Why the big fascination with First focal plane

[Flight01]

I had a burris with BDC reticile and it was very accurate. Had to be at max magnification to utilize the BDC. Did not like going to 14x to take advantage of the reticle due to quality of image on 14x magnification. I took the example they gave for my caliber, calculated the inches of drop, and made a few easy charts ( mostly for fun) . It is accurate and the FFP would eliminate the need for charts and so on. Practice is the key to good shots at any distance. I am not a LR shooter but practice out to 530 yards...

Longest shot was 325 yards on game and was a one shot kill. Laser ranged and scope dialed up, no wind, decent light and waited for broadside shot.

Bad mouthing turns me off. Everyone has their preference. FFP is a feature and if someone likes it , good for them .If someone don't like it , good for them.

we all have our strengths...mine are few and far between.

Everyone practice , practice. Be safe and have fun this hunting season.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Flight01

I had a burris with BDC reticile and it was very accurate. Had to be at max magnification to utilize the BDC. Did not like going to 14x to take advantage of the reticle due to quality of image on 14x magnification. I took the example they gave for my caliber, calculated the inches of drop, and made a few easy charts ( mostly for fun) . It is accurate and the FFP would eliminate the need for charts and so on. Practice is the key to good shots at any distance. I am not a LR shooter but practice out to 530 yards...

Longest shot was 325 yards on game and was a one shot kill. Laser ranged and scope dialed up, no wind, decent light and waited for broadside shot.

Bad mouthing turns me off. Everyone has their preference. FFP is a feature and if someone likes it , good for them .If someone don't like it , good for them.

we all have our strengths...mine are few and far between.

Everyone practice , practice. Be safe and have fun this hunting season.

If the image quality is poor at 14x, you need to get a better quality scope

[Jordan Smith]

All scopes that I've ever seen have some image degradation at max magnification compared to lower mag settings. It seems counter-intuitive to have a variable scope that uses a reticle with angular increments, that is only usable on one magnification setting...

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Jordan Smith

All scopes that I've ever seen have some image degradation at max magnification compared to lower mag settings. It seems counter-intuitive to have a variable scope that uses a reticle with angular increments, that is only usable on one magnification setting...

To me it's a waste to have a variable scope that you never use maximum magnification on, because the image quality is poor at the maximum magnification.

[Jordan Smith]

Agreed, but he never said that he never uses max mag

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Jordan Smith

Agreed, but he never said that he never uses max mag

Actually he posted that he didn't like to use 14x, because of the poor image quality.

Did not like going to 14x to take advantage of the reticle due to quality of image on 14x magnification.

[DaleJ]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Actually he posted that he didn't like to use 14x, because of the poor image quality.

So if he had FFP scope, not being able to use the "prescribed power for correct reticle subtension" will never be an issue. FFP will also eliminate a lot of parallax issues found on some of the higher mag variable power scopes. (don't spout off with the need better equipment stupidity)
For myself it would instantly define and quantify range flag readings into actual MOA hold-offs, and that's volumes more info than these stupid target dot scopes deliver.

[Jordan Smith]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Actually he posted that he didn't like to use 14x, because of the poor image quality.

He said "due to quality of image". Perhaps the quality on 14x is 98% of what it is at 10x, but because of that he prefers not to use 14x. All scopes that I've seen display this tendency, no matter how much money you pay.

[Highlander44]

I cannot see the advantage to a FFP scope for civilian/hunting use. FFP scopes came to market for the military so they can range accurately using the Mildot reticle and any magnification-they wanted to use the mildot reticle so the enemy could pic up their lazer signature using a lazer rangefinder. For me, i always want the max magnifiation when hunting at longer distances, so 2nd focal plane is good- and with FFP- the crosshairs only get thicker when you increase magnification- sometimes blocking out the target the lines are so thick.....

[ctd]

The same reason they are good for Military use makes them good for civilian use. (besides the laser being visible, most of our enemys do not have the ability to observe them anyways it is invisible to the eye).

The benefits have been stated already. You either own one or you don't. Benefits are their as well as disadvantages.

They work well if used properly.
Batteries fail and LRFs get misplaced, broken out of calibration.

[DaleJ]

Originally Posted by Highlander44

they wanted to use the mildot reticle so the enemy could pic up their lazer signature using a lazer rangefinder.

I don't understand this, sorry.

[Jordan Smith]

Originally Posted by Highlander44

with FFP- the crosshairs only get thicker when you increase magnification- sometimes blocking out the target the lines are so thick.....

No, the reticle is the same size relative to the target at all magnifications.

[DaleJ]

Originally Posted by Jordan Smith

No, the reticle is the same size relative to the target at all magnifications.

This fact is overlooked. Another overlooked fact, no more parallax issues, its all on the same plane. All these improvements are expensive, the March 5-40 FFP is $4700.00.

[Skytop B]

Originally Posted by DaleJ

This fact is overlooked. Another overlooked fact, no more parallax issues, its all on the same plane. All these improvements are expensive, the March 5-40 FFP is $4700.00.

? All my FFP scopes have parallax adjustment, still needs to be adjusted for different distances. (S&B / Leupold Mark IV)

[marxman]

Originally Posted by DaleJ

This fact is overlooked. Another overlooked fact, no more parallax issues, its all on the same plane. All these improvements are expensive, the March 5-40 FFP is $4700.00.

i never heard that. thats awesome. i never really had a problem with parallax that i knew about but with people fiddling with parallax at different ranges it must be a great feature to be able to ignore it. im getting a ffp whether i need it or not

[Skytop B]

Originally Posted by marxman

i never heard that. thats awesome. i never really had a problem with parallax that i knew about but with people fiddling with parallax at different ranges it must be a great feature to be able to ignore it. im getting a ffp whether i need it or not

Anyone that says they can accurately hold over or hold off at any distance with a regular reticle is FOS, you are guessing without having a mil reticle of some sort, FFP just makes it that much easier and more accurate. Let's say you dial in 0.4 mils for wind and hold on target and you see the bullet impact the dirt to the left, how much to the left? Well with a mil reticle it is easy to see say it hit 0.5 mils left, well swing over and hold the 0.5 mil mark on target before the wind changes and launch another pill. Don't dial wind at all just hold using your reticle. Or get a Horus reticle and never dial again.

[gtr]

Originally Posted by marxman

i never heard that. thats awesome. i never really had a problem with parallax that i knew about but with people fiddling with parallax at different ranges it must be a great feature to be able to ignore it. im getting a ffp whether i need it or not

You will probably get roids,as well, whether you need them or not.

[Ivo]

Originally Posted by Highlander44

I cannot see the advantage to a FFP scope for civilian/hunting use. FFP scopes came to market for the military so they can range accurately using the Mildot reticle and any magnification-they wanted to use the mildot reticle so the enemy could pic up their lazer signature using a lazer rangefinder. For me, i always want the max magnifiation when hunting at longer distances, so 2nd focal plane is good- and with FFP- the crosshairs only get thicker when you increase magnification- sometimes blocking out the target the lines are so thick.....

^This is the problem with the internet. Someone comes to the internet looking for an answer to a question and they get an, uninformed, uneducated, pulled out of your ***** answer like this.

Please, please, please if you feel compelled to post on a thread regarding a subject in which you are completely clueless either refrain or go to a website in the "know" and cut and paste a response that was written by someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

Lazer signatures?(Lazer is spelled laser btw)
Crosshairs blocking out targets?

What are you talking about? Please explain.

[Highlander44]

Originally Posted by Ivo

^This is the problem with the internet. Someone comes to the internet looking for an answer to a question and they get an, uninformed, uneducated, pulled out of your ***** answer like this.

Please, please, please if you feel compelled to post on a thread regarding a subject in which you are completely clueless either refrain or go to a website in the "know" and cut and paste a response that was written by someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

Lazer signatures?(Lazer is spelled laser btw)
Crosshairs blocking out targets?

What are you talking about? Please explain.

Ivo it sounds like you are an expert so I don't know why I have to explain??? And sorry- I'll run spell check for you next time..... My point is the when I use my mildot reticle for ranging on my 2nd focal plane scope it only accurately estimates at full magnification (or where the scope manufacturer sets it) which I only use for longer distances- so I want the magnification jacked up anyways. When using FFP scopes ( and yes I've used many) you can accurately estimate range on a known target size at any magnification setting- but the crosshairs cover more of the target ( more than a 2nd focal plane).
Don't get me wrong- I like using mildot's as a back up to a rangefinder. (I have had rangefinders fail on me also). I stated the military likes FFP as they can accurately range using any scope magnification setting- because they don't want to use LRF's for fear they will be detected-yes I know the lazer/laser (whatever) can't be seen with the human eye- there ARE detectors..... With a hunter, getting caught by the enemy isn't an issue- so is it worth having a FFP scope that is twice as much $$$- when you can just put it on full magnification and get the same results with a finer crosshair on the target. We were out doing some target practice not that long ago at 300 yards if I remember correctly at a hardball sized target and with his front focal plane vortex-I could not even see the target.
You are right evo-that is the problem with the Internet, anybody can post what they "think" they know...... instead of spending time being ignorant on Alberta outdoorsman forums maybe you should spend that time to take some marksmanship courses every year like I do- And go and practice using the mildot reticle at different ranges and at different targets.

[marxman]

Originally Posted by Ivo

^This is the problem with the internet. Someone comes to the internet looking for an answer to a question and they get an, uninformed, uneducated, pulled out of your ***** answer like this.

Please, please, please if you feel compelled to post on a thread regarding a subject in which you are completely clueless either refrain or go to a website in the "know" and cut and paste a response that was written by someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

Lazer signatures?(Lazer is spelled laser btw)
Crosshairs blocking out targets?

.

x2

[Highlander44]

Read the second entry in this post:
http://www.longrangehunting.com/foru...ffp-sfp-88841/

He explains it better than I can.

[wally338]

I dont understand the complaint that the crosshairs get too thick. Just dial .2 mil left and hold accordingly. Plus most mid to high end ffp scopes have open centre crosshairs available if one prefers.

[Skytop B]

Originally Posted by wally338

I dont understand the complaint that the crosshairs get too thick. Just dial .2 mil left and hold accordingly. Plus most mid to high end ffp scopes have open centre crosshairs available if one prefers.

My first S&B has the P4L I think it is, it is really too thick for target shooting if you are trying to get smaller than 2'' groups out past 500m, you have to just quarter the target, the next one has the "fien", I recently purchased a Leupold Mark 4 ERT 8.5-25 with the TMR reticle, still not a cheap scope but compared to other High end optics I don't think you can beat it, the TMR reticle is pretty fine and has .1 mil I think it is opening at the center of the crosshairs so it is quite a bit better for target shooting, the glass does not compare to a bender and I really prefer the bender with only 2 turns to the turret, impossible to get lost in rotation.

[Highlander44]

Originally Posted by tchardy1972

To add to my last post. Anyone that has shot a lot of long range knows that your drop changes with conditions, sometimes this change can be considerable. So the guy counting on a previously made chart or his memory to use his retical is in for an eye opener.

you got it tcharty! with most rifles just the temperature will throw most folk off at longer distances. Most rifles can vary 200 fps muzzle velocity from a cold day to a hot day- at that affects POI huge! Thats even before you take Altitude/BP into play....

[Jordan Smith]

Originally Posted by Highlander44

With a hunter, getting caught by the enemy isn't an issue- so is it worth having a FFP scope that is twice as much $$$

Please explain. I cannot think of a single scope model that costs twice as much in FFP as in SFP. A hundred or two hundred, sure. But not double.

[Jordan Smith]

Originally Posted by Highlander44

you got it tcharty! with most rifles just the temperature will throw most folk off at longer distances. Most rifles can vary 200 fps muzzle velocity from a cold day to a hot day- at that affects POI huge! Thats even before you take Altitude/BP into play....

You need to re-assess your LR load if you're getting a 200 fps variation between a cold day and a hot one.

[Highlander44]

Originally Posted by Jordan Smith

You need to re-assess your LR load if you're getting a 200 fps variation between a cold day and a hot one.

2560@10F and 2711@90F

I have a Leupold Mark4 LR T- the ERT's arn't double but $4-500 more.... Made a mistake there

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Highlander44

you got it tcharty! with most rifles just the temperature will throw most folk off at longer distances. Most rifles can vary 200 fps muzzle velocity from a cold day to a hot day- at that affects POI huge! Thats even before you take Altitude/BP into play....

200FPS difference?
I don't think so, not on a properly set up load and rifle.
That would be a difference of 78 inches of trajectory at 1,000 yards with a 500 yard zero with a 250 grain .338 Scenar. !!
I had to check the quickload to find this out because I have NEVER seen a trajectory difference that bad, even from July to October with thrown charges.
Cat

[wally338]

Originally Posted by Skytop B

My first S&B has the P4L I think it is, it is really too thick for target shooting if you are trying to get smaller than 2'' groups out past 500m, you have to just quarter the target, the next one has the "fien", I recently purchased a Leupold Mark 4 ERT 8.5-25 with the TMR reticle, still not a cheap scope but compared to other High end optics I don't think you can beat it, the TMR reticle is pretty fine and has .1 mil I think it is opening at the center of the crosshairs so it is quite a bit better for target shooting, the glass does not compare to a bender and I really prefer the bender with only 2 turns to the turret, impossible to get lost in rotation.

Both of my S&B have the P4L as well, they work well for banging steel and coyotes. I don't shoot competitions so can't comment on how well the P4L would work for that.

[Highlander44]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

200FPS difference?
I don't think so, not on a properly set up load and rifle.
That would be a difference of 78 inches of trajectory at 1,000 yards with a 500 yard zero with a 250 grain .338 Scenar. !!
I had to check the quickload to find this out because I have NEVER seen a trajectory difference that bad, even from July to October with thrown charges.
Cat

Mine works out to 151 fps difference between 10F and 90F- at 500 yards that 2.3 MOA or approx 11.5". I have verified this at several ranges and temperatures... What are you guys getting for temp variation? And has anyone verified this with a chrono? Maybe we should start a new thread here and not hijack this one...lol