Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Why FFP versus SPF?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Broz" data-source="post: 855710" data-attributes="member: 7503"><p>101, there are people who use them both and like what they have. I see the same things you did every time I look through a FFP. The strong selling point for FFP is that the sub-tensions are calibrated on any power. The problem I see is on many FFP's, at lower powers the sub-tensions are so small you can not even use them. The last 6~24 PST I looked through, it was about 10 or 12X before the reticle sub-tensions were large enough to see well enough to use. Yes in a FFP the reticle covers the same amount of target on 6 X as it does on 24X. Many FFP's do have thicker reticles, not all but the majority. This is so you will be able to see it at low power settings. With the SFP the target grows with any increase of power as the reticle remains the same size. I like this and the reticle is more visible on the lower settings. I may crank it down to locate the target and get point of aim close, then as I crank it up the target grows allowing me a fine aim point. I prefer fine reticles and large targets for long range. You will hear the SFP reticle is calibrated on one power setting... Not true. My MOAR reticle in my ATACR is 1 moa per line on 25X and it is 2 moa per line on 12.5 X. If I want to do the math I can use other power settings too. But I use these two as they are a no brainer to remember. If you are worried about the reticle calibrations for a follow up shot it makes no difference to me what power I am on. I can self spot the miss, count the lines over to the point of impact from point of aim, then simply hold that number of lines for the follow up. Makes absolutely no difference what power my sfp scope is on to use this method, and it works. For my type of hunting and long range work I seldom use hold over, very few quick shots so this is why SFP works so well for me. I feel I give up nothing. If I am in dark timber I can see my reticle just fine on low power settings as it will appear larger than the reduced size of a FFP. In this scenario most times I would be shooting point blank and a hold over would not be used anyway. </p><p> </p><p>This is simply my personal opinion of the two. This topic has been beaten to death. I am not looking for a debate. I have used both, done my own comparisons and am very confident I have made the best choice for my application.</p><p> </p><p>YMMV</p><p> </p><p>Jeff</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Broz, post: 855710, member: 7503"] 101, there are people who use them both and like what they have. I see the same things you did every time I look through a FFP. The strong selling point for FFP is that the sub-tensions are calibrated on any power. The problem I see is on many FFP's, at lower powers the sub-tensions are so small you can not even use them. The last 6~24 PST I looked through, it was about 10 or 12X before the reticle sub-tensions were large enough to see well enough to use. Yes in a FFP the reticle covers the same amount of target on 6 X as it does on 24X. Many FFP's do have thicker reticles, not all but the majority. This is so you will be able to see it at low power settings. With the SFP the target grows with any increase of power as the reticle remains the same size. I like this and the reticle is more visible on the lower settings. I may crank it down to locate the target and get point of aim close, then as I crank it up the target grows allowing me a fine aim point. I prefer fine reticles and large targets for long range. You will hear the SFP reticle is calibrated on one power setting... Not true. My MOAR reticle in my ATACR is 1 moa per line on 25X and it is 2 moa per line on 12.5 X. If I want to do the math I can use other power settings too. But I use these two as they are a no brainer to remember. If you are worried about the reticle calibrations for a follow up shot it makes no difference to me what power I am on. I can self spot the miss, count the lines over to the point of impact from point of aim, then simply hold that number of lines for the follow up. Makes absolutely no difference what power my sfp scope is on to use this method, and it works. For my type of hunting and long range work I seldom use hold over, very few quick shots so this is why SFP works so well for me. I feel I give up nothing. If I am in dark timber I can see my reticle just fine on low power settings as it will appear larger than the reduced size of a FFP. In this scenario most times I would be shooting point blank and a hold over would not be used anyway. This is simply my personal opinion of the two. This topic has been beaten to death. I am not looking for a debate. I have used both, done my own comparisons and am very confident I have made the best choice for my application. YMMV Jeff [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Why FFP versus SPF?
Top