Am I the only one? FFP vs SFP

[Johnny Boom]

Kombayotch, great posts especially about the angular lead. I was just about to research this subject and you saved me a whole bunch of time.

Just wondering, what software are you using to generate the graphs?

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

You wouldn't have any 6.5 Creedmoor brass you are going to sell?

 

[Zedbra]

Great info in this thread. I just learned my new thing for the day.

 

[TRG-42]

I find FFP far more useful for holdover in the field. Yes, when I am shooting paper or gongs I'm most likely dialed up to max mag anyways, but real world hunting a scope like the Nightforce 5.5-22 dialed up to 22X is often not usable

One less thing to remember in the heat of the hunt to dial up to 22X to use the recticle for holdover . Having said that, generally if I am reaching out ( like with 338Lapua ) on game , I generally have the time to dial come ups , but on more than one occasion I have had to use holdover when

Went to a FFP on my hunting rigs couple years ago and never looked back . I have since moved my SFP scopes to my paper punchers

Regarding the recticle apparent size change , it all depends on what recticle you choose . For example a S&B with P4F is just about right from low power up to 25X . At 25X it does not cover too much of target ( even for paper shooting ) , and at low power you are blind if you can't see the recticle !

On their lower powered the P3 works well

Lastly, I lover FFP recticle with matching turrets ( like Mil Mil )

 

[skypilot]

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).

This^^^. If you are in a hide(meaning time to prep/dial/etc), using a SFP works ok, especially if you are totally in tune with it and the math required for using it. Exposed and/or in a rush and FFP is quicker and easier IMO.

A FFP, to me, is a great piece of kit and after using my first, it was easier "out of the box" to use effectively. Especially on movers(hunting).

I do similar to Kombayotch, I did mine in Excel using 4 mph increments and JBM TOF/50 yd distance to get the lead in feet for 50 gr JHP.(I have a non mil-dot scope on a new semi at the moment) I'm reluctant to pull the FFP off of my .308 bolt gun setup. lol

For me, under most calling/hunting conditions(target always moving) the FOV vs mil-reticle spacing can be the issue. With a FFP you get your reticle spacing(leads) coinciding/moving with your FOV/magnification and that is an advantage on moving targets.

 

[kombayotch]

g

Kombayotch, great posts especially about the angular lead. I was just about to research this subject and you saved me a whole bunch of time.

Just wondering, what software are you using to generate the graphs?



You wouldn't have any 6.5 Creedmoor brass you are going to sell?

Sorry Johnny, I haven't completely decided if I am going to switch to 6 Creedmoor or 6 SLR yet, so I'm holding onto my 6.5 Creedmoor brass for a while longer.

Since you guys like the info, let me give you some more.

We know that we don't like doing math under stress because its easy to make errors, so we try to minimize it and we make cards like this to carry in our wrist coach:



We black out the portions that are inaccurate to avoid errors and do simple divisions or multiplication by 2 if we want to use targets or mil values that are larger than what is in our table. If we really want to be fast, we replace the distance with the actual scope come-ups.

Well, as we know, ranging isn't the only thing we use our reticle for. We also use it for hold-overs, hole-unders, wind hold offs and leads on movers. But, we can also use our reticle to estimate the speed of a mover. To do this, we need to know the distance. If we know the distance, we can measure how many mils our mover moves over a given time. If we know the distance, and we know the number of mils it has moved, we can calculate the distance it moved. Because we did this over a specific time, we have distance over time, which is speed. Now, like with ranging, we don't want to calculate this on the fly. So, we make a little chart to put in our wrist coach:



We observe our target and see how many mils it crosses while we count "one steamboat, two steamboat' in our head. So, if we were at 625 yards, and our target moved 5 mils, it is going about 3 MPH. We interpolate between the values in the table for distance and mil movements in between our values. They are close, so it's easy to do.

Well, we know how many mils/MPH we need to hold from my earlier post, so we go a step further and put the mil leads directly into the table:



So now we observe our target see how many mils it crosses while we count "one steamboat, two steamboat' in our head. So, if we were at 625 yards, and our target moved 5 mils, we lead 1.6 mils. Track holding 1.6 mils and fire! We've reduced our information down to something very fast and manageable that we can do in a match.

If a match director tells you that the target is moving at 2 MPH and it's moving at a 45 degree angle to your line of fire, you need to calculate the horizontal component. If you measure the target speed as above, it will give you the horizontal component directly.

Most of the time I have my magnification somewhere between 10-15x when dealing with movers. Even less when they're very close. But, that doesn't matter, I can always rely on my reticle because my scope is FFP.

 

[kombayotch]

Note that Frank is shifting his hips in the video above. He calls that a small mover, but it's going across what would be at least 4 target bays on a CF range. It's not uncommon to have movers moving 100 yards back and forth across the back of the range at US ranges that have mechanical movers. So, its something you have to do that you don't need to worry about shooting the matches here.

 

[stubblejumper]

For my hunting and shooting, I see no advantage with a FFP scope. My binoculars have a built in laser rangefinder that is faster and more accurate than trying to estimate range using a reticle, and I can take the range as I look the animal over and decide if I want it. At shorter distances, I just use the main reticle which is zeroed at 200 yards, and if the animal is farther, I just dial the magnification to the maximum(which matches the trajectory of my hunting load nicely), and I use the appropriate crosshairs. With my target rifles, I just use the laser rangefinder, and dial in the proper correction on my turrets.

 

[onetwentyish]

This is interesting information. I was aware there was differences between ffp and sfp, but didn't know what it was.

So it seems one would want a ffp scope for a hunting or combat aplication, but a sfp will serve well for paper or steel.

 

[Mystic Precision]

there have some super info in this post which will help many for sure.

I have both and offer both, so do not consider 1 better nor worst then the other. They are just tools and you pick the flavor that best suits your tastes.

Just want to point out that UKD shooting with a SFP is not the end of the world. Watch the very many vids on precision rifle shooting all over the US. You see a bunch of SFP scopes used. Right/wrong, better/worst... pick the kit that you feel is right, then practise like crazy to actually know how it all works.

I use SFP mostly for my target shooting and plinking. Reticle subtension isn't crazy hard to keep track off if you spend the time to know your gear. And if you need to change mag for various range targets, being off a small amount isn't going to cause a huge subtension error.

Say you have a 6-24 Sightron SIII scope with the LRMOA reticle. At 24X, the hash mark spacing is 2moa. 12X, it is 4 moa. If by mistake you turn to 14X, the reticle is now like 3.9 moa. If you go to 10X, 4.1moa. The aiming error due to unstable positions will be many times greater then anything you loose from your scope.

As an error relative to the targets being engaged, I would worry a heck of a lot more about the wind and positional shooting then if the reticle is out a smidge. Remember this is MOA not MRAD..... 0.1MRAD is 0.36 moa so we are talking a very small possible error due to reticle subtension.

For tactical/prs type shooting, I think a bigger problem is the useage of too much magnification. I was watching a vid (UTAH club) where they had to shoot every 100yds out to 1000yds. One shooter kept drifting left of the target. The puff of dust was real obvious in the vid. Why the shooter couldn't see IS the problem... He didn't fare well.

One shooter was using a SIII 8-32 scope... YIKES. Looked like the targets were in the 14" X 24" size - BIG, high mag is not really all that important. Spotting your misses would be.

Personally, I will be trying the STAC 2.5-17.5 scope. My thought is that it becomes a 3 power scope - 2.5 for close stuff in which case, aim and shoot. 9X for movers and fast multiple target engagements even out to say 600yds - these are big targets. 17.5 for all the longer stuff which seems to be 400 to 1200yds. The only mag which isn't on a stop is the 9X and if I am off a bit either way, as I have discussed, not the end of the world.

Anyways, if you are looking for a new scope and want to try FFP, go for it. It can be useful for some in some situations. If you decide you want a SFP for the main reasons they dominate some applications, you just have to learn how to use it for other applications. There is simply no way to be proficient at precision LR shooting without time behind the rifle.

Watch these vids and the big issues I see are shooters with guns that do not feed properly and shooters that can't keep their heads on the comb.. likely because their rifles don't function properly. This is where you will loose a ton of points... and a ton of time

Then there are plenty of shooters who can't change mags in a timely fashion... and on it goes. Rifle proficiency is high up the list of success for these types of shooting games. The scope reticle location is not going to save you.

Jerry

 

[skypilot]

Whenever I have been in a bind, FOV was the priority. In an extreme example....even if it was possible that no reticle was visible, the splash can be moved onto target and another round mailed.........didn't matter whether it was FFP or SFP.

I have both FFP and SFP also. There is no best, only what's best to you, your needs and skill set for that particular task.

 

[AP]

One potential advantage of FFP not yet mentioned is that "typically" (because of the way they are constructed) Variable Power FFP scopes are less likely to experience reticle shift as the power is changed compared to SFP variables. OTOH the increase in reticle size might obscure any advantage. This advantage could be significant in cold weather when tighter tolerances employed in SFP variables to minimize this occurrence cause stiffness in the "power" ring. The older Balvars used the entire ocular to adjust power so that there was some useful additional mechanical advantage available to assist with this.

 

[Local]

One potential advantage of FFP not yet mentioned is that "typically" (because of the way they are constructed) Variable Power FFP scopes are less likely to experience reticle shift as the power is changed compared to SFP variables. OTOH the increase in reticle size might obscure any advantage. This advantage could be significant in cold weather when tighter tolerances employed in SFP variables to minimize this occurrence cause stiffness in the "power" ring. The older Balvars used the entire ocular to adjust power so that there was some useful additional mechanical advantage available to assist with this.

I think it was already mentioned that the reticle in the FFP scope covers the same amount of the target at any power setting. I guess if the reticle was already a bit chunky at the low power setting it could be a problem at maximum magnification.

 

[K0na_stinky]

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?

I'm here with you on this one buddy. Seems like there arnt to many guys out there that like sfp anymore.

Oh well, sfp seems to work and maybe the trend will drop the price of sfp even more.

 

[Kevin M.]

I personally prefer SFP, i like keeping my reticule lines nice and thin when shooting long range. With FFP scopes, the reticule gets too thick at long range for my liking.

Just my .05

 

[skypilot]

FFP reticle is available in numerous sizes..... Some specifically for TARGET SHOOTERS

 

[scott_r]

FFP reticle is available in numerous sizes..... Some specifically for TARGET SHOOTERS

I really see no advantage to the target shooting crowd, Id take a SFP optic or even a fixed power. Dont all paper punchers shoot on max power?

 

[kombayotch]

Watch the very many vids on precision rifle shooting all over the US. You see a bunch of SFP scopes used.

If you go to an F-Class match, you see 6s and 6.5s being used in F-Open. But, how many of them do you see consistently up at the top in big matches? Should we just chalk it up to coincidence? There is no advantage to 7mm or 30 cal. It's just a coincidence that the top shooters prefer them... just a preference? Not likely. In PRS, not a single one of those SFP shooters made it to the PRS Finale. Not one. In big matches like the SHC that have a lot of dynamic shooting, few if any of them make it into the top quarter. And you probably have more SFP scope there than FFP ones. Novices usually shot up with NXS or Mark 4s because the guy at the gun shop who has never shot the matches told them to buy SFP because the "reticle doesn't change size".

Oh well, sfp seems to work and maybe the trend will drop the price of sfp even more.

We have been much slower to adopt FFP up here because of the limitations of our ranges. Understandable. If all you have is a small low definition CTR television, you won't see the advantage of using Blue-Ray over your VHS cassette. But, once you see the difference on a big HD screen, the VHS cassette loses it's shine very quickly. And just because you don't have an HD TV doesn't mean that your VHS cassette is any less obsolete. The military will continue to switch to FFP, as will US tactical shooters as PRS grows in popularity. Those are the two primary users driving the market demand for tactical scopes. You will see fewer and fewer new SFP tactical offerings because the SFP tactical scope are also not desirable to known distance target shooters because of the reticle thickness and magnification range. You will likely get some good deals on inventory clear outs, but I wouldn't count on prices dropping due to any kind of production volume increase. It's going the other way. If anything, the price of FFP scopes will continue to drop as it has been lately with many of the new offerings.

 

[scott_r]

Komba do you guys that shoot F-Class with a FFP reticle change your power often? Just curious to what advantage a FFP reticle would have...would you not shoot on the highest magnification all the time?

 

[kombayotch]

For most target shooting disciplines, there isn't a lot of advantage to FFP because they are shooting at known distances that are evenly divisible by 100 and their targets have scoring rings that are scaled for the distance they are shooting at to make doing their sight adjustments easy. They also have plenty of time to make their adjustments. Real life doesn't look like that. Distances are not evenly divisible by 100 and targets are not sized so that your adjustments are easy to make. And, you often have to make consecutive shots quickly at different not-evenly-divisible-by-100 distances. Being able to use your reticle the same way the F-Class shooters use their scaled target rings, at any distance and any magnification is a huge advantage when you're not on a square range and you don't have loads of time to adjust dials to specific settings and figure things out. Yes, you can do the same things with your SFP scope if time is not a factor, when you are in control of the situation and can take whatever time is necessary to figure things out. But turn that control over to someone like a PRS match director or to nature, and more often than not you will no longer have all the time you need to figure things out. The best shooter will be the one that can execute their shots not only accurately, but quickly.

I don't shoot F-Class. Some of my best friends are F-Class shooters and I do shoot against many F-Class shooters in our PR matches. Many of them are pretty good shooters (national F-Class winners). The Canadian version of Precision Rifle is basically F-Class with different targets, a mover at 400 and a few snap matches. The deliberate matches are held at 600-1000 yards. I seldom have my scope higher than 18x even at 1000 yards. I can't read the mirage as well (or see through it) above that and I find that reading the wind/boil better will give me a lot more than whatever the small amount of fine tuning of the cross-hairs the higher magnification gives me. One of my best friends won the Berger SWN last year (big US F-Class match). He told me that he never had his scope (March 8-80x) above 30x even in the best of conditions. It set lower during the hot hours of the day. One buddy who is an accomplished F-Open shooter told me he routinely shoots 1000 yards at single digit magnification so that he can see all of the wind flags on the range in his sight pictures. Lower magnification is a common theme I hear from the F-Class shooters I know who are winning big matches...

 

[skypilot]

I really see no advantage to the target shooting crowd, Id take a SFP optic or even a fixed power. Dont all paper punchers shoot on max power?

Yep likely, on stationary and known distance targets, when they can.(mirage)(FOV)

"The reticle is too big at full mag power on FFPs" is not as valid a reason any longer due to different size reticle choices.

I have both. Was trained initially on SFP mildot, but use whichever fits the task.

To me, I have a rough knowledge of comeups/leads/windage from the data I have and update. So for example I could memorize comeups to say 600m, then 1 mph leads and winds out to there to. Thats the easy part. The balance is in guessing the wind and leads within .5mph. All that's left is to shoot your comeups with the guesstimated wind and leads at that distance.

For me, with mil/mil scope and thinking in 10(which happens to be metric), I am finding FFP to be better suited to ME. However I don't shoot outside of hunting situations any longer. When I do target shoot privately, I use a SFP slightly more but that may change.

It's like asking which is better/mightier, the pen or the sword? Well it depends of whether you are writing Op Eds or in a sword fight. Each is better depending on the task at hand..........