Am I the only one? FFP vs SFP

C

cr5

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
151   0   0
Location
North of Edmonton
I really don't see any advantage to a first focal plane reticle in a scope. To me it seems like the treat of the week to grab another couple hundred dollars for a scope that is otherwise identical to the SFP counterpart.

Here's my reasoning.
-If I'm shooting far enough that I need to use the reticle for holdover or for range estimation I am more than likely going to be at maximum magnification.
-I really don't like how tiny the reticle gets when you dial back to low magnification.
-It costs an extra $200+ for something I really don't think I need and that I can easily live without.

Anyone care to comment and maybe sway my opinion with something I haven't thought of?
 
Last edited:
You are the only one....


I joke... There is a few advantages to FFP scopes,
1. range estimation
2. measure the distance and adjust turrets without any calculations
3. ease of communication between shooter and spotter.
4. reduced math
 
For benchrest shooting where all the yardages are known/fixed, I don't see the point in spending the extra for a FFP. If you're shooting at distant objects at unknown yardages, I think the FFP would be beneficial.

In Sig optics thread, someone pointed out that FFP doesn't always equate to being instantly more expensive.

One nice thing about SFP optics is that when you zoom in to max magnification, your crosshairs (on some scope models) aren't so thick that they obscure fine targets.
 
cr5 said:
I really don't see any advantage to a first focal plane reticle in a scope. To me it seems like the treat of the week to grab another couple hundred dollars for a scope that is otherwise identical to the SFP counterpart.

Here's my reasoning.
-If I'm shooting far enough that I need to use the reticle for holdover or for range estimation I am more than likely going to be at maximum magnification.
-I really don't like how tiny the reticle gets when you dial back to low magnification.
-It costs an extra $200+ for something I really don't think I need and that I can easily live without.

Anyone care to comment and maybe sway my opinion with something I haven't thought of?
Click to expand...

I won't try to sway you, as the difference in SFP v FFP are tailor made for different requirements.

For many benchrest(set zero and forget)using mag only for shots and reviewing bullet holes SFP is perfect.

For many long range shooters where very high mag is favored, SFP is likely more useful to them given the usual available FFP reticles.

If you never used a FFP, a SFP will likely be favored, especially if you've trained with it/used it for years.

If you shoot professionally(outside of sports) and at long distances, a SFP has some advantages if you know how to use them in that situation.

FFP is not likely to be a fan of bench rest because of generally available to the public, reticle sizes.

FFP is good for long distance where determination of the POI and the speedy compensation for the POI is a priority.

FFP is relatively more useful in hunting and quickly changing target(s) distance/high stress. Has some disadvantage in dark/closeup/ heavy foliage environment due again to what's easily available in reticles.

There is no BEST, only what is BEST for YOU under CURRENT USE/NEEDS

Just my dos centavos......
 
I love my FFP reticle hunting coyotes, My holdovers are the same on any power and I can range a coyote at any power as well. Makes things much simpler on coyotes that can do erratic things. On a 1-4 scope I think its pointless.

Shooting paper....no advantage.
 
scott_r said:
They are also very useful for leads on running targets, doesn't matter the power you are on the lead is always the same..
Click to expand...

And the angular lead is the same regardless of distance. You lead the same number of mils at 155 yards, as you do at 433 meters, as you do at 1134 feet, for targets of the same speed (assuming you are tracking and not trapping the target).

You can also measure the speed of the target at any power...
 
kombayotch said:
And the angular lead is the same regardless of distance. You lead the same number of mils at 155 yards, as you do at 433 meters, as you do at 1134 feet, for targets of the same speed (assuming you are tracking and not trapping the target).

You can also measure the speed of the target at any power...
Click to expand...

Gottcha!!
 
Last edited:
Everything stays the same in an FFP scope over magnification. The reticle is on the same plane as the target. That means that it gets magnified with the target and always stays 1:1 with the target. It will never cover more or less of the target, and the mil hashes will always have the same relationship with the target.

Here is a charts that shows the required target lead in inches for your typical 308 175 SMK load:

FFP1.jpg

It's what you would expect: the faster the target is going and the further away it is, the more lead is needed. Lets plot a few of those leads into a chart.

FFP5.jpg

Notice that it's nearly linear? For practical purposes, it can be considered linear. That means that the angle between that line and the horizontal axis is the same for each lead. Here what it looks like if you convert those linear leads to mils:

FFP2.jpg

Notice that for a given target speed, the lead in mils stays almost constant over a large distance. The thing you need to remember is that since it's an angle, the difference 0.1mil makes in inches is less at closer distances than it is at longer ones. So, if you wanted to use a single lead value for a particular target speed over a large distance, it makes sense to choose one from one of the farther distances. You pick a value that minimizes the error. Lets say we used the following values for different target speeds over the the entire 100-500 yard range:

FFP3.jpg

If we know the target speed accurately and do our tracking properly, we get the following errors:

FFP4.jpg

These are pretty small, and if everything else was done correctly (wind call, hold, etc...) and the load was accurate, they would result in a hit. This works for any caliber, and the shorter the flight time of the bullet, the less error there will be and the larger the range of distance this will work over.

This is what the 6mm Crusader that I will be shooting this summer looks like:

FFP7.jpg

The leads are smaller, there is less error using the same mil lead over distance, and this works over a wider distance.
 

