Leupold FFP or SFP ?

elkslayerjc

Active Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Messages
34
I'm looking at getting a new scope for my long range 300 RUM. I have been a die hard leupold fan for years. I am wanting a Mark 4 in 8.5x25x50mm but I'm not sure if I want the ER or the LR version. If anyone has used the ER with the FFP (front focal plane) reticle please give me some feedback on hunting situations; low light conditions, close shots, etc. And really what is the difference between the two. thanks
 
Leupold || FAQs

9. What is the difference between a front focal plane (1st focal plane) reticle and a rear focal plane (2nd focal plane) reticle?
Most riflescopes utilize a rear focal plane reticle design, creating a situation where the apparent size of the reticle does not change as the magnification is adjusted. In these scopes, the amount of target area covered by the reticle is inversely proportional to magnification; as the magnification is increased, the amount of target area covered by the reticle is decreased. This can be seen by looking through a variable magnification scope and increasing the magnification setting. As the power is increased, the apparent size of the target is increased, but the reticle appears to remain the same size; the result is that the reticle covers less of the target when the magnification is increased.

Rear Focal Plane Reticles – In general, hunting scopes are designed with rear focal plane reticles; this allows the reticle to appear bolder and heavier when set to low magnification, but appear thinner and more precise when set to high magnification. Most hunters set variable magnification scopes to a mid-level magnification for general carry situations, reducing magnification in low-light or heavy cover situations, and increasing magnification for longer, more precise shooting solutions. Rear focal plane designs allow the reticle to appear bolder in low light, making them easy to see and faster to acquire when the light is fading. This same property is advantageous in situations where heavy cover may be encountered, allowing easy differentiation between the reticle and vegetation. If a longer distance shot is to be taken, the magnification can be increased, creating a situation where the reticle covers less of the target, allowing the user to be more precise. If a front focal design were used, hunters would notice that in low-light or heavy-cover situations, the reticle would become much smaller and more difficult to see on low magnification; right when they need the reticle to be bold and easy to acquire.

Front Focal Plane Reticles – Many tactical groups prefer front focal plane designs because common tactical reticles serve a dual purpose: a point of aim and a means of measurement. Reticles such as a mil dot are based on a specific subtension and require exact feature spacing to be accurate; if this type of reticle is used in a rear focal plane design, the scope must be used on a single, specific magnification (typically high power). Placing this type of reticle in a front focal plane design allows the operator to use the scope on any magnification while retaining the exact spacing of the reticle features.
 
My choice is SFP with the Leupold Mark 4. I love the TMR reticle even though it subtends mils at max power with the M1 MOA turrets. If they had an MOA reticle to match the M1 turrets I would be more willing to part with the extra cash for the FFP.

If having matching MOA reticle and turrets concerns you, the TMR reticle subtends as an MOA reticle at slighly less than max power with an SFP. Otherwise, the only way to get matching turrets with a Leupold is to either buy an FFP scope with M5 turrets, or custom order an SFP with M5 turrets.

Either way you're stuck with mils, which may be good or bad depending on what you're accustomed to. Leupold does not offer a dedicated MOA reticle to go with the M1 turrets.
 
I have owned (or still do) both types. My first MK4 was exactly as described above. 8.5-25x50 LR/T M1 w/TMR reticle, dial in MOA, hold wind in Mils... irritating... but doable. I traded that scope for a MOA/MOA NightForce... anywho, my current MK4 is a 6.5-20x50 ER/T MK4 M5-A, 34mm main tube with auto-locking elevation turret. This is a FFP scope, TMR Reticle & M5 .10mil adjustments. I have NO intention of parting with this beast...

In your situation, do you intend to use the reticle for UKD (unknown distance) measurements? Or intend to learn how? If not, I think the SFP is just fine & not really worth the extra expense, just crank it to the designated power & fire when ready. Or if you always dial for both wind & elev, then it's also a moot point.

The real advantages of the FFP's are (IMHO) the ability to use holdovers at and power setting & the ability to better use the reticle for ranging measurements.
 
I have the ffp,mil/mil. 6-20x50. I love the scope and use the capabilities. I like that I can set holds to memory in mill adjust, as a smaller number,7mil gets me 1000. I hunt in foggy snowy area and am working on getting accurate mil reads,compared to lazer and in log book. Reticule has a 1/5 mil section. Most wind calls that are in 10mph, take 1.1 mil for a hold, wind is not a major where I hunt, east side larger factor.Scope has all I look for just wish it was 1/2 the price
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts

Top