Anybody Switch Back to SFP from FFP for Hunting?

JDZ

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
445
Location
Texas
Did you buy a first focal plane scope for hunting purposes and regret it? I'm considering jumping into my first FFP scope, but I don't want to spend the money and wish I had stuck with second focal plane. My main concern would be not being able to pick up the crosshairs at low power. Or picking up the wrong hash at low power.
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,015
No, and I don't know anyone that has either.



For your first concern- what scope are you looking at and for what use? Reticles in FFP scopes matter more than in SFP.
For your second concern- why would you be using the "hash" marks to compensate for elevation or windage on low power?
 
OP
J

JDZ

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
445
Location
Texas
For your first concern- what scope are you looking at and for what use? Reticles in FFP scopes matter more than in SFP.
Use would be western hunting from close range out to, say, 500 yards max. Not sure on scope, yet. Burris Veracity, Vortex Viper models, SWFA??


For your second concern- why would you be using the "hash" marks to compensate for elevation or windage on low power?
I wouldn't. Unless it was an accident. Like the crosshairs are so fine, my eye picks up a hash instead of the center crosshair in the heat of the moment.
 

Yotekiller

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
100
It depends on how you are using it. FFP eliminates a variable that I don't need to worry about any more. I would not go back to sfp. However, my scope has max power of 20 and virtually every shot I take is at max power with it unless it is well within range of needing the recital anyway. The odds of me needing to use a lower power on a shot where I need to hold for an adjustment is unlikely. I dial for my corrections therefore I am far more concerned about the tracking of the scope than ffp vs sfp or glass quality.
 

Yotekiller

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
100
The Viper I had did not track accurately or repeatably. All the other bells and whistles are useless if it doesn't track properly.
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,015
Use would be western hunting from close range out to, say, 500 yards max. Not sure on scope, yet. Burris Veracity, Vortex Viper models, SWFA??



I wouldn't. Unless it was an accident. Like the crosshairs are so fine, my eye picks up a hash instead of the center crosshair in the heat of the moment.


The SWFA SS 3-9x42mm scopes with milquad, have the best reticle of any FFP scope that I've used. Works as a duplex from 3-5x and then you can start using the reticle for holds after that.


No issue with mistaking a tick mark for anything. First they are quite short, second as stated above at 3x the whole thing looks like a duplex. That's the benefit of FFP.
 
OP
J

JDZ

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
445
Location
Texas
The SWFA SS 3-9x42mm scopes with milquad, have the best reticle of any FFP scope that I've used.
I've looked thru the 3-15x42, which prompted my questions, because the reticle is extremely fine. But now I see it has a different reticle than the 3-9x. The 3-9x has thicker stadia, which I think I'd like better.

Tell me I'm lame and behind the times, but I'm kind of leaning towards MOA. I actually like the looks of the Burris reticle.
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,015
I've looked thru the 3-15x42, which prompted my questions, because the reticle is extremely fine. But now I see it has a different reticle than the 3-9x. The 3-9x has thicker stadia, which I think I'd like better.

Tell me I'm lame and behind the times, but I'm kind of leaning towards MOA. I actually like the looks of the Burris reticle.
I grew up on MOA, HATED mils and was super pissed when we got issued the first mil/mil scopes. By the end of the first range day, really by the end of the first hour or so of shooting I NEVER wanted to go back to MOA. Yes, they are both angular measurements (I like everyone else thought mils were metric), but it was obvious that something broken down into tenths was more intuitive and easier to remember and apply under time pressure.

Now having taught a lot of shooters long range and how to use both MOA and mils, including a bunch of hardcore MOA users having to switch to mils- unequivocally people learn and pickup mils faster and easier than MOA. I'm not saying that you can't use MOA- of course you can and some really good shooters do. However when you look at the fact that 95%+ of PRS/long range field competitors and the entire military sniper community are using mil/mil, it stands that there is a reason.


You'd be hard pressed to name a scope I haven't used extensively, and there isn't a scope made that I've used that can beat the SWFA 3-9x in the 0-600 or so yard range for general hunting and shooting over all in my experience. Durability, reliability, correct functioning, zero retention, reticle.... the Burris isn't in the same league.

This scope has more than 100k rounds (yes, 100,000) on it and still works perfectly as it has since day one. I've got a half dozen or so with more than 30k apiece on them.
 
OP
J

JDZ

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
445
Location
Texas
they are both angular measurements (I like everyone else thought mils were metric), but it was obvious that something broken down into tenths was more intuitive and easier to remember and apply under time pressure.

Now having taught a lot of shooters long range and how to use both MOA and mils, including a bunch of hardcore MOA users having to switch to mils- unequivocally people learn and pickup mils faster and easier than MOA. I'm not saying that you can't use MOA- of course you can and some really good shooters do. However when you look at the fact that 95%+ of PRS/long range field competitors and the entire military sniper community are using mil/mil, it stands that there is a reason.
I know what a radian is, and therefore a miliradian, so no issue there. But, I have a good grasp of inches, and I like that MOA correlates to inches well.


You'd be hard pressed to name a scope I haven't used extensively, and there isn't a scope made that I've used that can beat the SWFA 3-9x in the 0-600 or so yard range for general hunting and shooting over all in my experience. Durability, reliability, correct functioning, zero retention, reticle.... the Burris isn't in the same league
I keep waiting for the catch. Best reticle, best glass, best tracking, best at killing deer, damn near carries the meat out for you, and it only costs $600??? How do you deal with those big clunky turrets? Do they have a zero stop mechanism that can be added?
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,015
I know what a radian is, and therefore a miliradian, so no issue there. But, I have a good grasp of inches, and I like that MOA correlates to inches well.



I keep waiting for the catch. Best reticle, best glass, best tracking, best at killing deer, damn near carries the meat out for you, and it only costs $600??? How do you deal with those big clunky turrets? Do they have a zero stop mechanism that can be added?

About the worst thing you can do for distance shooting is to try to convert angular measurements to linear...... I use both MOA and mil and do not even remotely think in inches/cm/etc with either.


Not the best glass- VX3'ish glass. It's not magic. It just does what a scope is supposed to do.
 

missjordan

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2016
Messages
932
Location
Missoula, MT
I do not regret the switch from SFP to FFP, and will probably never go back to a SFP. As for scopes I'm running both a Vortex PST and the Burris XTR ii in mils. Still testing out the Burris and need to shoot it long range to see how it performs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
OP
J

JDZ

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
445
Location
Texas
So, If I stayed with SFP, like a Leupold VX-3i, and dialed elevation with the CDS turret and possibly even windage with a custom windage turret, what would be wrong with that? Looks like I'd save about half a pound vs any of the FFP scopes people are suggesting.
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,015
So, If I stayed with SFP, like a Leupold VX-3i, and dialed elevation with the CDS turret and possibly even windage with a custom windage turret, what would be wrong with that? Looks like I'd save about half a pound vs any of the FFP scopes people are suggesting.

Accurate and consistent adjustments. They're erectors are not built for dialing.
 
OP
J

JDZ

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
445
Location
Texas
What's an erector and how should it be built? Good erectors must be heavy. Leupold has slop in it? How would it hold zero if it can't dial?

Not doubting, because I obviously have no experience, but I'm just trying to gain an understanding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

pyroducksx3

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,249
Location
Kitsap Co, WA
There's a difference between holding zero and having reliable and repeatable dialing. As far as I know leupold has never had a reputation for holding a poor zero, in fact they hold zero quite well I believe. But nearly everyone I talk too that has expierence with leupolds for dialing is disappointed and the critical reviews of their erector issues are pretty easy to find. I've had good luck with my vx3 4.5-14 from 2010 buthe the numerous complaints are too much to ignore to keep me from trying the vx6hd.
 
OP
J

JDZ

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
445
Location
Texas
So, is SWFA the only scope that'll dial consistently?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

pyroducksx3

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,249
Location
Kitsap Co, WA
No nightforce, bushnell, vortex viper pst or above (although you will use the warranty eventually, no expierence but burris are well reviewed but I've never talked to anyone personally who's used one.
 

KurtR

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
898
Location
South Dakota
Schmidt and bender, hendsolt, tangent theata, us optics, all perform but some at a weight penalty.
 
Top