Attachments

  • FFP1.jpg
    FFP1.jpg
    15.7 KB · Views: 648
  • FFP5.jpg
    FFP5.jpg
    37.9 KB · Views: 646
  • FFP2.jpg
    FFP2.jpg
    15.1 KB · Views: 646
  • FFP3.jpg
    FFP3.jpg
    7.8 KB · Views: 646
  • FFP7.jpg
    FFP7.jpg
    9.2 KB · Views: 648
  • FFP4.jpg
    FFP4.jpg
    27 KB · Views: 634
Last edited:
There is also a linear relationship between the angular lead and the target speed:

FFP6.jpg

So, it's pretty easy to create tables once you know the relationship (slope of the line).

The advantage to using the angular lead method is that there is less data. Its one dimensional vs two and is far easier to memorize and use since you only need to consider one thing: target speed. It also stays the same for odd distances. The linear leads would be different for values in between 100,200,300,400 and 500. With a good reticle it can be done accurately, and in an FFP scope, you can do it at any magnification. The other advantage is that you're focusing on the part of the target that you want to hit and not some space out in front of it. The one caveat with this is that it relies on you tracking the target and not trapping. If you trap, you need to account for lock time. Lock time is the time it takes for your brain to tell your finger to pull the trigger and for it to actually happen. With trapping, when you put your crosshair out in front of the target and stop, the target continues to move while that is taking place. So, its ideally better to track the target and follow through to eliminate the effect of lock time.

Btw, this isn't something new. Companies have integrated this it into their reticles:

bushnell-horus-vision-h59-scope-reticle.jpg


Look at the numbers above the horizontal crosshair and look at my 308 lead table. Those numbers aren't just for the quick ranging features, they're also used for leads on moving targets. You lead a 6 MPH target ~3.9 mils (depends on caliber and load). Look where the 6 is on the horizontal crosshair! Look at the other numbers and compare to my table. Their leads are a little smaller than mine because they used a higher velocity (~2730 fps).

It's taught this way at places like K&M and Rifles Only.

[youtube]l4pWUCyknxY[/youtube]

He mentions it right at the beginning... very matter of fact: The mil value staying constant between 100-500 and the 0.5mil/MPH rule of thumb (slope of line y=0.52 above). US tactical matches have movers at different speeds and different distance, so this makes a lot more sense than using a linear distance as a lead.
 

Attachments

  • FFP6.jpg
    FFP6.jpg
    42.9 KB · Views: 628
Last edited:
kombayotch said:
Everything stays the same in an FFP scope over magnification. The reticle is on the same plane as the target. That means that it gets magnified with the target and always stays 1:1 with the target. It will never cover more or less of the target, and the mil hashes will always have the same relationship with the target.

Here is a charts that show the required target lead in inches for your typical 308 175 SMK load:

View attachment 22358

It's what you would expect: the faster the target is going and the further away it is, the more lead is needed. Lets plot a few of those leads into a chart.

View attachment 22359

Notice that it's nearly linear? For practical purposes, it can be considered linear. That means that the angle between that line and the horizontal axis is the same for each lead. Here what it looks like if you convert those linear leads to mils:

View attachment 22360

Notice that for a given target speed, the lead in mils stays almost constant over a large distance. The thing you need to realize is that since it's an angle, the differences that makes in inches is less at closer distances than they do at longer ones. So, if you wanted to use a single lead value for a particular target speed over a large distance, it makes sense to choose one from one of the farther distances. You pick a value that minimizes the error. Lets say we used the following values for different target speeds over the the entire 100-500 yard range:

View attachment 22361

If we know the target speed accurately and do our tracking properly, we get the following errors:

View attachment 22366

These are pretty small, and if everything else was done correctly (wind call, hold, etc...) and the load was accurate, they would result in a hit. This works for any caliber, and the shorter the flight time of the bullet, the less error there will be and the larger the range of distance this will work over.

This is what the 6mm Crusader that I will be shooting this summer looks like:

View attachment 22363

The leads are smaller, there is less error using the same mil lead, and this works out to a further distance.
Click to expand...

Hmm... I'll have to remember this for service conditions movers...
 
tagged for further info/knowledge /my 2 cents ....

dont think any of my rifle scopes are ffp ......but just got a leupold mk 4 spotting scope ..... havent had chance to play with it .... i cant remember whats on my 50 cal

just by going off what ive read ....im thinking id prefer a ffp ...but ya money ...
 
It really comes down to the type of shooting you do or would like to do. If all of your shooting is at a single known distance, with copious amounts of time it probably isn't going to benefit you a lot. If you're plinking in the back 40, in situations you have control over, then yes, you can dial to the magnification the reticle subtends at or halves and quarters of it and play math games to try and use the reticle. But understand that that falls apart when you're no longer in control of the situation and are doing it under stress. In situations where you don't know what distance your target will appear at, where you won't know its speed until you see it or where you have to shoot multiple targets at different distances under time stress, the SFP tricks fall apart and the magnification the reticle subtends at usually not usable because the FOV is too small. Being off as little as 1/16" on your half or quarter magnification can introduce HUGE errors (read feet off the target) when you're relying on the reticle for leads, hold-offs and hold-overs/unders (and guess what's going to happen when you're doing it in a rush).
 
I bought a ffp scope in mils and have never regretted it. It has really upped my game. My guns are used on paper and for hunting and the ffp reticle makes measurement and hold overs easy. Less math on the fly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom