Using a mil-dot reticle do you prefer the second or first focal plane getting into 1000 yard target shooting and why?
Ffp or sfp for elr? Which do you prefer and why?
- Thread starter blgreene89
- Start date
ffp with an adjustable mount, for me. although the sfp guys do have valid points about reticle size, and hold overs at 1/2 and 1/4 power
With the available rangefinders today I would only use a FFP scope if the rules forced its use.
I prefer sfp for ELR. I want fine crosshairs at max power and I like to be able to dial back on power and double my hold over points when I run out of dial. Most ELR shooting your at max power anyway
With SFP you are limited to one magnification if you want the holdoffs to be true to the reticle, unless you like math, in which case the value of the hashes can be calculated. That can be a pain if you want to use another magnification like if there is a lot of mirage or you need a wider FOV. But you can always dial in your windage which negates the holdoffs. I try not to dial windage especially of course if the wind is coming from behind or into you face, and going back and forth across. Or in normal winds too. When it's really windy I usually dial windage.
FFP, the only problem is when you need to use very low magnification which makes the reticle harder to see.
I have only one SFP scope and it's for a certain and specific application where seeing the reticle on low power is top priority. I sometimes forget that on this scope it needs to be on 10x for the hashes to be correct, since I'm so used to FFP. A few, why did I miss, happens, and it occurs to me what I did wrong, lol.
FFP, the only problem is when you need to use very low magnification which makes the reticle harder to see.
I have only one SFP scope and it's for a certain and specific application where seeing the reticle on low power is top priority. I sometimes forget that on this scope it needs to be on 10x for the hashes to be correct, since I'm so used to FFP. A few, why did I miss, happens, and it occurs to me what I did wrong, lol.
Lynn - the reason we use a scaled is for and super fast accurate communication and corrections . It has zero to do with range finding.
blgreene89 Paper might be a different story as you can't use splash, frag and signature to determining values.. BUT 1000, unless your shooting a 14" 308/223 isn't ELR like your title suggests.
Diver
I don't see that as an issue in our 2000 yard + matches. Most of our shooters shoot so slow that the conditions change before they get there next shot off.
I read alot on here but rarely post as my main background is 600/1000 yard Benchrest.
I see about 6 familiar faces on this website
Lynn
I don't see that as an issue in our 2000 yard + matches. Most of our shooters shoot so slow that the conditions change before they get there next shot off.
I read alot on here but rarely post as my main background is 600/1000 yard Benchrest.
I see about 6 familiar faces on this website
Lynn
Just food for thought:
One of the myths of SFP is that they are thinner and thus better for ELR targets. This might be true for battle type reticles, but not all. In any case the SFP is dialed off max it is absolutely untrue if they both started with the same thickness at max.
Using some of the thinner FFP reticles they are on par with the SPF scopes under max power. Here is the rub- SFP reticles actually are effectively THICKER if one dialed off max power.
I get it that some of the guys are shooting in temperate climates or across cannons where mirage is midigated, so maybe they haven’t experienced the need to dial back off of max power; but that is NOT everyone’s reality. It is very common to need to dial back ELR targets in the summer heat when shooting across flat terrain like the desert.
When you dial down an SFP scope not only are the subtentions no longer correct for accurately communicating corrections, the reticles subtentions are now larger relitive to the reduced target image of the SFP scope.
Just something that should be considered.
One of the myths of SFP is that they are thinner and thus better for ELR targets. This might be true for battle type reticles, but not all. In any case the SFP is dialed off max it is absolutely untrue if they both started with the same thickness at max.
Using some of the thinner FFP reticles they are on par with the SPF scopes under max power. Here is the rub- SFP reticles actually are effectively THICKER if one dialed off max power.
I get it that some of the guys are shooting in temperate climates or across cannons where mirage is midigated, so maybe they haven’t experienced the need to dial back off of max power; but that is NOT everyone’s reality. It is very common to need to dial back ELR targets in the summer heat when shooting across flat terrain like the desert.
When you dial down an SFP scope not only are the subtentions no longer correct for accurately communicating corrections, the reticles subtentions are now larger relitive to the reduced target image of the SFP scope.
Just something that should be considered.
Using Strelok, I can enter in that I have a SFP scope and it will adjust the holdover for different magnifications.
That's pretty neat. I didn't realize it would until I read your post and figured I would try it.
As long as the magnification coincides with the calculations, then that would be great. Meaning like the scope is set on 20x but the actual magnification is 19x or 21x, which I bet isn't uncommon.
While you can do the simple math to compensate the SFP reading when milling, I agree it's not the real answer and FFP is more appropriate.
Not a tactical shooter but I run monthly 2000 yard matches and see very little difference in the outcome of the matches dictated by using a FFP or a SFP scope
And the smallest crosshairs I have seen have always been in SFP scopes.
Shoot whichever works best for yourself.
If you go FFP you can bracket the target so the crosshairs don't obscure your field of view.
And the smallest crosshairs I have seen have always been in SFP scopes.
Shoot whichever works best for yourself.
If you go FFP you can bracket the target so the crosshairs don't obscure your field of view.
Diver
I try and look through all of the scopes on the line. I don't see the ffp or sfp as a deal changer to my way of shooting.
I am a huge fan of good glass as it makes spotting errant shots a huge plus.
Spotting hits is easy with us as we use lights and no light means no hit.
We have a spin-off group who is using four square gongs setup so you know which qudrant was hit.
I judge the crosshairs thickness by comparing it to the straps that hold the gongs.
Thanks for the kind words.
Lynn
I try and look through all of the scopes on the line. I don't see the ffp or sfp as a deal changer to my way of shooting.
I am a huge fan of good glass as it makes spotting errant shots a huge plus.
Spotting hits is easy with us as we use lights and no light means no hit.
We have a spin-off group who is using four square gongs setup so you know which qudrant was hit.
I judge the crosshairs thickness by comparing it to the straps that hold the gongs.
Thanks for the kind words.
Lynn
Opps i just deleted by mistake. (I meant to delete a for sale itemI was posting)..
Yes, I get that. Just adding more context
Similar threads
