Re: Is FFP Even an Option for Target Shooters
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 243Varminter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am in the process of trying to decide on a new scope. This will be my first high end scope. I am prepared to spend at least 2000.00 but would go higher if the scope fits my needs. It will go on an SPS Tactical 308. I am a hunter and also enjoy shooting targets out to 510 yards but I am working on a place where I can shoot to 1000 yards.</div></div>
When it comes to FFP scopes' there will always be a compromise for shooting activities. A FFP reticle that excels for hunting and tactical shooting is easy-to-see at low magnification against dark targets and backgrounds - even in very low light. However, that same reticle can become a liability when shooting small targets (think 1/2 MOA and smaller). A FFP reticle that is very fine and allows precise aiming at high magnification and excels at shooting small targets at distance is typically very difficult to see at low magnification against dark targets and backgrounds - especially in low light.
Striking a fine usability balance in a FFP reticle is difficult and few reticles do it well - especially when illumination is an option. For instance, the reticle thickness between an illuminated and a non-illuminated version of a reticle is sometimes thicker (even at the same power and with the illuminated turned-off) some scopes. It depends unpon the manner in which the reticle is etched into the lens as well as the substance that is deposited into the reticle. The less luminous the substance deposited into the reticle is, the thicker the reticle has to be in order for the reticle to be seen <span style="font-weight: bold">whether the illumination is <span style="font-style: italic">"On"</span> or <span style="font-style: italic">"Off"</span></span>. I don't know if this is still the case at USO, but when a friend of mine ordered a USO SN-3 T-PAL 3.2X-17X44mm with an illuminated MD MOA reticle several years ago it was. Even with the illumination cranked-up on his USO SN-3 T-PAL 3.2X-17X44mm the reticle never became brighter than a faint glow.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 243Varminter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My question is a FFP going to cover up too much of the target to make precise shots when shooting groups? This is a tough decision for me because the FFP choices often come with more advanced and more functional reticles. Any tips and advice would be very helpful. </div></div>
Personally, while SFP scopes still have their place, now that I've owned and used FFP scopes I only buy FFP now. However, as I mentioned above there is a fine balance between reticle thickness and subtension and usability for various shooting activities, and your decision should be based on what you plan to do with your rifle and scope combination.
There are few FFP reticles that are fine enough that they don't obscure a significant amount of very small targets, but they do exist. In MIL-based FFP reticles, the reticle with the thinnest reticle, ie. the finest subtension, is the Premier Reticles Gen 2 XR at .075" at 100 yards <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">(3/4 of 1/10th" at 100 yards)</span></span>. Next up would be the S & B P4F. These two reticles are great in 5-25X[56mm] PMIIs', but are hard-to-see at 10X and below in low light - especially the Gen 2 XR.
If you're interested in PMIIs' in 3-12X and/or 4-16X the Premier Reticles Gen 2 XL or a standard P4 or P3 would be preferred, unless you happen upon a used Gen 2 XL. In case you're unaware, the Gen 2 XL and Gen 2 XR are no longer options in new PMII scopes. However, occasionally scopes with these reticles come up for sale here in the SH classifieds. If you're looking at Premier scopes you can get the Gen 2 and Gen 2 XR.
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">I want to point-out that according to Premier PDFs' the line thicknesses of the Gen 2 XR in PMIIs' are the same across the model magnification ranges, but in Premier Heritage Gen 2 XR scopes' that IS NOT the case. Referencing dimensions "K" and "N" in the diagrams below you can see that the line thicknesses of the Heritage 3-15X Gen 2 XR are thicker than those of the Heritage 5-25X Gen 2 XR at the same locations:</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">PMII 4-16X / 5-25X Gen 2 XR Reticle diagram courtesy of Premier Reticles:</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">PMII P4L (P4F Lighted) Reticle diagram courtesy of Schmidt Bender:</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Premier Heritage 3-15X Gen 2 XR Reticle diagram courtesy of Premier Reticles:</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Premier Heritage 5-25X Gen 2 XR Reticle diagram courtesy of Premier Reticles:</span></span>
In MOA-based reticles the reticle with the thinnest reticle, i.e., the finest subtension, <span style="font-style: italic">(according to USO's RDP MOA diagram)</span> - is the <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">UNLIT Center</span></span> of USO's RDP MOA reticle (.07 MOA). <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">The Main Line width/thickness is .125 MOA.</span></span> USO's reticle with the thinnest <span style="font-style: italic">constant</span> Main Line thickness is the MIL-based GAP Reticle, which is still my favorite USO-designed reticle (0.1 MOA Main Line thickness at 100 yards). Depending upon whether the USO GAP and Schmidt Bender P4FL MOA are both actually MOA-based, (most of USO's "MOA" turrets and reticles are actually IPHY (Inch-Per-Hundred-Yards) based, while the MOA-based turrets on PMII are actually MOA-based. Therefore, the MIL-based GAP Reticle is either just ahead of or in a tie with the PMII's P4FL MOA <span style="font-style: italic">(theorietically 0.1 MOA Main Line thickness at 100 yards).</span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">USO RDP MOA reticle diagram courtesy of U.S. Optics:</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">USO MIL-based GAP reticle diagram courtesy of U.S. Optics:</span></span>
The second-thinnest MOA-based FFP reticle is the MOA-based version of the P4F at .1 MOA/.1047" - <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">(just over 1/10th" at 100 yards).</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">PMII 3-12X P4L MOA Reticle diagram courtesy of Schmidt Bender:</span></span>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">PMII 5-25X P4L MOA Reticle diagram courtesy of Schmidt Bender:</span></span>
Obviously, a hands-on, through-the scope comparision of same model FFP scopes with difference reticles at a range would be the best way for you to decide what you think will be best for you. Second to that a visit or several visits to stocking dealers would work. In either case it's worth several hours driving time to get behind the scopes <span style="font-style: italic">yourself.</span>
However, if neither of these scenarios is possible and you base your buying decision without handling the scopes' in-person you may find that you've bought something that doesn't suit you for your intended purposes as well as you thought it would. Sometimes reticles appear different in-person than they do on paper.
Hope this helps and good luck.
Keith