Rifle Scopes second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

[Bluejazz]

I have been using sfp scopes, mostly dialing my dope and not using them for ranging estimations, or for follow up shots using hold off. After doing extensive reading on ffp scopes in regards to ranging and follow up shots using hold off in the reticle, is there really any difference if you use MOA or Mil, as long as it a ffp scope?
And MOA is alittle bit more precise, would not the MOA reticle be the way to go ?

I do not compete in tactical matches, just looking for ways to improve my hunting skills and expand my learning.

 

[BobinNC]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

The difference is: FFP MOA/MOA scopes are very few. FFP MIL/MIL scopes you have more choices in brands/models. MIL/MIL is a standard in both reticles and adjustments, between scope makers. There is no existing standard for MOA/MOA reticles and adjustments among scope makers.

MOA is not more precise, it is just another way to get to the same end.

 

[Bluejazz]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

Thanks for the reply, bobin.
However, I am surprised that I did not get more feedback from those that use ffp scopes. I assume there are some here that compete with ffp and would like to get some feedback on which they use ffp MOA or MIL and if there really is any difference in the two for taking follow up shots.
While there may be fewer choices at present for ffp MOA scope, I feel this will be changing shortly.

 

[BobinNC]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

Bluejazz,

Not sure what your looking for? An endorsement for FFP MOA/MOA over FFP MIL/MIL? The only reason necessary for choosing an FFP MOA/MOA is because you want one, and hate to use or to learn MILS. Other than that, any superiority of the MOA/MOA system over MIL/MIL is between the shooter ears, not the on paper performance.


I use FFP MIL/MIL to compete some, and hunt. I have not used MOA/MOA. But I would not expect any differences in reading your shot and then adjusting with either system. Your reticle is the ruler, regardless if it is MIL based or MOA based. Read your ruler and adjust. In short, no difference in second shot readability or adjustment.

There are simply more makers of MIL/MIL scopes than makers of MOA/MOA. And there is no standard for MOA reticle design, as there is in MILS. If that is not enough to dissuade you and an FFP MOA/MOA is your "thing", by all means buy one.

 

[Little Bill]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

I am in a similar boat as Bluejazz. I am looking at getting a new FFP scope, but the MOA / MIL is causing some indecision. I was raised with inches and yards, so I eye-measure everything in that way. It seems more logical to use MOA because of that. Maybe?

 

[Bluejazz]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

Thanks, Bob.
Thats kind of what I was looking for.
I am in the process of learning the mil system. Just having alittle dificulty trying to forget in inches , and just think of the hold off. I will get there.

 

[BobinNC]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Little Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am in a similar boat as Bluejazz. I am looking at getting a new FFP scope, but the MOA / MIL is causing some indecision. I was raised with inches and yards, so I eye-measure everything in that way. It seems more logical to use MOA because of that. Maybe? </div></div>

Little Bill,

Let me see if I can help you out: You don't have a LRF, and I show you a target at unknown range, and I tell you it measures exactly 36" x 36". Peering through your FFP MIL/MIL scope you measure it as being 1.75 mils tall.

Now I hand you a FFP MOA/MOA and you measure it to be 6 MOA Tall.

How far is it??? Since you have to either compute it or look at your mildot master to determine that it is 575 yards away, how did a lifetime of eye measuring in inches and yards help you with that solution?

To hit that target you still have to dial or holdover whatever your drop chart tells you to in either MILs or MOA.

Again taking the same problem, after you figure your dope out, and fire the shot, you see through your FFP MIL/MIL scope that you are .5 Mils Low. For your second shot you hold .5 mils higher and hit the target dead in the middle. How did a lifetime of eye measuring in inches and yards hinder you in making that hit?

And yes, you can do the same thing with a FFP MOA/MOA scope, and a lifetime of eye measuring in inches or yards will neither help nor hinder you. Because your adjusting to what you see in the reticle, and using the ruler given you. No more or less.

Think about it....

 

[J.Boyette]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Little Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am in a similar boat as Bluejazz. I am looking at getting a new FFP scope, but the MOA / MIL is causing some indecision. I was raised with inches and yards, so I eye-measure everything in that way. It seems more logical to use MOA because of that. Maybe? </div></div>

Why do you think that MilRad does not work in yards?

This is my main question to these types of posts.

We all take about shooting 600yds 1000yds, 352yds.

I guess if you want ot convert my yd dope to meters have at it.

but where does anything that has to do with MilRad talk about the range you shoot at has to be in meters?

Now, what if I use my MOA/MOA riflescope and shoot on a meter range.

How does that work?

John

 

[J.Boyette]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

Oh,

27.778 works for you.

John

 

[Bluejazz]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

So I would use 27.7 as my conversion factor for mils, and 95.5 for MOA. But either way I will need to do some math.
The mildot master would certainly help this process. The end goal for me is to try and not rely on electronic devises so much.

 

[sscoyote]

Re: second shot hold sfp or ffp ?

The only real way to get around not using a calculator is to get the std. mil system and use the MD Master. Besides that u're gonna have to use a calculator or have a bunch of spreadsheets available for all anticipated tgt. sizes. Understanding the math inside and out is really the secret to applying these systems for rangefinding. Take the TMR reticle for instance

U can use the std. mil subtension with this (and the MD Master) if u want or u can use it at it's highest degree of accuracy by using the .2 mil as your multiplier minus 1 line thickness, since most of us bracket between lines--not from center of one line to center of another line (.2 mil-.02 mil for 25x as mine's an 8.5-25x). That means that my multiplier for this reticle is 154.3 (100/.648). Nobody ever said that reticle-rangefinding was easy. Even a true inch per hundred yd. system requires a calculator (when dealing with inches to yds.). Suppose u have a simple 10" tgt. that occupies 1.7 1 IPHY subtension units. That's still 1000/1.7--something i can't figure out in my head.