Rifle Scopes SFP for long range shooting

[wade2big]

The same reticle in a 3x-12x vs a 3x -15x vs 3x-18x all ffp would have very different perceptions of the reticle size and usefulness at min and Max magnification. The same thickness getting 4x, 5x, or 6x the size from min to max. Right?

No. They will appear the same at all magnification ranges that are shared between the scopes. Of course the reticle will appear larger in the highest magnification as everything seen through the scope will appear larger.

some manufacturers use thicker reticles in their lower power optics and use thinner reticles in their higher power optics. Vortexdoes this in their pst gen ii line. They use a .05 mil thick i. The 3-15 and a .03 in the 5-25. They do not however do thisin their razor line and thats a shame.

 

[seansmd]

No. They will appear the same at all magnification ranges that are shared between the scopes. Of course the reticle will appear larger in the highest magnification as everything seen through the scope will appear larger.

some manufacturers use thicker reticles in their lower power optics and use thinner reticles in their higher power optics. Vortexdoes this in their pst gen ii line. They use a .05 mil thick i. The 3-15 and a .03 in the 5-25. They do not however do thisin their razor line and thats a shame.

I agree on the shared ranges.

If all at Max magnification have the same thickness, which i believe it's where the define how thick is too thick, then at minimum you would see a big difference?

 

[Diver160651]

I agree on the shared ranges.

If all at Max magnification have the same thickness, which i believe it's where the define how thick is too thick, then at minimum you would see a big difference?

It depends on the total magnification value, but also the overall reticle design. At 5x multiplication, many are not too bad. The 2-10s for battle rifles often have a thicker over all strata. Some 3-15s try a bit to hard to have uber thin lines at max value, others are better. Like anything you need to pick the best fit. Some like march 10x, is indeed a bit over the top

On my 3-15 hunting rifles, the 3X brings in the super thick strata on the sides and bottom and what was the tree is illuminated as a large cross in the center of the scope. It is super fast to pick up in daylight or low light. But it needs to be about 6x, with 8 being better to really get the quick reads on the tree. Again though i don't really need info until about 300+ yards so dialing up a tiny bit is never an issue

 

[wade2big]

I agree on the shared ranges.

If all at Max magnification have the same thickness, which i believe it's where the define how thick is too thick, then at minimum you would see a big difference?

The reticle and target stay dimensionally the same at all magnifications relative to each other. The reticle will seem thicker on 18x vs 15x because the image and reticle are larger through the scope. If someone thinks a FFP is too thick (at max magnification then it is too thick at the minimum as well. I think FFP reticle are too thin most of the time.

 

[Diver160651]

The reticle and target stay dimensionally the same at all magnifications relative to each other. The reticle will seem thicker on 18x vs 15x because the image and reticle are larger through the scope. If someone thinks a FFP is too thick (at max magnification then it is too thick at the minimum as well. I think FFP reticle are too thin most of the time.

I think Sean is asking at what min, do you loose the ability to pick up the starta. He has a ZCO 5-25 so I imagine he is asking more about the hunting type scopes using FFP. Ie a 5x magnifier of a 3-15 vrs a SB 7x for their 3-20 or a March 10x in the 8-80.. at what power factor does the strata become an issue

 

[wade2big]

I think Sean is asking at what min, do you loose the ability to pick up the starta. He has a ZCO 5-25 so I imagine he is asking more about the hunting type scopes using FFP. Ie a 5x magnifier 3-15 vrs a SB 7x 3-20 or a March 10x 8-80.. at what power factor does the strata become an issue

You may be right.

That is very subjective but has much to do with the thickness of the reticle. I prefer reticles at .05 mil at the thinnest for hunting scopes. I would like .07 mil if it were made. Anything with a .03 which is fairly common gets tough below 8x during last light without illumination. The thicker .06 mil reticles in the lrtsi is fairly decent all the way down to 4.5x toward last light but illumination is still nice to have. For comparison purposes, with a thick duplex reticle on a sfp scope, i never even considered illumination.


I prefer the thickest FFP reticle i can find if I am using it to hunt. The thickest I found is the Bushnell LRTSI and the SWFA 5-20. For target shooting the .03 in my razors are nice.

 

[Jackomason]

I kinda glazed through the comments and maybe I missed it but I think everything was covered except for shooting P-dogs. If you need to zap a Richardson ground squirle a long ways away a SFP may be for you. Most the ground hogs in the states are huge though.

For the most part FFP will do everything. I'm not an ELR shooter but if I ran out of elevation on my FFP I'd probably grab a Charlie Tacom before going to SFP.

 

[seansmd]

I think Sean is asking at what min, do you loose the ability to pick up the starta. He has a ZCO 5-25 so I imagine he is asking more about the hunting type scopes using FFP. Ie a 5x magnifier of a 3-15 vrs a SB 7x for their 3-20 or a March 10x in the 8-80.. at what power factor does the strata become an issue

Exactly, I assume they all set the thickness to NOT be too large at max magnification especially in the center, then on a 3-20 at 3x it would be extremely thin.

 

[Luvman]

Exactly, I assume they all set the thickness to NOT be too large at max magnification especially in the center, then on a 3-20 at 3x it would be extremely thin.

My Pic earlier is this thread is a S&B 3-20 with MSR2. It does get thin at 3x. Still usable for shorter range snap shots. Not optimal and illumination is very useful.

The best FFP reticle I have used was a gen 2 mil dot in a premier 3-15. Great at 3x. And great at 950yds at 15x. That’s the furthest I was able to shoot with it.

 

[Diver160651]

I kinda glazed through the comments and maybe I missed it but I think everything was covered except for shooting P-dogs. If you need to zap a Richardson ground squirle a long ways away a SFP may be for you. Most the ground hogs in the states are huge though.

For the most part FFP will do everything. I'm not an ELR shooter but if I ran out of elevation on my FFP I'd probably grab a Charlie Tacom before going to SFP.

Are you saying SFP (with subtentions) Allows you to aim smaller?? Let's put this into perspective and show the math. Note that some FFP reticles with run even a smaller dot the the ATACR.

First the difference at max zoom is not worth the argument.. But look at what happens as one zoom out a bit maybe for shimmer or barrel mirage. (note that was just quick math, should be close enough for the illustration).

I shoot my scope I use in positional matches between 15-10x all the time with fast and full use of the tree.. So with a SFP I might be using a unscaled hold (deal breaker) that looks up to 2.5X fatter on the target than my FFP.. How is that good?

That said, there are indeed places for Red dots, SFP Duplex (far less for SPF with subtentions -Subs).. and where these might be a great choice, but not in long range practical precision.

SFP makes a ton of sense in a ultra high power duplex for benchrest and F-class using ultra thing strata because the targets have MOA rings and because the magnification on these low travel scopes is 50-80x. Then the target is magnified so much, you do indeed get the aim small miss small effect. But these scopes suck for field use. Again I have a 8-80 March SPF for F-class that I am trying to make go away. It is great for that use, but not much else.

Lets remember the OP's thread title:

Sorry for betting this into the ground. I am just trying to make sure that people understand the math and the reality of subtentioned SFP scopes in our game.. Mainly, because I've run into shooter after shooter who has heard misinformation like in this thread and bought something they regret as soon as they start understanding the difference.

People can use what they like, but don't misunderstand the utility, then be that guy that tells every one why something of lesser use, is actually better, or why the better thing is worse. The only advantage in long range tactical precision SFP with subtensions has over a properly selected FFP, is it makes one feel cool for a cheap price. Crowbarring in, well I need it because I shoot far, or I need to hit small shit, is a complete Myth..

 

[Jackomason]

Are you saying SFP (with subtentions) Allows you to aim smaller?? Let's put this into perspective and show the math. Note that some FFP reticles with run even a smaller dot the the ATACR.

First the difference at max zoom is not worth the argument.. But look at what happens as one zoom out a bit maybe for shimmer or barrel mirage. (note that was just quick math, should be close enough for the illustration).
View attachment 7166188
I shoot my scope I use in positional matches between 15-10x all the time with fast and full use of the tree.. So with a SFP I might be using a unscaled hold (deal breaker) that looks up to 2.5X fatter on the target than my FFP.. How is that good?

That said, there are indeed places for Red dots, SFP Duplex (far less for SPF with subtentions -Subs).. and where these might be a great choice, but not in long range practical precision.

SFP makes a ton of sense in a ultra high power duplex for benchrest and F-class using ultra thing strata because the targets have MOA rings and because the magnification on these low travel scopes is 50-80x. Then the target is magnified so much, you do indeed get the aim small miss small effect. But these scopes suck for field use. Again I have a 8-80 March SPF for F-class that I am trying to make go away. It is great for that use, but not much else.

Lets remember the OP's thread title:

Sorry for betting this into the ground. I am just trying to make sure that people understand the math and the reality of subtentioned SFP scopes in our game.. Mainly, because I've run into shooter after shooter who has heard misinformation like in this thread and bought something they regret as soon as they start understanding the difference.

People can use what they like, but don't misunderstand the utility, then be that guy that tells every one why something of lesser use, is actually better, or why the better thing is worse. The only advantage in long range tactical precision SFP with subtensions has over a properly selected FFP, is it makes one feel cool for a cheap price. Crowbarring in, well I need it because I shoot far, or I need to hit small shit, is a complete Myth..

Agreed. My thinking was with a dedicated varmint scope. Razor thin reticle and big ol sun shade. A lot of long range shooters get into the game with P dogs in mind, I think it's still a fair point but is kinda niche. Does not mean I'd recommend a SFP scope even for that application but none the less it is one use of a SFP scope.

 

[Diver160651]

Agreed. My thinking was with a dedicated varmint scope. Razor thin reticle and big ol sun shade. A lot of long range shooters get into the game with P dogs in mind, I think it's still a fair point but is kinda niche. Does not mean I'd recommend a SFP scope even for that application but none the less it is one use of a SFP scope.

Even if it is just a duplex and the person dialed everything that's great.. I am not saying people can't make stuff work, they do - they have for years, that's kinda why the myth of SFP superiority just will not die . But help me again on how your example is better with a SFP than a well selected reticle and FFP? I must be missing something.

Remembering that a well selected reticle in a long range FFP, will have the same relative size on target at Max (some better) and actually be smaller relative to SFP on target the moment you touch the zoom.

 

[Jackomason]

Even if it is just a duplex and the person dialed everything that's great.. I am not saying people can't make stuff work, they do - they have for years, that's kinda why the myth of SFP superiority just will not die . But help me again on how your example is better with a SFP than a well selected reticle and FFP? I must be missing something.

Remembering that a well selected reticle in a long range FFP, will have the same relative size on target at Max (some better) and actually be smaller relative to SFP on target the moment you touch the zoom.

This is the exact reticle I had in mind. I have no dog in the fight nor do I have anything to gain. I have sold these scopes to people specifically looking for them but that's not often. It's a weaver scope that had exposed turrets. Probably crap by today's standards.

Like I said. It's niche and I'm not out recommending it to everyone that wants to shoot a ground hog. Its pretty well useless for everything else. You dont have to convince me that SFP should go the way of MOA. Just trying to answer the OP.

 

[Diver160651]

This is the exact reticle I had in mind. I have no dog in the fight nor do I have anything to gain. I have sold these scopes to people specifically looking for them but that's not often. It's a weaver scope that had exposed turrets. Probably crap by today's standards. View attachment 7166372

Like I said. It's niche and I'm not out recommending it to everyone that wants to shoot a ground hog. Its pretty well useless for everything else. You dont have to convince me that SFP should go the way of MOA. Just trying to answer the OP.

Cotcha- thanks

btw I am talking SFP with subtentions vrs FFP with subtentions.

 

[hlee]

So, given what I've seen from other threads involving this pharmer, I'm pretty sure he tossed this in here to see how many walls he could splatter with poo.

 

[beetroot]

Sorry for betting this into the ground. I am just trying to make sure that people understand the math and the reality of subtentioned SFP scopes in our game.. Mainly, because I've run into shooter after shooter who has heard misinformation like in this thread and bought something they regret as soon as they start understanding the difference.

People can use what they like, but don't misunderstand the utility, then be that guy that tells every one why something of lesser use, is actually better, or why the better thing is worse. The only advantage in long range tactical precision SFP with subtensions has over a properly selected FFP, is it makes one feel cool for a cheap price. Crowbarring in, well I need it because I shoot far, or I need to hit small shit, is a complete Myth..

I agree that PRS type competitions do favour FFP scopes, and have made the transition to one myself.
But the OP talked about Long Range shooting, which isn't PRS.

In my experience if I ever shot long range, be it 60m+ with my 22lr or 300m+ with my centrefires my scopes was always set to max magnification. This of course depends what magnification range your scope is, in my opinion up to 15-18x this will be the case.
The only time I experienced difficult was under extreme mirage and I needed to dial my magnification back, but there were other external factors that I could've addressed first (a suppressor cover mainly).

My transition to a FFP scope has been met with limited success, the main issues I have are when a fast precise shot is needed, or when positional shooting.
With a nice solid rest/barricade/bipod a thin FFP reticle is not so much an issue, in low light illumination will definitely help.
I have found, even with lots of practice shooting off and or from a unsupported kneeling/sitting position that a wide FOV helps with getting the scope on target quickly, but dialing back the magnification makes the FFP reticle very difficult to pick up quickly.
I find myself needing around 10-15x just to see the reticle clearly/quickly enough to get it on target in the time frame I need too, but loose a lot of FOV.
Whereas a SFP scope I can make the same hits with the same accuracy from the full 3-15x and do it quicker and easier.

While I would not recommend a SFP for PRS style shooting, I have found them to work very well with minimal limitations for hunting/long range scopes. Provided I understand the limitations I'm seldom at a disadvantage.

A properly selected FFP reticle will address some of the short comings in closer ranges, but the the vast majority of FFP reticles are.04ish mil lines with not thick duplex like strada, yes there are a few and a few more coming to the market but they are in the minority.
Admittedly I'm very keen to try the new Meopta Optika6 with the FFP Horseshoe style reticle and that may end up being my go to hunting reticle, but until I've tried the perfect crossover FFP reticle remains a pipe dream.

 

[Vodoun daVinci]

Not trying to be a dick but I have never wanted to compete until this summer.....while shooting hand loads at 600 yards I noticed I was being observed by several guys. When I finished both were trying to convince me to try my hand at F-Class shooting and compete next year. So I went to a few F/O matches looking at equipment and who was shooting what and what the winners were using and was *shocked* to find nary an FFP scope in the whole field in 4 matches. Not one.

Are the F-Class competitors that far behind the time's or that ignorant that they are not using FFP scopes?

Seriously, I have skim read most of this thread and I'm not getting it....I'm hammering stuff out to 1000 yards and watched other guys who were/are shooting way better than me and we are all using high magnification SFP scopes. What are we missing? I don't get it.

VooDoo

 

[Jackomason]

Not trying to be a dick but I have never wanted to compete until this summer.....while shooting hand loads at 600 yards I noticed I was being observed by several guys. When I finished both were trying to convince me to try my hand at F-Class shooting and compete next year. So I went to a few F/O matches looking at equipment and who was shooting what and what the winners were using and was *shocked* to find nary an FFP scope in the whole field in 4 matches. Not one.

Are the F-Class competitors that far behind the time's or that ignorant that they are not using FFP scopes?

Seriously, I have skim read most of this thread and I'm not getting it....I'm hammering stuff out to 1000 yards and watched other guys who were/are shooting way better than me and we are all using high magnification SFP scopes. What are we missing? I don't get it.

VooDoo

It's more of a just missing out. There's so many advantages to having that calibrated ruler right there and it's just so fast. On top of that it opens the door to communicating the same measurements in a field type shooting environment where there isn't an X ring.

Edit: by fast I mean being able to measure a target according to how much wind it can absorb and using an accurate hold for your wind.

zeroing can be done without moving.

Fast shots can be held over..

I know I'm missing lots but you get the idea.

 

[Diver160651]

Not trying to be a dick but I have never wanted to compete until this summer.....while shooting hand loads at 600 yards I noticed I was being observed by several guys. When I finished both were trying to convince me to try my hand at F-Class shooting and compete next year. So I went to a few F/O matches looking at equipment and who was shooting what and what the winners were using and was *shocked* to find nary an FFP scope in the whole field in 4 matches. Not one.

Are the F-Class competitors that far behind the time's or that ignorant that they are not using FFP scopes?

Seriously, I have skim read most of this thread and I'm not getting it....I'm hammering stuff out to 1000 yards and watched other guys who were/are shooting way better than me and we are all using high magnification SFP scopes. What are we missing? I don't get it.

VooDoo

You need to go back and read the posts benchrest and bellybenchrest (f-class) have MOA rings on the target and matching MOA turrets. Aka scaled subtension just on the target.
Also they have 1, 1 target distance wind hold.

again if you want to get into belly bench I have a great 8-80 SPF that is unused — it’s a complete isolated eco system...

This doesn’t transfer at all to long range field shooting of any type, yet many of these guys think it does.