I've gone to the dark side

[J.Baker]

I've been curious about NightForce scopes and all the hype that surrounds them for a number of years now, but never wanted to spend the money. That changed last week however and I'm the proud new owner of a SHV 4-14x50 F1 with MOAR reticle. Mostly it will reside on my AR15, but I got a QD mount with it so I can easily pop it off and use it on the new Stealth I'll be getting for review in the near future - at least that's what I told myself to justify the purchase. lol

My already overweight 10-lb AR now tips the scales at 11-lbs with the new addition.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v632/MrFurious45833/Gun%20Stuff/DSC01033.jpg

[LoneWolf]

Nice! I'm sure you'll be pleased by the upgrade. This scope is on my list of possibilities for a 223 trainer rifle in the future, but I think I'll pick up a rimfire first!

[LongRange]

what do you think about the glass?

[J.Baker]

Had a hard time deciding between this or another Viper PST 6-24x50 FFP. The PST is cheaper and offers more magnification, but my curiosity towards the NightForce won out. Definitely like the integrated illumination/side-focus turret (like the Razor HD) compared to the ocular mounted illumination knob of the PST. The magnification dial moves easily without being to loose or stiff which is nice as some are obnoxiously stiff and take forever to loosen up. *cough* Nikon *couch*

[WinnieTheBoom]

Could you do a box test and report your findings? I'd be interested to hear about glass quality and repeatability.

[J.Baker]

Glass quality is great. Only negatives thus far are 1) the markings on the side-focus knob aren't anywhere near close to being right, and 2) the FFP reticle is all but useless at anything under 8x as it just gets too small. I didn't get a chance to do a box test today as I just slipped out with a single 20rd mag of mil-surp green tips to get it relatively zeroed at 100. The weather is supposed to be great for the next 8-10 days so I'll be putting plenty of time in with it in the next week or so with some Hornady Steel Match ammo.

Here's the view of the 200 yard berm at our range through it at 14x.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v632/MrFurious45833/Gun%20Stuff/DSC01042.jpg

[LongRange]

My gen 2 is the same way...not sure where it get to small to see but I'll check and my parallax don't match up to my eyes...but that's my eyes not the scope.

nice glass though!!

[yobuck]

Question I would have is that since it is a parralex adjustment and not a focus knob, would that influence the number locations?
Ive often noticed the same thing on the old front adjustable scopes.
The comment on the reticle is interesting, especially since ive never looked thru a ffp scope.
At some point in distance, would the opposite be true where the reticle might appear too large?

[J.Baker]

Question I would have is that since it is a parralex adjustment and not a focus knob, would that influence the number locations?
Ive often noticed the same thing on the old front adjustable scopes.
The comment on the reticle is interesting, especially since ive never looked thru a ffp scope.
At some point in distance, would the opposite be true where the reticle might appear too large?

Spent a little time this afternoon at the range again playing with the parallax adjustment. Dialed in at 200 yards with no noticeable parallax the I'm between the 100 and 150 indications on the dial. Dialed in at 100 yards it's parallax free between the 50 and 60 yards markings on the dial. I've never relied on the markings 100% as I know they're rarely ever dead on, but usually they're pretty close - both on AO's and side-focuses.

As for the reticle, I guess it would really depend on the reticle design and scope magnification, and whether the reticle was specifically designed for that magnification range. On the NF, as shown in the photo above, the reticle is optimally sized for the maximum magnification (14x). As such when you dial down the magnification it continually gets smaller and smaller. Also, the NF reticle has subtensions ever 1 MOA making them squish pretty tightly together at 4x

Here's a pic of the reticle at 4x. The camera zoom and white backdrop makes it a lot easier to see in the photo than it is looking through the scope, but is shows how small the reticle gets compared to the full view through the optic.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v632/MrFurious45833/Gun%20Stuff/DSC01044.jpg


The reticle in my Viper PST 6-24x50mm FFP is setup a little different as I would say it was designed to be more usable through the entire range of magnification. At 6x you get the full view of the reticle with 40 MOA of hashmarks on the lower vertical. When cranked up to 24x the 24 MOA mark on the lower vertical is right on the edge of the view. One big difference here is that the PST's reticle has the subtensions spaced every 2 MOA rather than every MOA. This combined with the scaling to better match the whole magnification range make it a lot easier to use at the lowest power.

PST @ 6x
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v632/MrFurious45833/Gun%20Stuff/DSC01045.jpg


PST @ 24x
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v632/MrFurious45833/Gun%20Stuff/DSC01046.jpg


As you can see the crosshair/stadia lines do get thicker as you increase the power, but all the one's I have looked through have them about the same thickness as you'd find in a SFP reticle so it's not an issue.

[FiveInADime]

Hey guys, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything but I'd just like to know what your needs are for a FFP scope.

I would never want or need a FFP reticle and I don't understand why they are popular outside of tactical match circles. I guess it's because I have a range finder that ranges out beyond my shooting distance and I always shoot at max magnification when shooting past 300 yards.

Just curious, not trying to be a jerk.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[LoneWolf]

I feel the same way about SFP scopes..... I like my reticle to function the way it's ment too at any magnification I choose for a specific shot. I also never dial wind and always hold for it. To each their own.

[FiveInADime]

I feel the same way about SFP scopes..... I like my reticle to function the way it's ment too at any magnification I choose for a specific shot. I also never dial wind and always hold for it. To each their own.
But how often do you need to shoot at something at a range where hold off is THAT critical and you're not at max magnification? What real-world application is there if you're not a sniper ranging targets?

I would rather figure out the multiplier on lower magnification than max on a SFP reticle than have to try and read tiny, tiny, tiny little stadia at lower magnification with a FFP.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[LoneWolf]

I don't prefer max magnification. I only use max magnification for group shooting. Lower magnification allows me to see more of what's going on around the target to make a better wind estimation and many times I'm shooting strings of multiple targets at multiple distances at multiple locations around the range. High magnification doesn't allow for quick target transfers.

So the answer to your question is every shot because I only use full magnification less than 5% of the time when I'm shooting unless I'm doing load development.

[LongRange]

Hey guys, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything but I'd just like to know what your needs are for a FFP scope.

I would never want or need a FFP reticle and I don't understand why they are popular outside of tactical match circles. I guess it's because I have a range finder that ranges out beyond my shooting distance and I always shoot at max magnification when shooting past 300 yards.

Just curious, not trying to be a jerk.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

because its cool to have one LOL!


But how often do you need to shoot at something at a range where hold off is THAT critical and you're not at max magnification? What real-world application is there if you're not a sniper ranging targets?

I would rather figure out the multiplier on lower magnification than max on a SFP reticle than have to try and read tiny, tiny, tiny little stadia at lower magnification with a FFP.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

have you ever shot in a match on a clock from 300 to 900yds in changing winds with no sighters or second chances?

i like lonewolf only shoot full power during load development the rest of my shooting is done between 15 and 20xs...when your on the clock and dont get a second shot you dont want to be trying to remember what your actual holds are at a certain power as you already have to remember 4-5 different elevation numbers.
i see guys all the time at matches that run SFP with the scope at full power and they end up shooting the wrong targets because their field of view is to small to quickly find their target.

im not defending or saying a FFP scope is better or everyone needs one but there is a reason other than ranging where they will out preform a SFP scope.

[FiveInADime]

have you ever shot in a match on a clock from 300 to 900yds in changing winds with no sighters or second chances?


No, and that was more to my point. That is the situation where FFP makes way more sense than SFP. But where else does it make sense?

Only small-bore 3p and one high-power service rifle match for a qualification as far as competition for me.

But for a typical shooter like myself, a guy that hunts a little and plinks a little bit at intermediate distances, SFP makes more sense, in my opinion. I just see a lot of people that demand a FFP scope that probably don't need it and the value of it will be completely lost on them.




Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[LongRange]

I couldn't agree more.

and to add to this...the reason the FFP scopes have become all the rage is because of the precision rifle series or PRS.

[Jamie]

Hey guys, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything but I'd just like to know what your needs are for a FFP scope.

I would never want or need a FFP reticle and I don't understand why they are popular outside of tactical match circles. I guess it's because I have a range finder that ranges out beyond my shooting distance and I always shoot at max magnification when shooting past 300 yards.

Just curious, not trying to be a jerk.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I used to think the same way until I purchased a FFP, so it is simple for me....mirage.

Friday we were out shooting steel in 200 yard increments out to 6oo, then 100 increments from there to 1K. It was very nice in the morning before the sun got to beaming and mirage kicked up. When mirage did get to going I was able to dial down to 15x without having to adjust anything else. Still could see all my MOA lines and was able to keep shooting with out having to try and figure where my "BDC" would be on "X" power. I prefer not to dial inside of 1K if possible and I have 35 MOA in the reticle.

[yobuck]

I used to think the same way until I purchased a FFP, so it is simple for me....mirage.

Friday we were out shooting steel in 200 yard increments out to 6oo, then 100 increments from there to 1K. It was very nice in the morning before the sun got to beaming and mirage kicked up. When mirage did get to going I was able to dial down to 15x without having to adjust anything else. Still could see all my MOA lines and was able to keep shooting with out having to try and figure where my "BDC" would be on "X" power. I prefer not to dial inside of 1K if possible and I have 35 MOA in the reticle.


Well ill crawl out on the limb and say I think most people would have enough good sence to turn the power down when conditions dictate it best to do so.
As for using the reticle in lieu of dialing for other than close follow up shots, it wouldn't be advisable for most of us.
Keeping track of what mark to use at certain distances would in itself require a chart.
As one who for decades has used multible dot reticles, ill say it aint for everybody.
Nothings perfect for all situations, but regardless of scope choice, dialing would be the answer in most cases for most people.

[J.Baker]

Hey guys, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything but I'd just like to know what your needs are for a FFP scope.

I would never want or need a FFP reticle and I don't understand why they are popular outside of tactical match circles. I guess it's because I have a range finder that ranges out beyond my shooting distance and I always shoot at max magnification when shooting past 300 yards.

Just curious, not trying to be a jerk.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Range finders are nice when you're at the range or camped out at a shooting bench or in the bed of your truck in a field waiting on a groundhog or prairie dog to present itself. I have one (rangefinder), but more often than not I find I leave it at home or in the truck when I go varmint hunting (I suffer from CRS). As such it's nice having a scope that I don't have to remember to dial the magnification to a specific setting for the reticle spacing to be correct. I know how tall an average size groundhog is when on all fours or when he's sitting up on his hind legs and I use those heights to determine range with the reticle.


But how often do you need to shoot at something at a range where hold off is THAT critical and you're not at max magnification? What real-world application is there if you're not a sniper ranging targets?

I would rather figure out the multiplier on lower magnification than max on a SFP reticle than have to try and read tiny, tiny, tiny little stadia at lower magnification with a FFP.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

One thing you are forgetting is that most high magnification SFP scopes have the reticle calibrated for a lower magnification like 10x or 12x rather than max magnification. Now if the manufacturer is smart they'll make the ranging magnification 1/2 of max magnification so the math is easy if you want to range at max, but most manufacturers haven't quite figured that out yet.


No, and that was more to my point. That is the situation where FFP makes way more sense than SFP. But where else does it make sense?

Only small-bore 3p and one high-power service rifle match for a qualification as far as competition for me.

But for a typical shooter like myself, a guy that hunts a little and plinks a little bit at intermediate distances, SFP makes more sense, in my opinion. I just see a lot of people that demand a FFP scope that probably don't need it and the value of it will be completely lost on them.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

For most casual shooters, whether a scope has a FFP or SFP isn't going to make any difference to them. I just got my first FFP scope last year and this NightForce (thanks for hi-jacking my thread BTW) is my second. I still have quite a few SFP scopes on rifles I shoot regularly and I have no issue going back and forth between the two. I got along without FFP for 30 years of hunting and shooting and I'm sure I could have gone 30 more without, but I can utilize the benefit they offer in the roles I'm using them in - and that's really what it all boils down to.

To me the FFP v. SFP debate is akin to the old standard duplex v. ballistic reticle debate. Do you really need FFP or a ballistic reticle? No, but you can't deny the benefits they provide and once you do have one you'll find yourself finding ways to take advantage of those benefits in your everyday shooting.

[FiveInADime]

- Range finders are nice when you're at the range or camped out at a shooting bench or in the bed of your truck in a field waiting on a groundhog or prairie dog to present itself. .

- One thing you are forgetting is that most high magnification SFP scopes have the reticle calibrated for a lower magnification like 10x or 12x rather than max magnification.

- (thanks for hi-jacking my thread BTW)



- Not much of a big game hunter? I grew up and hunt in Northern Arizona and I now live in the desert around Arizona. I've been on a lot of trophy mule-deer and coues deer hunts and I've never once seen someone range a deer with their reticle. Lazed every time. But a lot of guys do have FFP reticles they forget to take advantage of in the heat of the moment.

- I've had 2 scopes with a BDC/ranging reticle one is a Nikon with the silly circles, and the other is my Vortex I just bought SFP EBR-1 MOA. Both are meant to use at max magnification. So I guess you're right, I wasn't aware that most SFP reticles were calibrated for less than max magnification.

- Truly sorry about hijacking your thread. I had a little bug up my rear because a guy at the range was telling me how essential his Nightforce FFP scope was to him. He's at the range almost every time I visit and I doubt his rifle goes anywhere but on top of the concrete bench. (200-yard max range).

I've done some prairie dog shooting up by Seligman, AZ and I can't say I missed having a FFP reticle (I was actually using an old Weaver T16 on my uncle's .222Rem). But I could see where it would add some excitement trying to range and shot without looking away from the scope.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk