Ffp or sfp

[deerhunter628]

I am just getting into longer range shooting. I bought my rifle and now is scope time. I have always been a leupold guy but have been looking at some vortex. Are you guys using more ffp or sfp? Thanks for your help.

 

[SkyScrapin]

FFP is my preference. It allows you to have a perfectly scaled ruler in your focal plain for hold overs/under and wind deflection adjustments. Don't get me wrong, I have SFP on some short range point and shoot guns, but for the LR game, get FFP.

PW

 

[Broz]

For long range hunting I much prefer SFP, I like to be able to see the entire reticle on any power. For timed shooting competitions, FFP has an advantage at some stages.

 

[SkyScrapin]

For long range hunting I much prefer SFP, I like to be able to see the entire reticle on any power. For timed shooting competitions, FFP has an advantage at some stages.

What type of optic and reticle are you using for long range hunting that you cannot see the entire reticle in FFP? I'm genuinely curious because I enjoy feedback from other threads and other forums (215g hybrid was my favorite).

In my experience with a handful of Schmidt and Bender scopes that are all FFP and are either 3x-20x or 5x-20x power ranges, I can't recall one time where I struggled to see my reticle. If you're long range hunting, you're leveraging somewhere between 6x-15x power range which gives you plenty of reticle to use. At 3x, it's harder to see, but not impossible. Maybe the difference is my 29 year old eyes which no doubt plays a factor.

 

[vaprecision]

I second what Boz says. Most all of my hunting rifles have sfp scopes as I prefer to have the larger reticle all the time. Never know when you will bump one up close and it just makes it easier to pickup in lower light conditions. In a hunting situation more than likely I will have elevation dialed in if I am taking a long shot.

My match gun for PRS style events sport FFP scopes. In those games, you get 90 seconds to crank off 10 rounds typically at varying distances. With these events the need to subtend at any mag is much more important.

 

[Broz]

What type of optic and reticle are you using for long range hunting that you cannot see the entire reticle in FFP? I'm genuinely curious because I enjoy feedback from other threads and other forums (215g hybrid was my favorite).

In my experience with a handful of Schmidt and Bender scopes that are all FFP and are either 3x-20x or 5x-20x power ranges, I can't recall one time where I struggled to see my reticle. If you're long range hunting, you're leveraging somewhere between 6x-15x power range which gives you plenty of reticle to use. At 3x, it's harder to see, but not impossible. Maybe the difference is my 29 year old eyes which no doubt plays a factor.

Pic one, turn it down below 10X and you will most likely be bracketing, turn it all the way up and most of the reticle leaves the field of view. For an example, my NF 7-35 ATACR F1 to get full reticle I need to be close to 7X why do I need 80 moa of reticle hold over at 7X? But at 35 x I only get maybe 25% of the reticle which is where I need it all. If it was a SFP I would see the same full reticle from 7 x to 35X

If all I hunted was coyote I could see some value in a FFP for calling and close fast shots. But in my world of ELR Targets to long lange hunting I will take a SFP every time. It simply works better for me.

If I am on a morning elk hunt, and watch a good bull go to bed in dark timber, I may want to go in after him. I will want to crank it down, and still see the reticle without having to turn on illumination, which is illegal in many states. Those tiny reticles that are hard to see suck in a timber with lots of pine branches.

 

[skierhs]

I prefer NF scopes. They're heavy but built like a tank. I personally like ffp scopes. I have never had a issue of finding the crosshairs and the always acuretly calibrated reticle is something i really appreciate and have used. It's all personal prefrence but my vote is for the ffp. Broz does have a point with the dark timer. Like everything there is a give and take with it all. I dont really look at sfp scopes since i have switched over though. tkae it as it's worth.

 

[SkyScrapin]

Pic one, turn it down below 10X and you will most likely be bracketing, turn it all the way up and most of the reticle leaves the field of view. For an example, my NF 7-35 ATACR F1 to get full reticle I need to be close to 7X why do I need 80 moa of reticle hold over at 7X? But at 35 x I only get maybe 25% of the reticle which is where I need it all. If it was a SFP I would see the same full reticle from 7 x to 35X

If all I hunted was coyote I could see some value in a FFP for calling and close fast shots. But in my world of ELR Targets to long lange hunting I will take a SFP every time. It simply works better for me.

If I am on a morning elk hunt, and watch a good bull go to bed in dark timber, I may want to go in after him. I will want to crank it down, and still see the reticle without having to turn on illumination, which is illegal in many states. Those tiny reticles that are hard to see suck in a timber with lots of pine branches.

Good feedback. I can agree with some of that.

Long range hunting, we're almost always dialing elevation so FFP or SFP, to each his own. PRS, I'm mostly holding over/under making FFP important. In both scenarios, wind is rarely consistent and thus I always hold my correction. Holding your wind correction in SFP is far more difficult than FFP.

Close range hunting, I want as little obstructing my field of view as possible regardless of shot presentation and bullet flight obstructions. A thicker reticle helps, but then again, I doubt our LR rifles would be go-to equipment for close range shots. If a hunter takes one rifle (I do) to hunt with, you have to make due with what you've got.

OP - I would suggest you look through FFP and SFP at both high and low magnification ranges to see what you can live with. It's all about personal preference anyways. In todays markets, options are limitless.

 

[Broz]

. Holding your wind correction in SFP is far more difficult than FFP.

It is? Hmmmm. Even when they have the same reticle? This could possibly be something that is due to your methods of choice, or preference. But I have the same reticle in both and as long as the FFP is turned up to a power setting where it is equally visible, they are the same. Now if you are on lower power settings, the FFP is harder as it will appear smaller and counting lines can be more difficult.

Never the less I typically dial the wind for the first shot for every long range hunting shot. Slow precise hits over fast poorly placed misses are in order here. At that point, and again hunting, I feel it gives me, or the shooter I am guiding the mental advantage of a center reticle hold. We never just shoot at the animal, we shoot that small aim point on the animals vitals, for this I prefer center cross hair holds, as opposed to "ok now hold over one or two lines, left or right, you know into the wind, on that aim point". From the center reticle hold, and In the event the point of impact was off my mark by one line, at this point, with either FFP or SFP, I hold one line and send the follow up. It doesn't matter if it is FFP or SFP or what power either is on. One line is one line in both. The only way I can see anyone screwing this up would be if they changed power settings on the SFP between shots. I doubt that is going to happen for a follow up shot on game.

Sorry to blow so many holes in all the myths about SFP, but the bottom line is if you train, and know the equipment equally well the SFP will do anything the FFP will do, and for myself, and my hunting needs, many things better.

Jeff

 

[SkyScrapin]

It is? Hmmmm. Even when they have the same reticle? This could possibly be something that is due to your methods of choice, or preference. But I have the same reticle in both and as long as the FFP is turned up to a power setting where it is equally visible, they are the same. Now if you are on lower power settings, the FFP is harder as it will appear smaller and counting lines can be more difficult.

Never the less I typically dial the wind for the first shot for every long range hunting shot. Slow precise hits over fast poorly placed misses are in order here. At that point, and again hunting, I feel it gives me, or the shooter I am guiding the mental advantage of a center reticle hold. We never just shoot at the animal, we shoot that small aim point on the animals vitals, for this I prefer center cross hair holds, as opposed to "ok now hold over one or two lines, left or right, you know into the wind, on that aim point". From the center reticle hold, and In the event the point of impact was off my mark by one line, at this point, with either FFP or SFP, I hold one line and send the follow up. It doesn't matter if it is FFP or SFP or what power either is on. One line is one line in both. The only way I can see anyone screwing this up would be if they changed power settings on the SFP between shots. I doubt that is going to happen for a follow up shot on game.

Sorry to blow so many holes in all the myths about SFP, but the bottom line is if you train, and know the equipment equally well the SFP will do anything the FFP will do, and for myself, and my hunting needs, many things better.

Jeff

I wouldn’t disagree with much of what you’re saying. A few points where we differ.

SFP is difficult to calculate conversions for beginners at power settings other than 10x, 20x, etc. Though the math is simple to the seasoned shooter, compounded with excitement of shooting an animal you just worked your tail off for, it can become an afterthought.

If you take your SFP reticle against my identical reticle, but now in FFP, and tried to hold the same hash marks I’m holding (using reticle and not dialing) you are unlikely to have the same POI with the same POA. If you’re dialing, it doesn’t make any difference assuming you have calibrated your turrets for tracking purposes.

It’s clear that your preferences are to dial in dope. My preferences are to hold corrections. Neither method makes either one of us any less accurate if you know your equipment, and your equipment is in capable hands.

I googled this article to try and find a source that could articulate the difference in wind correction in FFP and SFP. The content is accurate regardless of source.

Should You Choose a Reticle Positioned in the First or Second Focal Plane?

Simply put, there are more steps to calculating wind holds in SFP than FFP. If you’re dialing, any reticle or focal plane will Work so long as you don’t have an issue seeing it.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Broz]

Simply put, there are more steps to calculating wind holds in SFP than FFP. If you’re dialing, any reticle or focal plane will Work so long as you don’t have an issue seeing it.

As I stated in my first post, it is duty dependent. I didn't look at the link but I am sure coming from "Tactical Life" it is written more towards timed match shooting events, than long range target or hunting. I stated in my first post for a timed shooting event FFP was a better choice. That is if we are all considering hold over and hold off.

It really is not that hard to use hold offs with a SFP but you do have to be conscious enough to know what power your scope is on. IE with my NF NXS and MOAR reticle, on 22X 1 line is 1 moa, on 11X 1 line is 2 moa. Pretty easy math I say. Your argument, and I am not sure why you wish to argue with me when I simply stated what I prefer for what I do and supported it. But, let me offer this. This BS argument about people actually doing math with a SFP reticle is laughable. Who does this?? I never have. Again 1 one 1 moa, 1 line 2 moa. I have never sat there calculating moa for my reticle. That is an argument brought forth by FFP users to make the SFP look harder to use. Again, I see my impact I correct with the number of lines needed for the follow up. Makes no difference what power either ffp or sfp is on. None! I like to dial for the first one for the mental advantage and precision of a center reticle hold. My preferences and works very well for me. To me, holding elevation and windage both is crazy, hell the point of aim could be off reticle center so far its ridiculous. Now comes the time when FFP shooters say, oh well, if it requires that much hold off I will dial. Ok, why not dial for all LR targets and hunting shots then?

I am done, use what works for you. I do and my freezer is full. Hope you enjoyed the debate.

Broz

 

[deerhunter628]

Thanks for the help. That is the information I was looking for. I just recently learned ffp even existed.

 

[wind gypsy]

If you will always dial for wind and elevation, SFP. If will hold for any corrections, FFP. I like to hold for wind most times.

SFP if the top magnification is 12x or less because I know I won’t need to back off on the mag for anything needing a wind or elevation correction.

 

[maninthemaze]

I have a Vortex Viper PST 6-24 FFP scope on my 28 Nosler. For deer hunting in the woods it's way too much scope. At 6 power the reticle is so thin that I have to turn on the illumination to see it. Now I only take the gun out west for game and use another rifle with a 3×9 on it for whitetails here in Kentucky.

When I built the gun, I was hoping to have the one gun to do it all. The scope has kinda ruined that. When funds allow I'll probably buy an NXS in SFP.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[deerhunter628]

I have a Vortex Viper PST 6-24 FFP scope on my 28 Nosler. For deer hunting in the woods it's way too much scope. At 6 power the reticle is so thin that I have to turn on the illumination to see it. Now I only take the gun out west for game and use another rifle with a 3×9 on it for whitetails here in Kentucky.

When I built the gun, I was hoping to have the one gun to do it all. The scope has kinda ruined that. When funds allow I'll probably buy an NXS in SFP.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

I am trying to accomplish the same thing. That helps a lot. Thanks

 

[wind gypsy]

I have a Vortex Viper PST 6-24 FFP scope on my 28 Nosler. For deer hunting in the woods it's way too much scope. At 6 power the reticle is so thin that I have to turn on the illumination to see it. Now I only take the gun out west for game and use another rifle with a 3×9 on it for whitetails here in Kentucky.

When I built the gun, I was hoping to have the one gun to do it all. The scope has kinda ruined that. When funds allow I'll probably buy an NXS in SFP.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

FYI- my SFP NXS needs illumination to see the MOAR reticle at any power more so than my FFP LRHS scopes do at minimum power.. Not all FFP reticle struggle with low power issues to the same extent.

 

[HonkeyMcGee88]

If you dial all corrections than it doesn't matter all that much. If you use holdovers or mill targets, then FFP. SFP reticles are only correct at a single power setting (usually the highest). Depending on manufacturing tolerances, your reticle's accuracy may be hard to consistently achieve (i.e. 97% of max power, or worse yet, 102% of max setting). At all other magnifications you need to know exactly what magnification setting you are on and proportion the reticle.

Finally someone explaining it right.

OP please pay attention to this. The one and only big drawback to SFP is exactly what this guy stated.

In the heat of the moment how easy is it to forget oh shit I'm 3/4 of max power, what is the scaling for my adjustment, etc.

Solely for this reason I choose FFP. If you are always going to hunt on one power setting this may not be a big deal for you but this is the absolute biggest thing to think about in my opinion.

Also generally SFP has thinner reticles than FFP. Some people like or dislike that.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[PONYBOY]

FFP in my experience if you want hold over flexibility. I like being able to hold over at any power. With SFP, I believe you have to be on max power in most cases in order for hold over hashes to be accurate.

Hunt solo? There is definitely some value to holding lesser power and being able to use the hashes; this will help with following through and seeing impact in case follow up is needed.

I'm definitely not an expert, however I have had some success over the last couple of years and the benefits of an FFP scope have made a nice difference.

 

[Travis Bertrand]

Ffp if you use reticle. SFP if you dial and shoot. I think sfp is better for hunting. Ffp if I was competitive and using hash marks at different magnification.

 

[hwy1strat]

I have and use both. I would still consider myself a novice, so my advice should not hold the same weight as others on here. If you are new, after you acquire your rifle setup, you should look into a course. Some courses require FFP scopes, in my experience. These course are geared towards the tactical side and teach ranging with your reticle. There are other courses that do not have this requirement, but if you have one in mind already, you should check. I think that for a new shooter, FFP would be easier to learn on because you don't have to consider your magnification setting when holding over. It just removes one small detail. I know that even now I still make careless mistakes like not checking all my turrets when I first get to the range or something like that. So, i think, having one less thing to think about when learning is advantageous. I like to do PRS competitions so that is a little more geared to the FFP and fast shots. I definitely think SFP is better for hunting. My farthest animal is 525yds now, and everything else has been at 300 or under. So, my LR Hunting experience is still nothing. But having a tiny reticle when the animal is close can make it difficult. I started with FFP because I wanted to start shooting competitions and take classes in order to learn and train. One day I will take a 1000yd shot on an animal, but I need to get better first