Re: FFP for F-Class?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Defib</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey All,
I'm trying to decide between FFP and SFP, and was leaning toward a FFP (in the 5-25x range) because the scopes' duties will be split between tactical, F-Class and benchrest, and hunting. My question is, would I be able to shoot F-Class and benchrest successfully with a FFP?
Thanks </div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">71firebird400</span></span> said: <span style="font-style: italic">"Depends how competitive you want to be and the specifics of the reticle"</span>. <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">buffybuster</span></span> said: <span style="font-style: italic">"Depending on where your priorities are, there's going to be compromises made; more compromises in one area for less compromises in another."</span> Both are very true. If you're looking for <span style="font-style: italic">"the best"</span> for "tactical", F-Class, and benchrest <span style="font-style: italic">within a single scope</span> it doesn't exist, but various FFP and SFP scopes do exist that can and do work quite well in multiple shooting activities. As long as your looking at one of the upper-mid range to high end optics companies the quality of adjustment tracking (accuracy & repeatability), optical quality, and overall "quality" should be at a level that will more than get the job done.
Reticle design, subtension, and magnification range also play a large part in how well the scope will work for each of the shooting activities you mentioned, and should be one of the main considerations in deciding which scope you think will work best for you. For instance, "tactical" matches are time-driven and the focus is more on even hitting target rather than shooting small groups on 1/2 MOA or smaller targets. Because tactical match targets are typically much larger than F-Class and benchrest and you need to engage them on-the-fly a FFP reticle is favored by most over a SFP. Just remember that the shooter who knows his equipment and how to shoot can make either work well for a given activity.
Whether FFP or SFP, a reticle with thicker lines is faster to pick-up - especially in brush and/or low light. And as mentioned hunting is also time-driven. Fine reticles in FFP scopes can work, but at lower powers desirable for a wide FOV they can be "lost" easily in brush and low light.
For F-Class and Benchrest where the distances are known FFP isn't critical, and a reticle with thinner lines is more favorable over the ability to pick-up the reticle quickly since the shooting is typically less time-sensitive. Image quality and a fine reticle are more conducive to the ability to more-exactly position the reticle on the target than a thicker reticle that obscures the target. Because there are many more fine reticles in SFP than in FFP, a SFP reticle is almost always better than a FFP reticle for F-Class and Benchrest, especially for "serious" competition.
On the other hand, for casual benchshooting and F-Open and F-T/R competition a FFP scope is fine. Top shelf image quality and a very fine reticle for better aiming precision are very welcome, but not absolutely critical since the targets are pulled and marked to show the POI after each shot (its' still better to be able to aim as precisely as possible though). I have a PMII 5-25X[56mm] 0.1 MIL with Gen 2 XR reticle mounted on my 22" barrel Tac Ops X-Ray 51 .308 tactical rifle, and shooting FGMM 175s' in mid-range F-Class against long-barreled rifles in .260, 243, 6mm, and 6.5x47Ls' shooting pet handloads I've finished just behind the two 6.5x47Ls' so it can definitely be done.
<span style="font-weight: bold">F-Class: (2x25, Perfect score = 500/50X)</span>
Steve R. 240-08 248-10 488-18 - 6.5x47L
Mark E. 247-10 238-07 485-17 - 6.5-47L
Keith (ME) 243-07 241-08 484-15 - .308
Mark I. 241-08 239-08 480-16 - 6mm
Randall R. 240-04 239-07 479-11
Charles R. 234-05 241-06 475-11
Cameron W. 234-04 238-05 472-09
Joe C. 234-01 232-08 466-09
Conner 226-04 239-10 465-14
Rich 232-06 231-08 463-08 - .308
Scott G. 234-01 229-03 463-04 - .308
Yarish 225-02 214-01 439-03
Keith
