Scopes FFP vs SFP and MIL vs MOA

[waldedw]

Just wondering if anyone else has the same problem as me, with my old eyes I seem to struggle more and more with the FFP scopes, on the lower power I struggle to find the crosshairs or center dot, once I crank it up I'm fine. That's not a problem on the bench but on a gun that is used for hunting as well it is, also in lower light conditions early morning and late evenings it's tough.

I have 2 FFP scopes, a Bushnell Elite Tactical XRS 4.5 - 30 x 50mm in MIL on my 6mm Creedmoor, it's and Insite arms custom build that weights in at 19 lb so strictly a bench gun. The other FFP is an Arken EPL4 - 4 - 16 x 44mm in MOA it is on my 223 that is primarily used for hunting coyotes with the odd trip to the gopher patch, both are very clear and track perfectly but as I said I struggle with the center dot at lower power.

On my 6.5 PRC and my 7 PRC which are a matching pair of Christensen arms mesa long range guns I have Nightforce NX8 2.5 - 20 x 50mm SFP in MOA which I much prefer, they are clear and sharp and the second I settle in behind them the center dot is just there and sharp. The other thing is I'm old school and think in MOA luckily the only MIL I have is on the LR bench gun so I have time to think before I dial.

On my CZ457 I have a Bushnell elite 3200 tactical 10 x 40mm SFP / MOA, it's very nice for target shooting but a little to small a field of view for in the gopher patch but I make due, may just switch this one out yet and go to a variable.

Anyway just thought I'd throw it out there and see if anyone else has the same problem or it's just me. Getting Old sucks, but beat the heck out of the alternative.

[DiabeticKripple]

i run SFP scopes in MOA for everything. I like having the reticle the same size and if I need to shoot at distance I dial anyways so having a FFP doesnt benefit me at all.

[pikergolf]

The only FFP scope I run is on my competition .22 rimfire. We have an old timers comp/league type thing where us "physically challenged" folks do the PRS style thing off of the benches. FFP is very useful for that, in that the reticle is useful at making the proper adjustments for wind at any power. Other than that I really dislike FFP scopes, for the same reasons you do, can't imagine using one for coyotes or gophers. Sell that Arken and buy this scope, it is one hell of a scope for the money. I like it so much one is on my gopher .22 and the other is on my coyote rifle. Just be aware the reticle center is a little (very little) on the thin side. To bad we are so far apart, I could let you look through it. Check reviews on it if you are interested.

https://www.gotenda.com/product/bush...y-moa-reticle/

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by DiabeticKripple

i run SFP scopes in MOA for everything. I like having the reticle the same size and if I need to shoot at distance I dial anyways so having a FFP doesnt benefit me at all.

I am the same.
Before range finders and FFP scopes came into vogue , we used a maximum point blank range system for hunting. So we tried to get close in spot and stalk style hunting , and now with laser range finders it is easier to kill cleanly at a known distance .
My shooting disciplines I shot back in the day were fixed distances , and still are , so there is no need for me to use a FFP style of scope , and my eyesight is so poor anyway that I need a reticle I can clearly see.
SFP scopes do what I need them to .
Cat

[jayquiver]

I have one scope in FFP, Leupold Mk 5 3.6-18, non illuminated. I like it so far haven't hunted with it yet.
I think illumination is the way to go on FFP hunting scopes. I'm going to hunt with mine this season a bit and If I don't like it I will sell and get something else, with illumination.

[elkhunter11]

I use only SFP scopes with MOA adjustments.

[pikergolf]

Really, unless a person is shooting a timed event and a person doesn't want to take the time to dial the windage on various yardage targets I see no advantage to a FFP. I thought I could get away with a SFP on the PRS style shooting but it takes to long to dial the windage, so I got a FFP for that.

[waldedw]

Yes I forgot to mention that the Arken scope on my 223 that I use for coyotes has illumination which is a great help in low light and for faster acquisition on the center

[Dean2]

SFP scopes only too, all with MOA adjustments. Just bought a Burris 4.5x14x42 to put on a gopher gun. Cabelas has them on sale for 300, which is 100 bucks off. Has side parralax down to 50 yards, nice clear glass, and a nice reticle. Very nice scope for the price. Will get to try it out at the range as soon as my rings show up.

I tried FFP scopes, did not see any advantage to them over the SFP. I do however like ballistic style reticles, B&C, BRX, or Mil-Dots all work well for holdover shooting as well as hold offs in the wind, as I hate having to twist dials.

https://www.cabelas.ca/product/16142...-e1-riflescope

[brewster29]

Like the OP, I have to admit to getting a bit longer in the tooth, although I am a bit of an anomaly- an old guy the doesn’t need readers. I have exactly one FFP scope left: it’s an Athlon Ares BTR gen2 4.5-27x50 MOA. At lower powers (say sub 6x) the reticle is a bit tough to see, unless illuminated. I use it for load development only. There’s never any hurry so zooming or dialing is not an issue. That scope is an amazing piece of kit, especially considering the price.
It’s presently living on my Tikka 7 PRC build, but it will be replaced by a Leupold VX•R 4-12x40 CDS for the hunting season.

My brain works best in MOA. I can figure mils but have to do a bunch of mental math…

All my hunting rifles have SFP 40mm or 44mm scopes with either B&C or BRH reticles or some sort of dial up, in yards or MOA. I really like the illuminated center dot Leupold scopes. I personally don’t care for 50mm or larger scopes on hunting rifles that I have to carry.

[32-40win]

I have a .22LR, aand two 6.5cm's with ffp scopes on them. I like the reticles for the wind & range correction factor on the range and for plinking at gophers. The one 6.5 has a 3.5-16x44 on it, it has an illumintated reticle, I want to try it out in a specific area I know of that'll be a stand hunt. the ffp's are all kinda useless at low mags below about 10x as far as I'm concerned, but, in certain situations that really isn't much of a concern, person has to be picky about taking them out in the field. I can see value for someone using an ffp on some more open prairie apps for sure. I could put that scope on another 22cal, so, still have a good use for it. Other guns are all 3-9, 2-10, 4.5-14, SFP's with plain x-hairs or a BDC style reticle. I have another 3-9 I can swap out from the 4-16ffp if I decide I don't want to leave it on the 6.5. The one ffp on the 22LR is nice to use at the range, for sure, and on the gopher fields 4.5-20x is something I've used in those apps for 35+ yrs, nice to have that reticle to correct wind or distance with. They have their uses, so do the sfp's, got by just fine for many yrs with just a 2-7x33 and a 3-9x40 with plain x-hairs without lit reticles.

[LJalberta]

I’ve gotten rid of all my SFP and MOA scopes. I find it quicker and easier to think in Mils and the FFP makes holding for wind at any magnification quicker and easier in my experience.

I will say, most FFP for the competitive shooter have way too fine of a reticle for useful hunting. I really like the Maven RS 1.2, and SWFA 3-9 MilQuad reticles. Thick enough to see at low power, but not interfering near the higher end.

The Bushnell reticle on the LHRS/T series isn’t bad either, although I know some don’t like the donut.

[Smokinyotes]

A FFP is useless to me. I can’t make out the reticle much below 8X. All my scopes are SFP, most are NF with the MOAR reticle. The target guns wear NXS, the hunting guns SHV.

[markg]

I prefer the FFP scopes. I dont dial wind, I do hold overs on the reticle. Its easier to do with FFP. I like to know how high or low my hits and misses are by using the reticle. Just me and my preference. I know you can do the same with SFP scopes at certain magnification but its nice to know it works regardless of magnification.

If I was more focused on hunting I would likely feel the SFP were better and understand shooters that do. It also seems like the FFP are quite large and heavy, so not the best choices for hunting.

[6.5 shooter]

I like fine crosshairs or target dots and if seeing the central reticule is a problem I would just buy one with a target dot. I have tried FFP scopes and I really dislike not being able to see my target because the reticule covers it up. I also very seldom twist my elevation dial, I prefer "Kentucky" windage myself.

[Dubz337]

FFP and MIL for me.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by Dubz337

FFP and MIL for me.

Me as well.

[Envitro]

Different PRO's and CON's for every application, Fit for purpose.

FFP and MIL for certain situations
SFP and MOA for others

It all depends on what you're doing and what the application is.

Short range hunting (i.e anything inside of 200 yards) I'd say SFP/MOA and capped turrets is the way to go

Medium to Long Range Hunting (250-600 yards) I'd go with FFP and MIL or MOA exposed turrets

Dynamic Long Range Precision Rifle like PRS or NRL Hunter, FFP and MIL all the way

Long Range Precision Rifle like F-Class or Benchrest, go with SFP and MOA with exposed turrets with 1/8th MOA adjustment.

[AI 6.5]

FFP/Mil for me. Different tools for different applications. One is no better than the other imo.

[Cappy]

FFP and MIL if I can. However I still have a few rifles that are SFP duplex/BDC but they are 300 and in type rifles.