FFP SFP discussion from an other post

So as to not continue the off-tracking of the other post...

Foxx,
My point was than if you have matching reticle/turrets in a FFP, you don't have to "hold" you can just adjust :cool:.
I shoot a lot of UKD targets and range constantly, very handy in a FFP.
The argument about reticle thickness being to big or to thin isn't an argument against FFP, it's an argument about a poorly designed reticle.

If someone is afraid of dialing corrections to shots, then perhaps the focal plane doesn't matter. I don't see why would wouldn't want to dial, personally. But to me in a FFP having a constant reference (reticle) helps my mind wrap around how far something really is. Tiny little cross hairs at all times, tends to fool the eye.

BDC's for holds, and hoping the calibrated atmosphere and ammo performance is constant; that's beyond me how someone would want it, but they sell the snot out of them....

Cheers

Thank you for the independent thread.
I can't help but put my "rant" on record but then feel guilty about hi-jacking.
If your shooting paper or steel you can use your reticle to measure a miss, but were my primary use is long range hunting misses can't be measured with a reticle unless the original impact is observed at the time of impact and then the "hold off" correction using the reticle for reference for a fast follow up is possible even with sfp. Assuming you target is even still available.
I dial every shot except that theoretical rushed follow up.
ALL my targets are at unknown distance but also of unknown size making reticle ranging for any serious distance impractical at best and realistically irresponsible.
.
Because almost all of my shots are using a laser range finder and rarely at paper or steel. I rarely range with my reticle and only care about the reticle for heavy fog or snow ranging were the laser can't function. For this type of occasional reticle use ffp or even matching ret to turret offers little to no benefit.
.
While some ffp reticles sizes are better than others, there is a compromise even with the good ones. A sfp doesn't need to compromise the reticle thickness at all.

If a guy does his homework, he can use a bdc reticle very effectively and by using a ballistics computer and the moa spacing of the bdc reference points he can determine short to mid range hold over for any cartridge, environment or load very effectively.
If a guy does not do his homework and thinks the scope is magically going to land the bullet 500 yards away on the #5 hash mark regardless of load and conditions: He is an idiot and no level or type of equipment can fix lazy or willfully ignorant.

I can totally get behind that logic. My issue with the BDC(for the people I know use them) is that they use the dots as gospel drops. Which leads me to the exact same conclusion as you about that.
Different strokes I suppose, but the reticles always a single size, to me seem a compromise as well; I just haven't found one that floats my boat. Again this is a reticle argument more than a Focal plane argument.

I do hunt, but at this point in my life ranging known sized targets gets my blood pumping more than anything else. By volume, most of my game(deer, etc, not coyotes) have fallen to a sfp scope. I just get giddy about(at least in my mind) the simplicity of a ffp and dialing my corrections.

Cheers

I think the three of us agree with each other. It's a matter of knowing how to use what you have. I prefer FFP's, too. I can't afford them for all of my rifles though. The Primary Arms seems to be good enough considering it is FFP, and I have already committed a lot of money to several fairly high end scopes with sfp that I am not ready to give up on just yet.

As for holding off rather than properly dialing in, I agree. But I imagine there isn't always time for that, and, for a first shot in rush situation, I would rather have FFP so I can hold off for windage and elevation with a certain amount of confidence using the dots, but not with a SFP unless I am at full (or some other known, specific) power.

Personally, I can't stand the idea of turrets that do not match the reticle. That's WAY too complicated for me, and seems entirely unnecessary.

You guys are in a completely different ball game then I am! :very_drunk:

I just have my very first FFP (Burris Veracity 4-20x50) and I am very pleased with it thus far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FEENIX

I just have my very first FFP (Burris Veracity 4-20x50) and I am very pleased with it thus far.

---

NOTE: Not hijacking. With that said - Feenix, please go to my thread, "Millett took a dump...", dated 1/20/2015, and tell me what you think of that Burris.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxx

Personally, I can't stand the idea of turrets that do not match the reticle. That's WAY too complicated for me, and seems entirely unnecessary.

---

There is truth in that statement. Doing the conversions from mil to MOA is crazy and once you can get your mind wrapped around thinking in mils vs inches, using a Mil dot/milradian reticle is very effective.

I typically keep most of my shots on game within the MPBR of the caliber I'm shooting, but for longer range shots when conditions allow, I typically will dial in the range that the laser range finder gives me. I'll typically employ Kentucky windage using the mil dots to compensate for wind or if a second shot is available, but that presumes the animal stays put and I see where my first shot hit.

I enjoy doing the ranging drills with the reticle as a backup to the LRF, but definitely not my primary method.

I think the comment from Marine 24 with regard to getting your (mind wrapped) around something speaks vollums for most things not just scopes.
When you consider that as recent as about 30 years ago none of the scopes or reticles referred to even existed. Yet long range hunting and target
shooting did. In 1975 if you knew 50 long range hunters probably 40 of them had a Unertle scope on their gun. Those that didnt would have another
brand that was for all practible purposes the same thing with a different label. The shots being made then were just as long as are being made today.
The only difference in that regard is that today many more people are making them. Nobody attempted to range with their reticle because they didnt have to.
Reason being they had very good rangfinders that were and still are better than 90% of todays lazers. I would agree that a mil dot type reticle is very usefull
for hold over shots. But they were available then also in custom foremat from people like Premier reticle or Lee dot. Next time your out fooling around shooting
rocks or something and you miss 3' wide and 2' low, if your in a hurry just hold and shoot. But if your not, or even if the miss is much larger, just hold on your aiming
point and without moving the gun wind over to the hit. Then lets talk about mills and minits and which is best or if it even matters.
And im not advocating we all run out and buy a Unertle scope either. Im talking about getting your mind wrapped around whatever works and making sure everybody
in your group is on the same page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yobuck

...The shots being made then were just as long as are being made today. The only difference in that regard is that today many more people are making them.

---

Very telling and timely comment. I was just reading about the Battle of Spotsylvania during the Civil War and how Union General Sedgwick was killed by a Confederate sniper shooting a Whitworth .45 Caliber rifle from 800 yards.

With time comes progress and innovations that allow mere mortals or knuckledraggers like me the opportunity to accomplish something approaching this feat. We've come a long way with the 10X Unertl I'm accustomed to with the Marine Corps M40 to the S&B that tops the M40A3 now. Knowing your gear still rings true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marine24

Very telling and timely comment. I was just reading about the Battle of Spotsylvania during the Civil War and how Union General Sedgwick was killed by a Confederate sniper shooting a Whitworth .45 Caliber rifle from 800 yards.

With time comes progress and innovations that allow mere mortals or knuckledraggers like me the opportunity to accomplish something approaching this feat. We've come a long way with the 10X Unertl I'm accustomed to with the Marine Corps M40 to the S&B that tops the M40A3 now. Knowing your gear still rings true.

---

Was it 800 yards? or was it 500 yards?

Source I was reading said 800 yards but who knows. Long range shooting is like fishing. Distance, like the fish, gets longer as time goes on.