FFP vs SFP

[Mikecr]

I guess my perspectives are completely different.
I'm sorry if I offended you. That was not my intent.

[xphunter]

I am using a 5-25 S&B for awhile that has Holland's ART in it and 3 weeks ago I was able to go to Missoula, MT for one of their 1Kmatches (10 shots-PA club).
First time up using a rear grip 6.5-284 XP-100 & the S&B scope my first 5 shots were under 6.5 inches (horizontal group around 2 inches).
My 13 year old shot the next relay with the same rig (first time ever at a rifle match) and had 9 out of ten shots in 11.5 inches. 6th shot had a form break and it dropped 10" to turn the group into a 21 or 22 inch group overall. His vertical group on the 9 shots though was three inches-Conditions were moving the group from right to left, while during my relay it moved them up and into the right slightly.
At least with the S&B with Holland's reticle, I would say that the the FFP is plenty good enough to be precisely accurate @ least at 1K on 25 power.

Moved the scope to my center-grip XP chambered in 7mm Dakota and will go to a fun tactical style shoot this weekend in MT (distances from 350 to around 1K). It will be great that I can turn down the magnification if I want and not worry about subtensions changing on me--This scope is spoiling me.

[Mikecr]

Be objective now, how many SFP scopes beat you dispite such an 'advantage'?

How many of the best competitors use FFP scopes?

[jwp475]

Depends on the type of compition as to which has the advantage. Some matches where targets are engaged at varing distances give the FFP scopes a definant advantage since the highest power of your optics is not always wanted and or needed, especialy on movers. A SFP scopes reticle will not be calibrated properly on the lower powers. Also with a lot of mirage top power may not be advisable and again a SFP scopes reticle will not be calibrated on lower power or on top power as with the NXS 8X32 and 12X42 scopes..
There are advantages and disadvantages in both FFP &SFP.. I thouhgt that JonA laid them out pretty well in an earlier post....

[xphunter]

Mike,
First of all, I never said a FFP in 1K BR had an advantage over SFP.
The point I was making is that a FFP scope can be precise, even at a paper BR match. All the other times I shot I was using SFP scopes (center-grip XP's off of a bi-pod).
Did people beat me? You betcha
I'm sure I was the only one there using a FFP.
I would have been interesting to see the same scope on one of the Rifles that the regular 1K BR shooters use. If I could do that with a pistol and I had not been to a rifle 1K match in a couple of years & the first time for my son at a rifle match--How much better a seasoned BR shooter using a rifle?
That was my point.
Would it be my primary 1K BR scope if i regularly competed? No.
That is a set distance off of a bench.
A multi-stadia reticle in FFP has no advantage whatsoever in that environment-But it sure worked okay given the fact it was already on the XP.
I doubt if most guys would want to take a 45x Leupold BR scope with a fine dot and use it for regular hunting. It would work but it may not be the best though IMO.

I go and play @ 1K BR every now and then-Not a regular competitor. Then when I do, I am using one of my Specialty Pistol's anyway.
I don't mind being disadvantaged in that way at all. I am shooting against myself. If I happen to beat someone shooting a rifle now and then-It is just icing on the cake.

If I had my druthers I would use a FFP that subtended like the S&B I used for big game hunting or steel. For paper @ set distances (like 1K BR) and PD's I would choose SFP. That is my story & I am sticking to it

[Jon A]

Originally Posted by xphunter

First of all, I never said a FFP in 1K BR had an advantage over SFP.

Exactly. Nobody has ever claimed that. Most who hold for wind are going to hold on the target, not by using reticle features. That doesn't work so well when you shoot different targets at different ranges. A tactical-style match is much closer to what I do hunting than 1K BR by a long way. But that's just me; I know for some it's the other way around.

[Mikecr]

The only competition I can imagine lending an advantage to FFP scopes would be those which exclude use of laser ranging.

But this is a LONG RANGE HUNTING site, and if you're not laser ranging, if you're using only a reticle instead, your shooting system lags what it could be.
Might as well fall back to open sights..
JMO

-There is the argument of time. Well stalking is part of hunting, and there is time to do so at long ranges regardless of scope. Once I choose a position, I can set my bipod, measure, calc, dial in, load, level, hold off, and inject lead. One minute.
-There is the implication that use in IBS competition makes FFP good enough(rather than advantaged -my bad). But quite the opposite implication is defined in equipment lists and standings. There is no denying that SFP scopes are good enough.
-There is the apparent problem of reticle cal at a certain power. Well anyone could go to that power to range and return, if it makes them feel good about not having laser ranging.
-There is the promotion of some FFP reticles that aren't too large. Well thats good enough, but it never was an issue with hi power SFP scopes.

There is also the apparent problem of cost with FFP scopes. Not my problem, but I can relate.
I also believe Mils are for ranging, and MOAs are for holdoff, and neither is accurate enough -optically.
They're for use when all else fails in my book.

I know, I'm bull-headed..