Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics


Reply

First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #64  
Old 03-05-2013, 05:26 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
So you are saying anything a SFP will do a FFP will do better?
Not anything. Many things. I thought we were talking about long distance here?

I think the true answer lies with neither, but with DFP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
I could have said it a little better by adding for their type of shooting.
Yes, that does take the sting off it. The former indicates that only the inexperienced enjoy the feature.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
Now what is so difficult about this? On full magnification my SFP reticle will function the same as a FFP reticle.
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
If I do crank it down it reads twice the calibration.
Only if you crank it down to exactly half magnification. Well how do you know where that is? The printed numbers? Ever test a few scopes to see whether that half magnification actually lines up with the printed scale? Not many do. Even when corrected, the human error in getting them lined up perfectly is enough to ruin the shot. With FFP, all holds are constant, regardless of power. You literally don't have to care what magnification you are on. You dial the power ring to where you have the best, most workable sight picture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
Which by the way allows twice the hold over from the reticle and something the FFP does not have to offer.
While academically correct, is this ever a benefit in the field? On my GenIIXR reticle I have 10 mils of hold over. I dial my elevation, so I would never use it anyway. I dial my nearest half mil value for wind. So If I'm looking at a 1.7 mil call... I'll dial 1.5 and hold the rest. I'm a live wind shooter though, so I hold the wind to match the condition. I don't hold the shot to match the condition. Never have I ever needed to "double" my hold. I simply use the reticle, in its correct subtension, to hold the exact amount necessary. Give me a situation where you'd want to employ the "capability" you are describing.

Since I know we all like pictures... I dug up another. Below is a whitetail deer walking across the road at approx. 3000 yards. (yes, three thousand yards) Looks like the FFP would be able to get it done to me. That would be an ELR shot if I've ever seen one. That stop sign is exactly 2 miles. I can EASILY quarter that deer with the reticle. The crosshair could be out in front because that's precisely where I calculated fo.... haha.. Just kidding. It's just really hard to track a moving deer at 3000yds while taking a picture through your scope!

Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 03-05-2013, 05:30 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
If any of the readers here (Mr. Orkan excluded) feels I have posted any inaccurate facts or misled anyone please tell me and I will gladly stop posting on this thread. I wish it were easier to get a point across in print but it is very hard some times.

Trust me when I say if I felt a FFP would bring something to my table my new ELR rifle would be wearing one. I just don't see it and I have tried.

Jeff
This is a useful discussion. I'm not upset at all. NOR do I have a lower opinion of you than when we started. Quite the opposite. You've hung in there and maintained civility when others would not have. I applaud you for it.

I do not think you are intentionally misleading people. I trust you when you say you don't need FFP in your setting, for your situations.

Can you trust me when I say outside of your setting and situation... FFP can be of great benefit?
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 03-05-2013, 05:43 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,817
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

[QUOTE=orkan;773866]While academically correct, is this ever a benefit in the field?

Never have I ever needed to "double" my hold. I simply use the reticle, in its correct subtension, to hold the exact amount necessary. Give me a situation where you'd want to employ the "capability" you are describing.[QUOTE]

I gave you one but I will elaborate.

A 8~32 NXS has 65 total moa of internal elevation. You mount it with a common 20 moa rail. This gives you 50 +/- moa of elevation dial up. Your reticle on full power is 20 moa for a total of only 70 moa. There is a rock ledge at 2100 yards with a visible dark spot that is screaming at you "come on, try me" your 338 LM with a 300 Berger needs 81 moa. You are short by 11 moa. But you have the option to dial back to 16x and now you have a total available moa up of 90 moa.

Not common, but yes it is a fact and I have been it that position before.

Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 03-05-2013, 05:53 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,817
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by orkan View Post
Can you trust me when I say outside of your setting and situation... FFP can be of great benefit?
I was taught at a young age to never trust a salesman.

just kidding.

But I will trust you to say outside of some hunting situations a FFP can be of great benefit.

If you will recall I stated early on that I was not talking about competition shooting.


I am by no means the only one out here. I am by no means the only one doing what I am doing. Have you ever shot along side Shawn Carlock? I have on more than one occasion and I have never seen him use a FFP.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 03-05-2013, 06:01 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,817
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Oh, and by the way it no task at all to go to 1/2 power on a nightforce NXS accurately. There is an indicator and a special line you can turn to and alige very easily if you wish to double your reticles hold over.

all the time I have now. Gotta run.

Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 03-05-2013, 06:02 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Aaaah. I'm tracking now. I thought we were talking specifically about long range hunting, not just launching rounds at rocks for fun. I'm tracking, and agree, with that kit you would do just as you said.

However, with my Premier FFP, I'd simply back down the magnification a bit, and use my reticle for the hold. I have 65 mils (227 MOA) of holds available at 5x. An additional 28 mils available in my turret, for a total of 93 mils (325 MOA). Forgive the poor picture quality, but in the image below, you can see the hash marks every 5 mils along the entire vertical stadia, as well as windage stadia. If I dial .5 mils left, or right, I can use the tip of that stadia for a precise aim point.

Other FFP reticles have similar functionality.

Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 03-05-2013, 06:07 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
I am by no means the only one out here. I am by no means the only one doing what I am doing. Have you ever shot along side Shawn Carlock? I have on more than one occasion and I have never seen him use a FFP.
As was indicated by another poster... I could easily line up numerous witnesses and "big names" to support my position. I won't bother with it, as it serves little point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
If you will recall I stated early on that I was not talking about competition shooting.
Nor was I. I was talking about hunting. The idea that FFP is excellent for tactical competition, but not for hunting, is a self-defeating argument. I don't even need to point that out. In tacitcal competition we have more targets, smaller targets, in tougher situations, and less time to engage them. If it works for that, it will EXCEL at hunting.

People hunting "the most dangerous game" are using and prefer FFP. I've found that it also works very well on not-so-dangerous game.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do you archery hunt for elk?
YES - 32.06%
67 Votes
NO - 51.20%
107 Votes
Not yet, but I plan to. - 16.75%
35 Votes
Total Votes: 209
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC