Reply With QuoteFFP will make it easier to make adjustments by letting you measure misses with the reticle.
SFP will be a better crosshair at all magnifications and is cheaper.
SFP then?
First Focal Plane looks like the way to go.
Opinions?
FFP will make it easier to make adjustments by letting you measure misses with the reticle.
SFP will be a better crosshair at all magnifications and is cheaper.
SFP then?
Scooter recently posted a video of him slamming prairie dogs. What ever scope he used seemed to work just fine.Originally Posted by rcmark
I think if he had a different focal plane scope than the one he used, it would work fine also.
I've had a few FFP scopes. I found I didn't really get much benefit from them.
I prefer to have the reticle cover less as I zoom up in magnification. I can either spin the turrets, or use my reticle subtensions at specific powers.
I'll spend my scope money for better glass and accurate adjustment before I'll spend it on FFP
"Muzzle velocity is a depreciating asset, not unlike a new car, but BC, like diamonds, is forever."-German A. Salazar
++++++++1
I like FFP but I've been using them in competition where time is critical for a couple years. Don't have to worry that I'm at the "correct" power where measuring with the reticle is accurate.
Id suggest you go to your local sporting store and look through both and then deside...most stores will take you out side to look through them or at least where i live they do.
Check out this video, it may answer some of your questions. This is part 20 of a whole series, a lot of information to try to absorb, but after viewing these I think you'll have your answer….and probably a whole lot more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wBr_brpSYk
Check out what is said about MEASURED hold off or adjustments for rapid follow up shots while shooting at extremely long range where FFP is absolutely necessary. Others feel you're better off with second focal plane…..'cause p-dogs don't shoot back
Also try to avoid buying a scope with parallax pre-set at 100 yds and not adjustable. It's been my experience that these tend to be at the lower end of the cost scale.
I hope this helps.
Last edited by Texas10; 09-27-2015 at 01:15 PM.
Now that I actually know the differences, I will NEVER go back to second focal scopes.
First you MUST match your turrets & reticle!! No stupid mil-dot reticle with 1/4 moa turrets, crap scopes. Have moa/moa, or mil/mil.
Now when you see that you missed by 2 dashes on the scope, turn the turret 2 dashes. Doesn't matter what magnification.
Buy a $230 Primary Arms 4-14x MIL-MIL scope and watch the folks that bought a $750 SWFA 3-15 get pissed because you can actually see targets at distance.
I'm a firm believer in the theory that if it bleeds, I can kill it.
Or.....when you miss to the right by two dashes you could just hold two dashes to the left. TOO EASY.
Exactly!
The other con of a FFP scope is that usually with the extra mechanics in the tube takes away from the elevation and windage adjustment range.
"Muzzle velocity is a depreciating asset, not unlike a new car, but BC, like diamonds, is forever."-German A. Salazar
Uhhhhh... I don't think so Tim...
The. Mechanics are identical, merely the location of the reticle differs. Crap scopes offer crap adjustment, regardless of focal plane. My PA has 36 Mil windage and elevation adjustment in a 30mm tube. NF and some others need a 35mm tube, sell the sizzle not the steak.
I'm a firm believer in the theory that if it bleeds, I can kill it.
Exactly, exactly, the ones who think otherwise are technichal minded and not hunters. Whats the Horus reticle all about? Its about holding
where the bullet hit and shoot without dialing. And, dialing to where the bullet hit cant get any easier either, and it makes no difference at all what turrets you have.
I will concede that for some types of competetion, or for those playing war games without a rangefinder, there could be advantages to matching turrets and mil/mil.
Otherwise buy a rangefinder and shoot. If you hunt or shoot the same places often enough you could even ace the rangefinder.
No way games or competitions up here, but we don't use rangefinders either. Milling is just as easy, isn't another thing to pack around (there are no stands around here), doesn't need batteries, and most important is a fun skill to learn.
Nothing like glassing game and letting a true shot fly. The nice gent I went hunting with last year was a true rangefinder guy. He freezes and fumbles for it or can't do much else besides poorly guessing without it.
To each his own, but I've never seen it do anything but take people's sense of range and wipe it out. Now if you only hunt in one location or distance, obviously that changes things.
I'm a firm believer in the theory that if it bleeds, I can kill it.
Either plane would be successful for long range target shooting. You can use a SFP scope for distance shooting when time isn't much a factor. When time is a factor, I would go with FFP.
They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
this is why im going FFP on my new build.
I will say that if you are shooting at distances far enough to make your targets hard to see with a decent scope, then you shouldn't be shooting that far. Im shooting with a viper pst ffp 6-24 and I dont have any problem so far. Ive gone out to 1500 yds...not shooting but just testing the glass. Its not bad.
Only down side I had to ffp scope is the reticle was impossible to see in low light. This was a problem in hunting, not so much target shooting. Ffp is excellent, just spend some extra for illuminated Reticle.
This is comparing 2 identical Sightron SIII tactical in 6-24 x 50. Both could Id the game easy but only the 2nd fp reticle could be seen. In order to see the ffp we needed to turn the power up to the point where it was to dark to see the game. We're in the process of switching to Illuminated reticle
For long range deer hunting etc I usually dial full power to observe what I'm going to shoot then dial back to spot my shot during recoil.
Last edited by hafejd30; 09-29-2015 at 01:05 PM.
I would strongly recomend any one learn to range with there reticle......but, would not want to hunt with a "long ranger" who did not use a range finder on there target of unknown size. For fear of waisting my hunting season tracking there bad shot.
Exactly why I didnt get the hslr scope. No illumination. Those cheap scopes with illumination are pretty terrible and the illumination doesn't really help because it glares. Something like a decent quality scope such as a viper pst actually makes sense to have illumination on.
Im affraid im going to have to see to believe some of the claims made with regard to ranging acuratly with the reticle.
Especially on targets at extreme distances of unknown size. An error of just 50 yards means a miss with even with magnums
at distances under 1000 yds.
Come on D, you know how big your deer are, you know how much chest area the lungs take-up, and you know how big their hearts are.
Someone who doesn't know those things are who I wouldn't hunt with, regardless of the equipment they have.
I'm a firm believer in the theory that if it bleeds, I can kill it.
A year ago I would have SFP and save your money, now I don't ever see me buying a SFP again. So much so, that I find myself always grabbing for a rifle that has a FFP over a SFP scope on it every time I go out.
More shooting, less typing.
After using ffp, I have a hard time even looking at sfp scopes.
Well i just checked the 8 whitetail deer heads we have hanging on the walls here all with full shoulder mounts. They vary by as much as 3" top to bottom.
We hunt bear here also and needless to say a 150# bear will be a far different size than a 300 # bear.
I have several scopes with dot reticles and as we all know a 1 minit dot covers 1" at 100 yds and 10" at 1000 yds, provided the power used is the power the dot was set up on.
Over many years ive made numerous attempts to range distant objects with those dots. Lets just say im not good enough to do it.
But them im not good enough to shoot my 308 acuratly at a mile either nor would i even consider trying it.
A 6.5 wsm with a 140 smk leaving the muzzel @ 3400 fps with a 100 yd zero, drops over 78" at 700 yds, and over 94" at 750 yds according to the chart i have.
So assuming everybody had a 3400 fps 6.5, an error of 50 yds at even 700 yds could mean a missed deer even assuming there were no other errors
with the shooting. Of coarse were talking first round hits here.
Guessing the distance, then seeing the hit and correcting off that for a follow up shot is a different situation than accuratly ranging the target.
Members who have read this thread in the last 1 days: 0
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks