SFP vs. FFP

[trueblue]

I prefer and use ffp and mil, my future scopes will all be this.In NWMT I have successfully used my mil scope that is divided into 1/5 mil to range elk to 800 yrd and harvest. We have a majority of cloud,fog snow,conditions that make range finder useless. I could only range 250 yrs this weekend,but could see 950 yrds. I also carry a range book that I drew up of my favorite spots for this reason also.

I am leaning in this direction as well.
Might need to contact you to help speed up the learning curve.

 

[window licker]

I prefer and use ffp and mil, my future scopes will all be this.In NWMT I have successfully used my mil scope that is divided into 1/5 mil to range elk to 800 yrd and harvest. We have a majority of cloud,fog snow,conditions that make range finder useless. I could only range 250 yrs this weekend,but could see 950 yrds. I also carry a range book that I drew up of my favorite spots for this reason also.

Good point, I use the ffp mil system myself in comps and hunting. You may want to look into getting a mil-dot master if you dont have one, lots of information in a small, light package.

 

[Varberger757]

As Mikecr already mentioned, LR = SFP. Not to mention, the hundreds of dollars that can be spent on better glass by going SFP over FFP. And as Bill123 said, spend the money on the glass.

+! That's it in short form and nothing to add. gun)

 

[window licker]

Well to each his own, I do find it strange why most people shooting precision rifle matches seem to lean towards ffp, there must be a reason for that.

 

[LONGSHOOTER]

I like my SFP NF NP1RR ranging reticle.

 

[window licker]

And I like the 3 S&B P4Fs that I use, as far as LR= sfp we can agree to diagaree.

 

[sp6x6]

Good point, I use the ffp mil system myself in comps and hunting. You may want to look into getting a mil-dot master if you dont have one, lots of information in a small, light package.

I have one as well as my just fresh, expert marksman marine son

 

[window licker]

Nice, tell your son good work. I have quailified expert on edson range myself.

 

[Jcub]

Not to be rude, but tbh if you're asking the difference between the 2, it's not going to matter which 1 you choose.

 

[ToKeepAndBear]

The best thing you can do is spend a ton of time reading, learning and then deciding exactly how you are going to use your scope when hunting big game LR. There are many valid reasons to consider FFP and ranging isn't one of them.

Are you going to dial or hold for elevation?

How about wind?

Do you measure groups with your reticle or size up game animals with your reticle?

Do you plan on shooting different power levels, especially if you also will use the reticle for elevation and/or wind holds?

All of these things will help you decide if FFP is something you should consider.

Today's FFP reticles are a zero issue for LR shooting IMO ELR is a different story. The thickest of FFP reticles only cover 2 inches at 1000 yards. So for big game applications this is a non issue for almost everyone with a modicum of good eyesight. Loosing the reticle on low powers is likely a bigger concern. However, the way the outside portion of the reticle is designed in today's FFP scopes, this is a non issue as well.

Good luck in your decision.

Scot E.

+1, Scot gives a nice summary of the advantages of FFP. You can do the same thing with a SFP scope. But you will one day forget to do the conversion if not shooting at max magnification and under pressure. Ask me how I know...

 

[Scot E]

+1, Scot gives a nice summary of the advantages of FFP. You can do the same thing with a SFP scope. But you will one day forget to do the conversion if not shooting at max magnification and under pressure. Ask me how I know...

Yup, I know too! learned the hard way!

Scot

 

[window licker]

FFP removes a potential problem while employing the reticle, the same as a zero stop does when employing turrets. At least in my case the less I have to ponder the better prior to the shot.

 

[cwinner]

I've recently joined the ffp camp....mainly for some of the reasons outlined earlier.

The biggest benefit I have found is consistent windage holds across the power range....don't underestimate this benefit. Like most I dial elevation and hold wind and holding the same spot on the reticle is worth a lot.

I spent a lot of time looking at animals with my new ffp's across tha power range at ranges to over 1200 yds recently and I did not feel I could have taken the shot because the reticle was covering too much of the animal.

Ffp keeps things simple, another must have is a reticle that matches your knobs, either MIL/MIL or MOA/MOA, either works but I find MIL's easier to work with.

 

[Mikecr]

The biggest benefit I have found is consistent windage holds across the power range....don't underestimate this benefit. Like most I dial elevation and hold wind and holding the same spot on the reticle is worth a lot.

This is true if you use only horizontal hash/dots for windage, but means nothing for the shooter who simply holds inches into the wind(like me). I dial elevation, and my favorite aim is a simple med-fine crosshair. My click-card as I call it tells me the hold-off in inches per range per 5mph wind.
When this isn't simple enough that a caveman could do it, I don't take the shot -until it is.

I spent a lot of time looking at animals with my new ffp's across tha power range at ranges to over 1200 yds recently and I did not feel I could have taken the shot because the reticle was covering too much of the animal.

Finally, someone honest around here!