Is a FFP scope worth the extra $$$?

[Rockrivr1]

The long range shooting thread got me back to thinking about replacing my scope on my FN Special Police in 308. I have a nice Leupold Vari-X III 4.5-14x40mm Adj Objective Tactical scope on her now, but made the mistake of getting the duplex reticle instead of something like mildot. It's great for plinking but not functional enough when trying to estimate distance.

As I've been looking at quality options I'm heavily leaning towards a FFP scope instead a SFP. Though I'm wondering what people think about the FFP option and if you think it's worth the extra $$ to go in that direction?

Right now I'm thinking this Vortex Viper PST scope will replace my Leupold. Long range shooting forums and Sniper's Hide have glowing reviews for this particular scope even though it's less expensive then some of the more well known glass makers.

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product...fp-riflescope-with-ebr-1-mrad-reticle/reticle

 

[mac1911]

I'm all over the place looking for a new scope.
In the end I think it comes down to what type of shooting you will do most with it.
You can range estimate with a standard duplex reticle. You just need to know a few things. Ex I know with my old school leupold 2.5x8 my fat post will just touch the out side see of a 6" bullseye @ 100 yards.

Vortex has some videos on thier web sight comparing the 2

I also learned a few things from these videos
http://www.tedsholdover.com/video/shooting-demonstrations/mildot-ranging-target-demonstration/

 

[xtry51]

How often do you shoot at different power? The advantages to FFP are the reticle scaling stays constant and you're less likely to see a change in zero between powers.

I prefer a FFP and won't buy any scope that isn't.

 

[Rockrivr1]

How often do you shoot at different power? The advantages to FFP are the reticle scaling stays constant and you're less likely to see a change in zero between powers.

I prefer a FFP and won't buy any scope that isn't.

This is what I"m thinking as well. I'd like to get into more long range shooting and having the right gear sounds like the first step.

 

[frenchman]

This is what I"m thinking as well. I'd like to get into more long range shooting and having the right gear sounds like the first step.

It depends. My first rifle (well, not really mine) was a FRF1 with a APXL 806, which had a 3.85X magnification and a German #1 reticle. We took center of mass shots at 700 meters with that setup. Tiny groups won't happen, but it really depends what the intented purpose is. Honestly, I believe that distance estimation becomes less of a priority, with constantly improving electronic range finders. Those things were any sniper team's wet dream two decades ago. You can get close with an old school estimation through calculation and using your reticle, but if you go for a quality range finder like the Leicas, you'll eliminate some margin for error. Not important when you kill paper targets, but crucial if that one shot makes the difference between a failed and an accomplished mission.
This said, FFP would be the way to go if I was looking at a new glass.

 

[Rate_of_Twist]

FFP is kinda dumb on my 2-10 XTR2. Perhaps if I had greater magnification.... I still buy the scope again, but I bought it knowing I was likely only ever use on on 8-10 magnification

 

[bigblue]

FFP is important if you are using the holdovers at different magnifications. If you only use the holdovers at max magnification then it isn't an issue. If you had a 2-10x that you liked to shoot at 6x and 10x then SFP would have different values for the holdover whereas a FFP scope would have the same holdover value.

For me, it is more important in a variable high magnification scope that may be used at partial magnification.

 

[lupis42]

I wouldn't buy a BDC/Ranging reticle scope without one. There are some really solid affordable options out there - http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-3-15x42-Tactical-Rifle-Scope-P62238.aspx


This remains one of the best reviews going for higher-quality glass http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/ - even if these are a bit above budget, the category weighting is probably about right.
Ilya Koshkin is also a pretty solid resource - if you're contemplating dropping more than a kilobuck on a rifle-scope, you will probably find some useful info. http://opticsthoughts.com/?page_id=476

 

[mac1911]

My only dislike of FFP scopes is the reticle lines/dots/harsh marks or what ever you want to call them cover a pretty large area of the target. if your looking to shoot nice small groups that can be a problem.

either way getting to know your scope is always best which ever you choose. I printed up cheat sheets for my scope. gives me the change in zeros on each hold over for my magX they fit nicely in my lense caps. or I laminate them and hang them from my bipod..

im not completely ruling a FFP scope out yet but only really seeing it usefull if your going to be shooting lots of unknown distances a lot. like some sort of tactical match where you need to range the targets and shoot them quickly. with out a fancy range finder.

