FFP vs SFP

[älg]

"I also believe Mils are for ranging, and MOAs are for holdoff, and neither is accurate enough -optically."

Well I would say you can use both for ranging and/or holdoff ; it´s just two different ways of measuring angles.

You are however forgetting that FFP let´s< you holdoff/over without having to worry about the power setting. Of course you may have time to do all the math, but the FFP may give you an edge if you only have to range the target with your laser RF and shoot.

[älg]

And while ranging accurately with a reticle is very difficult, it is not so with holdover.-if I need i.e. 2 mils of elevation, I just have to use the corresponding line ( 2 mils) in my vertical crosshair.

[learjet]

yup, this is a hunting forum, but all the info here has been helpful for me. im goin FFP for my next scope, which will be on a 300wsm ill be using mainly for <GULP> groundhogs, and whitetails when the hunting season opens. my m1as my grabit gun now, w a fixed 10 i can shoot steel to 1k and groundhogs from 500 in. but groundhog huntin is where i believe the FFP will serve me well. we have a number of farms we hunt, we are pretty familiar w the ranges to various landmarks. ive got rangecards for some of our fav setup spots, but we get quite a few quick shots walkin in and out. we dont carry a LRF or a computer on these trips, no time to use them on the popups anyways. i thought id try a variable this time as some of the shots are real close. right now if i see a hog i can mil him quickly, dial it in(or holdover), and let it fly. if i go w a SFP scope ill never move the magnification, or i will miss holding off for wind/ele eventually. at least i know this, ill always want to look at the power ring before bringin up the gun to make sure i know where it is. thats time wasted.

do have a ? BTW....will the better LRFs currently available range a groundhog accurately to 500-600yds? im considering buying a new one, ive got an old tasco that works well enough to hit trees etc, but i use it to range landmarks, not game

great thread all

lear

[Ernie]

Originally Posted by learjet

do have a ? BTW....will the better LRFs currently available range a groundhog accurately to 500-600yds? im considering buying a new one, ive got an old tasco that works well enough to hit trees etc, but i use it to range landmarks, not game

great thread all

lear

Lear,
I think the Swaro will be as good as any LRF's for that purpose. I need to check on almost level ground to see, how good it works.

[Jon A]

Originally Posted by Mikecr

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

All that shows is a lack of imagination...or experience. To take it another step the other way, at many of these types of competitions Horus reticles have a very good following. Have you ever seen one of those? What do you think all those lines and numbers are for? Ranging stuff?

One minute.

As I think back to the biggest bucks and my most fondly remembered "trophys" I've gotten, if it had taken me a full minute to put a bullet through them most would still be alive today (or dead from old age by now). Really, if it takes you a minute to accurately take a 400-600 yd shot you're doing something wrong.

I also believe Mils are for ranging, and MOAs are for holdoff,

And I believe inches are only for measuring width while feet are only for measuring length. Makes exactly as much sense (zero).

I know, I'm bull-headed..

No, maybe just a bit inexperienced, not quite understanding things completely yet. Believing one unit of angular measurement is only good for one thing, but another unit of angular measurement is good for something else shows a simple lack of understanding, not bull-headedness.

[Mikecr]

The system I described earlier is what I've been using for the last 15yrs of GH hunting. That's walking varmint hunting, and not shooting and shooting and shooting until walking shots into steel plates. Single cold bore shots with a very high kill% on a 3" kill zone. This is way beyond the capabilities of +90% of shooters out there.
In july, I was paid to eliminate a GH from a graveyard(nobody wants them there). He was old, smart, and left nothing but risk for any shot. I spotted him a couple days, and decided on an elevated position a little over 600yds. Day 3, after a couple hour wait, and then ~30mins of watching him through the scope(He never did stand up for me), I dropped him between two headstones without property damage. One shot, if I had missed, he'd live another day. That's a rule for me, and it's alot of fun.
Yes, there are shooters here who are way better than me, no doubt.
But I figure I'm qualified to express an argument for my system.

I say MOA is for holdoff cuz it's nothing but compromise for ranging, and MILs aren't nearly as precise for holdoff as MOA.
Mils are better for ranging, but no where near the precision of an LRF.
So if I were to accept these compromises in my shooting, I would range with a MIL reticle in a scope utilizing elevation clicks in 1/4MOA or less.
I use a Leica LRF1200, and NF NXS or Leupold MK4 M1 scopes. Damn hard to beat the precision there.

I don't think laser ranging is a waste of time either. That's one reason why I shoot long range, to buy me time, and better position for a one shot kill.
To me, that's what this is all about

[Jon A]

Originally Posted by Mikecr

I say MOA is for holdoff cuz it's nothing but compromise for ranging, and MILs aren't nearly as precise for holdoff as MOA.

Not as "precise?" How exactly? It's a unit of measure. Nothing about the unit defines its inherent accuracy or lack thereof. It's like saying yards are more accurate than meters. It's stupid.

From a practical standpoint, the most popular MOA reticle out there is probably the R2. Any Mil reticle with 1/2 Mil marks has marks closer together for elevation. And WAY closer for windage marks as 5 MOA are laughably precise. There's the R1 you say. Well there's also the MPR from USO with even more "precise" Mil marks.

The design of the reticle determines how "precise" it is. The unit of measure chosen does not.

Mils are better for ranging, but no where near the precision of an LRF.

No shit? You do realize I spend 100% of my hunting hours walking around with a $1600 rangefinder hanging around my neck, right? Implying that because I know what a Mil is means I don't use a rangefinder is getting highly annoying.

I don't think laser ranging is a waste of time either.

See above. Plus, have you ever hunted with a buddy who does the ranging for you? He yells out the range and you can have the shot away in a fraction of a second with a good reticle and some skill. If you need a minute to prepare, not so much.