Sfp vs Ffp

[LongRangeSweden]

Is it just me or has it become a trend that you need to have a ffp scope with extreme magnification to be able to shoot long range. I was looking for a new scope and it kind of just hit me... It almost seems that it's imposible to shoot past 100 m with sfp. Sure, I love my other scope with ffp, definitely, but it's also my first one and it's not like never shot LR before that haha.
No, no, as long as I have ffp and maximal magnification I'm ready to go. Who cares about clean picture in the scop and good and reliable turrets...

Also, while I'm on the subject. For years and years people have been dropping moose after moose with a 6.5x55 and all of the sudden you need at least 30-06 (even that is to week) to drop hogs with. Wtf. Has the knowledge taken a step back at the same time as iPhone apps came out!?

So! I'm done with my complaining for today

 

[stranded]

Hogs and moose over here are bigger. Our eye sight may not be good enough to see clarity differences. Besides FFp's are what the big boys use. How do you like your Lothar barrel?

 

[LongRangeSweden]

To be honest I was kind of worried since I couldn't find any info about it but my smith talked really well about it. Now after this time I'm sure that even the next one will be a Lother

 

[LongRangeSweden]

FYI the complaint was about people in general (but in a way especially about hunters and stores here)

 

[gstaylorg]

A lot depends on what you're doing. Many (not all) FFP scopes have very thick crosshairs and/or stadia marks. These can make their use difficult in something like F-Class because they obstruct a great deal of the target center. For that type of target shooting, SFP is generally preferable although some of the new FFP scopes have apparently addressed this issue.

 

[djskit]

I make that argument about the 6.5x55 all the time...usually in response to the "should I take my 260/6.5 CR hunting?" question.

 

[LongRangeSweden]

Gstaylorg,
I absolutely agree, but in a way I still get the feel that stores try to sell it harder then the SFP. I do firmly believe that both of them have their pros and cons but when it comes down to the line I still think that it depends on the shooter and his/her knowledge and experience. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue with you, just trying to understand the sellers

djskit,
I seriously had a discussion with a guy yesterday at the range that stated that a 308 cant kill a boar at 15 m. Seriously, true story. You know when you get the feel that it's better to just be quiet - if you start to explain velocity and energy the dudes head would explode? That's how I had it

 

[jameybaxter]

I like the both the SFP and FFP myself, but it is application. It is the "cool" thing now, even if the reps in the stores and the public don't know how to use them.

 

[Aegis]

I have been trying to figure out the same thing - FFP has a high cool factor but other than ranging at variable magnification I couldn't find the benefits that justfied the cost. FWIW I am more of an old-school bolt-guy varmint hunter getting in to precision semi-auto.

The one thing I read that made me really want FFP was this - let's say you are at 12x ( my most common setting for varmints) on a 20x scope. If you spot your hit at 2 mils/MOA left, you can dial in two mils/MOA. This only would work with FFP, unless I am misunderstanding the whole thing.


If it is just for ranging, my thought process went like this - If I have time to range a shot, I have time to go to max magnification where a mil is a mil.

Vortex lists the reticle subtensions on their website if you want to see how much obstruction of the target there is. I figure it is roughly .2-3 MOA on their scopes.

 

[wigwamitus]

I have two FFP and one SFP ... I think I like the SFP the most ... but it is also true that I have the most experience with it. I never have a "reticle visibility" issue with the SFP, I do have "reticle visibility" issues with both of the FFP, on low power.
I only shoot the SFP on either minimum power (3.5x) or maximum power (10x). I use 3.5 for night ... and also 3.5 for day out to 325yds. I use 10x for day beyond 325yds. By only shooting on min or max power ... at the opposite ends of the dial ... I mitigate the "are you really sure you have the dial where you think you do" issue. And because I've fired about 500 rounds at 3.5x or 10x I've at least field calibrated the arithmetic needed to convert my holds and that is "divide by three". Where the SFP seems to help the most ... is if I am dialed to one distance and then try to dial up to another greater distance and run out of clicks ... I can dial back down and then instead of holding like 7.2 mils up ... and leaving the "sweet spot" of the center of the reticle ... I can switch to 3.5x and hold 2.4 mils and I use that "feature" a lot.

 

[RRW]

I have been trying to figure out the same thing - FFP has a high cool factor but other than ranging at variable magnification I couldn't find the benefits that justfied the cost.

I have used a NF NXS 5.5-22 on my personal rifle for a few yrs and have no complaints other than its a SFP scope. After shooting a few comps, I will be changing to a FFP scope. Using the reticle for holdovers and for movers was critical in my opinion. I use it for ranging as well but think its used more for holdovers and moving targets.

 

[alpine44]

FYI the complaint was about people in general (but in a way especially about hunters and stores here)

The underlying problem is the public fool system. Most people have not the faintest clue about basis physics. Instead of understanding concept like sectional density or scaling in optical systems, they just follow the latest fad regardless of whether it makes sense for them or not.

 

[alpine44]

Here is another pet peeve of mine:

Newbie asks what scope to get and the answer is: "FFP because that's what the .mil snipers use"
Then, newbie asks about BDC reticles and the answer is: "BDC reticles are useless unless you use standard ammo and standard barrel length in standard atmospheric conditions".

Ironically, if you go against the fads on both counts you will have something very useful.

On a SFP scope you can match the BDC reticle to virtually any load (I got it to work for even a muzzle loader) by adjusting the magnification. Nothing stops you from still using the turrets at any other magnification if you have more time available.

You can even do range estimation with the standard formula if you switch to the magnification where a mil-dot on the reticle is a milliradian in the real world (usually the highest magnification).

Or you adjust the size/range formula to work with the magnification that gets your BDC lined up with your trajectory. Just multiply the 27.7 constant in the range formula with "your" magnification divided by the maximum magnification.(e.g. if I am using 6x on a 3-9x scope to match my BDC, I would use 27.7 * 6 / 9 = 18.46 in the range formula)

 

[Asperly Aimless]

I like both (SFP and FFP) for F-Class, benchrest, hunting, and other shooting disciplines I much prefer SFP scopes with standard duplex crosshairs. For unknown distance I very much prefer FFP with a G2 reticle. Regardless, I always have a range finder on me.

 

[steve123]

A FFP scope is easier to use in dynamic situations where the user cannot be troubled with being concerned about what mag the scope is on for holdovers, holdoffs, leads, ranging and measuring.

Ironically, someone picking a FFP because they wanted the latest fad made life much easier on themselves unknowingly.

F-class, Benchrest, those are where a SFP scope with finer clicks and reticle come into their own.

I just sold my last SFP scope with LV600 BDC reticle. Haha, all the reasons you stated were exactly why I sold it. Why?, every time I picked a new bullet or powder I had to tune the load to the reticle, etc, ...what a hassle!

I have 3-12x44 LRHS FFP on that AR223 now, I'm a little pissed at myself for hanging on to that NF 2.5-10 so long!

 

[alpine44]

With all due respect to people's personal choices:

A BDC reticle in an FFP scope is probably the least practical combination out there, IMO. At low magnification, most reticles are too fine for fast shots and, unless you are extremely lucky, the BDC lines never match the loads you developed for accuracy nodes.

Now let's put that BDC reticle in a SFP scope and ignore that everyone on SH is wondering what we are smoking. Wow, we can actually see the reticle for fast and closeup work at low magnification. That's already a big improvement but it gets even better.

I zero the scope at the distance that the crosshair is supposed to represent. Then, I change the scope to the highest magnification and shoot at the distance for the furthest drop line. If the shots are low I adjust the MAGNIFICATION DOWN until I get hits. Now I mark this magnification on my scope (or set my cat tail so that it will go no further) and all other drop lines will match my trajectory. BINGO.

In the rare event that the shots are high at the maximum magnification for the furthest drop line, I need to go to the reloading bench and find a lower accuracy node. But typically the BDC reticles are rather optimistic.

(PS: Granted, you can fix the trajectory issue of a FFP BDC scope by assigning odd distances to the drop lines but then you need to memorize those and intermediate distances become a real mind bender)

 

[alpine44]

If anyone wants to get rid of one of these totally useless SFP scopes, please PM me.

Seriously, if you have something of reputable quality but you feel the need to upgrade to the latest and greatest, let's talk.

 

[alpine44]

A FFP scope is easier to use in dynamic situations where the user cannot be troubled with being concerned about what mag the scope is on for holdovers, holdoffs, leads, ranging and measuring.

Ironically, someone picking a FFP because they wanted the latest fad made life much easier on themselves unknowingly.

F-class, Benchrest, those are where a SFP scope with finer clicks and reticle come into their own.

I just sold my last SFP scope with LV600 BDC reticle. Haha, all the reasons you stated were exactly why I sold it. Why?, every time I picked a new bullet or powder I had to tune the load to the reticle, etc, ...what a hassle!

I have 3-12x44 LRHS FFP on that AR223 now, I'm a little pissed at myself for hanging on to that NF 2.5-10 so long!

I think you misunderstood the concept.

You do not need to tune the load to the BDC reticle on a SFP scope because you can make the adjustment with the magnification.

Put the gun in a vise or lead sled, set the scope to maximum magnification, and aim the crosshair at a point in the distance.

Now look where the furthest drop line points. When you decrease the magnification, the target will get smaller in relation to the reticle and the drop line(s) will move further down on the target while the cross hair is still pointing at the same spot. This variability between reticle subtensions and target dimensions is exactly what the FFP fanboys hate about SFP.

This variability is also the "secret sauce" for making a BDC reticle work for virtually any load. The "magic" magnification on a SFP scope is where POI=POA for the drop lines when shooting your particular load. There are online calculators to figure this out: http://zeissrapidz.com/Calculate.aspx http://ballisticprograms.swarovskioptik.com/#/setup/init/en

Alternatively, you can use the trial-and-error method on the range. First, zero the crosshair with the turrets. If you bullets hit low when using the drop lines at longer ranges, decrease the magnification but DO NOT TOUCH THE ELEVATION TURRET. Since the drop lines are spaced to represent the (roughly) parabolic arc of a trajectory, you need to only match the POI for the furthest distance to the corresponding drop line by adjusting the magnification. If necessary, tweak the windage as well. Everything inside of that range will be golden.

On a FFP scope, the drop lines (or mil dots) represent the same dimension on the target regardless of magnification and FFP fanboys love this for ranging or communication between spotter and shooter. HOWEVER, you now need to match these static drops with your load. You are stuck with whatever trajectory the manufacturer chose for the BDC reticle and that's why most FFP fanboys diss BDC reticles.

 

[steve123]

I used to use a Leupold/varmint reticle and that NF 2.5-10 so I didn't misunderstand.

With the NF I "wanted" to leave it on 10x and not mess around with finding exactly what mag fit the trajectory of the load or mark on the scope to match that corresponding mag but that's beside the point because with the NF V reticles and NF ballistic program you use sightin distance to account for different FPS, BC and trajectories. It's very close but not exact without tuning. It's the same with any SFP/BDC reticle and using mag to line dope up, close but not exact unless a guy just happened to luck out or the load is tuned for the reticle match up.

I did exactly what you described with the L-varmint reticle. Like I've previously mentioned, it's a PITA to have to stay on one mag when using a BDC.

One thing you did not mention is how to determine where on the reticle to accurately hold for wind since the mag has now been changed to line up the BDC with the trajectory. I suppose it could be mapped as well but what a PITA!

Your last paragraph... Why on earth would someone want a BDC reticle in a FFP scope??? LOL, to be honest I didn't even know there was a BDC reticle made in a FFP scope. In that case I can definitely see your point.

My most used FFP reticle is a H-59. In it I can see 1 click in the reticle, heck half a click if I really thought I needed to do so. I can choose whatever mag suits the situation and use my drop chart to give me quick dope for holdover and pretty easily make a hit on a 1.5 moa steel at any reasonable distance in normal wind conditions. I mentioned windy conditions because I also see 1 click of windage in the reticle for holdoff as well.

This spring on my BIL's ranch we went PD hunting using my 20x47L and S&B 5-25/H-59. He is a SFP 3-9x40 standard type ranch dood. After 1 minute of explanation about using the reticle for holdoffs and holdovers he was laying waist to that town. 250Y head shots and connecting out to 400Y more often than not. We never touched the dial. It wasn't calm either. As the mirage kicked up we dialed down the mag with no ill affect.

There are reasons why FFP has become so popular.

I admit I did like that NF 2.5-10 for close hunting and having a full sized reticle, however the G2H with the 4 mil wide circle on 3x works great for the same application.