking my heart. thanks for the info now I have to use it.

[@dominicemole6546]

Great discussion. Even aside from the MOA/MIL debate great discussion of the concepts and facts. That is why I enjoy this channel so much. It`s worth my time. Thanks

[@shroudedunity]

Love the analogy of watching white belt vs black belt. I'm a medic and often volunteer to train new guys. I always lecture them on basic fundamentals because they see the advanced stuff and that's all they want to learn. What resources would you recommend to someone who is trying to learn the fundamentals of long range? I know a class would be great. But not all schools are created equal and traveling may not be possible. Are there books, videos, online courses that you would suggest? Do you offer the didactic portion of your school for purchase online?

[@CutlassOutdoors]

I’ve learned so much from your channel. Thanks for putting out such amazing content (for free, no less)!

[@XxDarkchyldex]

Gary, awesome video. I am in Australia pretty new to firearms and precision shooting is what does it for me. It was a little weird for me to see people get excited over high precision without the high accuracy and basing their best performance from any chosen 3 shot group. So this video was so good to watch. As we use the metric system here I gravitated towards MIL. I know millimeters and MIL are not the same, but the working out just made more sense to me. I was wondering if you have ever seen anyone using MIL and the metric system for distances as I have looked but can't find any.

[@paramounttactical]

Hey thanks for watching bud! Cheers. Yeah man, I used Mils and the metric system all throughout my military career. There's definitely some added benefits given that at 100m 1 Mil is 10 centimeters so every click adjusts your POA 1 centimeter. At 500M 1 mil is 1/2M so when it comes to range estimation it makes things easier if you're already using the metric system. The same thing is true with the Imperial system. At 100 yards 1Mil is 1/10th of a yard 3.6" and at 1000 yards 1 mil is 1 yard/3'... at 1000 feet 1 Mil is 1 foot. But we American's don't measure that way. Hope that helps. Thanks, Gary

[@Blackplagueprecision]

I use MIL in Fclass and it is at times an issue with the culture of Fclass in MOA. But I’m upgrading for my he Kahles 525DLR to the March 8x80 so MOA is in the near future.

[@HighHoleOutdoors]

Very informative!! Thanks

[@john1349]

The stats side is tricky. I shot 4 5 shot groups today with max SD of 26 & ES of 62. But across the 20, the hi minus the low was 127 FPS different, or 3/10’s at 500 yards or 5.4” variance from that alone. You just don’t know when it’s going to happen. That’s what they were sort of saying group size was like with misconceptions. How you explain that in MOA beats the hell out of me.

[@bajadrifter]

So I think it follows: the best shooter and the best gun don't always win the shooting competition. This is because the sample size ( of the results) is based on "lucky" performance. There is a low natural variation in the results. So is the standard deviation a good measure of the best gun or shooter. I'll be thinking about this as I mow my lawn. Gotta run.

[@Frostytravels]

Swapped many years ago to MIL and will never look back.

[@gwashington65]

I use MOA and will continue. I doubt any Benchrest/Fclass shooters will switch to mil after watching this video. I think they like the greater scope precision of .1 inch per click w moa. With that said, thanks for the great video and that hornady section was valuable.

[@paramounttactical]

And as I stated the video, F Class and BR shooters shouldn’t switch. They wouldn’t get the benefits of MIL due to how they shoot and because all their peers use MOA. Thanks for watching! -Gary

[@williamsonnie9935]

This was a better put together video, good job Gary.

[@paramounttactical]

I’ve come to accept the fact that all videos resonate with some and not others. If I have the 5% on either side of the margin telling me it’s the best video ever and the other telling me it’s the worst… It’s as good as it’s going to get. 😂 Thanks, Gary

[@robbysreloadingroom]

Awesome video 🙏

[@douglasbattjes3991]

Great video and info Gary, Mils here since my service in Viet Nam, 👍👍👍👍

[@johnwalsh7070]

Did your barber go on vacation?

[@paramounttactical]

😂

[@andreashannon3928]

18:00 "YOU Can't handle the TRUTH!"

