Rifle Scopes Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

[Jdpalm3]

Ok, so I'm new to the mil dot, but I like it and i will be using it on my new 700. Im looking at scopes but cannot decide if the FFP is worth it. Many of the scopes I have found that are in my range are SFP. (i.e. Bushnell 4200 tac/Falcon Menace FFP) Its really between these 2 scopes. Im just wondering if I should limit myself to a FFP scope or not. If I go SFP, what adjustments will I have to make to use it effectively.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

Depends on what kind of shooting you will be doing.

For punching paper, where you'll dial your elevations and perhaps your windage, a second focal plane scope is fine.

If you're going to shoot tactical rifle competitions which involve moving targets under various conditions, and multiple target engagements at various distances with time limitations, so you won't have time to dial elevation changes between targets, a first focal plane scope is a distinct advantage.

You can use a FFP reticle for wind holds, moving target leads, holdovers and holdunders, at <span style="font-weight: bold">any</span> magnification you choose. With a SFP scope, you cannot - the reticle marks are accurate at only one magnification.

 

[Jdpalm3]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

is there a way to correct for that with the SFP so that it will be accurate again at any magnification?

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Palmer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there a way to correct for that with the SFP so that it will be accurate again at any magnification?</div></div>

You can map your reticle so you know what the values are at different powers, usually we see it with scopes like the NF where people get the 22X, and they map out the reticle at 5X and 11X so they know what the values are, for instance on an MLR reticle from NF, you can use the .5 Mil Hash mark on 11X as 1 Mil, then the 1 Mil hash will be 2 mils, etc...

its easy if you take the time to do it, takes preparation to know what you are looking at and then you need to mark your scope and log it.

But it can be done, I wouldnt try to map every power setting, but usually you can half and quarter things.

 

[dmg308]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Palmer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there a way to correct for that with the SFP so that it will be accurate again at any magnification?</div></div>

You can map your reticle so you know what the values are at different powers, usually we see it with scopes like the NF where people get the 22X, and they map out the reticle at 5X and 11X so they know what the values are, for instance on an MLR reticle from NF, you can use the .5 Mil Hash mark on 11X as 1 Mil, then the 1 Mil hash will be 2 mils, etc...

its easy if you take the time to do it, takes preparation to know what you are looking at and then you need to mark your scope and log it.

But it can be done, I wouldnt try to map every power setting, but usually you can half and quarter things. </div></div>

This would make a kick ass how to sticky thread on how to map your non ffp scope.

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dmg308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

This would make a kick ass how to sticky thread on how to map your non ffp scope.


</div></div>

Mapping it is one thing; using the resulting table under stress in the field is another.

 

[dmg308]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

I hear ya I'm ffp all the way but alot are'nt.I figured it may cut down on these threads.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

it's not perfect but plenty of people do it with verying degrees of success, usually due to what reticle they picked. But turning a scope to 11x and knowing the first hash mark is 1 mil isn't rocket science. If your prone to stress practice more with it turned down, it's only a training issue. No tables necessary.

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

So if you want to limit yourself to two settings then for sure it is easy. Hardly takes a sticky thread how-to to accomplish that.

 

[dmg308]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

What I was suggesting is one on how to verify your reticle's accuracy at a given magnification.All SFP scopes have a magnification that the reticle is set for but they don't always line up exactly with the mag numbers on the power ring.

 

[JLM]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dmg308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I was suggesting is one on how to verify your reticle's accuracy at a given magnification.All SFP scopes have a magnification that the reticle is set for but they don't always line up exactly with the mag numbers on the power ring. </div></div>

That's a good point. Take the Zeiss Rapid-Z reticle as an example or another like the Burris Ballistic Plex.

Zeiss has a little program on their website (its lifted from Exbal I believe) where you can 'calibrate' to the load you are going to be shooting to get the ranging marks to work. So, I tried the program on a whim and it suggested that I set the power ring to 8.3 (for a 9x scope) to get accurate ranging. Which led me to the inevitable question: how the hell do you set a power ring to 8.3 with any degree of repeatability? That might get you to 'minute of deer' depending upon the range but.

I'm just going to spring for a FFP scope at some point and be done with it. I like the idea of being able to hold for wind at any magnification for one thing.

 

[MAX100]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

I don't like a FFP scope because the reticle is real small on low power and real large on high power. For ranging a SFP scope can be used like a fixed power scope. They are usually setup on 10x or 12x power which is a good all around magnification. You can make more accurate hits with a SFP scope because of the reticle staying the same size.


GC

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAX100</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't like a FFP scope because the reticle is real small on low power and real large on high power. For ranging a SFP scope can be used like a fixed power scope. They are usually setup on 10x or 12x power which is a good all around magnification. You can make more accurate hits with a SFP scope because of the reticle staying the same size.


GC

</div></div>

Not true, "most' SFP scopes set the power to valid at highest power, which is the dilemma for most, as the it's too much power, so they run into problems when you (they) turn it down.

And you can't be more accurate if the reticle is only accurate on one power... they are also more prone to shift issues.

Being valid on all powers, and in perfect relationship too the target is much better, no matter who you are, because you as an individual prefer a SFP doesn't make it better by any stretch of the imagination, especially for tactical applications, maybe with a target shooting you can get away with being set on a fixed power, but in any kind of dynamic situation, a FFP reigns supreme for the very fact its always right.

Holds, leads, etc, using the reticle will only work at one power and I have seen it where the magnification ring was not properly calibrated so it was actually never correct. With a SFP you are smart to map the reticle to test it, a FFP doesnt have this problem unless the manufacturer puts the wrong reticle in there.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I was suggesting is one on how to verify your reticle's accuracy at a given magnification.All SFP scopes have a magnification that the reticle is set for but they don't always line up exactly with the mag numbers on the power ring.</div></div>

See:

Optically Checking Rifle Scopes

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Palmer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Many of the scopes I have found that are in my range are SFP. (i.e. Bushnell 4200 tac/Falcon Menace FFP) Its really between these 2 scopes. </div></div>

Why do you list the Falcon Menace as an example of an SFP scope?

If that's your price range, set aside the SFP/FFP issue and take a look at what unit the turrets are setup in. The Falcon gives you Mil based turrets to match with your Mil based reticle. AFAIK they're pretty much the only option for such a setup in that price range (at the moment.) The fact that it's also FFP is icing.

 

[MAX100]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

Just about all of the scopes in the US are SFP scopes. I don't know how we have managed thus far with such inferior scopes. The majority prefer SFP scopes.

I like my MK4 Leupold SFP scope. I think I will keep it.


GC

 

[matchking]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAX100</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The majority prefer SFP scopes. </div></div>

What majority? Majority of bench shooters-yes? I would think anyone that needs to use holdovers, shoots movers, etc. would prefer a FFP. Many deal with a SFP because that is what they have, not what they prefer.

 

[dmg308]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAX100</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just about all of the scopes in the US are SFP scopes. I don't know how we have managed thus far with such inferior scopes. The majority prefer SFP scopes.

I like my MK4 Leupold SFP scope. I think I will keep it.


GC </div></div>

We've held on to the Imperial measurement systm as well when metric is better in every way.

 

[dmg308]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I was suggesting is one on how to verify your reticle's accuracy at a given magnification.All SFP scopes have a magnification that the reticle is set for but they don't always line up exactly with the mag numbers on the power ring.</div></div>

See:

Optically Checking Rifle Scopes
</div></div>

Thats what I was getting at ...Lindy great as always thx!

 

[learjet]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

bit of a story... i was out at Badlands takin the basic precision rifle course. ive used only FFP and fixed mag scopes on my LR rifles...please understand i believe BOTH have there place, depending on what an indivdual wants. anyways, ive got a 10x ss on my rifle, my partner on the line has an awful nice 8-32 loopy. we both qualified, and began workin on mil holdovers. i got my dope and fired mil holdovers w the SS, np. when we began to work on his mil holdovers, we missed the first shot at 400. hmmm...scratched my head...thought about it, fired again...miss..hmm..trace goin way high..hmm...wierd..back to 100yd, his rifle hits POA fine. wtf.. rich sees us scratchin our heads in disbelief, and chews my butt for not checkin his magnification setting. yep, it was set off whatever mag the mildots are accurate at. my mistake, but i dont, and never will use a RFP scope for LR, UKD. they r fine, till ya get bz, then u better know ur gear. RFP has its place, but its not in my house hehe

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAX100</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just about all of the scopes in the US are SFP scopes. I don't know how we have managed thus far with such inferior scopes. The majority prefer SFP scopes.

