For tactical type matches, how important is it to have a front focal plane scope?
What do you have and why did you choose it?
Thanks.
What do you have and why did you choose it?
Thanks.
Rifle Scopes Do I Need a FFP Scope?
- Thread starter amp
- Start date
I started with a SFP Leupold Mk4 3.5-10x40mm, it was good enough but then switched to a SFP Nightforce NXS 3.5-15x50mm, which was better. The reticle matched the turrets at 15x and worked fine for most of the shooting I was doing at local matches. I wouldn't say you need FFP but I have to admit, it is nice and takes some of the fudge factor out of things. If you dial down the magnification your not messing up your reticle subtensions. I'm now running a US Optics FFP and couldn't be happier. FFP is nice because you can hold elevation and wind at any magnification.
+1 FFP lets you hold at any magnification and not have to worry if you are on the typical 10x or what ever the scope is made to be used for hold over. Also in tactical matches holding over is sometimes needed as its faster then dialing your turrets.
I just recently made the switch and FFP, to me, is the only way to go. U never have to check your magnification or worry about math. Takes out the potential for error. If I wasn't running FFP I'd probably go to a fixed power. I don want to have to think on the fly.
After you make the switch you'll never go back. Matches are moving away from just belly shooting. I'm rarely on max magnification unless it's a KYL or TYL.
I can't find one reason NOT to get FFP.
I can't find one reason NOT to get FFP.
Because they are in such high demand, generally, they tend to run pricier. Also, if you have a very wide magnification range, the hairs can become noticeably thicker on the high end, creating the illusion of precision loss. They are especially useful with Horus/MSR type reticles which were specifically designed to make turret adjustments near null and void. The tactical guys these days tend to go pure holdover, and treat it as the primary method of correction. If that's how you want to go, then an FFP reticle is ideal. If not, you can still opt for a TMR/Mil-Dot/etc based reticle, find your max and mid settings where the power level matches the subtension properly (I have a Leupold Mk4 SFP 8.5-25x50, and I found its' half-power is actually at 10x, not 12.5x) and work that way. It's up to you. Spend some more money, learn to range and adjust elevation one way, or, Save some money, do it a little slower, and learn to do it the old-fashioned way. Note, you should learn both methods regardless.
Under pressure, with a SFP scope, sooner or later your not gonna be at the proper magnification and blow a shot cause of it. I have reasonable attention to detail, however, I like not having to make sure/confirm every time I want to spot a correction to be on the right power. Not absolutely necessary, but nice to have. If on a budget, get a top notch fixed power and save some $$$ and get great glass too.
Two of the best shooters I know run NF SFP scopes and they apparently have no problems given how well they place. But these guys have their heads screwed on straight. For the rest of us, that make mistakes, FFP helps us by removing one source of error.
Amp, some excellent advice has been given, in my case I started shooting matches with a fixed power scope. I switched to a sfp ior 4-14x50. The reticle works for me and I like the glass, its a lower magnification scope and for the most part it stays at 14x, shooting at multiple targets at different distances, I just use the reticle for my windage and elevation calls. If the scope was a higher magnification say 5-20, I would have opted for ffp, it does take the human variable out if the equation.
Thanks guys, I appreciate the advice. I think I'm going with the Vortex PST ffp--if I can find one.
Few other notes: sfp will always look and be more precise, not much more but a little. Anything you can do with a FDP can be done with a sfp but a bit slower. I think that past 300-400 yds, your taking at least 3-5 seconds off of your total setup time. Given you have a usable reticle. The reticle is the single most important thing to a FFP IMHO. A Christmas tree reticle is my personal favorite. I find my self dialing 90% on my nxs's with NP-R1 and holding 99% of the time with my HDMR's. I like both for their differences. My FFP with regular mil dot reticle don't work as well for me for speed/accuracy. Speed is the only benefit I see for FFP. If not then I would dial everything and be about perfect. But holding with my reticle/ffp scope ling range hits are still just as possible. I say that going with a ffp of the bat wouldn't be a bad idea at all. Good luck.
Hmmmm..... Meaning what, exactly?
You don't need FFP unless you are engaging multiple targets at multiple distances under time constraints. Some of the bigger matches will have a stage or two requiring that skill, but even then you don't need FFP unless you intend to dial magnification in the process of engaging those targets.
Or unless you simply want to shoot the stage at lower than maximum power. 20X, 25X, etc can be slow to use on mid-range targets. If you hold for wind, that goes for all the stages, even those with a single target.
I agree with the above for tactial type matches I would opt for FFP, it is handier.
For shooting at known distances, where calculation on the fly is not neccesary its the same thing so as long as you are in higher magnification.
For using the scope at lower magnification SFP is better for me, because FFP gets too thin and small and hard to see...
I have both and see pros and cons on both types. There is no perfect one.
For shooting at known distances, where calculation on the fly is not neccesary its the same thing so as long as you are in higher magnification.
For using the scope at lower magnification SFP is better for me, because FFP gets too thin and small and hard to see...
I have both and see pros and cons on both types. There is no perfect one.
You can use a lower than maximum power with a SFP scope, you just have to remember the multiplication factor for the power you are using and do the conversion in your head. 25x, even 20x can be downright impossible to use on long range targets. Where you need 25x is on very, very small targets at short ranges, in which case you can dial wind or hold it because there isn't much of it. I shot a SFP NF on 15x for three years in competition. Never took it off of 15x. Shot 100 yard movers at 15x. Never needed more magnification on the long range shots.
If the choice is between a good SFP scope and a marginal FFP scope I would get the better scope every time.
Not nearly as experienced with FFP as some of the posters here but... for the square range I prefer SFP with 1/4moa or 1/8moa turrets. I have had more than one occasion where mil turrets did not provide sufficient granularity to get me where I needed to go. And for measurements that small at long ranges I can't hold off as precisely as a 1/4 or 1/8 moa adjustment. And the cross hairs remain smaller than a FFP at several hundred yards. This is when shooting for an x-ring. For every other application I prefer FFP and definitely zero stops. For larger elevation changes mil turrets require fewer clicks/revolutions for adjustments and shooting steel or deer doesn't require microscopic precision. But it may require shooting at a moving target and quick ranging. For reasons stated above a FFP plane optic offers quick adjustments that don't require your eye leaving the target to see what your power setting is, to employ a range finder, or (if you have a zero stop) to figure out where you are currently dialed. If I had to have only one it would be FFP.
Last edited:
Yes, that is true. Though one could attach that caveat in describing nearly any situation and argue FFP reticles really aren't useful for anything ever--just use a multiplication factor.
Of course the whole idea is to not have to use a multiplication factor in your head when you've got a bunch of other things you're thinking about and trying to get right in a high pressure situation. Personally I'll go through many stages in a match or long range Bambi kills without even knowing what power the scope is on. I simply crank the scope to "the right power for the situation" and shoot. Having to look at and see what power it's on so I could then come up with a multiplication factor would add many non-value added steps to my shooting.
Everybody has their own preferences, there's nothing wrong with that. I also like to use high power for long range shots when I can for several reasons--target ID is sometimes important, I can see mirage better (to help in wind judging), and when shooting a little pea shooter the higher power helps is spotting misses. But again, those are the reasons I chose what I do, not everybody else will have the same preferences.
Jon A, that makes sense to me.
It used to be, in the old days, that to get a FFP scope would cost about a grand more than a SFP scope. The price difference was huge. Then Bushnell came along and priced their DMR and ERS within reach of the better quality SFP scopes. Now you can get a Bushnell FFP for about the same price as a NF SFP or Nightforce F1 FFP (the previous price leader in its class). So the question is no longer one of price, and whether the FFP is worth paying so much more for, but now it's for what purpose do you use a scope?
It used to be, in the old days, that to get a FFP scope would cost about a grand more than a SFP scope. The price difference was huge. Then Bushnell came along and priced their DMR and ERS within reach of the better quality SFP scopes. Now you can get a Bushnell FFP for about the same price as a NF SFP or Nightforce F1 FFP (the previous price leader in its class). So the question is no longer one of price, and whether the FFP is worth paying so much more for, but now it's for what purpose do you use a scope?
Very true. Bushnell, SWFA, Vortex, even Weaver have put quality FFP scopes within reach of many they weren't even just a few short years ago. Buying a S&B simply wasn't/isn't in the cards for many. Now we have so many good choices....
We also have very good quality rings to go with the scopes ,Thanks Jon.
+1 for FFP, it just simplifies things and leaves less room for error. Everyone else's input/info here on this thread is good so read and decide. If you can afford the model you have in mind in FFP, I'm willing to bet you won't be disappointed in slightest.
I dig FFP but dont know that I cant live without it. Wish there were more FFP options.
Similar threads
