FFP vs. SFP ??

[K0na_stinky]

Hey all I'm looking to buy a new scope but I don't know if I should get a First Focal Plane or a Second Focal Plane.

I don’t have the option to look threw a FFP. Where I’m from high end shooting stuff is unheard of.

I understand what a FFP does but I don’t know what it looks like to look threw one. When your at the lowest power what does it look like? How about at the highest power? Do the lines get really thick?

I’m looking at buying a Vortex Viper PST 6-24x50. It comes in both FFP and SFP


Here is a link to the site. http://www.vortexoptics.com/product/vortex-viper-pst-6-24x50-ffp-riflescope-with-ebr-1-moa-reticle
And a link to the retical. http://www.vortexoptics.com/uploads/sub_viper-pst_624f1-moa_details.jpg

I think it says the line is 0.18 MOA thick. Is that thick?

Thanks for any imput you guys have.

 

[RonAKA]

Here is what is said at the Leupold FAQ site:

"11. What is the difference between a front focal plane (1st focal plane) reticle and a rear focal plane (2nd focal plane) reticle?

Most riflescopes utilize a rear focal plane reticle design, creating a situation where the apparent size of the reticle does not change as the magnification is adjusted. In these scopes, the amount of target area covered by the reticle is inversely proportional to magnification; as the magnification is increased, the amount of target area covered by the reticle is decreased. This can be seen by looking through a variable magnification scope and increasing the magnification setting. As the power is increased, the apparent size of the target is increased, but the reticle appears to remain the same size; the result is that the reticle covers less of the target when the magnification is increased.

Rear Focal Plane Reticles – In general, hunting scopes are designed with rear focal plane reticles; this allows the reticle to appear bolder and heavier when set to low magnification, but appear thinner and more precise when set to high magnification. Most hunters set variable magnification scopes to a mid-level magnification for general carry situations, reducing magnification in low-light or heavy cover situations, and increasing magnification for longer, more precise shooting solutions. Rear focal plane designs allow the reticle to appear bolder in low light, making them easy to see and faster to acquire when the light is fading. This same property is advantageous in situations where heavy cover may be encountered, allowing easy differentiation between the reticle and vegetation. If a longer distance shot is to be taken, the magnification can be increased, creating a situation where the reticle covers less of the target, allowing the user to be more precise. If a front focal design were used, hunters would notice that in low-light or heavy-cover situations, the reticle would become much smaller and more difficult to see on low magnification; right when they need the reticle to be bold and easy to acquire.

Front Focal Plane Reticles – Many tactical groups prefer front focal plane designs because common tactical reticles serve a dual purpose: a point of aim and a means of measurement. Reticles such as a mil dot are based on a specific subtension and require exact feature spacing to be accurate; if this type of reticle is used in a rear focal plane design, the scope must be used on a single, specific magnification (typically high power). Placing this type of reticle in a front focal plane design allows the operator to use the scope on any magnification while retaining the exact spacing of the reticle features."

My short interpretation would be that a hunter or target shoot would choose a RFP, while a Tacticool fan would likely choose a FFP. My interest for target shooting would be for as fine a reticle as possible (that I can still see) at the highest power. For hunting I want to see a heavy reticle for low powers which are likely to be used freehand and in lower light. I would never consider a scope that has an illuminated reticle. If it is too dark to see the reticle, it is too dark to be shooting. So, it really depends on your intended purpose and priorities.

 

[K0na_stinky]

The scope is going on my new Savage model 12 Fclass. Its going to be used for target shooting and steel gong plinking at long range.

Thanks a ton RonAKA.

I think for my needs I might as well get the SFP. Save about $150 too.

 

[K0na_stinky]

The cross hairs on the SFP are only 0.06MOA thick. Is that really thin? It sounds like it would be really thin to me?

 

[brian427cobra]

IMHO the only advantage to FFP is when shooting movers, so if your not shooting movers a SFP scope will work just fine, but if you do buy a FFP scope make dam sure your reticle and knobs match, ie MOA/MOA or Mil/Mil, I perfer Mil/Mil and no it's not metric.

 

[RonAKA]

The cross hairs on the SFP are only 0.06MOA thick. Is that really thin? It sounds like it would be really thin to me?

0.125 moa is common for a target dot. If you simply have fine cross hairs then 0.06 sounds about right, but I will defer to the hard core target shooters on that. I just shoot for fun.

 

[K0na_stinky]

0.125 moa is common for a target dot. If you simply have fine cross hairs then 0.06 sounds about right, but I will defer to the hard core target shooters on that. I just shoot for fun.

I just shoot for fun too.

I think I'm set on the SFP

Thanks Ron

 

[moosetracker]

My preference for target and short range hunting is a SFP scope, for many of the reasons elaborated above. However, for medium and long range hunting I much prefer an FFP scope, not for distance measurement (I use a laser rangefinder) but rather for hold off shots and wind drift using a Gen II mildot reticle.

 

[people]

I just got a FFP scope and If you want to use your scope off of the known distance range the FFP is really handy.

 

[K0na_stinky]

I just got a FFP scope and If you want to use your scope off of the known distance range. The FFP is really handy. No mater what power your scope is set to your reticle is scale is always the same. One MOA is one MOA. On a SSP scope 1=1 only at one power setting.

Most do not need a FFP as most users really do not use any of the realy. Hunters are an other story. Most of them can get by with a $100.00 scope.

Me I like to shoot long range and extended long range. All the extra features make it easier to connect on targets and game at those extended ranges. My days of walking all over to get with in 200yds are long gone. Those days were not much fun when I was doing them

To me a hunting/target reticle or scope is 100% worthless. I do not shoot matches and I do not hunt.

Well I have a laser range finder. If I wanted to range something with the SFP I could just use the power that the retical is accurate. I have no problems with that. I’m not into dressing up and pretending to be a sniper so I’ll be ok with sub-par scopes.

 

[brian427cobra]

There is so more to a Mildot scope or a scope with a MOA reticle other than ranging, for instance, the reticle is calibrated ruler and on a FFP scope that scale is the same at any power setting, shoot at a steel plate at 600, miss and you see the impact in the dirt, that is your correction, use the reticle and hold that measurement or dail it, next your shooting a mover at 440 yards(there a formula to figure out what your hold is) you give the target a 1mil lead, but figure out that you have too much power dialed in, reduce from 20x to 5x and since you have a FFP the lead is still 1mil in the scope, bam dead trophy buck and you get your picture in a magazine. The reticles in modern scopes serve a function, learning to use it is not hard, but I suggest you stop thinking in inches feet and yards when looking thru the scope and start thinking in MRAD or MOA, the reason I perfer MRAD(Mildots) is because they are universal across our planet, and have no value unless the shooter assigns them one, 1mil is 1/1000 of any unit of measurement on the planet, or 1 inch at 1000 inches, 1 lightyear at 1000 lightyears, and every scope manufacture makes a mildot reticle scope, and every scope manufacture who make a MOA reticle scope the reticle is different, some are TMOA, SMOA, or mismarked IPHY, wow more to think about.

 

[K0na_stinky]

There is so more to a Mildot scope or a scope with a MOA reticle other than ranging, for instance, the reticle is calibrated ruler and on a FFP scope that scale is the same at any power setting, shoot at a steel plate at 600, miss and you see the impact in the dirt, that is your correction, use the reticle and hold that measurement or dail it, next your shooting a mover at 440 yards(there a formula to figure out what your hold is) you give the target a 1mil lead, but figure out that you have too much power dialed in, reduce from 20x to 5x and since you have a FFP the lead is still 1mil in the scope, bam dead trophy buck and you get your picture in a magazine. The reticles in modern scopes serve a function, learning to use it is not hard, but I suggest you stop thinking in inches feet and yards when looking thru the scope and start thinking in MRAD or MOA, the reason I perfer MRAD(Mildots) is because they are universal across our planet, and have no value unless the shooter assigns them one, 1mil is 1/1000 of any unit of measurement on the planet, or 1 inch at 1000 inches, 1 lightyear at 1000 lightyears, and every scope manufacture makes a mildot reticle scope, and every scope manufacture who make a MOA reticle scope the reticle is different, some are TMOA, SMOA, or mismarked IPHY, wow more to think about.

I don’t really want more to think about. The scope I’m buying doesn’t have the option of a mildot reticle. Weather you have a FFP mildot reticle or a FFP MOA reticle or a MOA reticle that isn’t accurate because its SFP you can still take a shot and hold off for the next one with the accurate/inaccurate lines.

Also if I can find a shot longer then 50 yards anywhere that I will be hunting I will be lucky. I will probably never take a 440 yard shot at game.

I just want to have with a target/LR plinking gun.

 

[necchi]

[quote author=K0na_stinky]
I don’t really want more to think about. [/quote]

I'm with ya brother, mildot does have it's place and uses.
But it's far from the alpha and omega of retical choices. ALOT can be and has been done for decades without mildot retical let alone needing one in the FFP.
Dreaming about harvesting a trophy moving buck because you have all the wherewithall to patiently do the math for hold over and lead AND choose the proper dot in a snap shot,, OR shooting so much that the same snap judgement of dot choice will be automatic is just that, dreaming.

If a person can SEE where the shot hit on a stationary target, simply moving the common 4plex retical up and over does the same thing, why would one need the "dots" to do it,, just because it works with the math?
To me that's just plain giving up on your own ability to compensate and adapt, I don't need the dots to compensate for me, and yes I understand Milradian.

 

[jo191145]

Is it just me????

Were'nt Vortex scopes like $150 a few months ago?
Even if I'm totally wrong on that i'd still be wary of spending that much cash on a new product from a new company with little track history. JMO
Heres a good place to look at a bunch of merchandise at once.

http://swfa.com/default.aspx

edit
Seems I'm not wrong. Vortex scopes at SWFA $100-$200. Now all of a sudden they have one worth $800+. Big Red Flag for me.
Having a scope you can trust is priceless.

SWFA has "The Sample List". Its dealer demos and such. Buyer beware they'll have ring marks etc. Call and inquire before buying.

I'd look for a Leupold 8.5X25 there at a reasonable price before I'd buy a Vortex. At least Leupold is a proven scope with full warranty.

 

[people]

I see it never hurts to ask questions so you do not get burned on ordering equipment. “hunters”

 

[K0na_stinky]

Is it just me????

Were'nt Vortex scopes like $150 a few months ago?
Even if I'm totally wrong on that i'd still be wary of spending that much cash on a new product from a new company with little track history. JMO
Heres a good place to look at a bunch of merchandise at once.

http://swfa.com/default.aspx

edit
Seems I'm not wrong. Vortex scopes at SWFA $100-$200. Now all of a sudden they have one worth $800+. Big Red Flag for me.
Having a scope you can trust is priceless.

SWFA has "The Sample List". Its dealer demos and such. Buyer beware they'll have ring marks etc. Call and inquire before buying.

I'd look for a Leupold 8.5X25 there at a reasonable price before I'd buy a Vortex. At least Leupold is a proven scope with full warranty.

Vortex also has a $2000 scope. So far I have 3 vortex's and they are all great for me. Cheapest being $230 the next is $350 and my newest is $500.

I am open to your sugestions tho. I would like to hear what else is out there.

Vortex has a good warranty. A local guy had his turret caps off when he was sighting in his rifle. The rifle slipped out of his hand and the elevation turret landed on the corner of the tail gate on his truck. The guy that owns one of the local gun shops called into vortex asking about pricing for repairs on that scope. Vortex said send it to us and we will fix it or replace it for free. And thats exactly what they did.

Can't complain about that.

 

[K0na_stinky]

Also I pretty much can't buy a scope out of the States. Living in Canada makes its tough to find things.

 

[Dgd6mm]

You will not go wrong with a PST. If there is a better scope out there for the same $ I'd like to see it.

 

[jo191145]

Maybe it is just me then

 

[RonAKA]

Maybe it is just me then

No, not just you. The Vortex brand seems to have kind of an internet cult following that I just do not get. When they first came into the market I believe they were made by LOW (Light Optical Works) in Japan. This is the same company that made Bausch & Lomb Elite, and now Bushnell Elite when Bushnell bought them out. They also make Clearidge, Weaver, and it is believed the components for Nightforce and possibly Leupold. So they originally were a top quality scope. But, in more recent times Vortex has switched most of the scopes to an unknown supplier in the Philippines.

Not my cup of tea either, as I prefer scopes made in Japan.