1st Focal Plane or 2nd Focal Plane scope for varmints

[fredo]

Will pick up my own slack & show the easy math path to figuring how 'thick' a FFP reticle is...

First, let's establish the constant: 1miliradian = "3.6" @ 100yds

Next, let's use a nice round distance value: 1,000yds

Therefore, 1mil @ 1,000yds = 36" (Multiplying 3.6 x 10, as 10 x 100 = 1,000)
This also a constant, just showing math for use with any distance...

Easy, yes?

Once you have solved for 1mil at a given distance, you simply multiply the reticle thickness value!

In the case of the Gen2XR reticle referenced above, the thickness of the main crosshair = 0.025mil. (That info should be included with your scope. If not, give CS a call, and they'll have it for ya)

Now, just take the inch constant you solved for above (36"), and multiply it by the reticle thickness (0.025)

Viola! The Gen2XR reticle in my 5-25x ,covers ONLY 0.9" at 1,000yds

Repeat: this FFP reticle covers LESS THAN 1 INCH at 1,000 yards

Now, once I have that value established, I can use THAT constant, for any other distance....

Sooooo, to stay easy with #s again, @ 500yds, the Gen2XR will cover only 0.45".
1/2 the distance, 1/2 the thickness, since the FFP subtends the same (0.025mils), regardless...

Too thick, some say???
The more you know...

 

[fredo]

Comparatively, the Gen2Mildot in another FFP scope I have is 0.06mils thick

Easy math says that will cover 2.16" @ 1,000yards (36 x 0.06)

So, we learn the Gen2Mildot reticle possibly become bothersome for a critter as small as a 3-4" wide p-dog. Not ideal for shooting p-dogs at that extended range, but it only covers 1.08" @ 500yds

Likewise, covers right at 1/2" @ 250yds
Easy Peasy!

Just sayin' the range you're shooting at is certainly a deciding factor in reticle selection...

Now, everyone reading this can easily figure out how thick a FFP reticle will be, without buying it, or even looking through it.

Match the FFP reticle tor what you're shooting, and how far it is. You'll have NO worries, and enjoy benefits...

The more you know

 

[Milo 2.0]

I’ll be the first to admit I don’t do change well. It seems to me that consistency relates to accuracy for me. I couldn’t go from moa to mils and back, I understand it’s only math, but kudos to those that can.

We all fight change unless we are the driving force behind it. Sometimes the people not wanting to adhere to change end up benefitting the most.
You're 100% correct that consistency = accuracy, I shoot the same actions, stocks, etc.., but because I understand both mils and moa it's not a problem for me. Given the fact none of us can figure a quick firing solution without a dope card, phone app, etc.., I use a Kestrel 5700, it's as simple as changing profiles in the unit.
There is one drawback to FFP for guys who like simple, with FFP you are getting a RETICLE, no target dots, no duplex, it's going to be busy. There are more FFP scopes for sale daily all because someone thought they could adapt to the reticle they chose. Make no mistake either, some reticles can have so many lines, that missed shots get lost in the noise of the lines that are supposed to be aids.

 

[JRS]

We all fight change unless we are the driving force behind it. Sometimes the people not wanting to adhere to change end up benefitting the most.
You're 100% correct that consistency = accuracy, I shoot the same actions, stocks, etc.., but because I understand both mils and moa it's not a problem for me. Given the fact none of us can figure a quick firing solution without a dope card, phone app, etc.., I use a Kestrel 5700, it's as simple as changing profiles in the unit.
There is one drawback to FFP for guys who like simple, with FFP you are getting a RETICLE, no target dots, no duplex, it's going to be busy. There are more FFP scopes for sale daily all because someone thought they could adapt to the reticle they chose. Make no mistake either, some reticles can have so many lines, that missed shots get lost in the noise of the lines that are supposed to be aids.

My S&B 6x42 has the duplex reticle.

 

[Milo 2.0]

My S&B 6x42 has the duplex reticle.

Really, I guess I've never seen a plain reticle in one. Is it because it is fixed power?

 

[Milo 2.0]

My S&B 6x42 has the duplex reticle.

S&B offers some neat reticles for hunting, 12 power max though. My only experience is the PM II, I guess I've never looked into S&B that far.

 

[JRS]

Really, I guess I've never seen a plain reticle in one. Is it because it is fixed power?

You can get the duplex reticle in a number of their variable power scopes also. I prefer fixed power FFP scopes. I purchased my S&B 8x56 with the duplex also.

 

[JRS]

S&B offers some neat reticles for hunting, 12 power max though. My only experience is the PM II, I guess I've never looked into S&B that far.

The duplex is available in the 4-16x50

 

[Milo 2.0]

You can get the duplex reticle in a number of their variable power scopes also. I prefer fixed power FFP scopes. I purchased my S&B 8x56 with the duplex also.

Learn something daily, I cannot shoot most of these ffp reticles, too much for me. A lot of guys waited for the NF Mil C reticle, a friend dropped a rifle off for me to do load dev, it donned one, I had to pull it and slap one of mine on, I could not shoot it.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

2nd FP is ideal because ground squirrels are very small creatures. But, there are certain FFP scopes that have very thin reticles. Of course with really thin reticles in FFP, you can see small targets better at long range on high mag, but then barely make the reticle out on the lowest power settings. I personally find it frustrating.

Unless you plan on using the reticle to range objects on various magnification levels, the FFP holds no advantages. Even certain 2nd FP reticles can range when set to the correct power. If using a laser rangefinder, there's no reason for a FFP reticle.

Even if you plan on ranging with a FFP, it will never be as precise as a LRF. I personally wouldn't even want to mess around with the math of how a ground squirrel measures up in a FFP reticle for ranging. Just my opinion

 

[fredo]

Unless you plan on using the reticle to range objects on various magnification levels, the FFP holds no advantages.
.
.
Just my opinion

Literally NO ONE I know uses a FFP to range with. With the advent of LRF technology, it'd be stupid to even bother...

Sure, there may be a stage at a PRS type match where ya hafta range via reticle, but those are even few & far between.

So, I can agree with ya that ranging via reticle is likely a moot point, but it IS still an option that SFP only offers at 1-2mag settings, at most. The option/benefit is there, even if never utilized...

More importantly, wanted to point out that you missed sharing the most obvious, and most common and tangible benefit of a FFP reticle. That being, the ability to use your reticle as a holdover for bullet drop compensation, and to hold over for wind...at ANY mag setting. That feature alone, is worth the price of admission to 'FFP land'. I usually dial for drop (as it's usually a constant) but ALWAYS hold for wind, as it often requires modifying your correction call, at a second's notice. With a FFP, your are never at the mercy of having to remain at given 'ranging power' in order to use the reticle for the measuring device that it is...

Just sayin', ya missed the most tangible & obvious benefit of FFP, vs. SFP for ANY type of shooting.

The more you know

And I can agree with Milo, in that I'm not a fan of overly 'busy' FFP reticles. The ones I prefer have perfectly adequate 0.5mil subtensions, and I can extrapolate out a required hold, from them. Some shooters seem to want 0.2mil hashes, but that's getting too fine for my liking...

As always, if YOU like it, that's the right reticle for YOU!

 

[Milo 2.0]

2nd FP is ideal because ground squirrels are very small creatures. But, there are certain FFP scopes that have very thin reticles. Of course with really thin reticles in FFP, you can see small targets better at long range on high mag, but then barely make the reticle out on the lowest power settings. I personally find it frustrating.

Unless you plan on using the reticle to range objects on various magnification levels, the FFP holds no advantages. Even certain 2nd FP reticles can range when set to the correct power. If using a laser rangefinder, there's no reason for a FFP reticle.

Even if you plan on ranging with a FFP, it will never be as precise as a LRF. I personally wouldn't even want to mess around with the math of how a ground squirrel measures up in a FFP reticle for ranging. Just my opinion

Lol, it's like decaf coffee or bottled or canned beer. I'm not telling anyone they need FFP, I could survive 2nd for what I actually do. I just got into a couple ffp and now that is what I buy. I do not having an issue seeing or hitting a paint can at 1K with NF F1 MOAR at 35, or my 25 power, taller than a pdog, same girth. Did not say 1st rd impact mind you, lol

