Rifle Scopes How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

[Lexington]

When I had an opportunity to look through a FFP scope at low magnification, the reticle lines appeared so close as to be less useful (I won't say "useless").

I don't shoot matches. I shoot for entertainment and my groups are not very good. For my mountain property, my only goal is to be able to hit zombies on the perimeter of my property, which lies about 300-400 yards from the fire pit. I am almost always at max magnification whenever I shoot for entertainment, and even then the 15" gong only covers 2 mils at 200 yards.

I like the uncluttered view of my SFP scopes. Please tell me how you more talented shooters make good use of FFP reticles at low magnification.

 

[deadly0311]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

I will say that the Hensoldts reticles are very usable on the lowest end of the magnification range, unlike some other FFP scopes.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

You have to define "good use" ?

In most cases you wouldn't be using it below 6x at least not the reticle in that way. If youre that close, do you need the mils?

The key for a FFP is the fact you don't have to think about it, you can reduce the magnification and not have be perfect, it's a gross adjustment. I don't always shoot on max power, but I don't necessarily shoot on 1/2, 1/3, 3/4' I shoot where I am comfortable.

At night optimal power should be about 8x but conditions might let you shoot 9x, 11x, or even 13x, point being I don't need to look I can let the sight picture dictate the setting. That goes for moving targets as well.

If you have to come off glass to confirm your power you're less effective.

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

I was shooting Snaps and Movers today with a Razor HD 5-20x50 set at 8x.

It's a lot easier to crank out a 1.5 mil lead when you don't have to do any extra math.

I had the optic set at 8x because it gave me the field of view I needed to see the entire area the target could appear in.

 

[dcjs]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

As everything in life, reticle design is a compromise. If there is little information in a reticle (i.e. plain mildot) and the reticle is rather thick, it will most likely be fully useful even at lower power. Also, a lower zoom ratio is less demanding regarding reticle design because you simply aren't stretching the visibility of the reticle at different magnifications as much.

If a reticle has finer graduations than a standard mildot (half mil or even finer hashmarks), it is important that the finer hashmarks "disappear" on lower power without intermixing with the coarser ones, making even those useless in the process.

I can usually make full use of half mil hashmarks at around 5x, and full mils at 3x. This of course varies depending on conditions and from one shooter to the other. In the end, if you are losing some of the functionality of a FFP reticle on low power, you are only losing a capability you wouldn't have had in the first place with a SFP reticle (unless you always use multiples of the "ranging magnification" of an SFP scope and are capable of keeping up with the changing math without fail).

 

[sharac]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

You mentioned zombies and properton (imagine voice of Cartman...) you really shouldn't need any ranging as you should memorize markers/features around your house that represent certain distances...

As for ranging if your rounding of object sizes is a bit off, and you are a bit off in your mil decimals your estimate will be way off. So i think a lot of focus in your practice should be on range estimates if you really want to use mils to get them zombie varmint... Getting tactical shooting skills sure is boring very little shooting and a huge amount of practicing wind reading and estimating distances

...

 

[Top Cat]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

300-400 yds is close to point blank range...For 3-400 yards you don't need mils, ffp or any of that stuff...a scope is optional for that matter unless you're shooting at varmints.

TC

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Top Cat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">300-400 yds is close to point blank range...For 3-400 yards you don't need mils, ffp or any of that stuff...a scope is optional for that matter unless you're shooting at varmints.

TC </div></div>

If you want to use irons at 400 yards you go right ahead, I'll use my scopes every fricking time. Can I hit at that distance with irons, yes. Would it be my choice, hell no.

I think the point blank range comment really depends on your zero, my rifles are zeroed at 100, the holdover at 400 is just under two mils, I'd need to hold just over 2' high-I don't quite see that as "point blank" anything.

Once things are moving (at any range) I prefer my holds to work no matter where my power is dialed to without thinking.

 

[Lexington]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Top Cat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">300-400 yds is close to point blank range...For 3-400 yards you don't need mils, ffp or any of that stuff...a scope is optional for that matter unless you're shooting at varmints.

TC</div></div>

OK, so we've established that I shoot at a short range relative to tactical marksmen who shoot to 1000 yards. Even at the distances I shoot, I use the scope at its maximum magnification.

I understand that an FFP reticle allows you to shoot leads without any extra math, as LoneWolfUSMC says, and that lower magnification gives a greater field of view.

And Sharac is right that I should know the geometries of items around my property, like the height of fence posts on the perimeter.