[@paramounttactical]

I should have thrown in that Few Good Men clip right there! Damnit! 🤦‍♂️🤷‍♂️

[@Forumrida38621]

I feel like the only thing i have heard is that .25moa is a finer adjustment then 1/10 mil, which i agree is true but i agree with you it doesnt matter because it isnt more efficient

[@paramounttactical]

The point of this video is yes, .25 MOA is a finer mechanical adjustment than 1/10 mil but it doesn’t translate to any actual difference in ballistic precision because 1/10 mil is finer than can be utilized by any shooter to begin with.

[@Forumrida38621]

Agreed I recently bought the element theos in mil and love it

[@neal9700]

I like and use mils and have since my Army days. I was an moa shooter prior to my service. That said, there is such a thing as stacking tolerances. Any time you can decrease a variability, it's a good thing. Increasing your rifle's mechanical accuracy by 0.1 MOA, then increasing your ammunition's mechanical accuracy by 0.1 MOA, then getting a 0.1 MOA more accurate zero, then reading wind 0.1 MOA better, etc. etc. It all adds up. For ultra accuracy, like with benchrest shooters, the difference between a 3.6" 1000 yard click with a 0.1 mil adjustment and a 1.3" 1000 yard click with a 1/8 MOA adjustment is extremely significant. Obviously, it's a much smaller difference with a 1/4 MOA adjustment, but the difference is still there whether or not you are a 0.36 MOA shooter. A 1 MOA shooter is still going to get more hits on target with a 0.5 MOA rifle than he will with a 1 MOA rifle just because of margin of error.

[@paramounttactical]

No, shooting isn’t machining and the stacking tolerances doesn’t even apply here. With precision shooting, your system is capable of least precise component, they don’t stack. If I have 1 MOA rifle and 1 MOA ammo, that doesn’t leave me with a 2 MOA gun. It doesn’t work like that. You cannot get a more accurate zero with 1/4 or 1/8 MOA. I talk about testing that theory and I have. I welcome you to do the same. Do a sample size of at least 30rds like Hornady discusses and you’ll see that is correct Your example is exactly what the Hornady podcast was addressing. If you have a 1/2 MOA 5rd group at 1000yds, shoot 30rds and see if you still have a 1/2MOA group. Of course you wouldn’t. You’d end up with likely a .75 MOA (being VERY generous). so with an almost 8” group, when you shot that 5rd group you happen to have those rounds fall within a certain area randomly. And then you click for adjustment and you happen to have the next 5rds fall into an area. Those could be all on the right side of your random dispersion. But when your actual random dispersion (actual group size) is more like 8-10” at 1000yds the 5rd group may or may not reflect the 2 x 1/8 MOA clicks you dialed. If it does then you feel good but it was actually completely random and a stroke of luck. You could do the exact same thing with 1/10 of mil and get the exact same results using the exact same gun and ammo. Honestly I think 1/8 MOA is a total scam and offered to make people feel good. Just the variance in parallax alone would provide more variance in impacts than 1/8MOA could control. I think with a statistically significant number of rounds you’d see what I’m staying is true. I 100% believe that given the same conditions, a winning group shot with 1/4 or 1/8 MOA, if there had happen to be a 1/10 mil optic on it would have yielded the same result. I think 1/8 MOA provides a placebo effect of confidence to many shooters and that’s not nothing… confidence has a HUGE impact on shooting results so in that sense it probably has some effect. I’ll be the first to admit that last bit is speculation. If 1/4 or 1/8 MOA could possibly be utilized (I still don’t think I can be) it would be by BR and F Class shooters. So I’m ok if I’m wrong on that last part. If I can think of way to definitively test that I will. But there’s no chance at all the other 99.5% of shooters with a simple bipod and a rear bag would see any precision difference using MOA vs Mil. Thanks for watching and your thoughtful comment/argument. -Gary

[@thepracticalrifleman]

@@paramounttacticalI do field shooting and I do F-Class. 1/8 MOA is absolutely useful in the discipline. Last match I shot a 197. Had I moved 1/8 MOA to center my waterline, I would have scored a 199 or 200 and added at least two Xs. The reason behind MOA over mils in that discipline is because the scoring rings line up with MOA. If it weren’t for that, there are 0.05 mil scopes. In a field match? No. There is no use in MOA. Mils rule for that discipline. Speed, commonality, and it’s mentally easier to work in 1/10ths than 1/4s.

[@ShaminMike]

I about shit a couple months ago when I realized I spent $1700 on a primary arms 1-8 compact and mount for my ar that had a BDC radical in yards but adjusted clicks in mills. But I’ll never dial with that scope so once it’s zeroed it doesn’t matter anyway.

[@thepracticalrifleman]

In F-t/r (shot off a bipod) we shoot 20 round groups. My rifle will shoot 20 rounds at 100 yards into about 0.75 MOA. Most guys will tell you their guns shoot in the .2s or .3s but in practice they are shooting three or five round groups. I measure mine in twenty round groups because that’s a whole match. I see people chase shots believing it was the wind that got them, but their next shot will drop points too because it was actually part of that rifle’s group. But at the end of the day, a clean score is 1 MOA with accuracy in the ten ring. X’s are in 1/2 MOA. There are guys shooting 200s with 20Xs but it isn’t a given.

[@awsomedude9111]

I think years ago internet was saying that everyone and the military was going to use MOA, combined with more companies having better reticle and options like Vortex. I think using both or understanding both is ideal.

[@paramounttactical]

Sure. Just understand the capabilities of both systems and understand the pros and cons to both. Understand that that there is no practical precision difference. Understand that no part you strap onto a gun can override or improve its ballistic/precision capabilities. If I put race tires on my truck it doesn’t make it go faster. 🤷‍♂️

[@codyvickers967]

Awesome response! OK, When I say I like the more precise adjustments, I am talking about shooting tiny groups at 1-300 yards from a bench. I agree that mils work great at long distance. Personally, when using the same rifle both from a bench and for long range when I occasionally get the opportunity I think I still prefer moa, with that said I can easily do the math in my head to convert. It does take a bit longer, but again, I am not competing. If more of my shooting was long distance than it currently is, I can see where mils could be a better option.

[@Pallidum]

How is MOA helping you shoot smaller groups? Your groupsize isn't affected by your angular measurement. Sure, the adjustments are a little bit different, but they are still much smaller than the 1 MOA group you're shooting. And if they are too big, just go with a 0.05 mil adjustment scope. Or 1/8 moa. But chances are your shooting won't need those precise adjustments, unless you're well into benchrest land or similar.

[@codyvickers967]

@Pallidum it doesn't help shoot smaller groups. It moves said groups in smaller increments. That is all. I said I prefer it for my own purposes, I also said I understand the use of mil at long range. I really didn't think I left anything to argue over. Bottom line is, both ways work, it is simply a matter of preference and if shooting with a bunch of people speaking in mil, you need to be able to speak that language, if they are speaking in moa then same.

[@codyvickers967]

@Pallidum And yes, I am talking about moving a quarter inch or so group maybe 1/8 to 1/4 inch left right up or down to perfectly center it on a target. I have OCD, it just is.

[@sandybartlett1333]

Keep em coming Gary. Love the humor man!!! Moa does suck!! Yards and inches lol

[@brotherhood-n-arms]

Great info Gary, thanks for sharing. Very frustrating to hear guys keep pushing misinformation on MOA being more precise at distance. Hope they all watch rhis video to gain some better insight.

[@joshjohnson1653]

I learned to shoot long-range with buddies all with MOA. At this point, it's just convenient for calls and adjustments. I want to try a mil scope, but there is no reason to change what i got when I am hitting the mile consistently! If I had to do it all over from the beginning it would probably be MIL. Plus Im cheap and it seems i can get a nicer scope in MOA for cheaper! Hahahahahaha

[@paramounttactical]

There’s absolutely no reason for you to change and you’ll not likely gain any performance for what you’re doing. You’ll never hear me say that MOA doesn’t work. It does and for many people it’s more than adequate for what they do. Thanks for watching! -Gary

[@bghiggy]

If you ever plan on shooting prs matches it's to your benefit to switch to mils because that's what nearly everyone uses and they will be giving you wind calls in Mils and you'll end up having to convert it in your head which will add time.

[@PentiumThorn]

Facts. Any LVL 1 SOTIC will tell u this.

[@markottinger]

Gary, how many round groups would you shoot to see what grain/ load your rifle likes? 50 rounds per load can get quite expensive. Your thoughts. #remember19april1775

[@paramounttactical]

I would recommend watching that full episode. They discuss more in depth that 30 seems to be the number that statistically gives you the sample size you need. They also discuss that yes, there is a larger cost in the analysis phase but you shoot and waste WAY less ammo and money in the long run by missing less and having to go back to analyze ammo again and again due to bad decisions made because of co flushing drawn from small sample sizes. For any testing going forward, I’ll be using 30 as a minimum. It’s going to change the way we look at precision capabilities but it will be more precise.

[@bghiggy]

AND using mil allows you to use the gun number system for wind calls. For example if you have a 5mph gun that means a 5mph full value wind will make your bullet drift 0.5 mils at 500 yards and 0.6 mils at 600 yards etc. If you have a 10mph crosswind, just double the call so it would be 1 mil at 500 and 1.2 at 600. It's extremely convenient.

[@paramounttactical]

Don’t forget Creedmoor Hack as well, mong many other benefits. I’ll be making a separate video on all the advantages of mil over MOA.

[@kyley808]

You can do it in MOA too. I have friends that won't switch. All I do is do it in mils in his Calc once I get the number I switch it to moa for him

[@bghiggy]

@@kyley808 yeah I'm not saying it's impossible, only that it's MUCH easier and faster to do the math in your head in Mils

[@paramounttactical]

With enough math you can probably shoot long range using nothing but a sextant attached to your rifle…🤷‍♂️😂

[@McgSpook]

wouldn't that depend on the bullet caliber, speed and BC?

[@t.c.2527]

I used MOA for years and there is nothing wrong with it but I switch to Mils 10 years ago and never looked back.....its just easier to use and that's the just of it. Thanks for sharing Gary

[@troltron]

Funny enough, my name is John, but i say MOA is superior because the math is so easy. If i know the distance and how far off i am, i can do the math in my head and dial a correction. In the 10's of thousands of rounds i have fired in my life, never once has someone called my miss in mils, to be fair though they dont call them in MOA either, but the almost direct correlation between inches and MOA makes the math easy...of course i was a machinist for 20 years.

[@paramounttactical]

John, regardless of whether you use mils or MOA, what you described is a completely incorrect way of adjusting for misses. Are you calling misses by perceived inches off at distance, e.g., “you’re off target 15 inches”? If so, that’s just an incorrect way of doing it. It’s also the slowest and least precise way of doing regardless of which system you’re using. There should be no calculations needed. You use your reticle which is far more precise than trying to estimate 28” or whatever at 750yds or whatever distance. You have a very precise ruler in a heads up display that tells you exactly what the correction is. Using a reticle you should be able to measure and execute a follow up shot in under 2 seconds or so. If you’re doing any math, you’re doing it wrong brother. Thanks for watching! -Gary

[@Vadderax]

Sounds to me that some people are not in it to be better shooters, to learn and understand information and adapt, but to be eithier a drama stirer or to be a pride full stubborn individual thats not going to change in there ways. Thats fine by me, it only means that they are missing out on being a better shooter. They will probablely be let go by the community by there own means eventuality.

[@paramounttactical]

No, they’ll huddle up in their echo chambers and make arguments as to why the 1911 is still better than Glock and yap on about how iron sights don’t need batteries, stroking each other’s egos built on antiquity all while feeling tactically superior. 🤷‍♂️😂

[@TexasNationalist1836]

I bought an MOA scope 😢

[@alexcampbell3743]

Get your next scope in Mils and when you learn and utilize both you’ll be ahead of the game !

[@jasonard7227]

just got done with all the MOA suck videos wow I learned some stuff for sure a lot of what I learned is that I dont know jack sh_t about long range shooting and that when I get my new scope to play around in some long range it will 100% be MIL. I also know that it seems most folks and or there guns are not as good as the .25 or .36...very nice series on this I was an old MOA guy until I saw these and learned some things I didnt know or even think about knowing...thx..

[@jasonsponsler21]

I’ve had a chance to use both now and definitely seen the benefits of MIL vs MOA. Have started the change to MIL. Oh and MOA SUCKS!!

[@Frank-eg4mw]

What comes to mind with Mils is more like Milliseconds vs minutes in moa to me thats common sense to me idk 🤷‍♂️ about anyone else

[@krodkrod8132]

They are both units of measure. Whichever one goes down to finer adjustments will be the most accurate. It's that simple. But it doesn't mean one should be completely ousted. They both still work fine. The new world record for longest shot is with a MOA scope. It was 4.4 miles.

[@bghiggy]

Did you miss the part where he talked about moa being fine for f class? Extreme range shooting is essentially extended f class. You are not able to shoot the 0.11 inches difference between mil and moa at 100 yards or the 1.1 inch difference at 1000 yards. Don't believe me, go watch Texas Plinking's 1 moa at 1000 yard challenge. NOBODY has been able to maintain even 1 moa, let alone 0.1 moa. Mil uses smaller numbers and is faster to make adjustments than moa is.

[@bghiggy]

And not only that, using mil opens up extremely convenient methods of wind calls like your gun number. Find out what mph of wind makes your bullet drift the equal amount of mils as your distance. As in at 600 yards your bullet drifts 0.6 mils at say 5mph. That means if you have a 10mph crosswind you know that at 5mph you have to hold 0.6 so with 10mph it's 1.2. You can't easily do that with moa

[@Johnsormani]

Clearly you didn’t get the message in the video. It’s all about statistics. And even when you would be right still there are factors like mechanical errors like hysteresis, spring tension etc that will kill that extra theoretical bit of precision

[@paramounttactical]

And it could have been done with mil too. 🤷‍♂️

[@paramounttactical]

It is not more accurate. Period. I don't understand why people can't understand this. You cannot direct rounds/groups with more fidelity. You cannot shoot smaller groups with it. You cannot get a better zero with it. You're confusing mechanical and quite frankly theoretical capabilities with ballistics results. If you zeroed the same gun with MIL and shot 5 groups of 30 (as determined by Horandy to be a minimum sample size to get close to definitive results) and then did the same with MOA you would see absolutely ZERO difference. And that's with dispersion at 100yds. As you go out in distance shot dispersion would increase so the difference between MOA and MIL would matter even less. You can't utilize the precision within 1/10th of mil so you can't utilize 1/4 MOA. It may make you feel good but it translates to zero additional capability.

[@gabrielruiz3214]

Considering that both MOA and MILS are angular measurements, everything you are saying about MOA applies to Mills... Mills are not more precise than MOA. Both work, simple as that. I don't hunt "competitively" so speed is not a factor. I don't know how or where you hunt, but in Arizona, we glass, setup, range, make a wind call, set the dial and shoot. If "speed" becomes a factor we simply don't take the shot. Metal targets don't bleed and a "miss" could mean a wounded animal... we simply don't take that kind of shot. That doesn't mean we take our time, we simply take the time it takes to be sure of the shot we're about to take. No timers, no uncertain distances. And, the fact that you find one NUMBER simpler than another NUMBER simply does not make sense. You range, set the dial... not that tough. I shoot rifles with MOA dials, and Mils... no difference at all, not tougher, not easier... It is a tool, use what you like... I do appreciate the "click bait" we should do "Mils Suck" video... They don't, but you get the point (I think)... I wonder if the guys at "Barbourcreek Long Range" know that they have been shooting long range "wrong" all this time... :) Something else we do that should fall under your: "How can you do that, you don't know, what you don't know category"... we shoot BOTH first and second plane scopes... surprised we ever hit anything. :)

[@jasonard7227]

ok so im in the market for a better scope to go on browning 30.06 bolt gun. Im a deer hunter and only use the rifle sometimes I like archery a million times better but I dont do long range shooting but would like to go to the range with a buddy who does just to try it out for fun sometimes. I know jack shit about any of it all my stuff is moa I understand it somewhat. so would I be better off getting a Mil or moa scope for mostly deer max range shot maybe 300 yards thx... I dont mind learning something new..

