FFP or SFP Please vote

[Bravo 4]

Not all FFP reticles are the same, so it would be hard to say yes I like this or like that. To me it is like saying to you prefer Ford or Chevy...a Ford or Chevy what?

I use both but tend to go with FFP when I'm buying, but mine can pull double duty as well. I was viewing deer at over 1600yards the other day with my FFP MK4 @ 20x and had no problem with the open center of the TMR reticle. The floating dot of the IOR MP8 is really nice as well.

The OP needs to look through the scopes he is pondering over and then make a decision. Pick what he thinks is the best for his application.

 

[Scot E]

You are more than welcome to come shoot with me anytime. But be warned the scope that may be on my LRKM could be a surprise. You will probably hate it, so bring along a FFP and we will do some field testing.

The fact is the SFP will work equally well at close and far shots. The things that are important to you like having to be on max power or the chance of a mistake I do not feel are really that valid of an issue. I am almost always on max power. If I come off 22x it would be for a close chip shot and even then why would I? If I am spotting for someone and need to call a correction using my reticle I would only be on max power where the reticle is just as or even more efficient than a FFP. Also, my SFP has the advantage to hold 20 MOA in the reticle, if I need more I have the option to back down to 11 X and that 20 now becomes 40 moa. Can't do that with a FFP.

As for your quote that "95% of LR shots are under 1/2 mile" That's 850 yards or so. I think with gaining technology and the love of this LR sport that is becoming less true. Especially for practice purposes. Many are now taking factory rifle to 1000 on a regular basis. Also many , as I, believe in practicing well past where you intent to hunt. This makes the actual shot at a shorter distance easier when you need to do it. This is something Shawn teaches too. So, you jest about us being not being in the 21st century??

I believe in buying as good of equipment as your budget will support. I like this equipment to last and I don't want to out grow it. So if I buy a scope that is better suited for closer distances like you state 1/2 mile, then I could end up wishing I had the better choice down the road as I work my way out to the longer shots. Like I said, the SFP will do both with ease for me, and I prefer it.


I hope this discussion is bringing out some points of operation for both so the OP can decide which is good for him.

Jeff

Hey, I don't hate SFP, as a reminder I still use them on many guns. I just like the features FFP provides for big game hunting and don't find their limitations nearly as big of a deal as you do. I do practice further than I shoot BTW. I was just out back of my house where I have a 125 yard archery target course, getting ready for a late season mule deer hunt. Same applies to rifle hunting. But when I practice LR shots I am choosing rocks the size of the vitals of the animal I am going to be shooting and I center things up just like I would in field conditions.

Like we have discussed on other threads I think a couple important points should be mentioned. 1. I am not as dedicated to the LR game as some are. I know a few guys that will pass up shots because they are too close. For them the trophy is in the shot. And I totally get that but it isn't me. I also don't setup for a LR shot and wait around for something to present itself. Maybe I will have that kind of patience sometime but for now I am way too impatient and enjoy seeing as much country as I can while I am out. I am not going to pass up what I am looking for no matter how close it is. 2. I don't shoot nearly as far as you do.

For my purposes I want a system that allows me to have as perfect of a system as I can for my style of shooting and any shot I will encounter from close range moving targets and all the way out to 1/2 mile or so. So I am not a huge high magnification fan either. I like 3-4 on the low end and 12-16 on the high end, although 20 x or so is fine. I just don't like the narrower field of view, higher mirage, etc. that high power scopes have. I like using the reticle for holdover out to 4-500 yards. I really like holding for wind and dialing distance even on longer shots. I like being able to call hits/misses (especially during practice) with ZERO risk of error. It is a huge aid for me in learning to read the wind better and this is the toughest part of LR shooting. For my parameters the FFP is ideal. If I hunted differently or shot longer distances like you do I would have an SFP scope but I would still miss the FFP features.

Oh, but you are wrong here my friend. I have done it many times. I hunt dark timber for elk too. Plus shot many coyotes while on stand. If I can find and get on a yote, a deer or elk is only easier. Never a problem with the RP-R1. Maybe you should try one and see for yourself? Plus I have never taken a shot at game with the ILL reticle either. To me it is more of a novelty than a necessity.

Jeff

That is interesting. I have used one and had a really hard time seeing it in dark timber and in sage brush areas at dusk/dawn. There is another thread right now about changing from the NRP1 to a new reticle for this exact reason. Different strokes I guess.

