Hi everyone. New member long time shooter. I have been shooting all types of guns since I was 5. I come from a very pro gun family. My dad was a competitive long range shooter for years. He was even an alternate for the Palma team though he never made the team. I live in Indiana where 1000+ ranges are hard to come by so I have always shot at under 250yards but over the past few years I have been coyote hunting and had some opportunities to take 400+ yard shots and am instantly in love with longer range shooting. I have bought a Remington 700 sps 308 its very accurate. I have a weaver tactical scope on it that is sfp. I like it ok but personally I think 308 is only for paper at 1000 yards. So I bought a remington 700 5r 300wm 26". I am shopping for.a scope. I enjoy the ruggedness and the adaptive useability of tactical scopes and systems but my dad very much laughs at anything "tactical". He actually thumbs his nose at shooting from bags at all(your not a shooter your a machine operator) also doesn't think you need high power scopes if a scope at all but that's not my style. His advice is to get the finest crosshair scope I can find 2nd focal plane. The logic is the crosshairs on a ffp get larger at higher magnification and become too large to shoot precisely at very distant ranges. Now my hatred for thick crosshairs (cheap scopes) has this logic making sense to me and has me staying away from ftp scopes on purpose. But it seems EVERYONE on this site and many others is about ffp or nothing. Given the amount of professional shooters and the great amount of knowledge on this site could anyone explain why ffp is a must? I figure thousands of knowledgeable guys can't be wrong. I understand the clicks always match the graduations on the recticle. that is pretty cool but if the crosshairs cover up the 8" bullseye at 1000 yards what's the point? I like hold over recticles but when does ffp really help? Given my limited experience and knowledge I feel like I'm missing some advantages. Any reply will be greatly respected and considered. Thanks guys!
Rifle Scopes ffp bad for 1000+
- Thread starter Holeshot
- Start date
I prefer SPF for most applications because the reticle gets too small at low mag for me, on a lot of scopes, and the opposite at higher mags. Also, if I have time to mil range, and it's far enough away that I need to range, then I have time (a whole two seconds) to adjust to the proper magnification. For those reasons, I prefer SPF for my applications.
Holeshot,
Welcome to the hide. The reticle thickness of some FFP scopes will not cover an 8" bull. The SWFA SS 5-20x50 is only 0.05 mils thick. It would cover 1.8" at 1000 yards. Hope this helps.
Tim
Welcome to the hide. The reticle thickness of some FFP scopes will not cover an 8" bull. The SWFA SS 5-20x50 is only 0.05 mils thick. It would cover 1.8" at 1000 yards. Hope this helps.
Tim
I don't. While FFp is pretty awesome I still use many SFP scopes myself. For 90% of the shooting I do, SFP is perfect. I have time to adjust mag to get correct ranging and holdovers. Also I don't have to worry about the reticle being too small at lower mag. Plus SFP scopes are usually cheaper.
For my uber-tacticool rifle I use a FFP because all I do with it is shoot steel at known and unknow distance, and it is just cool.
Each one, SFP and FFP, has it's place. It's all about what works for you.
FFP really is mainly useful for shooting in dynamic situations where you will be razing and lowering magnification and engaging targets at various unknown distances and using hold-overs and hold-unders. For strict dope dialing at long range known distances, SFP has the advantage, of course, of a relitively thinner reticle (and relatively fatter at the low end).
In a perfect world, a scope could be designed with FFP reticle that maintained constant subtentions across all magnifications, but the reticle stayed proportionately at the same thickness at all magnifications. Hmm... Maybe I'm on to something... You heard it here first folks!
In a perfect world, a scope could be designed with FFP reticle that maintained constant subtentions across all magnifications, but the reticle stayed proportionately at the same thickness at all magnifications. Hmm... Maybe I'm on to something... You heard it here first folks!
The reticle on the FFP does not get larger. It covers the same space on the target at 4x as it does 16x (or whatever zoom range your looking at). In real life the SFP reticle gets smaller as you zoom in. I believe each style has its uses. People who like to group shoot will prefer SFP because they like the fact that as you zoom in the reticle gets finer (in relation to the target). Most of this site is tactical shooters or hunters and if we miss the exact center of the bull by 1 inch because out crosshair is .005 mil thick the animal is still dead, or the steel is still ringing.
Thanks for the responses guys! Tim I think you are right about the recticle specs being what I am most concerned with. I don't have access to many high end optics to compare and physically look through so I'm left with research and asking questions to sway my purchase. For me $2000 is a lot and I can't afford to buy one on a whim and wish I had the other. Thanks to all the responses and understanding question. With my lack of knowledge of this discipline its hard to know what to care about intill I actually get into it. Just trying to save myself some costly mistakes. I am having a blast trying to figure it all out and hope to have even more fun putting it into practice! Again thanks to everyone. No one around here(indiana) knows much about quality optics.
Where are you in indiana. I have quite a few quality FFP, and SFP scopes that you can play with to help speed up your learning curve.
Pretty simple.
If you are going to be using the reticle for holdovers and quick adjustments on the fly then you need a FFP.
If you are shooting at static targets and either like to adjust via your turrets or don't want a busier reticle in the way, get a SFP.
If you are going to be using the reticle for holdovers and quick adjustments on the fly then you need a FFP.
If you are shooting at static targets and either like to adjust via your turrets or don't want a busier reticle in the way, get a SFP.
Easier yet....get a FFP. Always.
Holeshot,
There is a gentleman from your state named LoneWolfUSMC. He has a series of videos called "Mail Call Mondays" on YouTube. I believe you will find them very helpful. The videos are approximately 30minutes long. He covers equipment including scopes. I believe that there are several videos addressing FFP vs SFP, magnification range, etc.. The videos are very well done. By the way, he is also a hide member.
Tim
There is a gentleman from your state named LoneWolfUSMC. He has a series of videos called "Mail Call Mondays" on YouTube. I believe you will find them very helpful. The videos are approximately 30minutes long. He covers equipment including scopes. I believe that there are several videos addressing FFP vs SFP, magnification range, etc.. The videos are very well done. By the way, he is also a hide member.
Tim
It's not easy to make a reticle that works well over a 5x (or more) magnification ratio.
Several I've used that have stadia that are just right at 20x + are the G2DMR and the P4F.
The MSR in my Steiner 5-25 is a bit thick.
The MSR-K (Kahles version, name is not official) with floating center dot is an improvement.
Regardless, I'll never buy a scope with more than 10 power that is not FFP.
The value of selecting a magnification based on circumstances like mirage, movement of the target, or whatever, and having the reticle subtend correctly is far greater than any minute precision lost because the reticle covers a bit too much of the target.
Joe
Several I've used that have stadia that are just right at 20x + are the G2DMR and the P4F.
The MSR in my Steiner 5-25 is a bit thick.
The MSR-K (Kahles version, name is not official) with floating center dot is an improvement.
Regardless, I'll never buy a scope with more than 10 power that is not FFP.
The value of selecting a magnification based on circumstances like mirage, movement of the target, or whatever, and having the reticle subtend correctly is far greater than any minute precision lost because the reticle covers a bit too much of the target.
Joe
Im in richmond, so if you want to travel that far drop me a line.
Sending a pm. Thanks!
FFP helps if you hold over, as no matter what the power dialed up, the graduations are the same measurement.
I ended up with a Vortex Viper PST 6-24x FFP scope. It worked well out to 1200 yards on my .308. And with mount and rings, in the $1000 range.
I ended up with a Vortex Viper PST 6-24x FFP scope. It worked well out to 1200 yards on my .308. And with mount and rings, in the $1000 range.
Each one has pluses and minuses depending on the intended use and the magnification range of the scope. I think people who say that only X is good are thinking narrowly of their own shooting uses and not of all possible uses. If you want to have accurate holdovers or ranging at various magnifications, FFP is the way to go. If you want a really fine reticle that is always fine relative to the image, SFP is probably the way to go.* I think there's a reason that FFP dominates high-end tactical scopes and SFP dominates high-end competition scopes and most hunting scopes as well. Determine your uses and preferences and buy accordingly.
(*I don't need to hear one more time that FFP is always the same size relative to the target, I've heard it a million times, and anyone who has a basic understanding of FFP is well aware of this.)
(*I don't need to hear one more time that FFP is always the same size relative to the target, I've heard it a million times, and anyone who has a basic understanding of FFP is well aware of this.)
Similar threads
Rifle Scopes Help me decide which Nightforce scope I want.