[@paramounttactical]

Jason, mil is very easy to learn so you’d have it mostly figured out in one range session. For a hunting rig like 30-06 you can buy something in the $300-500 range. An Athlon or Arken. If you decide to get into LR seriously I’d have other recommendations,

[@jasonard7227]

​@@paramounttactical thx.. yes thats what im looking at the arken ep-5-25x56 or I was looking at the step down with the shj 6-24x50 just like that I can start at 5 power as I hate being zoomed in but that may be cause my cheap scope Nikon pro staff 3x9x50 I think its like 14 years old, but since I know nothing about this stuff wasnt sure again thx for the help for sure got a new sub from me God Bless

[@paramounttactical]

@jasonard7227 either of those will be a YUUUGE improvement over your Nikon. Not a big difference between 6x and 5x. Go with the cheaper one. It will be fine do more than you need it to.

[@jasonard7227]

@@paramounttactical thx for the input I like the less money part as well lol

[@mikemarker4387]

You like mils, use mils. You like moa, use moa.

[@paramounttactical]

My thoughts exactly. Just don’t believe or spread things that are factually incorrect. 🤷‍♂️

[@rabbahhagri1493]

I agree. Don't know why he chooses to fight this one

[@paramounttactical]

@@rabbahhagri1493 I think you’re confused and not realizing who you’re responding to. The thing that is false that’s being spread is that MOA results in more precision. It doesn’t. 🤷‍♂️ Or maybe I’m mistaken and you’re agreeing with me.

[@rabbahhagri1493]

Yep, meant to agree with Mike. Use what suits you. The 2 are functionally equivalent.

[@paramounttactical]

@@rabbahhagri1493 the two are definitely equivalent in the precision arena.

[@cncmillman]

Kudos stretching this out to ~40 minutes. So what I learned, MILS is cool and tactical. Benchrest and F-class is lame and that’s why they use MOA.

[@paramounttactical]

If that’s your takeaway then you’re clinically retarded.

[@adamrodgers2377]

​@@paramounttactical 🤣👍🏻🤙🏻

[@hew2001]

They are both units of measure. One is not more precise than the other.

[@paramounttactical]

Oh I realize that. But 3/4 of the long range shooting community incorrectly think otherwise.

[@FieroGTXX]

I said this, but in way too many words. Lolz!!

[@MrLucky426]

I'm gonna tell you the facts....MOA has .1 MOA more adjustment than MIL. But it's not more precise due to xy and z....😂

[@C_oprator89]

Moa guy- hits steel center left edge at 800 Moa guys - better click over my windage 2 times just to be sure Mil guy - I called that wind pretty great huh boys!

[@jdj3806]

0920 - I listen to your video and having little to no working knowledge of either MOA or Mil, I can say without hesitation I would rather hear you teach than comment on why people chose one or the other. Who gives a rats ass. Tach what you know so some of us can learn. Thank you.

[@paramounttactical]

I am teaching and you got a shit ton of important info here. What you’re wanting is everything YOU need/want in one video. That’s not possible. That’s why we offer formalized training, As I stated there’s mass confusion, delusion, and misconceptions that need to be undone or addressed before a learning process can even begin. There’s a million videos defining and explaining what milliradian is or minutes of angle are. Feel free to go watch them. WHY people choose specific gear or systems or think incorrectly about a topic and its practical application is VERY important. If 90% of the people think 2+2 is 9 how can you effectively teach mathematics? Who gives a rat ass? Well I do and since it’s my channel and my content that’s all that really matters.

[@jdj3806]

Maybe I chose the wrong wording to get my frustration voiced. I have heard you teach before and it was great information and as well a much less controversial topic, so with that said. Teach on. It is your channel.

[@paramounttactical]

@jdj3806 don’t you think it’s a real shame that any subject regarding firearms and ballistics is “controversial”? I realize more and more that this community is full of cult members grasping onto their own paradigms, no matter how incorrect they are and they can’t stand to have any of it challenged. If they don’t receive confirmation bias, they get emotional. It’s not my job to pander or to not be controversial. This isn’t religion. I’m not Kentucky Ballitics. I’m not here just to entertain and just grow the audience for sake of it. I’m here to grow the right audience that’s interested in the pursuit of knowledge. If people find facts and objective truth “controversial” this channel isn’t for them. -Gary

[@redrock425]

​@@paramounttactical I know where you're coming from, and after many years I came to the realisation that what you describe is people. Whichever walk of life you look into you find the same cross section of people, those that question, true believers and the majority that never even think about it! I don't try and convince anyone these days, I'll give my advice when asked but what they do with it is up to them. Thanks for taking the time to explain, there are plenty of us quietly listening and learning 😉

[@bghiggy]

Oh I can't wait to hear the old men start yapping about thinking in inches

[@doctormdds]

I'm 65. I'll never buy another MOA scope.

[@bghiggy]

@@doctormdds good for you! Glad you are on the correct team haha

[@McgSpook]

i knew this was coming....snake oil. That said i agree with 95% of this but he board is provocative. technically it is more accurate/precise, but we just know most people aren't capable of shooting that difference. maybe the better statement is its unusable precision by most shooters? At least we pointed out that f class and BR is a different world because the game is different. Thats totally true. Liking MIL because its easier is a legit reason to use it. That its a shared system so everyone is speaking same language is a legit reason. Most importantly its fast and less clutter on reticle which is very important to PRS/Hunter shooters. But is absolutely not true that MOA is not a more precise measurement. On number 6, you aren't changing fidelity of course, what you are doing is moving the center of that group so that more hits happen. Assuming you are 1 MOA capable, those bullets hit somewhere inside that 1 moa circle. so the more of that 1 moa circle covering the target the higher the likelihood of a hit. If you were shooting and missing (or grouping) left by .1 mil wouldn't you adjust? of course you would. Its the same thing on a very slightly more granular scale. I do think that modern turret/reticles make it a moot point personally but to each his own. MIL stays on my PRS rifles, MOA stays on my BR rifles. Whatever tool you use be familiar and proficient with it. MOA Mafia forever.

[@paramounttactical]

😂 Well as shooters how the system translates to performance is all that should matter. But most believe (and I know because I see the comments) that because it’s a finer measurement they can utilize it. When people say “MOA is more precise” they’re not referring to it being a smaller measurement they are directly saying, “I can move rounds with greater precision” and that’s what they believe, 🤷‍♂️

[@McgSpook]

an easy way to say it is group size will not be smaller,. group placement may be slightly more precise, but we cant shoot that difference so its not worth losing all the benefits of the easier to use MIL system.

[@McgSpook]

@@paramounttactical agreed. it all gets kind of muddled by shooter voodoo.

[@McgSpook]

@@paramounttactical ps,i love that this has made it to 3 videos hahahaha

[@bghiggy]

How can you guarantee that the 0.1 mil left wasn't due to your position or wind?

[@jerrymartin5100]

MOA is finer than mils

[@paramounttactical]

So that doesn’t translate to an increase in precision capabilities in reality. Clearly you didn’t watch the video.

[@jerrymartin5100]

@@paramounttactical I watched the entire video sir

[@paramounttactical]

@@jerrymartin5100 ok, then you know just because MOA is mathematically a finer increment it has no practical relevance on ballistic performance, precision, or ability to adjust impacts. Or you don’t… makes no difference to me. As they say, you can lead a horse to water. 🤷‍♂️

[@ronhendrick55]

I like and watch your gun videos, but you take too long to get to the needed information. I am at the 22:25 min. mark and I have not heard one helpful MILR scope tip yet.

[@paramounttactical]

Cool. Watch another channel then or learn to use fast forward. Literally everything I said was relevant and important so if you want to the cliff notes version of everything maybe PRECISION shooting isn’t for you. 🤷‍♂️

[@ronhendrick55]

@@paramounttactical You're right. I have already changed all my scopes to MILR FFP scopes. I was looking for a video to share with my friends to get them to switch to MILR.