Straight Shooter
Well-Known Member
Am looking at shooting 1000 yards. Why do I need a FFP scope. Isn't the reticle at low power too fine? Please educate me.
Talk me into a FFP scope if you can.
- Thread starter Straight Shooter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
EdWalton
Well-Known Member
Most of the time the crosshairs are usable, if the light conditions are difficult I have to increase the magnification to see the crosshairs; but with the front focal plane I have that option when needed.
R.Morehouse
Well-Known Member
Look at the scopes used in F-Class. NF Comp 15-55 and a host of others.....All 2nd FP. If I was going to run a FFP scope it would have one of the best ranging reticles available in the scope I chose.gun)............................
Hondo64d
Well-Known Member
Depends on the magnification range you want to use. I have a Bushnell LRHS 3-12. Fantastic scope, but I find the mil marks unusable at anything less than 6x. I think that magnification range would be better served with a 2nd FP reticle. The downside with 2nd FP is that the mil values (or MOA values) are only accurate at one specific magnification value, usually the scope's max mag.
For me, I would prefer a 2nd FP reticle on any variable that has less than 6x on the lower end. Above that, a FFP would be preferable.
John
dragman
Well-Known Member
I can't find a good reason to buy one. I just can't, and as a shooter I am always looking for something to throw my money at. gun)
jsthntn247
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2009
- Messages
- 887
They are good for Tactical type shooting or military. You can see your miss and know how far off you were, can only do that on max power with sfp. I never use below 8 or 9x on any scope so the reticle not visible on lower power does not bother me.
dragman
Well-Known Member
I don't see how that is a benefit. if you see your miss with a SFP no mater what power I don't know who is looking to see how far they missed by they are using the splash to readjust and take another shot so both scopes work.
jsthntn247
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2009
- Messages
- 887
I was shooting a tactical match last month. Target was 727 yards away. The first shot I saw the bullet go through the reticle .2 mils high and .5 mils to the right. I made the correction and put 7 consecutive hits on target. Being that it was a ffp scope I knew immediately EXACTLY what correction to make. If it was a sfp scope and not on the power setting where the reticle was accurate I would not know the exact correction to make and would have to think about where to hold then hold off the target in the open with no reference. When you have 60 seconds to make multiple hits a varying differences from different positions a ffp scope is a must.
Straight Shooter
Well-Known Member
jsthntn247,
can't you do that with a SFP scope also? Just see where your shot hit and move over the correct hashmark no matter what power you are on?
can't you do that with a SFP scope also? Just see where your shot hit and move over the correct hashmark no matter what power you are on?
Wind Gypsy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 147
If you have to make a precise shot id much prefer to dial and hold dead on and maybe for wind than try to hold precisely for drop and wind.
dragman
Well-Known Member
That method isn't hard with a 2fp IMHO. Just don't see the benefit of the ffp unless its in battle or I have no rangefinder
All of my scopes except for the last 2 purchases are FFPs and I'm very pleased with them. Try ...
or
Last edited by a moderator:
davkrat
Well-Known Member
With my 2.5-10 anything 200 yards or further is going to be on max power. With my 4-16 I can't imagine having it on less than full power on anything less than 300 yards. Who is possibly going to be shooting beyond 400 yards on anything less than full power. My duplex reticles intends 2 MOA on full power. With any flat shooting modern cartridge 2 MOA is close enough for a quick wind correction at medium range. It takes a pretty hefty wind to need more than 2 MOA correction. I've never shot a tactical match but in my experience shooting ground squirrels even a bad wind call at short-mid range is usually within 2 MOA and I can easily hold over to the duplex or dial a minute.
I'm as far from tacticool as you can get though.
Lastly on my scopes I'm always either on the lowest setting when moving or on the highest setting once in position. I just don't see it being an issue. If I'm going to take a snap shot at a moving target it's not going to be far enough away for long distance bells and whistles to even apply. If it is that far I'll be on high power and my scope subtends what it's supposed to. The tiny reticle on low power would drive me nuts though.
I'm as far from tacticool as you can get though.
Lastly on my scopes I'm always either on the lowest setting when moving or on the highest setting once in position. I just don't see it being an issue. If I'm going to take a snap shot at a moving target it's not going to be far enough away for long distance bells and whistles to even apply. If it is that far I'll be on high power and my scope subtends what it's supposed to. The tiny reticle on low power would drive me nuts though.
IMO, simple answer to the OP's question.....for 1000 yard shooting, using a FFP will make no difference in his shooting results.
I think the benefit of using a FFP gets realized if you are fully indoctrinated to the use of the MIL system and use it for BOTH ranging and shot corrections using the reticle. The military applications for ranging have been standardized from human forms to tank sizes, and all communications are standardized using the MIL system. A FFP offers the flexibility to change magnification without effecting the computation. Also, what if the SFP scope magnification is not on in the heat of battle? I think if you are a MIL system user for your hunting and shooting, and/or compete in certain tactical competitions requiring scope ranging I think the FFP is a benefit. This is the application it was designed for. I think if you are using the MOA system, for the hunting/shooting that comprises the majority of the use on this site, the benefits of the FFP become much less convincing and there are easy work arounds with a SFP for most instances where a FFP is claimed to offer an advantage. Early on I started with MIL ranging and holds but have since moved to MOA. Since, with several years of LR shooting/hunting and a bunch of game taken, I don't think I have had an instance where FFP would have made a difference in the result. I also very much prefer a constant reticle size/orientation which is where 100% of my focus is on the shot. In the end though, I think it all comes down to application and personal preference.
I think the benefit of using a FFP gets realized if you are fully indoctrinated to the use of the MIL system and use it for BOTH ranging and shot corrections using the reticle. The military applications for ranging have been standardized from human forms to tank sizes, and all communications are standardized using the MIL system. A FFP offers the flexibility to change magnification without effecting the computation. Also, what if the SFP scope magnification is not on in the heat of battle? I think if you are a MIL system user for your hunting and shooting, and/or compete in certain tactical competitions requiring scope ranging I think the FFP is a benefit. This is the application it was designed for. I think if you are using the MOA system, for the hunting/shooting that comprises the majority of the use on this site, the benefits of the FFP become much less convincing and there are easy work arounds with a SFP for most instances where a FFP is claimed to offer an advantage. Early on I started with MIL ranging and holds but have since moved to MOA. Since, with several years of LR shooting/hunting and a bunch of game taken, I don't think I have had an instance where FFP would have made a difference in the result. I also very much prefer a constant reticle size/orientation which is where 100% of my focus is on the shot. In the end though, I think it all comes down to application and personal preference.
