First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

[bigngreen]

A few I know about.

Premier Gen 2 XR (in Premier scopes only) .025 MIL/.085 MOA
Bushnell Tactical G2- .03 MIL/.1 MOA

I am pretty sure I have the SS 5-20 specs at home. Will post those later.

SS 5-20 .05 MIL/.17 MOA main line thickness, .015 MIL/.05 MOA MQ Dot size

Scot E.

The tech specs on line for the Gen2XR look like .075 in/hundred in the 5-25 and in the 3-15 it's .144 in/hundred, at least that's what it looks like unless there is some other info.

Do you have any good source for a picture on the SS 5-20 reticle?

 

[Scot E]

The tech specs on line for the Gen2XR look like .075 in/hundred in the 5-25 and in the 3-15 it's .144 in/hundred, at least that's what it looks like unless there is some other info.

Do you have any good source for a picture on the SS 5-20 reticle?

SWFA SS Reticle Substensions - The Optics Talk Forums

Scot E.

 

[westcliffe01]

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'm NOT Speculating Anything AT ALL, work out the Math on that for a second,

IF they were that Thick they would be .21 = 21MIL at 100yds and that 210MIL at a 1000yds that is 8 and a 1/4 inches at a 1000yds.

Now how the Heck can we see A 1/2" MOA Hiding behind a21mm Reticle

1/2"= 12.7mm approx, 21mm= 13/16ths,

I Repeat, I Phone the Company that Supplies the British Army And the British Police Force and He looked it up on his computer just to make sure and he said that they are .03 and .06

Now weather Those drawings are accurite as per newer models I dont know, But I will Call him again and get the Spec Sheet that he is Quoting from,

If they were .21 that meens they would measure .00827" (just over 8 thou) I think,

When a Person from a multi million Dollar Company Who supplies the Armed Forces gives me the good Oil on a product I have now reason to call him a Liar.

this thread is getting out of hand now, I am the messinger Thats all

 

[westcliffe01]

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. The vitals on an elk would be well more than 1MOA and the same with a brown bear and the bodies on either of those closer to 2MOA or more, so seeing them and chosing a point of aim should not be a problem.

 

[Broz]

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. The vitals on an elk would be well more than 1MOA and the same with a brown bear and the bodies on either of those closer to 2MOA or more, so seeing them and chosing a point of aim should not be a problem.

Westcliff01, I understand that it does not matter to you and you are comfortable with a .210" and sir you are completely entitled to use what works well for you.

I also prefer a fine reticle and .2 would not be one I chose. My aim point at my 1000 yard target is not much more than 2" and I prefer to divide it. I have shot more than a few coyotes past 1000 along with more than a couple antelope between 1000 and 1300. I like to split the vertical thickness of them in 1/2 and for this I feel thinner is better. Not to long ago I was on a sitting coyote at 1760 yards and ready to attempt my first mile yote. But he decided to move. I can tell you for sure I would not have wanted a reticle thicker than my .062" NP-R1 for that shot.

It may be a personal preference, but I have also taken a few elk past 1000 and it is not the fact that it can't be done with a reticle that covers 2" or 3". It is more about the sight picture for me. I prefer to keep that 2" or 3"reduced to a finer point of aim. 2" could mean a lot on an elk if I am off on my wind call. Just another error we try to trim down.

Just my experience and opinion, your mileage may vary.

Jeff

 

[orkan]

Yet you buy an ATACR with its thick reticle?

 

[rick523]

Yet you buy an ATACR with its thick reticle?

I havn't said much on this thread, other than I prefer sfp. But man you just won't let it rest, your just too full of yourself, and since you are a sponser I will say this because of this thread, I wouldn't buy chit from you.

 

[Broz]

Yet you buy an ATACR with its thick reticle?

It is still thinner than many, but Yes, thicker than a NP-R1, and everyone here has heard me request a thinner one for it.

Here, see these old threads of mine:

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f116/how-could-we-improve-new-t-c-r-nightforce-105282/

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f116/5-5-22-nightforce-my-only-choice-99362/


I have even called NF and asked for a thin reticle for the ATACR. Just so you know, the ATACR reticle is thinner than the one we were just talking about by .080"+ . I will either get along with it until a better reticle is offered or go back to the NXS and NP-R1. I opted to go for the 125 + moa of elevation and ED glass and had to give a little on the reticle.

Why would you care? Or is this just another childish remark and you looking to argue more? Sorry if that sounds rude but you reap what you sew.

Jeff

 

[westcliffe01]

Few attempt what you have already done and it goes beyond the definition of Long range Hunting. Extra Long range for sure...

I have shot more than a few coyotes past 1000 along with more than a couple antelope between 1000 and 1300. I like to split the vertical thickness of them in 1/2 and for this I feel thinner is better. Not to long ago I was on a sitting coyote at 1760 yards and ready to attempt my first mile yote.
Jeff

 

[JackinSD]

Orkan and Broz have both made valid points in this thread. You might have to look for them between the jabs back and forth but they are there. Don't focus on the childish crap and you can find them. Page 34 of a thread that, without the childish crap, would well be under 10 pages.

Neither willing to give the other MUCH credit for the knowledge being passed on. Just pick at the part that they personally don't like or disagree with, or an inconsistent answer.

I have to give credit to both for not backind down from their personal beliefs though.

 

[Broz]

Few attempt what you have already done and it goes beyond the definition of Long range Hunting. Extra Long range for sure...

For some, yes I agree, and there are few that care to go that far. And I also will state that only a couple of the 19 big game kills we made last season with my rifle were past 1000. The average was probably 5 to 600 yards. But the technology is improving in every aspect. The 1000 yard one shot kill is very real with practice and good equipment in decent conditions. But even if we are just busting 1 moa rocks at a mile, I really enjoy it and have worked to be able to do it. That is why this site does indeed have an "ELR" forum. No disrespect meant, just offered what I do and prefer.

Thanks
Jeff

 

[westcliffe01]

For the moment, the longest "range" I have access to is 450 max. I just got 2 nice pieces of plate to make reactive targets so that I can spend more time working at the longer ranges. I need to get a wind meter and when I read that Kestrel is going to release one with the applied ballistics software and library, I decided that was worth waiting for...

Next year I will probably make the move to CO and will have access to more shooting locations (if it is not banned)...

 

[Tnwhip]

I just installed a 6x24 viper pst ffp. This is my first FFP scope. I was shooting it Saturday. At 200 yards I was shooting a diamon that was 3/4" from corner to corner. the cross hair just covered it but I could still see it and had no trouble shooting at it. I ranged a tree with a crow in it at 1080 yards. The cross hair did not block him. A SFP has worked all these years but I like this FFP scope. It is going to work out for the range and things I shoot at.

 

[bamadawg2009]

I havn't said much on this thread, other than I prefer sfp. But man you just won't let it rest, your just too full of yourself, and since you are a sponser I will say this because of this thread, I wouldn't buy chit from you.

Well said I clicked on this thread trying to decide if I wanted a FFP and now Im almost tempted to sell every scope I own and go back to open sights.

Note to moderators can we take out the bickering and arguing in this thread so we can reduce the post count from almost 40pages down to maybe 3 that are totally useful and cut the BULL so some people actually get some information out of this thread instead of mine is better/bigger than yours. I havent heard this kind of arguing since kindergarden.

Broz you make very valid points for the SFP which is kinda of why I don't see the reason to pay the extra money for the FFP, but Im sure somebody disagrees with me.