I like my MK4 Leupold SFP scope. I think I will keep it.


GC </div></div>

Are you a statistician for the United States or something?

The majority and their preferences are of no interest to me nor many others here.

I've got a 4.5x14x50 M1 sitting here and for the life of me cannot find a use for it. Not a real Mk 4, not FFP, knobs don't match the reticle, reticle only accurate on one power setting... though like you, the masses seem to have embraced it.

Whatever.

 

[MAX100]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

Sorry I am not going to drink the cool aide the FFP scope group are selling.


GC

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

CG,
You've been asleep for a while the tactical community has been moving further and further away from SFP scopes for several years. Wake up and smell the new millenium.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAX100</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just about all of the scopes in the US are SFP scopes. I don't know how we have managed thus far with such inferior scopes. The majority prefer SFP scopes.

I like my MK4 Leupold SFP scope. I think I will keep it.
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MAX100</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry I am not going to drink the cool aide the FFP scope group are selling.

</div></div>

Clearly you made your decision based on careful and rational thought as well as analysis of your extensive experience. The rest of us just do whatever JuJu the monkey-boy whispers in our ear while we sleep.

There are absolute edicts, and there are universal edicts, but nothing goes with kool-aid better than a absolute universal edict.

 

[MAX100]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've got a 4.5x14x50 M1 sitting here and for the life of me cannot find a use for it. Not a real Mk 4, not FFP, knobs don't match the reticle, reticle only accurate on one power setting... though like you, the masses seem to have embraced it.</div></div>

Put it up for sale for a decent price. It will be snapped up in a day or two. They are well liked, for some reason.


GC

 

[Lindy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We've held on to the Imperial measurement systm as well when metric is better in every way.</div></div>

Begin standard screed:

There is nothing "metric" about mils. Both milliradians and MOA are measurements of angle which have <span style="font-weight: bold">nothing</span> whatsoever to do with any system of linear measure.

There are two times Pi radians in a circle, and a milliradian is simply one-thousands of a radian. One milliradian is an angle which subtends an arc whose length is 1/1000th of the distance from the vertex.

In other words, one milliradian subtends an arc whose length is:

1 yard at 1000 yards.
1 meter at 1000 meters.
1 mile at 1000 miles.
1 league at 1000 leagues.
1 fathom at 1000 fathoms.
1 inch at 1000 inches.
1 foot at 1000 feet.
1 lightyear at 1000 lightyears.
1 attoparsec at 1000 attoparsecs.
3.6 inches at 3600 inches (100 yards).

Claiming that there is something "metric" about milliradians is just a demonstration of innumeracy.

It has nothing to do with any English or Metric system of linear measure.

For more on the mildot reticle, see:

<http://www.excaliburenterprises.com/scopes/mil-dot.html>

It makes life easier to have a scope which adjusts in the same system the reticle is graduated in - whether that's MOA, IPHY, or mils is a matter of taste and practice.

And, if you want to know how to calculate how much to hold over or under, see:
Calculating Holdovers and Holdunders

/end standard screed

Man, I'm glad I have that stored in a file so I don't have to keep re-writing it!

 

[matchking]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Man, I'm glad I have that stored in a file so I don't have to keep re-writing it!

</div></div>

Smart move. Your fingers should thank you.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We've held on to the Imperial measurement systm as well when metric is better in every way.</div></div>

Begin standard screed...

</div></div>

Lindy, this time I don't think the statement was necessarily meant to imply that Mil's based scopes are metric, he was just giving an alternate example of how just because something is prevalent in our society doesn't make it better than the alternative. Substitute 'VHS' and 'BETA' for 'Imperial measurement system' and 'metric'...

 

[Lindy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

You might be right, Ratbert, but it bears repeating.

 

[ykrvak]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

Lindy, When I first saw your standard MIL dissertation I thought to myself, "He's said this sooooo many times. I can't believe he's going to have to type this all over again." Thank you for saying it and thank you also for making it easier on yourself.

 

[dmg308]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We've held on to the Imperial measurement systm as well when metric is better in every way.</div></div>

Begin standard screed...

</div></div>

Lindy, this time I don't think the statement was necessarily meant to imply that Mil's based scopes are metric, he was just giving an alternate example of how just because something is prevalent in our society doesn't make it better than the alternative. Substitute 'VHS' and 'BETA' for 'Imperial measurement system' and 'metric'...



</div></div>

That is correct I've read Lindy's stuff to many times to ever I mean EVER confuse mils with metric now thank you sir may I please have another

 

[Scimitar]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

After learning the difference and going to FFP scopes, I'll never
make the mistake of going back. I don't have any scopes that
I just use for hunting or f-class. Most see double duty. The
mil-spacing being correct at all power power ranges is more important
than a lot of people think. Holdovers and one very important
target---movers.

We had a training day at Butner and were shooting moving targets
at 400. After an instruction period I went to the line and most
of the shooters stayed back. Various guns, scopes, etc were used
by all. I noticed several of the shooters missed every mover. And
they were consistant. They shot in front of the target every
time. Using a 2 mil lead with a 308 was the correct lead for
a walking target. When I went to the firing line to see what
was going on, I saw that the guys missing had SFP scopes on the
wrong power. When they adjusted to correct power they got back
to business.

 

[tat1987]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Palmer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there a way to correct for that with the SFP so that it will be accurate again at any magnification?</div></div>

You can map your reticle so you know what the values are at different powers, usually we see it with scopes like the NF where people get the 22X, and they map out the reticle at 5X and 11X so they know what the values are, for instance on an MLR reticle from NF, you can use the .5 Mil Hash mark on 11X as 1 Mil, then the 1 Mil hash will be 2 mils, etc...

its easy if you take the time to do it, takes preparation to know what you are looking at and then you need to mark your scope and log it.

But it can be done, I wouldnt try to map every power setting, but usually you can half and quarter things. </div></div>

Thats what I do with my NF. I map out my reticle on some of the major power settings I use. I will admit that this gets confusing while hunting or any other situation that is time limited. I try to plan everything out before hand, but it doesn't always work out. My next scope with definitely be a FFP NF NXS.

 

[[email protected]]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

The advantages of an FFp show up in unknown terrain - its too easy to precalculate shooting arcs on your own or familiar shooting positions in advance to make it a point of importance.

JMHO.

 

[Crazy Dog ll]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

tag

 

[jhegg]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Begin standard screed:

There is nothing "metric" about mils. Both milliradians and MOA are measurements of angle which have nothing whatsoever to do with any system of linear measure.</div></div>

Thanks Lindy - I'm finally starting to understand it.

Jim

 

[striker3]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

I for one cannot really see the downfall of a FFP. Sure, at lower magnifications the reticle is smaller. Well, at lower magnifications, my target is usually bigger. If I need to fine tune aim with the reticle...just dial up the magnification.

With a SFP scope, there is no correcting the fact that I can only use the ranging features as they are meant to be in one magnification.

I also went with a mil adjustable scope as mils are something I am very comfortable working with. Just because something used to always be one way, doesn't mean there are not better ways.

 

[Short Round]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

Come on it's like cherry kool aid not one of the off the wall made up name flavors that are electric blue.

 

[palma]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: striker3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I for one cannot really see the downfall of a FFP. </div></div>

Price.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: palma</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: striker3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I for one cannot really see the downfall of a FFP. </div></div>

Price.</div></div>

$375 or so for a Falcon Menace?

 

[Daniel Barham]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

$375 or so for a Falcon Menace?
or
Up to 3500 for a 5x25 S&B Gen II XR. FFP coolaid is my favorite.
Start out with a Falcon Menace (got one of those myself) and decide from there. But I want be owning another SFP unless it is for a dedicated F-Class rig. Been there done that, being on the wrong power on a moving stage and dropped every one. Learned my lesson.

 

[mp45acp]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

FFP is the ONLY way to use mildots as they were intended.
if you are going with a SFP, thats fine, just dont get a mil-dot reticle on it. It serves NO purpose.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">FFP is the ONLY way to use mildots as they were intended.</div></div>

While I only own FFP scopes, I wouldn't go that far.

The first variable-power military mildot scopes were all SFP, so it can hardly be the case that they were <span style="font-style: italic">intended</span> to be used FFP.

In addition, a 10-power fixed mildot scope is perfectly usable for tactical shooting, so which focal plane it's in is irrelevant.

A scope like the Nightforce 5.5-22 can be used very usefully at half power, just by cutting holds using the mils in half.

So, I'd say your statement goes a bit too far.

 

[Hi Speed]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

FFP is the ONLY way to use mildots as they were intended.
if you are going with a SFP, thats fine, just dont get a mil-dot reticle on it. It serves NO purpose.


How many here learned to use mil dots at Ft. Benning and used an M24 with a FFP MK4? I think your assertion is a bit out there. I have little trouble with either. For the money I'd choose better glass on a SFP.

 

[McCrazy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

The Leupold M3A on my M24 had a mil-dot reticle but it was also fixed power. It didn't matter if it was FFP or SFP as the zoom couldn't be changed either way to affect the accuracy of the mil-dots.

As for the OPs question if you are going with a variable power scope and want a mil-dot reticle; save yourself the added opportunity to mess things up and/or confuse yourself and go with a FFP scope. On the other hand if you aren't going to use the reticle for leads, ranging, or holdovers then you don't need a mil-dot reticle anyhow and without a mil-dot reticle it doesn't matter as much if you go with SFP or FFP.

 

[DIBBS]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

Very informative discussion, and helpful to me with the links to some fantastic information.

I'm just beginning to delve into mildot scopes and long range shooting, and need all the help & information I can get.


Lindy thanks for your web page...I printed several of the articles/links for my notebook.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

You're quite welcome - I'm glad you found them useful.

 

[JLM]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Palmer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there a way to correct for that with the SFP so that it will be accurate again at any magnification?</div></div>

You can map your reticle so you know what the values are at different powers, usually we see it with scopes like the NF where people get the 22X, and they map out the reticle at 5X and 11X so they know what the values are, for instance on an MLR reticle from NF, you can use the .5 Mil Hash mark on 11X as 1 Mil, then the 1 Mil hash will be 2 mils, etc...

its easy if you take the time to do it, takes preparation to know what you are looking at and then you need to mark your scope and log it.

But it can be done, I wouldnt try to map every power setting, but usually you can half and quarter things. </div></div>

LL, I have a question about this I've been meaning to ask

Say you have a 4-16 SFP scope. As you say you should be able to use 8x for wind/leads/drop etc. Now, what I'm wondering is, how do you dial to 8x with any degree of repeatability? Or does a slight difference really not matter like if you're actually at 7.8 power or 8.2 etc?

 

[Lindy]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

Optically Checking Rifle Scopes

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Focal Planes: is the FFP worth it for mil dot?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JLM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim Palmer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is there a way to correct for that with the SFP so that it will be accurate again at any magnification?</div></div>

You can map your reticle so you know what the values are at different powers, usually we see it with scopes like the NF where people get the 22X, and they map out the reticle at 5X and 11X so they know what the values are, for instance on an MLR reticle from NF, you can use the .5 Mil Hash mark on 11X as 1 Mil, then the 1 Mil hash will be 2 mils, etc...

its easy if you take the time to do it, takes preparation to know what you are looking at and then you need to mark your scope and log it.

But it can be done, I wouldnt try to map every power setting, but usually you can half and quarter things. </div></div>

LL, I have a question about this I've been meaning to ask

Say you have a 4-16 SFP scope. As you say you should be able to use 8x for wind/leads/drop etc. Now, what I'm wondering is, how do you dial to 8x with any degree of repeatability? Or does a slight difference really not matter like if you're actually at 7.8 power or 8.2 etc?

</div></div>

Use lindy's link, but the short answer is, you have the map the scope magnification and they you have to mark the setting where the 8X is correct, because chances are, it's not going to line up perfectly.

But you have to put the effort in, you have to physically go out and adjust and measure your reticle so that you know exactly where it works and they you have to mark the scope accordingly.

Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance