Rifle Scopes Help Understanding FFP Reticles

[crossgun]

OK, I believe I have an understanding of the front focal plane reticles and how they range through the magnification range of the scope. My question to users of these scopes is how do you deal with the reticle becoming so small and washed out when you’re on the lower magnification?

I have looked through some great reticle patterns that are used to range when on the upper end of the power curve but then when the power is reduced just fade away. How do you overcome this? Do you just range and aim on the max magnification?

I own numerous Nightforce 2nd focal plane scopes and can only imagine if they were not a max power the reticle would totally disappear before the low end was reached.

 

[hydro556]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

If the scope is a quality unit, this will be factored in when building the scope. I have owned FFP scopes from USO, Premier and S&B. The S&B has the most extreme magnification range (5-25) and it works fine. Some of them can get a bit hard to see (especially at lower light levels for me) but they all functioned.

I so rarely crank my scope down to minimum power that it has never been an issue. And if they are illuminated it would help as well.

 

[doc76251]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

Unfortinately that is the down check to any FFP scope and the balance between the upper end and lower end is a real engineering delima. To have a reticle that is viable at 5X on a 5 - 25X you will end up with a HUGE reticle on high power that will obstruct or cover up everything. Conversely if you have a FINE reticle at 25x it will disapear in the low powers. The above being said the stadia will still cover the same amount of target no matter what the power. You may just have to concentrate a bit more to resolve it on low power as it will not just jump out at you.

Then again if you have a 5 - 25 chances are the rifle is pretty doggone big so you won't be kicking doors with it. If you are using NV your concern should be the viability of the 10X view as that's where you need to run most day optics to be able to see clearly.

This is where the Dual Foacal Plane concept came from. Yes it's still in the works but on the shelf as R&D is on hold for the time being.

Cheers,

Doc

 

[noname]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

zeiss has a new diavari 1.5x6 with 2nd and 1st. dot in 2nd, and cross in 1st. somewhat different than your needs perhaps, heard a rumour about 2005 that they were doing some dual stuff by hand tuning each scope. Doc would know more about that however, one way is to stay away from ffp variables having large ranges in their magnification and high mag. powers.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

I have never had a problem using any FFP reticle I have used, USO,Premier, Nightforce or S&B, due to low power. Usually I don't go below 8x and when I do the target is usually so close there really isn't a need for the mils on the reticle anyways and if there is it just takes a little more concentration to use them but they are still usable.

The pros of the FFP greatly outweigh the cons, which the above is the only one I could think of.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

My experience has been that mostly when I need a scope on low power, it's because I'm close to the target, and need to turn the power down to get a wider field of view. At those magnifications, the only thing I need to see is the crosshairs, which is not a problem even in a scope with a high ratio between maximum and minimum magnification.

Actually, at those ranges, the scope tube pretty much serves as a large ghost-ring sight.

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

Once you get below about 6x the mil scale or mil dot reticle basically becomes a crosshair. Think about it - at that low of a power you'd be making a closer shot anyway so the target is relatively big for field/"tactical" use, assuming you were going to fire a round with it turned down that low. Often lower power is used for target locating, then once done you can dial up power if it is a smaller target.

Even if you need to keep the power low for field of view purposes, you still can accurately dial your wind and elevation with the knobs, even if the reticle graduations are unusable. The crosshair in the middle IS still usable for a holding point. You can also calibrate your hold based on the size of the target and using the target itself as the measuring scale rather than the reticle. The nose to chin dimension is about 3.4", a man's chest muscles from the bottom to to top of the shoulder about 7", so there are 1 mil and 2 mil references easily available on the the target itself.

If you want to shoot golf balls at 300 yards while dialing down your power, you need a 2nd FP scope with a finer reticle.

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to shoot golf balls at 300 yards while dialing down your power, you need a 2nd FP scope with a finer reticle. </div></div>
Exactly. This is the major draw back to FFP scopes. They cover up small targets at long range. S&B scopes in the FFP will cover up a golf ball, ping pong ball, and mini clay pidgeons (60mm) at 300 yards plus. All these targets have been used in tactical competitions. Plus, the S&B reticles will cover up the small dot on a KYL drill (know your limits). You don't get this with 2ndFP NF scopes. You lose a little precision when you have a larger reticle covering up your target and field of view. But, S&B glass is nice! I also like the idea of using the paralax adjustment to help figure out the distace on UKD targets!!

NF scopes with the 2ndFP work great with the NP-R1 reticle. The horizontal lines are used for wind, movers, and (ocasionally) milling targets. Most of the time is spent at 22x, which you get the full 2 MOA stadia lines. I dial down to 11x on movers, and the stadia lines become 4 MOA apart. You normally need to have a 4-8 MOA lead on a moving target anyway. IMO, the 2ndFP NF reticles is the best set up.

 

[Advokaten]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

Chad, call me silly them but them there seems to be a slight error in the makeing of the comp, right?

Are you testing the shooters tactical abilities or if he/she can hit a golf ball at 300 meters,

that small of a target is to my limited knowledge not the most common size in real life.

I had a 1/8 dot reticle scope that would do the same thing, I just held of that 1/8 th, adjusted for it and shot the bull.

/Chris

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

A competition is a competition, not TRAINING.

The goal of a competition is to make it very challenging to see who is the best.

FFP scopes have their place. Now that I have had some field/training/competition use with mine I have decided that all FFP's for work guns will have illumination. The reticle on my 4-14x is too fine at 4x to pickup at night on a cluttered target and impossible on a dark target.

For daytime I have never had a problem, but I work mostly at night.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

No two people look at scopes the same especially when it comes to use.

It's really personal preference, however there are definitely limitations to both. One is designed for a fine, unmoving crosshair, the other is more dynamic in nature.

I know people who run the numbers are often disappointed in their performance when the "numbers" don't work in practical application, but then again, I also feel that is a training issue. You can't sit in front of the computer and spell out what you think you will do, you actually have to go out and do it, more than once.

Everything works right to each of us when we are thinking about it, or when we are out on the range by ourselves "trying" something. It's when you add others into the mix that things don't turn out so well. Then, all the 1/2 Minute guns fade to 1, all the boring consistency goes by the wayside and all you're left with are the stories of yesterday when it worked for you.

 

[Advokaten]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

LoneWolf,

under those terms you are more than correct,

I as a european shoot about half my scopes FFP and the other SFP,

I have no real preference they all work for there intended use and I can say that you are spot on with the ilum part.

We tend to hunt and shot a lot in low and no light conditions and the last three years with ilum rets, I have taken shots I never could have, out of respect for the animal taken before.

I like progress, still there is nothing wrong with a cold night, snow on the ground and a 8x56 scope with a nr 1 reticle in it,

makes for easy shooting.


For daytime play shooting and my 22 LR long range play @ beyond 200 meters I like the TMR of my Mk4.

LoneWolf thanks for indulging me, I belive that is the correct word?!

/Chris

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

No problem Swede.

I like SFP's for target shooting, but for everything else I like the FFP.

 

[BobinNC]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

It's funny how things have come full circle. In the late 60's through the 70's, European scope makers, Zeiss, S&B, Nickle Supra, et al had a hard time selling scopes to American Sportman. The reason was all their variable scopes were FFP. Put a German #4 style in a 2-6x40mm FFP variable of that time, and you had a reticle @ 6x that would cover an elephant @ 50 yds. At 2x you could barely use it, when you really, really need it to shoot that dang elephant......

Americans wanted SFP reticles on their variables like what were produced by Weaver, Bausch & Lomb, Redfield, Leupold. For a time Bausch & Lomb used a tapered crosshair (similar to Leupold CPC), so that the reticle looked the same on any power.

The European makers had to develop SFP variable scopes to have a chance of selling there variables in the vast American market. Here we are 40 years later, and now FFP is the newest and most modern and SFP is old hat/old school.

I used FFP scopes in the 70's and hated them for the high power- big reticle, low power small reticle, stick... Of course the problem was not FFP, it was reticle design. But who knew...

Now that we have discovered usefulness of mil-dots, hash-marks, and ranging reticles of all kinds, FFP is back in vogue.

I would have never thought that FFP would make such a big comeback. Guess that's why I'm not rich....

I hope I'm around to see the next evolution back to SFP.....

Bob

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A competition is a competition, not TRAINING.</div></div>

That is true. If it were to be used on larger, man-size targets, it would be a good thing to have. I think of what will apply to me the most for use in competitions. I have heard many times after a stage that "my reticle covered up the target". That's why I like the 2nd FP scopes.

 

[rksimple]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChadTRG42</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A competition is a competition, not TRAINING.</div></div>

That is true. If it were to be used on larger, man-size targets, it would be a good thing to have. I think of what will apply to me the most for use in competitions. I have heard many times after a stage that "my reticle covered up the target". That's why I like the 2nd FP scopes. </div></div>

Never had that problem with my p4fine reticle in any competition. Sounds like a SH IOR reticle or something. With .04mil reticle subtension, I doubt I'll ever run into that issue. Unless of course I'm shooting at a .25 MOA target or something ridiculous like that. But then, the advantages to FFP outweigh these small negatives. I guess it comes down to what kind of competition you're shooting. For all I've attended, FFP is the clear winner.

 

[He Shoot Me]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

I'm glad you brought this up, I'm new to all of this. I had the same WTF moment when I looked through my Falcon 5.5x25 FFP for the first time.

I've sinse spent a lot of time working with the scope, and have become quite comfortable with it. I really like practicing with it trying to figure-out what ranges different things are using the reticle in conjunction with a mil-dot master, and then using Google Earth 5.0 to confirm. I've been pleasantly surprised with how close I'm actually getting.

I've also been practicing lining-up on closer objects as quick as I can in the trees with the scope all the way down/best field of view because I will be taking it hunting this year. What's worked best for me so far is with the Falcon it has short, dark, fat lines on the top and sides that don't stick out very far before the individual lines appear and basically putting what I'm shooting at in the perceived center. I figure from 10-150 yards this will work just fine.


-Pat

P.S.

"Everything works right to each of us when we are thinking about it, or when we are out on the range by ourselves "trying" something. It's when you add others into the mix that things don't turn out so well. Then, all the 1/2 Minute guns fade to 1, all the boring consistency goes by the wayside and all you're left with are the stories of yesterday when it worked for you."

Way too much truth in that. ;-)

 

[doc76251]

Re: Help Understanding FFP Reticles

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChadTRG42</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to shoot golf balls at 300 yards while dialing down your power, you need a 2nd FP scope with a finer reticle. </div></div>
Exactly. This is the major draw back to FFP scopes. They cover up small targets at long range. S&B scopes in the FFP will cover up a golf ball, ping pong ball, and mini clay pidgeons (60mm) at 300 yards plus. All these targets have been used in tactical competitions. Plus, the S&B reticles will cover up the small dot on a KYL drill (know your limits). You don't get this with 2ndFP NF scopes. You lose a little precision when you have a larger reticle covering up your target and field of view. But, S&B glass is nice! I also like the idea of using the paralax adjustment to help figure out the distace on UKD targets!!

NF scopes with the 2ndFP work great with the NP-R1 reticle. The horizontal lines are used for wind, movers, and (ocasionally) milling targets. Most of the time is spent at 22x, which you get the full 2 MOA stadia lines. I dial down to 11x on movers, and the stadia lines become 4 MOA apart. You normally need to have a 4-8 MOA lead on a moving target anyway. IMO, the 2ndFP NF reticles is the best set up. </div></div>

I'm having a hard time with much of this post.

First: In a FFP scope the cross hairs will cover up exactly the same amount of target wether it be at 25X or 5X (or any other magnification) that is the point of a FFP scope, they subtend correctly at any power. I cannot speak to S&B's covering up too much target as I've only shot a couple and briefly at that. In a SFP scope the reticle remains the same size but as you dial on more power the target appears to grow larger around the reticle. So at low power in a SFP reticle the reticle will cover up significantly more of the target at any range, on higher power the reticle will cover less.

On the NF reticle, or any SFP reticle with stadia..... If you dial down to 11X on a 22X scope and can effectively do the math on the fly and it works you are VERY lucky. Most scopes "power values" on thier power rings are an arbitrary approximation at best. If you A$$uME that they are correct you are uninformed/lucky at best. To ensure the correct subtension you need to calibrate the reticle to make SURE it is doing what it says it is. Much the same with click values.

I'm glad you dig SFP scopes and wish you all the best. Some folks like it the other way.

Cheers,

Doc