I also hope this is helping show both sides of this issue. There are definite positives for both.

You are killing me with the new scope for the LRKM. I am guessing the NF 8-32?

Scot E.

 

[Broz]

You are killing me with the new scope for the LRKM. I am guessing the NF 8-32?

Scot E.

No, I have had those and went back to the 5.5~22. I choose to not talk about it until I have it and do some field testing.

Jeff

 

[shortpants]

Great thread. This horse has been beat before and it will be again. Jeff and I have gone back and forth on this a bit and he almost has me convinced to jump ship from my FFP to SFP. I've been shooting FFP for 10 years now. I'll point out some things that work or don't work for me.
Jeff says he always stays on high power (22) so for him he does not have to worry about changing subtensions on the SFP. For years I always shot on high power but struggled to tighten up my groups till I took the advice of a friend. He told me to turn down my power because on high power you see more movement and more mirage. I listened and instantly shot better and have ever since. When I get out to 1000 I do turn up the power to 18-20 (20 is max for me) but I shoot all my closer shots around 12 power. My subtensions are the same either way and there is no risk of making a mistake. That is my biggest complaint about the SFP is you have to know what your subtensions are every place you turn the power to. On mine I usually am looking through the optic while turning up the power. I always carry it on it's lowest power for quick target acquisition and after the shot retun it to low power and return the turrets to zero.
I do agree that on lower powers I can't even see my hash marks in my FFP. You SFP fans however argue that the reticle is more versatile in SFP but it sounds to me like if you want to use the reticle it has to be on 11 or 22 power or you won't know what the subtensions are. You would have to remember a lot of info to know what they are through the entire power range or have one hell of a chart that would take some serious shooting to figure out.
It really does boil down to the intended use of the optic. For ELR it's a no brainer the NP-R1 is perfect as well as on small game at closer ranges.
For the 1000 and under shooting on big game which I believe is still the vast majority an FFP of your choice (I like the 1 MOA windage subtension models) is the most versatile option around.
The argument about the FFP being backwards and having the reticle get larger as you crank down the power is understandable yet silly. That's what the SFP does. Now if it were possible to keep the crosshair/target relationship the same and somehow pull that off that would be great but that's as likely as the day we all get unlimited tags for all big game and there $1 a tag!

 

[Broz]

I just want to say one more thing then I am done here. I hear all this about risk of holding over wrong due to being on a different power and the reticle not on cue. Well, I have used hold over reticles for years and I can tell you this. For me the confusion of what subtension line to hold on is were the risk comes in with either FFP or SFP. In the heat of the moment it is way more likely to use the wrong line than if you dial in for the shot. And it is said often hunters like this hold over method for the "quick" or "moving" shots. Back when I was using hold over reticles I missed a lot of game by being on the wrong line. These reticles today are even worse as they have more lines than a horny gigolo at a beauty pageant. Since I started dialing for every shot past the zero my success rate has vastly improved. This fall alone we are 13 DRT for 13 shots on big game and dialed every one from 200 to 1285 yards. This is definitely a choose what works for you subject with merit for both sides. But lets be honest about the good and bad points and what really increases the risk of a miss.

Jeff

 

[shortpants]

Jeff, I could not agree more with you on dialing for wind. We are on the same page here. However you do use a scope with windage holdover marks as do I. So even though we hardly ever use them they are there as an option. To say it doesn't matter because you don't use them raises the question why not just use a fine duplex? The debate is about what features you prefer when buying a new scope. We like the bells and whistles and both scopes have their goods and bads. I mean no disrespect nor do I think I have any chance of changing your opinion over which you prefer. In fact just the opposite is true. You have all but convinced me to make the switch to SFP. My previous post is just my reasons why I find the decision to be quite difficult. The vast majority of my hunting will be inside 1000 yards. I have started pushing my practice beyond that but until I can afford a custom built 338 or larger cal. I think an FFP just might suit my rifles capabilities better. I'm still not entirely sure of that but it's what's making the most sense in this very dense head of mine. Then again I sure loved looking through that NP-R1 the other day. HMMM........

 

[royinidaho]

All things being equal . . . clicking is the most accurate, by far! IMNSHO.

0.1 Mil @ 500 yds is 1.8"

0.5 Mil @ any distance is straight forward. Simply bracket the target. Easy to discriminate "as much above as below" dot. As is holding 0.1 Mil over or under a dot. Dots on my scope are 0.2 mils in diameter.

Other than exactly a half mil things get iffy.

I'd click the Mil dot scope but the clicks are 1/8th minute. Way too many clicks to keep track of.....

 

[kcebcj]

Being interested in my first FFP scope this has turned out to be a good thread. I hope the OP got a lot of info out of it as I have. I have been dialing elevation for 4 years now and agree with Jeff this is the way to go beyond the zero setup on the rifle and I have not had a incident where I did not have time to dial elevation.

My future plan is to dial each time when the range is beyond the rifle setup and hold off for wind using the reticle and eliminate the error factor of being on the wrong power. I think holding off for wind and being able to quickly adjust to the environment is a really good way to go if one's ability to read the wind is efficient. As for using the elevation hash marks for holdover it could get dicey when the pressure is on but will see with the new scope. I think with a lot of time and practice one might get pretty good at it.

Thank all you guys who are in the know and posted. Very good thread and thanks to the OP for posting.

 

[shortpants]

Jim, when you say using elevation hash marks for windage holdover what does that mean? Did you mean windage hash mark for wind holds???

 

[shortpants]

Jim, when you say using elevation hash marks for windage holdover what does that mean? Did you mean windage hash mark for wind holds???

Never mind, I think you were talking about elevation holdover. I misunderstood but now I get it.

 

[bigngreen]

My HS LR has a reticle thickness of .08 MOA which is half of the FFP version and I've pushed it out on goats to 1200 yards on the nose, at a 1000 yards I feel the reticle thickness is a little heavy doubling it would not work for me, the numbers say it's small but when it's on game it's telling me something else. I've been holding for wind all year and been dead nuts on, not one issue holding wind with a SFP scope but I also know that when I'm turning my scope down I'm in a hunting situation that I'm not going to have time or need to hold wind, it's going to be point and shoot. If I have time to dial I have time to get my optic on the correct power so it has not been a hindrance at all.
I do like holding wind vs dialing, I screw up dialing wind even when I'm looking at the freaking dial, for targets I do still dial windage though.
So personally for me the reticle is way to thick on the FFP and I have not found a need to have the reticle stay the same at all powers, and I don't want a thin small reticle in dark timber on the lowest power and I get a free set of Nightforce rings with my SFP vs the cost of a FFP

 

[barnesuser28]

I do beleive the reticle on the vortex viper pst 6-24x50 ebr-1moa is .06 MOA on 24x, i think the nightforce np-r1 or whatever it is called (the one Jeff likes), is .069 thick. I hope this isnt going to be too thin in a close range situation.

P.S. Rhian did you start a thread about your antelope hunting this year? And that awesome 1200 yard shot?

 

[shortpants]

My HS LR has a reticle thickness of .08 MOA which is half of the FFP version and I've pushed it out on goats to 1200 yards on the nose, at a 1000 yards I feel the reticle thickness is a little heavy doubling it would not work for me, the numbers say it's small but when it's on game it's telling me something else. I've been holding for wind all year and been dead nuts on, not one issue holding wind with a SFP scope but I also know that when I'm turning my scope down I'm in a hunting situation that I'm not going to have time or need to hold wind, it's going to be point and shoot. If I have time to dial I have time to get my optic on the correct power so it has not been a hindrance at all.
I do like holding wind vs dialing, I screw up dialing wind even when I'm looking at the freaking dial, for targets I do still dial windage though.
So personally for me the reticle is way to thick on the FFP and I have not found a need to have the reticle stay the same at all powers, and I don't want a thin small reticle in dark timber on the lowest power and I get a free set of Nightforce rings with my SFP vs the cost of a FFP

Thanks for posting your feedback. I still don't know which side of the fence I'm going to land on??? Great thread!!!

 

[bigngreen]

I do beleive the reticle on the vortex viper pst 6-24x50 ebr-1moa is .06 MOA on 24x, i think the nightforce np-r1 or whatever it is called (the one Jeff likes), is .069 thick. I hope this isnt going to be too thin in a close range situation.

P.S. Rhian did you start a thread about your antelope hunting this year? And that awesome 1200 yard shot?

The shot was awesome the dialing by the operator was not ya I'll put up a season ending thread but a 1200 yard shot is not a 1200 yard kill when you dial every thing but elevation correctly, just think of all the fun screw ups you have to look forward to since you got such a young start at it
Your optic will be fine, my dad shoot that reticle and it's really nice for all round shooting.