FFP value?

Discussion in 'Long Range Hunting & Shooting' started by Rich Coyle, Sep 1, 2018.

  1. Rich Coyle

    Rich Coyle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,899
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2013
    What's the value of FFP outside of ranging?
     
  2. Hondo64d

    Hondo64d Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    381
    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Having the reticle subtensions be constant at any magnification selected.

    John
     
  3. Bravo 4

    Bravo 4 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,683
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Ditto :D
    Utilizing the reticle for hold overs/hold off at any magnification.
     
    stwcattle likes this.
  4. BallisticsGuy

    BallisticsGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    403
    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    This ^^^. It's important for ranging and holdoff/holdover. That's about it. If you don't do those things then SFP is going to be much less cost and will likely accomplish your needs.
     
    stwcattle likes this.
  5. stwcattle

    stwcattle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    215
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2015
    ^^^
     
  6. Gord0

    Gord0 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    447
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2017
    I copied this from Broz on long-range only as I share many of the same viewpoints, and he wrote it much better than I could have.

    I have not done the Mil/mil but I sure have owned and experienced many FFP's. I went back to SFP and if I had to use a FFP for hunting you could not give me one.

    Different strokes. But before anyone reads this and goes and spends more for the FFP look through one first. Turn it to low power and see that in many scopes you will not be able to distinguish the small reticle subtensions at all. On many, like the PST 6~24, below 10X all subtensions become useless. So the hype about having calibrated subtensions on all power settings just lost some credit in my book. As 1/2 of you power settings they are to small to see. This is especially bad as the low powers would be where you would have your scope set for quick acquisition of a closer target and a hold over would be a quicker choice. Also if you turn down magnification and go in dark timber you could have a problem seeing the reticle at all. Now FFP advocates will say, "turn on the ILL ret." Ok but when you do that many times it will only produce a red glare so as you are adjusting the intensity for that given lighting the elk just slipped away or you buddy shot him with a SFP utilizing a reticle visible in all lighting that always looks the same. Also, some long range and ELR shooters and hunters prefer a thinner reticle for fine aim points at long range. The FFP's I have owned and used were usable but surely not my favorite for the long shots where I aim small.

    The fact that a FFP reticle remains constant at all magnification settings is true. But this is not all good in all scenarios. Know that a SFP scope with a reticle that offers a 20 moa hold over at 24X will also offer 40 moa hold over at 12 X or 1/2 magnification since SFP reticle subtensions are times 2 on 1/2 power. So lets look at that closely. The fear of a hold over being off if the reticle is not on full power is a main argument for FFP. Even though I tend to use my reticle on full magnification most of the time, lest just say I screw up and have it on 18 instead of 24. 18 being 1/2 way to where the reticle doubles on a SFP. If my SFP scope has 1 moa subtensions at 24 X and 2 moa at 12 X then at 18 X they would be 1.5 MOA. That would put me exactly .5 moa off from my huge screw up with my SFP scope. .5 moa at 500 yards is 2.5 inches. Hmmmm, don't think the deer would care, even the coyote would be in trouble. OK, even though we will most always be on full power at 1000, and most of us would dial the wind at that distance, lets say we for some reason we cranked it back to 18 again and forgot. Well at 1000 yards this screw up of mine with my SFP reticle would equal a mis hold on the wind of .5 moa or 5" at 1000 yards. again I say the deer would be in trouble and the coyote maybe. These facts are the reason I do not agree with all that said and some of the fear that has been imposed about SFP reticles and reticle calibration.

    Please,Don't anyone take my word for this, and I'm not trying to start this old debate again. But just take a look for yourself, do your own math, and decide what you want for your personal application.

    Whal1678, nothing personal at all and Sir you are fully entitled to your personal opinion and preferences. It is just a topic with more than one side to it. We at LRO are striving for well supported data so I wanted to offer a view from the SFP side.
     
  7. FEENIX

    FEENIX Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,010
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    If someone actually does, I'll gladly take if off your hands and save you from any FFP woes. ;):cool::D

    Sorry, I couldn't resist. :rolleyes:

    Cheers!
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2018
  8. Bravo 4

    Bravo 4 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,683
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Jeff (and GordO) has a point- if at all possible look through the scope at different ranges, at different magnifications, at different sized/color targets, and in different light conditions...they are not all created equal as far as reticles (thickness & “amount” of business, and is it lighted?), glass quality or performance. That goes for both FFP and SFP! I do not think it’s the best thing to categorize the FFP all together. To each their own, and it seems there is something for everyone.
    Now saying that on my ELR rifle I am running a SFP Nightforce NXS. Why? Because it’s a time proven dependable scope, and the best I can afford.:D Even that scope gets bad comments by some now a days:rolleyes:, my how spoiled we have become...but isn’t it nice!!!:D
    Disclaimer: I’m not taking shots at anyone in particular or at any particular equipment.
    As for scopes- I use both SFP, FFP, illuminated reticles, non-illuminated reticles, zero stop, non-zero stop, mil reticles, moa reticles, mil turrets, moa turret and any & all combos there of. The scope does not make the rifle any more accurate. It is merely an aiming apparatus to make the shooter more accurate (if used properly). And therefore since it’s for the individual shooter, and we all are individuals with individual needs/wants/requirements, it is (as FEENIX would say) a personal choice. The good news is that there are enough choices that there is the right application for about everything. The bad news is that you have to figure out what it is. That and I don’t believe there is an optic (or rifle, or cartridge) that fits every situation.
    Sorry, coffee kicking in!!!
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2018
  9. stwcattle

    stwcattle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    215
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2015
    I own both f1 and f2 scopes, and I have to agree with most all Broz had to say.
    In my experiences, outside of running a 25 or 35x scope that one might turn down to 20x, a f1 optic is not a advantage in a hunting situation.
    I purchased a NF 4-16x42f1 ATACR when the optic first come out and put it on a 7SAUM hunting rifle thinking my shot was going to be around 400 yards on a cow elk. As it turned out, weather was going to get bad overnight and I had a 3 day NM tag and it was day 2 with 1 hour of hunting light left. I ended up taking a shot at a cow at like 90 yards to get the hunt done. Before taking the shot i turned the power down on the scope and could not pick the reticle. I had to take valuable time on a group of spooked cows to turn my power back up to see the reticle. If I had one of my NXS 3.5-15x50's on the rifle, or the later released 4-16x50 ATACR, I could had turned the power down to pick the cow up quickly through the scope not had a issue seeing the reticle late in the day with shadow's where the cow's and spikes stood.
    With that said, I still own the scope and it's on a 6 creedmoor hunting rifle that its use is mainly smaller game like antelope and coyotes where I keep the power on 16.
    But in all honesty, in my opinion, having a f1 optic on a dedicated hunting rifle isn't the best option for me and on this years NM cow elk/deer hunt, I and my wife will be running a old favorite of mine, two NF NXS 3.5-15x50's.
    Bravo 4, sounds like you may have a NXS 5.5-22x50 or 56. If so, a excellent hunting optic that is overlooked by many.
     
    Bravo 4 and Barrelnut like this.
  10. Bravo 4

    Bravo 4 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,683
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Yes sir, it’s a 5.5-22x50.
    Gotta admit I would have been borderline panic model, may have been the only chance on an elk I would have all year (maybe two)!
    Good example of wrong reticle for intended purpose. I have used a few FFP scopes that I would say are not good for hunting. The Falcon Menace I have with the skeletonized reticle is a great example of hard to pick up at anywhere near low power in anything but good lighting. However, the MP-8 I had in a 3-18 FFP IOR was good from low to high power. I have also used SFP reticles that were hard to pick up at low light, the fine duplex in Leupolds is one I don’t like for hunting. You may have had the same problem on the cow elk with that one.
    My point is that I’m not totally disagreeing with you as there is validity. I’m saying that FFP isn’t the devil (even when hunting), it’s we as end users to blame for not picking the right tool for the job.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2018
    djm670, FEENIX and HARPERC like this.
  11. HARPERC

    HARPERC Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,992
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    I have one FFP, and like it. Forced to choose I'd go SFP

    The issues mentioned are there, but for me don't rise to the level of disappointment some have had.

    I do get with the price tag on optics the aggravation factor goes way up when expectations aren't met.
     
    Bravo 4 likes this.
  12. Greyfox

    Greyfox Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    I shoot both FFP/MIL and SFP/MOA scopes on a frequent basis. I use my SFP scopes for hunting for many of the reasons previously cited, but I wouldn’t feel overly handicapped with the right reticle in a premium FFP(NF-ATACR/F1, S&B PM8). For PRS/Tactical sports, IMO, it would be difficult to compete without a FFP scope. Stages can be “reticle use only” at multiple ranges, and varied target sizes....with 90 seconds to score 10 hits from different shooting positions.