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
  #246  
Old 03-19-2013, 05:35 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 180
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by westcliffe01 View Post
Since these are FFP scopes and yes, I posted the pictures directly from the Vortex website and it says right on them that they are in MOA (I am not a MIL man), it means that no matter what, the reticle will be either 0.21 or 0.18 MOA wide.

So taking the 4-16 as the worst case with the 0.21 wide reticle and knowing that 1MOA is a dimension of 10.47" at 1000 yards then multiplying 0.21*10.47" yields 2.20" at 1000 yards. So, please explain to me what you are trying to shoot at 1000 yards, that is smaller than 2.20" ? Especially considering that a 2mph wind drift is a full 1.4MOA POI shift or 14.6" ?

I can understand that in benchrest shooting, where most other factors have been eliminated and one has the means to make tiny, repeatable corrections to the point of aim, that seeing the target clearly is important. But this is not a benchrest forum. Here people hunt in "field conditions" using what they carried to a high point and that sure isn't a bench rest...
WestCliffe, I posted the figures quoted to me by the Dealer/Retailer because people were quoting figures in Mrad as they were quoted to me, So when I saw you post referring to my speculation I did the Math to convert it for you in order to help you understand that the two workout to be the same, And Like you I work mainly In MOA

But after Talking to Broz and Orkan and many more WORTHY People, I can see that there Right,

John
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 03-19-2013, 06:17 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 180
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

[QUOTE=westcliffe01;781189]I would have to add, that I am pretty sure my eye is not going to resolve a 2" object in my 16x scope at 1000 yards. Perhaps someone younger and better endowed in the vision dept, but not me. Which is why I got the 6-24 on order since I think I have a better chance resolving something at 1000 yards with that scope. Even a coyote is more than 0.5MOA at 1000 yards and with the 6-24 scope the reticle should neatly divide it in 3.

I'll be sure to post here when I do actually shoot my first coyote at 1000 yards. end Quote,

Well I truely Hope that you do manage to succeed your goal,

Now the reason why it is so criticle to have A reticle that Is finer than the crosshairs at 100yds than the ammo that you are using is so you can maintain on a constant basis of ALWAYS shooting the true Sub MOA's that your/our Rifle's can shoot BECAUSE the Human Factor is the only weak link in the chain,

In order to Achive a 4" group at a 1000yds its no good not being able to see1.5 inche's of it when 3/4s of it is hiding behind the crosshairs,
Now The reason Bros and Orkan and Quite a few others here are so Damn good at shooting is because they factor in all these issue's And it is important to be able to see the shots through your scope because A person could always double the size of the grouping just because of the size of the reticle,

Premier, Night Force and Vortex all have listend to shooters from around the World and Addressed this issue.

MYSELF I use to use 5.5 yd/5 mtr AirPistol Targets @ 100yds, and when you can get the bullets in the same hole or your next shot is Only half a bullet width out then its time to move the target back to 200yds and start all over again,

And if you really want you make it hard for your self do it with a .22 but if not use a .223 or bigger that will make you sweat buckets,

If you try this then no Critter's will be safe up to and beyond 1500yds

Good Luck with it,

John
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 03-19-2013, 01:20 PM
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Victoria ,Texas
Posts: 60
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by gamehawker View Post
Did you ever call Vortex and if did, what did they say?
talk to vortex and the only answer they had was that if my redicale focus adjustment wasn't exactly the same on both scopes that that would have some influence on magnification Im not sure that's it but the the target still seems smaller to me and how would you know your retical focus adjustment is exactly the same
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 03-19-2013, 01:48 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 180
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by PEEWEE69 View Post
talk to vortex and the only answer they had was that if my redicale focus adjustment wasn't exactly the same on both scopes that that would have some influence on magnification Im not sure that's it but the the target still seems smaller to me and how would you know your retical focus adjustment is exactly the same

PEEWEE, Why not get a Mate to adjust them to his/her eye's and then ask them if they are the same or not???

john
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 03-19-2013, 05:06 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Near Napoleon,MI
Posts: 1,024
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

John, what is funny about all this talk about the reticle obscuring a magnified target is that people shoot with iron sights and no magnification whatsoever and achieve grouping close to what many others can only do with a scope. I don't fall into this category, since I couldn't even see my target at 100 yards (it has a 1" aiming point).

David Tubb manages to shoot 1/2 MOA with iron sights at 1000 yards, I wonder if he complains about how wide his front sight blade is ? One imagines that changing a mask used for etching the reticle should be a relatively minor issue for a scope manufacturer, so if they are not doing it, they apparently are not getting enough requests to make it worth their while. Or perhaps they get more complaints that the reticle is too thin by people shooting 300-500 yards....

Don't get too wound up about the comments. Why relay hearsay when you can directly post the image of the reticle ? That leaves no room for doubt, don't you think ?

[QUOTE=mildot1960;781429
Now the reason why it is so criticle to have A reticle that Is finer than the crosshairs at 100yds than the ammo that you are using is so you can maintain on a constant basis of ALWAYS shooting the true Sub MOA's that your/our Rifle's can shoot BECAUSE the Human Factor is the only weak link in the chain

Good Luck with it,

John[/QUOTE]
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 03-19-2013, 05:45 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 180
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

WestCliffe, I use to shoot with open sights also and It does take some doing,
But the subject Reticle's came up and It is one of those things that often dictate's which scope we buy,

I always use to use the 3030 type but then the power thing became an issue, So I worked on the fact that PM AI rifle's use to use a maximum of 12 power so for a while I resticted my self to Only Military Issue Items,

But I am not involved with that anymore and scope's have moved on and the reason why Reticles are an important issue is because in the Sale's pitch that is one of the things that they Put in the list of features in order to separate us from out hard earned Dollars, And quite a few people here are upgrading to these new scopes all because the one's that they bought in the first place were not up to standard in the first place, and you only have to buy 4 or 5 of these things and thats $10,000 and thats alot either way you carve it,

John
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 03-19-2013, 06:25 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Near Napoleon,MI
Posts: 1,024
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

I'm on 2 FFP scopes for $1700 invested - the Viper PST 4-16x50 on my Savage 12 243 AI and the 6-24x50 which is slated to go on my Remage (Remington 700 with a match 8x57 barrel secured with a barrel nut...). I was planning on both of these being switch barrel rifles. The 700 is a long action and the Savage 12 is a short action. But to make that a reality I need one of the receiver wrenches for each which slide into the bolt bore so the barrel can be removed without disturbing the scope base or scope.

In addition I have a Nikon 3-12x42 Monarch and a 4-16x50 Monarch. Then a bunch of Weaver 6x fixed scopes for my muzzle loader and Savage 24 combo gun. The Weavers have a rather short eye relief and the scope itself is short too so sometimes mounting them can be a challenge...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:38 AM.


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