But my questions still remain. If 300-400 yards is point blank, and you all are shooting at greater distances, how much use do you get from a FFP reticle at lower magnification? Do you shoot low magnification beyond, say, 600 yards? I'm wondering if you can accurately resolve to fractional mils as well as you can when the scope is at full magnification.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

Depending ont he terrain and target, I may shoot 500 yards on 8 poswer and I may shoot 500 yards on 22X. I usually shoot whatever distance at whatever magnification looks best under the conditions and what I want to do.
This is done without knowing (or caring) what my magnification is dialed to-becasue it doesn't matter, I twist the knob til it looks good and have at it.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

And yes, I can tell the difference on my USO MPR reticle between .2 mil hashmarks and .3 at 6X, so I do use the fractional mil markings because at the ranges lower power comes in handy, the wind holds are usually fractions of mils....

 

[Swan]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

It definitely depends on whatever game you choose to play. Shooting tac matches a FFP is definitely an advantage over SFP, but not necessary by any means. Many shooters leave their scope at max power and leave it. But, for example, we shot a 4" popper on a 3mph mover at 100yds last spring and there was no way you would be hitting that thing multiple times at max power while trying to lead. I seem to recall backing off to 5-7x or so to only get a few hits.

FFP is kinda like air conditioning in a vehicle. Is it necessary? No. But it sure is nice.

 

[Lindy]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

On a 3 mph mover at 100 yards, your lead would have been about 5 inches, so you could have just held the width of the target at whatever magnification was useful. One doesn't always have to use the reticle.

 

[SScott]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

When you mention FFP in low mag I think if Super sniper and their 3x9, which is pretty expensive for what you would be doing. I think you may have your question answered as far as its usefulness.
I have a leupold 8.5x 25 with their Varmint reticle which would be perfect for what your doing, if your thinking of a new scope purchase you should really check into this one.
SScott

 

[frankythefly]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

I like FFP because if my can heats up to bad from a long string,(causing an annoying mirage like no other) I can turn down the power. So if I was to shoot and spot my shot one mil to the left on the lower power it is one mil to the left no conversions like sfp. I think it is a heck of a lot easier/faster to shoot this way and also helps if you are spotting for yourself. I have a Leupold 3.5 to 10 that is FFP and true at 3.5 the hash marks are so freaking small but turn it up to 4 or 5 and your in business. I believe what others said above is also true about reticles in FFP some are better some are worst. I have simple Mildots in my higher FFP and I like them for turning up and down through the magnification range and I have no issues seeing them or using them on lower powers. I didn't think FFP would be a big difference but now I am hooked and I will never buy/use another scope unless it is FFP..it just make sense, just like having a turret with zero stop.

 

[jackh]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

if the reticle is usually not used below 6x or 7x, is ffp worth the extra money on a 10x scope, say the IOR 2.5-10x42?

 

[Lindy]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

Cut and pasted from another thread:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In a scope whose power max is 10, FFP vs SFP is pretty much moot.

I had a 3.5-10 FFP, and it stayed at 10 unless I was shooting at something really close where I needed a lower power for field of view - in which case I just held in reference to the target using the center crosshairs, and didn't need the graduations of the reticle.</div></div>

 

[edward r homeyer]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Depending ont he terrain and target, I may shoot 500 yards on 8 poswer and I may shoot 500 yards on 22X. I usually shoot whatever distance at whatever magnification looks best under the conditions and what I want to do.
This is done without knowing (or caring) what my magnification is dialed to-becasue it doesn't matter, I twist the knob til it looks good and have at it. </div></div>

FFP is handy if your scope doesn't track well (dialing). You can power down and get more mils.
We were shooting one mile with our .308s and I had to dial down to around 7 power to get the required 29.9 mils.
If you are in your hide and put your night vision on be it a PVS22,26,27 or some type of thermal, you are going to have to dial for clarity. You may find yourself on 12 power, 10, 7, 6.2 who knows. The quality of your glass, NV and surrounding conditions will determine what power you end up on. But either way my mils will stay true.

 

[michael_aos]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

I think it depends on the particular scope too.

The IOR 3-18x reticle is pretty huge @ 18x, but the upshot is that it's still usable down on lower magnification.

 

[gugubica]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

How useful is a SFP reticle on low power? Its not, it is simply an aiming point (unless you can perform great feats of math, in your head, under stress, not many people can). The worst case reticle on a FFP scope is at least as usefull as a SFP.

Not everyone needs a FFP scope, but it sounds like you are trying to justify your way out of it for the wrong reasons.

 

[Opticsspecialist]

Re: How useful is FFP at low magnification - really?

the only reticle i've ever seen that is remotely usable on low magnification is the NH1