• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Rifle Scopes SFP the way to go FFP old tech.

kiwiaug

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Jun 20, 2007
88
0
54
New Zealand
went in yesterday to look at the new sightron ffp 6-24 MOA, the salesman asked why i wanted and said that ffp old technology, and only sell ffp to military guys who normally use it. . Now days we have laser range finders and don't need ffp. when looking at the scope on 6X you could hardly see the recital until you zoomed it up. where the sfp was clear all the way.they sell sightrons and nightforce scopes there. he seems to have a good argument for the sfp scope.
now i'm thing the sfp scope will be better.

any thoughts..........
 
If you want to always shoot at max power, SFP is great.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 4
 
why do you need max power? you laser range find, adjust turret as needed and fire.i dough that i could use the 6x on ffp as the recital is so small.
 
Wind holds different at different powers 2x at 1/2 power. E.g. if your reticle us 1/2 mil at 24x it's 1 mil at 12x.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 4
 
For a hunting scope using a lrf, second focal plane is perfectly fine. Shot my WY mulie at 841 yds with this type of setup.
Not sure about Tac matches, as I have yet to shoot in one, but am getting setup to at present time.
Going to use a 260 and a Steiner scope.
 
That was my point, if you're on 6x, you probably don't need the reticle other than the crosshair.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 4
 
Technically the salesman is unintentionally correct. FFP is "older technology" and SFP is "newer technology". The first variable power scopes were FFP. SFP reticles were developed later to address the complaint the FFP reticle covered too much of the target and was difficult to pick in low light.
 
I use several sfp scopes on rifles for practical steel matches - specifically, Sightron SIII 6-24x50 LRMOA & Vortex Viper PST 6-24x50 EBR-1 MOA. Only time I cuss sfp is when setting up to shoot movers. One match organizer has kept his movers at pretty much the same speed & distance (~443yds) for the two years I've been shooting there, so it was easy to set the SIII on 9x to get the right lead using hashmarks on the reticle. But at the last match, he included a 6" square plate at the same distance that you had to engage before engaging the mover and sped them up a bunch. Throw in a little wind (about 2.5 MOA worth), using the Vortex instead of the SIII, and it got more complicated. I can sit down here and figure lead & wind out - pretty easy, with no stress, distractions, or time limits involved. But get on the rifle and start wondering whether to dial in the lead or use the reticle, and what to do about the wind....

A ffp scope doesn't solve all my issues - only practice solving practical problems in the field will help. I've got a couple of 1.5-6x24 ffp Weavers that I wish were 2nd fp, simply because having the reticle smaller at low, QC magnification settings is just backwards to what I need. The only other ffp scope I have is also a Weaver - a 5-15x50 tactical model with mil dot reticle & MOA turrets - that doesn't do much for me either, even though it's an otherwise very good scope, with very good glass and accurate & repeatable clicks.

What it boils down to for me is to use one type of scope on all my tactical rifles, and work with it until solutions in the field are intuitive. It's either that, or mentally flounder & miss at a match.
 
Both are great for certain reasons. For some rifles I go SFP only (hunting-lowlight scopes-smaller light scopes) then others the FFP can be a nice option like target shooting-matches with different targets at different ranges-and some LR huting. I have a few different rifles for special purposes. But that being said, my main carry rifle is a GAP 6.5 CM with a G2DMR. I feel I can do most anything with that scope.
 
I've had quite a few FFP scopes. Right now I'm running the Mark 6 3-18x44 w/ the TMR and before that I was running the G2DMR. Both can be used at low power. I'd think for hunting you'd WANT a thicker reticle to see it on the target. I shoot at 6-9 and 12 power all the time w/ the TMR at movers and muti distance targets. For me FFP is about wind holds and hold overs. I was shooting a SPF Vortex 6.5-20 on my trainer the other day. It's mil/moa so I though I'd just hold. Had it at 6.5x and it took me a second to figure out why I only needed 1 mil at 400 yards. I thought I was loading my 223 WAY to hot lol.

The doofus at the shop is... a doofus.


FFP mil/mil or ffp moa/moa is faster, and requires less thinking. Nothing changes, it all stays the same, you just set the mag where you want it, dial/hold and go.
 
If you shopped in New Zealand , all he was doing is selling what he has in store now , its that simple .
 
Depends on how heavily you rely on all the reticle tick marks. For known distance competition (benchrest, f class, etc) that requires high precision, 2nd plane is going to be better every time. A plain cross hair or target dot will be SFP for what should be obvious reasons. If you really want to dial up some random magnification and have the tick marks still work without thinking, you'll put up with the downsides of FFP. And they are downsides. What we really want is a reticle that looks like a SFP reticle but whose tick marks move with magnification, but as far as I know, that's not quite possible with today's technology.
 
If you shoot at multiple targets at multiple distances under time constraints, you need FFP.

If you shoot on square ranges at one known distance at a time, you don't need FFP.

If you never hold wind, you probably don't need FFP.

But if you dial the magnification down to shoot movers, and want to hold wind without doing math in your head, you need FFP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
We need a high quality Dual Plane Reticle.

A thin SFP main reticle and a FFP reticle with Windage & Holdover hashmarks. FFP reticle needs to be either slaved to the SFP reticle or independently adjustable so it can be cowitnessed to the SFP reticle.
 
This is one of those debates that never seems to be resolved. I think a lot of what drives one's preference is what he learned on in the first place. I learned on an SFP, and I've successfully engaged movers and multiple targets at unknown distances. Plus, for close range engagements (I've set up on actual operations as close as 35 yards), I can dial down my power and still have a usable reticle. If you prefer a FFP, that's fine with me too.

HRF
 
I'd think for hunting you'd WANT a thicker reticle to see it on the target.

Unfortunately, the hunting situation when you would benefit most from a heavy reticle, close range, is when FFP is thinnest, so it's kind if backwards in that application.
 
DFOOSKING - I can relate to that - hate those badgers! Very seldom get a shot at one, so really hate to screw it up when one does present itself. Sure get tired of bouncing over their burrows out in the field, no matter whether I'm driving a tractor, combine, or sprayer. They're almost enough to justify buying some serious NV or IR gear so I could whack 'em in the dark.
 
Unfortunately, this is typical of a lot of gun shops, where the person behind the counter thinks he knows more than he actually does.
 
We need a high quality Dual Plane Reticle.

A thin SFP main reticle and a FFP reticle with Windage & Holdover hashmarks. FFP reticle needs to be either slaved to the SFP reticle or independently adjustable so it can be cowitnessed to the SFP reticle.

That's actually pretty clever. Hadn't thought of that. Anyone know how practical this is or if it's been done?
 
If you have to ask an internet forum whether or not you need an ffp scope, then you do not need an ffp scope.
 
That's actually pretty clever. Hadn't thought of that. Anyone know how practical this is or if it's been done?

Conceptually Shepard Scopes has had a dual plane reticle, though execution left much to be desired.

There was a thread on here about a dual plane reticle that went on for a while but I don't know what's happened with it. I think USO has/had one in a low power variable. Nothing with a 20X magnification.
 
Conceptually Shepard Scopes has had a dual plane reticle, though execution left much to be desired.

There was a thread on here about a dual plane reticle that went on for a while but I don't know what's happened with it. I think USO has/had one in a low power variable. Nothing with a 20X magnification.

My knowledge of scope internals is fairly superficial, but I wonder if it's not a matter of tolerances in keeping the two reticles lined up well enough.
 
Unfortunately, the hunting situation when you would benefit most from a heavy reticle, close range, is when FFP is thinnest, so it's kind if backwards in that application.

Unless your quarry is on the small side. Then the thicker SFP reticle has the potential to obscure the target. In which case a thinner FFP reticle would be more appropriate. That's not always the case, it depends on the specific reticle and the size and distance of the animal obviously but I have run into this problem many times. It has taught me that for small moving targets, FFP is what works best for me regardless of magnification.
 
we i was wanting the FFP for long range shooting and normally the power is kept up around 20-24 so i'll go with the FFP.
seem to have made a good topic.

cheers Kiwiaug.
 
I think we actually need a Heads Up Display reticle, which uses laser-projected light to place a "death dot" on the precise bullet impact point, automatically taking into consideration all physical and ballistic factors. In fact, it needs to be linked to an auto trigger with integrated tracking and ID as well. And it needs to have HUGE biceps and say cool shit like "I'll be Back."

It's not that far away, sadly.

Auto-Aim Sniper Rifle

:rolleyes:
 
I think combined FFP and SFP is the wave of the future. It allows the primary crosshairs to stay the same size, but allows the stadia lines to adjust for ranging, holdover, and windage hold. It takes some precise engineering to make it work so expect they will be spendy.
 
SFP the way to go FFP old tech.

I think combined FFP and SFP is the wave of the future. It allows the primary crosshairs to stay the same size, but allows the stadia lines to adjust for ranging, holdover, and windage hold. It takes some precise engineering to make it work so expect they will be spendy.
I think that scope would need Berillium Zantium coatings to make it work properly. LOL!
 
Actually the perfect solution would be Zoomies with two adjustable reticules. Your right eye would have a FFP reticule, and your left eye would have an SFP reticule. Just swap shoulders to choose the right reticule for you.....
 
Actually the perfect solution would be Zoomies with two adjustable reticules. Your right eye would have a FFP reticule, and your left eye would have an SFP reticule. Just swap shoulders to choose the right reticule for you.....

Yep, read on here that Zoomies are all the rage, what with the new military models they're working on. They even have a model that fits the GPNVG goggles, pretty cool. Not sure when the reticle models come out, but I'm sure the engineers at Zoomies have it covered.
 
Dfoosking, did you say to yourself, "badgers? we don' need no steenkin' badgers" before you took the shot?

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

I have a Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x32 FFP, like it a lot.

Mark H.
 
This is one of those debates that never seems to be resolved. I think a lot of what drives one's preference is what he learned on in the first place. I learned on an SFP, and I've successfully engaged movers and multiple targets at unknown distances. Plus, for close range engagements (I've set up on actual operations as close as 35 yards), I can dial down my power and still have a usable reticle. If you prefer a FFP, that's fine with me too.

HRF

I agree, same kinda goes with MOA vs MIL..

Also, my eyesight is good so a FFP at 4 power isn't as bad as it might be for others.