Current Best LPVO?

[Sniffer]

Yeah, Razor 1-6x is SFP and the 1-10x is FFP. For what it's worth, with 16x and below, FFP isn't really better. Odds are if you're trying to make an accurate hold, you'll be at 6x anyways. Once you get above 6x it's far superior, imo, to have an FFP scope as you can conceivably be going for accurate wind/elevation holds even if not on full magnification.

FFP would be my preference for sure, if it weren't for that I would probably have picked up a 1-6X Razor already as they are supposed to be an awesome scope (particularly on 1X).

I shot a match at the weekend where there were targets at ~50M & ~125M and used 3-4X (even though my scope is 1-8X) as I find that zooming in too much makes it hard to find the target (small field of view). The nice thing about the FFP is that I can trust my holds no matter what magnification level I am using.

 

[Bartok5]

Don't overlook the Vortex Razor 1-6 (particularly the Gen 2 E).

From what I have read / heard it very much punches above its weight, in particular on 1X (the consensus is that it is pretty comparable to a simple red dot with excellent glass and a super bright red dot).

I have a Trijicon Accupower and I like it, it is FFP which I feel is an asset (small simple red dot at 1X and a big easy to see reticle at 8X) as the drops work immaterial of what the magnification level is. I honestly feel that the most important thing when picking any optic is getting a reticle that feels "right" / works for you.

My understanding is the Razor 1-6X is SFP but the 1-10X is FFP.

I had the Razor 1-6x, but sold it in favour of the Vortex PST2 1-6x. The PST2 has a smaller 30mm Tube diameter, but is otherwise near identical to the Razor 1-6x in terms of the scope's layout, reticle, 1x daylight-bright "Red Dot" function, etc. At half the price, the PST2 1-6x delivers 90% of the Razor 1-6x's functionality and performance. YMMV, but don't discount the Vortex PST2 1-6x if you are considering the Razor 1-6x. Your wallet will thank you!

 

[rugbydave]

FFP would be my preference for sure, if it weren't for that I would probably have picked up a 1-6X Razor already as they are supposed to be an awesome scope (particularly on 1X).

I shot a match at the weekend where there were targets at ~50M & ~125M and used 3-4X (even though my scope is 1-8X) as I find that zooming in too much makes it hard to find the target (small field of view). The nice thing about the FFP is that I can trust my holds no matter what magnification level I am using.

That shoulda read "with 6x and below, FFP isn't really better"

I also wouldn't be shooting at max mag at 50 and 125m but at those distances you really aren't holding over much (and certainly not holding wind) with a .223. Zeroed at 100 you'd be holding up maybe 0.4 mils (about an inch) at 50 and dead on at 125m. My point being that once you start shooting far enough that your holds need to be accurate, you'll be at max mag (when using a 1-6 or lower power optic) so FFP or SFP isn't a big deal. For sure for 1-8s and up FFP is the way to go.

 

[Brutus]

NF NX8 1-8. My only real complaint is such a critical eyebox.
Otherwise it's pretty good.

 

[Sniffer]

That shoulda read "with 6x and below, FFP isn't really better"

I also wouldn't be shooting at max mag at 50 and 125m but at those distances you really aren't holding over much (and certainly not holding wind) with a .223. Zeroed at 100 you'd be holding up maybe 0.4 mils (about an inch) at 50 and dead on at 125m. My point being that once you start shooting far enough that your holds need to be accurate, you'll be at max mag (when using a 1-6 or lower power optic) so FFP or SFP isn't a big deal. For sure for 1-8s and up FFP is the way to go.

For what I was doing (3 Gun) it made more sense to zero at 50 (even 50 is too far TBH as most of the targets are closer than that but it is a good compromise), which left me a little high at 100 and spot on at 200.