 

[Rate_of_Twist]

My only dislike of FFP scopes is the reticle lines/dots/harsh marks or what ever you want to call them cover a pretty large area of the target. if your looking to shoot nice small groups that can be a problem.

either way getting to know your scope is always best which ever you choose. I printed up cheat sheets for my scope. gives me the change in zeros on each hold over for my magX they fit nicely in my lense caps. or I laminate them and hang them from my bipod..

im not completely ruling a FFP scope out yet but only really seeing it usefull if your going to be shooting lots of unknown distances a lot. like some sort of tactical match where you need to range the targets and shoot them quickly. with out a fancy range finder.

I'm not sure FFP and "tactical" reticles have a place in a known distance rifle match like NRA High Power prone matches.... I just don't know how it would be of benefit

 

[lupis42]

I'm not sure FFP and "tactical" reticles have a place in a known distance rifle match like NRA High Power prone matches.... I just don't know how it would be of benefit

At that point, the reason to prefer a fancy reticle is that it's calibrated for your rifle and load, so that you never have to touch your turrets. Even the best scopes have a tiny amount of mechanical error in the adjustment systems.

 

[mac1911]

At that point, the reason to prefer a fancy reticle is that it's calibrated for your rifle and load, so that you never have to touch your turrets. Even the best scopes have a tiny amount of mechanical error in the adjustment systems.

which would you prefer you fancy reticle in FFP or SFP?

its not always easy to say which is better I would want a FFP if I was trying to range variable toroso size targets vs shooting little groups at a known distance.
Get to know your scope and your hold overs with a SFP on various MagX will be fine. I think another advantage to a FFP "mil dot" style reticle is not needing to adjust your turrets to often.
I was able to try all sorts of scopes over the summer. Very enlightening made my decision process harder. I know after some time trying and looking my budget grew a little it had to. In the end im looking for something that's got a 1/8th moa target dot with side adjustable parelax 24x or more maybe and a few windage hold overs. still looking and saving

 

[Nickle]

FFP is important if you are using the holdovers at different magnifications. If you only use the holdovers at max magnification then it isn't an issue. If you had a 2-10x that you liked to shoot at 6x and 10x then SFP would have different values for the holdover whereas a FFP scope would have the same holdover value.

If you range only on max power, and you either don't use the dots for holdovers, know the value at lower powers or always do your holdovers at max power, then the difference is irrelevant.

For me, it is more important in a variable high magnification scope that may be used at partial magnification.

Exactly.

My only dislike of FFP scopes is the reticle lines/dots/harsh marks or what ever you want to call them cover a pretty large area of the target. if your looking to shoot nice small groups that can be a problem.

either way getting to know your scope is always best which ever you choose. I printed up cheat sheets for my scope. gives me the change in zeros on each hold over for my magX they fit nicely in my lense caps. or I laminate them and hang them from my bipod..

im not completely ruling a FFP scope out yet but only really seeing it usefull if your going to be shooting lots of unknown distances a lot. like some sort of tactical match where you need to range the targets and shoot them quickly. with out a fancy range finder.

If you're trying to shoot small groups, you shouldn't be using a tactical (mil-dot) scope.

For serious group or score shooting, I either use a 6 power scope (when ruke mandated), or use a 24 power, 25 power or 36 power scope, with a suoer fine crosshair or a 1/8 MOA dot.

For up to 1000 yards, I use a straight 10 power (fixed power) mil-dot scope. Focal plane doesn't come into issue, as it's fixed power. For the rifles being used for further ranges, I use 4.5-14 scopes, and range on max power anyways.

I'm not sure FFP and "tactical" reticles have a place in a known distance rifle match like NRA High Power prone matches.... I just don't know how it would be of benefit

They don't. The guys shooting long range benchrest and F-class tend to use scopes like I use for short range benchrest. Fine crosshair or small dot. Mil-dots, heavy crosshairs, or large dots tend to obscure the target. Also, these same guys will tend to use fixed power scopes, I think you'll find.

At that point, the reason to prefer a fancy reticle is that it's calibrated for your rifle and load, so that you never have to touch your turrets. Even the best scopes have a tiny amount of mechanical error in the adjustment systems.

The biggest problem with that is your ballistics do change based on environmental or weather change. Temperature, elevation, different ammo all will make significant changes to your trajectory, and therefore your "come-ups" to compensate for it.

Limited accuracy rifles (like a stock AR-15), using the same particular ammo (M855) up to a moderate distance (like 800 yards) can get away with that. I've got a TA-31F ACOG that does just that. It's close enough with this combination. You can even vary the ammo some (like use Mk 262) and it will still probably be close enough, at most of that distance.

 

[mac1911]

If you range only on max power, and you either don't use the dots for holdovers, know the value at lower powers or always do your holdovers at max power, then the difference is irrelevant.



Exactly.



If you're trying to shoot small groups, you shouldn't be using a tactical (mil-dot) scope.

For serious group or score shooting, I either use a 6 power scope (when ruke mandated), or use a 24 power, 25 power or 36 power scope, with a suoer fine crosshair or a 1/8 MOA dot.

For up to 1000 yards, I use a straight 10 power (fixed power) mil-dot scope. Focal plane doesn't come into issue, as it's fixed power. For the rifles being used for further ranges, I use 4.5-14 scopes, and range on max power anyways.



They don't. The guys shooting long range benchrest and F-class tend to use scopes like I use for short range benchrest. Fine crosshair or small dot. Mil-dots, heavy crosshairs, or large dots tend to obscure the target. Also, these same guys will tend to use fixed power scopes, I think you'll find.



The biggest problem with that is your ballistics do change based on environmental or weather change. Temperature, elevation, different ammo all will make significant changes to your trajectory, and therefore your "come-ups" to compensate for it.

Limited accuracy rifles (like a stock AR-15), using the same particular ammo (M855) up to a moderate distance (like 800 yards) can get away with that. I've got a TA-31F ACOG that does just that. It's close enough with this combination. You can even vary the ammo some (like use Mk 262) and it will still probably be close enough, at most of that distance.

Right understood......but I want a,little of both worlds admit!
Thought the pic might come out better.... any how this is the reticle I have come to like the most so far.

 

[bigblue]

Any chance you have a larger picture? I don't have a microscope to view that one.

 

[Nickle]

Right understood......but I want a,little of both worlds admit!
Thought the pic might come out better.... any how this is the reticle I have come to like the most so far.

Well, if the two worlds are precision and long distance range finding, you can't get both/

Any compromise will make you give up some good and get some bad.

And, I could make an opinion, if we could see that reticle. There are some workable compromises out there, a lot depends on what you're using, and what the target is.

Remember folks, there are no bad reticles, just better or not better, and optimum for the job or not.

 

[strangenh]

Any chance you have a larger picture? I don't have a microscope to view that one.

I think that's the Death Star at 10AU. Hope that helps.

 

[mac1911]

I think that's the Death Star at 10AU. Hope that helps.

I don't know why the pic didn't work well. I will try to repost it. It's a reticle from a Hawke brand scope. Map 6 they call it.
It works well. I really like it and has been lots of fun with the 22 out to 100 yards. Really fun on the pellet guns out to 75 yards. I mounted it to my latest "varmint"#ar and it works ok. Resolution and clarity are a bit lacking on 12x @ 200yards but that's what 250$ gets you.
For target I fell in love with the 36 and 40x fixed 1/8 and 1/16th moa target dots. It's fun putting the dot inside the bullet hole...I'm just not going to be shooting enough past 200 yards making fixed 32x a bit to much at 100 yards.

I'm probably going to just buy the weaver T36 1/8 dot with side focus for now for 200 yards. It's not so expensive to kill my budget completely and I could mount it on my 513t later and have fun with the 22 @ 200 yards. Then pick up something "better" in a few months.

 

[Queen Bee]

if you want a cheaper option you can do a Primary Arms 4-14... some on this forum have owned one and had great experiences with it. I have broken two within a a month.

I am looking at the Bushnell ET 6-24 power with the G2 reticle.. its a nice superfine reticle with an hold over christmas tree reticle.

if you want something cheaper and at a really good sale price right now the bushnell 3-12 at digital oasis is a steal
http://www.thedigitaloasis.com/BUS-ELITE-TACT-3-12X44-G2-DMR_p_18051.html#.VtZUEuaf7Mk

but you may find yourself wanting more mag, which is why i want to buy the 6-24 when it is back in stock and on sale

bushnell has a no questions asked lifetime warranty just like vortex.

 

[Nickle]

It's a reticle from a Hawke brand scope. Map 6 they call it.

Like this?

 

[mac1911]

Like this?

Yes non illuminated version though. I like how small the "dots" are. VS my 10x mil dot style scope. If the picture was clear and you could expand it you can see even up close the dot is pretty small.
this is 25 yards on 8x or 12x I forget. But the pellet hole lower left is .17 cal. For comparison.
My old VXIII 30/30 duplex ret has been a fine scope. Its only 2.5x8. Simple hunting scope. Not to bad for fun target work but the intersecting lines cover Bout 3/4 moa.
If vortex or night force made a scope with a map6 reticle with nice small dots I would most likely go that route. I won't be range finding much so no FFP for me.

I will try to post some pics of my other ret. Against targets just for hahahas

 

[lupis42]

which would you prefer you fancy reticle in FFP or SFP?

FFP - otherwise the zero may drift slightly between magnifications and the holds, both for drop and for wind will be different at different magnifications.

The biggest problem with that is your ballistics do change based on environmental or weather change. Temperature, elevation, different ammo all will make significant changes to your trajectory, and therefore your "come-ups" to compensate for it.

Agreed. Just throwing out the one thing those reticles do that's still of use even with known distance.

 

[mac1911]

I don't know if these are available FFP or not but a few reticles I like

Sightron moa2
the ECR1 on the new vortex golden eagle but they don't expect release of that model until late summer?
both have hash marks that are small. .125moa ish

 

[oppressed]

The SWFA SS 10x42 10x fixed power scopes have a mil-quad reticle option. The mil dots are open diamond shaped. Helps with the problem of the dots obscuring the target.

I just ordered one, but they are on back order until April 14th.

 

[mac1911]

The long range shooting thread got me back to thinking about replacing my scope on my FN Special Police in 308. I have a nice Leupold Vari-X III 4.5-14x40mm Adj Objective Tactical scope on her now, but made the mistake of getting the duplex reticle instead of something like mildot. It's great for plinking but not functional enough when trying to estimate distance.

As I've been looking at quality options I'm heavily leaning towards a FFP scope instead a SFP. Though I'm wondering what people think about the FFP option and if you think it's worth the extra $$ to go in that direction?

Right now I'm thinking this Vortex Viper PST scope will replace my Leupold. Long range shooting forums and Sniper's Hide have glowing reviews for this particular scope even though it's less expensive then some of the more well known glass makers.

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product...fp-riflescope-with-ebr-1-mrad-reticle/reticle

Have you made any gains in your search? I was just on sightron web site and noticed a FFP offering I didn't see before.
I'm tempted a bit on this model. I'm just wondering if the .25 moa dot will look huge at 300 plus yards?

 

[Rockrivr1]

Have you made any gains in your search? I was just on sightron web site and noticed a FFP offering I didn't see before.
I'm tempted a bit on this model. I'm just wondering if the .25 moa dot will look huge at 300 plus yards?

I did. After a bunch of research I went with the Vortex Viper PST 4x16-50mm with their MRAD reticle. I've put it on my FN Special Police and I'm liking it.

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product...ffp-riflescope-with-ebr-1-moa-reticle/reticle

 

[SJan]

I did. After a bunch of research I went with the Vortex Viper PST 4x16-50mm with their MRAD reticle. I've put it on my FN Special Police and I'm liking it.

Excellent choice, I have the same scope with the MOA reticle

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Vortex has the only guarantee in the industry without a clause that starts out with the word "excludes".

 

[dlarge]

Vortex has the only guarantee in the industry without a clause that starts out with the word "excludes".

Also great discounts on Promotive. Really happy with my Vortex products so far.

 

[PEW]

I did. After a bunch of research I went with the Vortex Viper PST 4x16-50mm with their MRAD reticle. I've put it on my FN Special Police and I'm liking it.

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product...ffp-riflescope-with-ebr-1-moa-reticle/reticle

I purchased nearly the same scope (6-24, SFP) a couple of weeks ago to mount on a 50BMG, at least partly because of this:

Vortex has the only guarantee in the industry without a clause that starts out with the word "excludes".

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk