Focal plain which is best ?

[Red hunter]

What are the good and bad of second plain focal reticals? why do most scopes not say which focal plain they are on the box ? How can you check this in the store before purchasing ?

 

[Broz]

Oh Crap, here we go again but I will get my vote in first.

Since this IS Long Range Hunting forum! I like second focal plane scopes. The reason is the reticle I have choosen stays small as you crank up the power and the target increases in size. This allows a more precise point of aim on any target. This is most useful at distances beyond 700 yards where a laser rangefinder is more accurate than ranging with a reticle by far. However if you feel you do not wish to use a laser RF and do intend to range with your reticle then a First focal plane scope could be desirable to you. This is because the reticles will remain calibrated to what ever method of measure ( moa or mils) at any power that is selected. The SFP reticles are only calibrated on one given power for ranging. So really, it depends on what your field practices are for ranging, reticle, or laser.

When you are looking to see what the scope is you will need to look at the spec sheet.

Jeff

 

[brentc]

SFP is the most useful for me. My problem with FFP is that useful magnification is eliminated because the reticle is either to thick on the high end or too thin on the low end due to the reticle maintaining subtension throughout the power range. The newer scopes are better at resolving this issue, but for me, it's still an issue. I had a Vortex PST 6-24 FFP and it was a great scope, but I was most comfortable at around 18 power because that is where I felt the reticle didn't obstruct small targets. My SFP scopes allow me to run at max power for the same size targets.

FFP is nice for the guy who desires a more functional reticle though.

 

[davewilson]

yeah we havn't had a focal plain debate for at least a week now...i'll take SFP.

 

[sp6x6]

FFP for me. I like a mil system and dials are same as holds. My TRM reticule has a small hollow area at center, a 1 1/2 '' sticky dot just centers @ 400yrds.I really like it

 

[Red hunter]

Thanks, I did not mean to create a ford chevy thing. I am new to this and apreciate your helpfulness. I was brought with the understanding that the only stupid question is the one not asked. If you dont knbow you never will unless you ask. Thanks again

 

[royinidaho]

Straight Skinny! End of discussion...

FFP for certain!!! I have 'em both. My favorite usually ends up being the scope on the rifle that I happen to be behind at the moment.

How's that for a strong definite answer.

 

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

FFP for me, MIL/MIL all the way, TMR or MP8 rectical are as thin as any SFP optic out there.

 

[Broz]

Thanks, I did not mean to create a ford chevy thing. I am new to this and apreciate your helpfulness. I was brought with the understanding that the only stupid question is the one not asked. If you dont knbow you never will unless you ask. Thanks again

RedHunter, It was not a stupid question by any means and I don't think any of us felt it was. But it is a topic that has been debated before in the recent past.

Hopefully you were able to gather some useful ifno from the posts to help you decide what will work best for you. If not maybe tell us what your intended method of ranging a target is, and at what max distance you hope to shoot to as your progress into LR hunting and shooting. Then more accurate info directed to your needs will be given. Most of the short shooters with small calibers will be the ones that prefer the FFP's. They range with reticles and are very effective to maybe 700 yards. But for a shooter that has hopes of shooting targets to a mile the SFP I feel is a better choice. I have owned both and shot both to a mile. Now, all my scopes are SFP's. The increasing size of the FFP reticle simply was just to large when the pinpoint accuracy of point of aim is so critical at extended distances. This is a great site with may knowledable members , and most all answers are correct that are given. But with the wide variety of methods and distances that are shot, you need to be specific with a question. You can never supply to much info. This is long range hunting forum, but what is long range to some is not to others and visa-versa.

Jeff

 

[Jon A]

I was brought with the understanding that the only stupid question is the one not asked.

Very true, but as has been mentioned, this question has been asked. Over and over again. If you put "focal" into the search function you'll find a whole bunch of threads that will give you hours of good reading material. Asking for those threads to be repeated every other week is not polite.

To quickly address a couple a couple things said here:

Yes, this is a Long Range Hunting site. This is not a Long Range Egg Shoot or Long Range P-Doggin' site.

There are a multitude of FFP reticles available which are thin enough to pose zero, I repeat, zero problems precisely aiming at vital zone sized targets out to as far as anybody can hit them.

While some still may not like them, or may prefer something else--much the way they may not like a synthetic stock colored blue instead of black--that's fine. Everybody is free to like what they want to like.

But stating they cause some real functional problem is simply false information.

And also since this is a Long Range Hunting site, not one devoted to competitions where there are rules meant to test certain skills, EVERYBODY USES A LASER RANGEFINDER!

Since that seems to be overlooked (seemingly purposely) in every one of these threads, in case anybody missed it the first time--EVERYBODY USES A LASER RANGEFINDER!

Everybody. So that should have absolutely nothing to do with your choice of scope.

What should affect your choice is whether or not you want to use the reticle for anything. For most here, the most common use is holding the wind precisely with the reticle. Since the wind can often change between the time you dial and pull the trigger, making the adjustment on the reticle as you watch it happen through your scope can be helpful to many shooters. For this, a FFP scope works no matter what and a SFP scope needs to be set on a specific power and/or you need to do math.

Most of the short shooters with small calibers will be the ones that prefer the FFP's. They range with reticles and are very effective to maybe 700 yards.

And you know, I really don't think made up BS like this is helpful to anybody. Those who use FFP are guys with little guns who aren't smart enough to realize that Laser Rangefinders might be helpful and can't hit a **** thing beyond 700 yds.

Where on earth do you come up with such garbage? In case you forgot already, EVERYBODY USES A LASER RANGEFINDER! Please stop saying that.

Of all the thousands of members here, the years this site has been around, can you name one single person who fits the above caricature you made up? Somebody who hunts big game out to 700 yds and does not use a LRF, instead "ranging with the reticle" of a FFP scope?

One single person? If not, please come to the realization that you are spreading false information.

 

[Broz]

JonA, you do not have to agree with what I stated, but for sure it is no more garbage than your repeatedly stating everyone uses a LRF. There are plenty of shooters that use reticles to range game andor sizing of game. I, they and you know this process is only accurate within its limits of measuring error. For that a I chose 700 yards. That is my opinion.

You bring a good point to the table about holding for wind. I repeat too, good point. But for us who dial in for wind, which I do because I feel it too is a better choice for longer distances, wind hold with the reticle means nothing to me. Thus another reason i feel the spf is a better choice for me.

The smaller cal statement I made should be explained more. My bad. I was trying to say that in my opinion the FFP is usually used at lesser distances and I would hope you agree that for the very long distance shots larger cals are a better choice for obvious reasons.

As for your quote on vital size targets. Do you feel you can accuratly confirm your drops on a target aimimg point of 1 moa or larger? I surely hope you would use a very precise hold to shoot groups at all distances, especially past 1200 or 1500 yards where I feel the FFP really fall short.

I hardly think I make it a habit to post garbage, I try vary hard to post my actual field experiences and what I see is best. If you disagree that is fine. But I do take offence to the way you addressed my post and feel in no way does my trying to share field knowledge of my own deserve your rude responces.

Some people do range with reticles, not all, and certainly not most. But you sir are the one spreading inaccuracies on that part.

Jeff

 

[Jon A]

but for sure it is no more garbage than your repeatedly stating everyone uses a LRF. There are plenty of shooters that use reticles to range game andor sizing of game.

If that's the case, who? There are 40,000 members here, many have expressed their preference for FFP scopes in this section. Who uses them to hunt big game at long range without a LRF? You said most of them do that. I'll stand by my statement that the actual number who fit your description is virtually nil. If not, name some names that show me I'm wrong.

That's not a matter of preference or opinion, people use them or they don't. I can't think of a single Long Range Hunter who doesn't use one regardless of scope choice. And if they don't they should.

Do you feel you can accuratly confirm your drops on a target aimimg point of 1 moa or larger?

First, many of the smallest groups I've shot actually have been on ~1 MOA targets--"quartering" a round or square target with the reticle, centering a dot in a round bull, etc, can yield quite accurate results.

But what makes you think FFP scopes can't be used on smaller targets? When there are FFP reticles (ones I've mentioned a thousand times) as thin as .086 MOA, they can precisely aim at some very tiny targets indeed. That's less than 1/10th MOA thickness. Have you actually tried such a reticle?

I hardly think I make it a habit to post garbage, I try vary hard to post my actual field experiences and what I see is best.

I know you don't, and I truly apologize if that's how my post sounded. This was not my intention. I know you have a great deal of very real experience and post very valuable information. I look forward to your posts and find a great deal of good info on many subjects.

This subject seems to be the exception. I just really think if you tried a FFP scope that was a good choice for your application, you'd find that while you still may not like it, your belief that it couldn't get the job done very well would change.

 

[Broz]

Jon, I have friends that have attended Hollands school. They told me that it was taught to learn to range with reticles. I know for a fact they do this and they use FFP scope for this reason. This is partially how I drew that conclusion. But they do use the reticle ranging system to certain distances. We have had long discussions about this method, its advantages and its short commings.

I have no where near the experience you and others do with the FFP's. Why, because I admitidly only gave it one honest attemp. That was a NF NXS 3.5x15 FFP. Not a cheap scope by any means. I compared it to a 3.5x15 sfp in the field. You are right, I hated it. But it was easy to sell so I realize there are needs for the FFP. I have since replaced those scopes with 5.5x22 NXS's in SFP.

Why does Nightforce ony offer FFP in the lower power 3.5x15? Beacuse the lower power scopes are better at longer distances? Another fact I have used to draw my opinions. Why does anyone even offer a SFP if the FFP is the holey grail of scopes? It would seem that if they are the best for all usage then the SFP's would become extinct. Anyway, I do not contest to know everything. But I do know my personal capabilities at long range, and the more I shoot the more comfortable I become. Right now I feel the SFP is best for the kind of shooting I do. If you are ever down this way you are welcome to come visit and shoot with me. Maybe you can teach me something about FFP scopes. And just maybe you will pick something up too. But please be more courteous with your wording when you knock on my door.

Jeff

 

[nwolf]

Im here to name names. Me. I use my scope to make range estimations on coyotes in the field. Also I use a sfp to do it. Mine is set at 1 mil at 12 power, and half mil at 24.

I personaly dont care that I am the minority. I do use my reticle for its intended purpose. And for me the topic is valid. No I dont shoot past about 400 yrd using this method. Its just not precise enough. Also, with a kill zone of about 4" I want a fine reticle, but thats just me.

Is the worlds best and only long range shooter on here? I ask because it sounds like someone thinks they are.