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Lol, it's like decaf coffee or bottled or canned beer. I'm not telling anyone they need FFP, I could survive 2nd for what I actually do. I just got into a couple ffp and now that is what I buy. I do not having an issue seeing or hitting a paint can at 1K with NF F1 MOAR at 35, or my 25 power, taller than a pdog, same girth. Did not say 1st rd impact mind you, lol

I wouldn't mind them if the reticle didn't become so congested on low power settings. FFP scopes have definitely come a long way and it seems manufacturers are packing them with more features and outfitting them with latest advancements before they do the SFP scopes. It actually seems harder for me to find a SFP scope with all the goodies I like these days. Kinda like when 30mm tubes took over 1". Now 34mm is starting to take over 30mm. I'm sure one day I'll be converted to the dark side

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Literally NO ONE I know uses a FFP to range with. With the advent of LRF technology, it'd be stupid to even bother...

Sure, there may be a stage at a PRS type match where ya hafta range via reticle, but those are even few & far between.

So, I can agree with ya that ranging via reticle is likely a moot point, but it IS still an option that SFP only offers at 1-2mag settings, at most. The option/benefit is there, even if never utilized...

More importantly, wanted to point out that you missed sharing the most obvious, and most common and tangible benefit of a FFP reticle. That being, the ability to use your reticle as a holdover for bullet drop compensation, and to hold over for wind...at ANY mag setting. That feature alone, is worth the price of admission to 'FFP land'. I usually dial for drop (as it's usually a constant) but ALWAYS hold for wind, as it often requires modifying your correction call, at a second's notice. With a FFP, your are never at the mercy of having to remain at given 'ranging power' in order to use the reticle for the measuring device that it is...

Just sayin', ya missed the most tangible & obvious benefit of FFP, vs. SFP for ANY type of shooting.

The more you know

And I can agree with Milo, in that I'm not a fan of overly 'busy' FFP reticles. The ones I prefer have perfectly adequate 0.5mil subtensions, and I can extrapolate out a required hold, from them. Some shooters seem to want 0.2mil hashes, but that's getting too fine for my liking...

As always, if YOU like it, that's the right reticle for YOU!

That makes sense on the holdover. Good point there. I personally do not like any clutter in my reticle because I prefer to dial turrets. I find the "H" style reticles give me a headache and become very annoying in low light situations. So much clutter in the FOV. Not that there's anything wrong with the holdover method. I have been known to make small holdovers on quick shots in the field when I feel there isnt enough time to dial. But I prefer dialing my turrets. Of course there's reticles for holdover that don't have a lot of clutter, which is the design I use in a lot of my scopes. My favorite reticles have very thin posts and hash marks with a floating dot. Allows for extremely precise aiming and holdover should you ever need it, but keeps clutter to a minimum in the FOV.

 

[Coleridge]

Like any tool, neither is perfect for every situation... I own both & use both- depending on what I'm doing.

Many of the old FFP reticles were very thick at top end so they where still usable on the bottom end. However, several "new" ones (as explained) are just as fine as SFP scopes on high end. If your shooting varmints with these or anything where you stay on the high end of magnification, they work great. However, with this, where the FFP looses in wide variables is it's either too thick on high or to "thin" on low. If your reticle covers less than an inch at 1000 yards, it's going to become pretty invisible on 5 power as it still covers up less than 1/10 of an inch at 100 yards. The plus for FFP is - IF- you can make out stadia, the granulation is correct at any power setting, one cant goof a holdover/holdoff. The reticle is ALWAYS the same relative to the image (think digital zoom. or zoom in on image on your computer). Again, the problem is making out the reticle on low end...

With SFP scopes, the reticle APPEARS the same thickness throughout the power range. So on lower power covers much more area, and the stadia becomes difficult to use (not consistant units). However, the SFP is MUCH easier to "find" at low power or especially low light. (think putting a straw/finger over your computer screen then zooming in/out). The problem here is if you aren't on the calibrated power setting it is EASY to goof holdover/holdoff.

If using on the high end all the time (but not always on the VERY top end) I find the FFP better (think PRS - turn down slightly for bigger FOV at times). If there is a possibility to use scope throughout any power range (think coyote hunting - he may be 20 yards, he may be 400 yards), I like a SFP scope -

(on a side note: something in the 3-15x range seems to be a good compromise SFP scope because if intended target is at long range, one will likely turn to the very top to get all power he can get which is where the scope is likely calibrated for stadia ---if the scope goes to 25x or more, that person may stop short - if it's at short range on lower power stadia not needed or important).

YMMV

 

[Leftybee]

second. for all very small targets

 

[steve123]

I'm not mentioning this to brag or to be disagreeable but to make some points.

I'm in my late 50's and have had my share of SFP Varmint, BR, tactical and regular hunting scopes. Varmint shooting was about all the shooting I did before I discovered what shooting steel was like.

About 10 years ago I got into tactical matches and decided I'd try a less expensive FFP scope, which was a Horus Predator 8-26x50. I found out that the turrets did not track correctly. So I was forced to learn to use the reticle to holdover and off for wind at long range. This reticle was a IPHY grid type reticle with each hash having a value of 1" at 100Y, 2" at 200Y, etc.

With this scope I won my first tactical match and it was a 100Y paper match that the club was testing out for a big two day match coming up. If I were to guess, because I don't have this scope anymore, the crosshair was a 10th of an inch thick. I didn't feel like it was too thick for paper or varmints as the years went by.

With that same scope I won my first long range Field Course steel match, not ever dialing the elevation or windage turret. As far as I know everyone else dialed.

The next year I bought a few FFP Bushnell HDMR's with H59 reticles in them. With these scopes, holding over and off using the reticle most of the time, I won the points series two years in a row, the same match I mentioned in my last paragraph. Distances were 300Y to 1450Y and it was normally quite windy there.

My points - FFP
Pick your FOV size by choosing the magnification that suits right then and there because the hashes will always be the same value on any magnification.

Not dialing saves time or within a time constraint gives you the extra time to see what the wind is doing or for building a steadier position.

Use the hash marks to measure with since they are constant. Miss .3 mil left, compensate for it .3 mil right. Miss .3 mil low, compensate .3 mil higher. Out west in AZ I didn't have any problem seeing where I missed as the bullet kicked up dust.

Varmint hunting PD's, I hardly dial anymore. I prefer .2 mil reticles nowadays and have for years. Bracket in between hashes, well that's .1 mil or in other words I can see what 1 click is "in" the reticle. I can also break that .1 mil into .05 mil without much trouble if I'm steady enough.

Once my friend and I were holding over with the H59 on my 22rf shooting potguts in Utah. We had no problem hitting them. Longest hit was 265Y. It was very efficient with one guy spotting, ranging with the RF, then giving dope to the shooter who was holding over and off for wind.

I did buy a SFP 4-16 for coyote hunting because I purposely wanted a thick mildot reticle and most shots being within 250Y, It'll be on 4x 90% of the time. I have to stick with 10x for holdovers and holdoffs so mils will be correct, but I can always dial at 16x for small critters. It's currently my only SFP scope.

Even in Field Target air rifle comps, which is dominated by SFP scopes, I use a FFP scope. I got a 48 out of 48 just last Saturday. Though I dialed.

 

[Delfuego]

FFP for everything. At least everything I do.

 

[fredo]

I have been known to make small holdovers on quick shots in the field when I feel there isnt enough time to dial. But I prefer dialing my turrets.

Me too. For something like woodchuck whackin', I'm always dialing elevation. Then, watching the grass/conditions, and basing a wind hold, on best judgement. Not once do I have to worry about what magnification the scope is on! All the vids I put in the REDLINE thread, from ~100-740yds, are via FFP reticle. And have been rockin' FFPs to kill chit, for a long time now. It's all about matching the hatch and picking a reticle that'll work best...

For coyote stands, it's sure is nice to have a FFP, for the same reason. If you know your dope, you can quickly hold over a near exact value via reticle, and NEVER have to worry about setting the mag ring at a particular #.

If you're not on that exact mag setting where the SFP reticle subtends correctly, then you gotta come off the scope and make sure of it. By that time, you'd sooner just dial the dope & be done with it...

FFP allows you to actually use the entire magnification range of the scope. Where, you're stuck on max mag with SFP, or hafta plays 'halfsies' , and double the subtension values in your head...

Horse puckey!

 

[Rem06]

ffp all the way for me for hunting , various ranges and low light etc...punching paper at a known distance 2nd is fine.