$1000 Scope Advice

[pyroducksx3]

Ffp is highly over rated unless you plan to do prs with it.

 

[Fire_9]

The 3-10 is SFP only, unfortunately. If I'm going to be dialing mils, I would think a FFP would be the right choice.

I know it's personal preference but a FFP 3-10 makes absolutely no sense to me. Are you really going to be shooting any kind of distance on anything other than 10x? 10x is plenty for 600 but I just don't see the need for a FFP. Anything under 15x for me I look for SFP

 

[dotman]

The 3-10 is SFP only, unfortunately. If I'm going to be dialing mils, I would think a FFP would be the right choice.

Ahh that's true and it only in MOA.

 

[dotman]

Ffp is highly over rated unless you plan to do prs with it.

Completely agree, if your not ranging with a reticle it isn't needed imo.

 

[Formidilosus]

Probably why he was asking for info.

And then promptly ignored the people who have actually used it.

I have never used a NF. The scopes that I have used have between 3.5-4.0" of eye relief. I am hesitant to go much closer than 3.5" with a lightweight rifle in a magnum caliber. I don't want to get kissed by my scope. A few guys have said the 3" of eye relief on the NF isn't an issue, but I have found an equal number that say it is an issue. Either way, it is beyond my budget... but if it weren't for the eye relief I would probably splurge.

The people that have actually used one in this thread have said it's not an issue...... I've only worn out a couple of 300WM and 338L barrels using that scope design....


Having said that it would not be the scope I would choose for your stated purpose.

Ffp is highly over rated unless you plan to do prs with it.

How is a scope who's total features can be used at any power "overrated", versus one that is forced into only the highest power? You must have quite a few rounds and much experience with the FFP scopes mentioned in this thread to form such an opinion...?

I know it's personal preference but a FFP 3-10 makes absolutely no sense to me. Are you really going to be shooting any kind of distance on anything other than 10x? 10x is plenty for 600 but I just don't see the need for a FFP. Anything under 15x for me I look for SFP

What experience with the FFP scopes mentioned in this thread (or any FFP scope) have caused you to form that opinion? It's funny- do you guys not have to worry about spotting you own trace, impact, hits, misses, reaction to the shot, etc on animals that you shoot at "600 yards"?

In the last 30 animals or so that I've killed past 300 yards, more have been at less than max power (or with a fixed 6x) than I have at max power....

Completely agree, if your not ranging with a reticle it isn't needed imo.

You use the reticle to range? I thought it was mainly used to hold for wind, maybe elevation, and used to measure and correct for impacts?

 

[pyroducksx3]

I have a ffp scope and I prefer 2nd focal for my hunting and specifically longrange hunting I have quite a bit of shooting under my belt. Your sarcasm is coming through loud and clear good luck being an ass hat who knows all and anyone else's opinion is obviously worthless.

 

[Formidilosus]

I have a ffp scope and I prefer 2nd focal for my hunting and specifically longrange hunting I have quite a bit of shooting under my belt. Your sarcasm is coming through loud and clear good luck being an ass hat who knows all and anyone else's opinion is obviously worthless.

"Worthless"? What do you call an "opinions" that are not based in actual experience? People are responding to questions about specific pieces of gear, yet have no experience with that gear. I'm not being an asshat, I'm being blunt, with no maliciousness intended. Can you answer the question I asked? How is a scope who's features can be used at any power "overrated" when the intended use is out to 600 yards?


You have an FFP scope, which one?

 

[pyroducksx3]

I have a vortex gen 1 razor, and am picking up a nightforce atacr 5x25 f1. I don't like the ffp reticle for hunting because it covers alot of the target at distance. For big game it is functional but for target shooting it covers small steel targets after 600 yards about the size of steel rabbits and under. I don't find the reticle to be useful to me at all under 12-10 power pertaining to the reticle. The reticle gets so small the reference marks are useless to me under these powers. For coyote hunting and tactical matches where targets are moving quickly the ffp is quite valuable. In my general hunting if the animal is at a range I need to account for bullet drop and wind I have had time to dial both. The op specifically has a budget and ffps cost more. Given his budget and intended uses of the scope he could get more scope for less going sfp. So while the ffp certainly has areas where it shines it's not a best fit for all situations. And ps you aren't being blunt your are acting superior and like you are beyond question. There are situations where being blunt is required, this discussion instead one of them.

 

[KurtR]

I prefer my ffp xlr reticle now as i dont worry about what power it is on. I can make my own corrections and hold wind with out wondering if reticle is on. I shoot matches with it so it has become what i am used to and comfortable with.

 

[dotman]

And then promptly ignored the people who have actually used it.









The people that have actually used one in this thread have said it's not an issue...... I've only worn out a couple of 300WM and 338L barrels using that scope design....


Having said that it would not be the scope I would choose for your stated purpose.






How is a scope who's total features can be used at any power "overrated", versus one that is forced into only the highest power? You must have quite a few rounds and much experience with the FFP scopes mentioned in this thread to form such an opinion...?








What experience with the FFP scopes mentioned in this thread (or any FFP scope) have caused you to form that opinion? It's funny- do you guys not have to worry about spotting you own trace, impact, hits, misses, reaction to the shot, etc on animals that you shoot at "600 yards"?

In the last 30 animals or so that I've killed past 300 yards, more have been at less than max power (or with a fixed 6x) than I have at max power....






You use the reticle to range? I thought it was mainly used to hold for wind, maybe elevation, and used to measure and correct for impacts?

With a FFP scope you can use the reticle to range since the actual measurements never change, as in each mark remains 2moa from 3x to 18x but in a SFP it would change. Now I don't know if anyone still does this, but it is an option, since rangefinders are so good (I think PRS guys use it as a backup for a failed RF) but tell me why a SFP with ballistic turrets wouldn't provide the same results when using an RF and ballistic app? To me the only issue with a SFP is when using a BRC type reticle with known expected distances at a set zoom.

So when using a ballistic app and RF I don't think FFP matters and has been overrated. Now if I'm wrong let me know, I'm always up for learning. But I'm pretty sure the turret adjustment isn't dependent on the reticle being in the SFP or FFP.

 

[dotman]

I didn't read the entire article but google how to range using a FFP scope reticle https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/range-estimation-making-long-shot-first-focal-plane-scopes/

Oh and no I do not use a reticle to range since I prefer SFP.

 

[Formidilosus]

I have a vortex gen 1 razor, and am picking up a nightforce atacr 5x25 f1. I don't like the ffp reticle for hunting because it covers alot of the target at distance. For big game it is functional but for target shooting it covers small steel targets after 600 yards about the size of steel rabbits and under. I don't find the reticle to be useful to me at all under 12-10 power pertaining to the reticle. The reticle gets so small the reference marks are useless to me under these powers. For coyote hunting and tactical matches where targets are moving quickly the ffp is quite valuable. In my general hunting if the animal is at a range I need to account for bullet drop and wind I have had time to dial both. The op specifically has a budget and ffps cost more. Given his budget and intended uses of the scope he could get more scope for less going sfp. So while the ffp certainly has areas where it shines it's not a best fit for all situations. And ps you aren't being blunt your are acting superior and like you are beyond question. There are situations where being blunt is required, this discussion instead one of them.

Not thinking superior at all. I hear responses like posted in this thread about scopes on a weekly bases, and it's always from those who have limited or no experience with the subject. Conversely, every single person that I know that does have experience with the OP's stated use, need, and scopes mentioned all gravitate a certian direction. Every person I know that didn't like FFP, always shot on the highest power, etc., after actually using them and learning it correctly now only use FFP's, shoot most shots at less than max power, etc.




The OP's stated need is -

"to hunt to ranges up to 600yds on elk, deer, and antelope. My number one priority is durability and function"




The SWFA 3-15x SS reticle is .06 mils thick (or less than .25moa)

The Bushnell LRHS's reticle is .06 mils as well

The Nightforce SHV F1 is .04 mil (or .14 MOA) thick.




Genuine questions-

So you believe that being able to quarter a .25 MOA target with the reticle is "covering too much"?

And the reticles on the above scopes are not useful to you at "12-10 power"?

You dial for windage while hunting big game? If so, how do you deal with ebbs and flows? What do you do when the wind picks up or let's up right as you're pressing the trigger?

What SFP scope better meets his stated priorities?

 

[pyroducksx3]

Yes I dial for wind, my first 3 years shooting I held for wind. I have found dialing to be much more accurate for me. I hunt with nightforce nxs 5.5-22 sfp, atacr 5-25 sfp and a leupold vx3 4.5-14 sfp longrange w varmint the reticle on my ultralight mountain rifle. As far as ebbs and flows I generally wait until the wind is constant to my wind call. Luckily most of my longrange hunting shots (942, 916, 868, 812) have been mild wind with the 868 yards shot in a constant 14 mph full crosswind. Ifor however I need to make minor corrections in wind just before the shot I will dial in my wind correction and then hold the minor correction off of that. I shoot often enough I have little trouble getting the targets in my scope at max power. For the situations you mention of trying to quickly aquire the target (animal) and then quickly using the reticle to make corrections based of distance and wind I prefer to pass on those shots if I don't have time to properly assess the shot. If wind isn't a factor or minor I have a tape on my scope with yardages pre marked so if under 600 yards and time is a factor I can range dial to the tape and hold into wind on animal. This is performed very quickly still and I've never felt the need to have a ffp scope. Coyote hunting however it's nice when a tote rips off and I'm trying to catch up but I wouldn't take those types of shots on a big game animal.

 

[Formidilosus]

With a FFP scope you can use the reticle to range since the actual measurements never change, as in each mark remains 2moa from 3x to 18x but in a SFP it would change. Now I don't know if anyone still does this, but it is an option, since rangefinders are so good (I think PRS guys use it as a backup for a failed RF) but tell me why a SFP with ballistic turrets wouldn't provide the same results when using an RF and ballistic app? To me the only issue with a SFP is when using a BRC type reticle with known expected distances at a set zoom.

So when using a ballistic app and RF I don't think FFP matters and has been overrated. Now if I'm wrong let me know, I'm always up for learning. But I'm pretty sure the turret adjustment isn't dependent on the reticle being in the SFP or FFP.

Using the reticle to range is all but useless unless a hit anywhere on a 6 foot target is acceptable.


The reticle is used for correcting for wind, a ruler to measure for misses or impacts, holds for corrections, etc. Despite what most seem to want to have people believe- misses happen. Hits that aren't perfect happen. Animals that are hit well don't always go down immediately. On top of that the more X's on is using the less feildnof view on has. Spotting your own impacts, splashes and trace through recoil is very important, especially so if you don't have a spotter. In all of those instances being able to make an instant correction ON ANY POWER is only going to help.

As well wind isn't steady- it's cyclic. It picks up, lets off, dies, swirls, etc. If you're dialing for wind and any of those things happen while you are prepping to shoot, how do you deal with it? Do you come off the gun and adjust the windage dial? Leave it the same and guess? Wait and hope it holds long enough to be usable?





There are tons of shots that I take that aren't on max power. There are shots that I won't take on 10, 12, 15x based on position, recoil, or animals movement due to not being able to spot my own impacts/misses, that I absolutely will take on 6x due to being able to watch the results through the scope.


A properly designed FFP reticle gives options at all powers, a SFP does not.

 

[dotman]

Also on an SFP your reticle marks will be known at max power which I don't think any one would be adjusting for wind in a situation that you wouldn't be on max power?

For example on 3x I doubt your adjusting for wind because most everyone will be on max power @100+ yards but even at less then 100 yards with a quick shot how much wind adj are you going to make?

For example @100 with 50mph 90* wind my poi is off 0.5 or 2 clicks.

 

[pyroducksx3]

This is diverging from the original topic though. You feel that the op needs a ffp scope and that's OK it has performed well for you and other people you know. Could he benifit from a ffp scope ? possibly but it really is up to him. Should a ffp scope be an option for him? Sure, hopefully he can find someone who has one and shoot a bit with it. Is it his only option? No, as stated other people may have a different preference. I prefer a sfp scope and have used both as much as that blows your mind. A leupold vx 3 cds will work, never tried one but a huskemaw 4-16 would be an interesting option, many of the mid grade scopes made by burris will work for 600 yards.
I will agree ranging with a reticle is silly, thats what lrf are for

 

[Formidilosus]

Also on an SFP your reticle marks will be known at max power which I don't think any one would be adjusting for wind in a situation that you wouldn't be on max power?

For example on 3x I doubt your adjusting for wind because most everyone will be on max power @100+ yards but even at less then 100 yards with a quick shot how much wind adj are you going to make?

For example @100 with 50mph 90* wind my poi is off 0.5 or 2 clicks.

m


Not 3x, but 6-8x seems to be a common range for myself and those I hunt/shoot/work with.

This is diverging from the original topic though. You feel that the op needs a ffp scope and that's OK it has performed well for you and other people you know. Could he benifit from a ffp scope ? possibly but it really is up to him. Should a ffp scope be an option for him? Sure, hopefully he can find someone who has one and shoot a bit with it. Is it his only option? No, as stated other people may have a different preference. I prefer a sfp scope and have used both as much as that blows your mind. A leupold vx 3 cds will work, never tried one but a huskemaw 4-16 would be an interesting option, many of the mid grade scopes made by burris will work for 600 yards.
I will agree ranging with a reticle is silly, thats what lrf are for

Do you shoot F Class?


I shoot with and see shot a bunch of Leupolds every year. Only a few dozen VX 3's, but they have enough issues with tracking, adjustments, RTZ, or zero retention that I would not trust one for dialing. Same with Burris, Zeiss, Swarovski, Nikon, etc, etc.

 

[pyroducksx3]

Nope don't shoot f class. I have heard they have had reliability issues. But this is a 600 yards scope he really isn't asking much of it and not a f class comp scope. I have a vx3 and shot an elk at 934 and deer at 916 with it, it has tracked well and performed for me. Sightron has been well reviewed as well. Honestly I haven't used much of the mid ranged scopes. I stepped up to a nightforce and immediately saw the value of putting up the extra money on high quality optics. The mid ranged scopes seemed like a waste of my time and money but I understand others aren't as fortunate to be able to spend that kind of $$. You seemed bound and determined to point to out that you know best and there is a problem with every recommendation that is not your own. I've said my piece to the op and agreed that some of your options have merit and are in fact good options. Carry on with your thread.

 

[dotman]

m


Not 3x, but 6-8x seems to be a common range for myself and those I hunt/shoot/work with.









Do you shoot F Class?


I shoot with and see shot a bunch of Leupolds every year. Only a few dozen VX 3's, but they have enough issues with tracking, adjustments, RTZ, or zero retention that I would not trust one for dialing. Same with Burris, Zeiss, Swarovski, Nikon, etc, etc.

Well then I guess if your using 6-8x at 500 yes you should get a FFP. @100 your still not in a material diff if at 6x vs 10x and using your reticle for wind adjustments in a hunting situation not shooting comp.

I think you make some good points but we need to consider the end goal is a hunting setup not PRS or F Class.

Getting a setup that tracks consistently is key I agree with that but for hunting I don't think FFP is better then SFP but that's my opinion.

 

[TheCougar]

Correcting the record: the is at least one post on this thread that stated the NF eye relief was too little and he changed scopes. I have found other threads on Rokslide and other forums that discuss the eye relief and possible inadequacies. Like I said before, folks who have used them give both positive and negative reviews of that particular issue. You are right in that I have never used one of these scopes. I am a bow hunter by trade, but I am looking to expand my horizons. I only have experience with capped turret SFP scopes with BDC reticles. Although they are easy and quick, my goal is to be accurate and ethical. I want a scope that I can quickly make an accurate and precise first shot. Running a SFP with ballistic turrets is an option, but changes in elevation and atmospherics can significantly affect drop at 600yds, and it only grows beyond that. I know 600 yds is not far for a lot of you guys, but It is for me. I planned on making a ghetto turret tape (Ryan Avery had a picture of one on a recent thread) to be a poor mans ballistic turret. With a dope chart, I can quickly dial mils for shots when conditions permit.

Everyone has an opinion on SFP/FFP, turrets, reticle, etc. I'm still in the process of deciding, but I am leaning towards FFP with Mil reticle and turrets. I think with practice and preparation, this can be almost as fast as a SFP with ballistic turrets.

I appreciate everyone's input. Keep it classy. Cheers.