Rimfire scope buying frustration - mil, MOA, reticles, focal plane etc

[Dunc]

No problem, gbal.

 

Why FFP? It's idiot proof. With a SFP scope you can forget to wind to the calibrated mag.

The ret thickness is not a problem. The main crosshairs on a Schmidt P3 are 7cm thick at 1000m. Hardly imprecise!

 

Why mil as opposed to MOA? Far easier maths because everything is in tens. Also, bog standard mildots (e.g. Schmidt P3) are ubiquitous. If I look at a mildot, I know it's a mildot and I know each dot is 1 mil (there's even a clue in the name). If I look at a ret with hashmarks, it could be MOA or mil and the hashmarks could mean anything. I've then got to look at the marks and remember what they mean etc. The only exception to this is if the hashmarks have numbers next to them but then you've got extra crap on the ret. Bog standard mildots are great.

 

Measuring is using the ret to measure the difference between where you were aiming (POA) and where the bullet hit (POI). It could be that you can see the strike in grass or sand, can see the mark in a target (paper, steel etc) or are having a target marked back with spotting discs. Once you measure, you know you've missed by say 2 mils, you can either hold 2 mils or dial 2 mils. No mag winding, no thinking.

 

I agree with Shuggy's post. It's the same for any rifle. Probably other projectile weapons too.

 

 

Conclusion: FFP (or fixed mag), mil knobs and a mildot are just a great combo.You have to try VERY hard to get it wrong. But change any one of those three things and you've just given yourself loads more room for error.

 

 

Hope that helps. Sorry if I missed anything out. Feel free to ask again if I did.

Have you ever used a FFP scope? Would be interested to know how you got on as I have and that's why all my scopes are now SFP.

[snc_2010]

Yep. Have used the usual Schmidts etc and used to own one of the FFP Falcons. Used it for targets but it was too big and bulky for rabbiting.

 

What didn't you like about FFP?

[snc_2010]

Not to be selfish but recommendations for a scope with the specs I want still gratefully accepted.

[tisme]

Don't vortex do a FFP mil/mil scope for around £300 HST

[Shuggy]

Vortex HST are second focal plane. Apart from Falcon Optics, the next most affordable FFP mil/mil readily available in the UK would be the Vortex PSTs and Bushnell Tactical Elites at about £600-700.

[snc_2010]

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product/vortex-viper-pst-2-5-10x32-ffp-riflescope-with-ebr-1-mrad-reticle/reticle

 

Good spec (maybe not even that large) but sadly way over budget at $899.

[snc_2010]

I might just have to find more money... I'm not spending £300 on something close.

[Dunc]

 

 

What didn't you like about FFP?

Couldn't see the subtensions below 4-6 mag

[snc_2010]

Couldn't see the subtensions below 4-6 mag

Was it hashmarks or dots?

[terryh]

Couldn't see the subtensions below 4-6 mag

Dunc,

 

At that mag you are, I assume, shooting close in, so at short distance I cannot see the point of hold overs - that's 'point blank' ?

 

T

[Dunc]

Dunc,

 

At that mag you are, I assume, shooting close in, so at short distance I cannot see the point of hold overs - that's 'point blank' ?

 

T

Actually CSR at 500!

[Dunc]

Dunc,

 

At that mag you are, I assume, shooting close in, so at short distance I cannot see the point of hold overs - that's 'point blank' ?

 

T

Actually CSR at 500, mind you a few years ago! Max mag allowed of course was 4.5x, IIRC

 

 

And it was hashmarks. Vortex scope.

 

That's why I asked if the OP had used a FFP for what he wanted to use the scope for, as I believe it's largely individual preference. Both 'systems' can work fine as long as you know what you're getting.

[gbal]

snc -thanks for your reply- I hadn't factored in 'idiot proof'-though I doubt there is such a thing (proof I mean).

OK- I accept the 'single calibration' point-but the only real use for calibration is in ranging a known size target-and good luck with the very definitely non metric arithmetic that ensues...multiplying by 27.7 (or whatever)! Not even sure the mil is a metric systemreally,though mil scopes do have ten clicks per mil-can't see how that really helps...but if so,go for it. Have we not (all) accepted that ranging is best and accurately done with a laser rangefinder-especially in the context of 22rf at 200y+,so maybe not a big dealmaker ?

Glad the croshairs issue has a solution- shame it needs Schmidt money though...

I'd have thought that if you are seriously shooting 22 rf at distance-someone should try,and show the limitations-remembering what the hash marks on your scope of choice for the job are should not be a memory challenge-as you say,dots mean mils, so they are hash lines,so they must be moa-surely ,given the amount f practice/use you will experience in this project,forgeting what your scope is seems ....err unlikey, so help you god.

Seeing splash and adjusting is valuable-good luck with seeing splash in grass etc with a little 22 at 200y,but on a marked target,or into sand etc,it can be seen/used...but again,any reticule markings will do-you don't even need to know,or remember,whaat the scale-as in your example,and mine too-perhaps you forgot it-the logic is the same-if the strike is two dotds/hashes low,aim two dots/hashes high...there is no advatage to either over the other ( tough if your blob dot happens to obscure the little splash,and the ma hashes will potentially be more precise-as there are more of them,but let's accept that there is no advantage from mil dots,or moa hashes per se..the unit is irrelevant to the splash correction-how idiot proof is that !)

 

OK: the case for consistency is agreed -mil/mil moa/moa or whatever/whatever.

Therafter the case for mil versus moa seems marginal either way-much of the alleged advantage of one system (usually mil,not always) actually applies equally to the other,or the claims are implausible (ranging at unknown size targets),and each system has some downsides,though either are entirely workable-with

occasionally,an advantage to one or t'other,at some price.

 

Price,and choice,of course are the rub-hence your frustration,perhaps. No surprises,when a more detailed evaluation is attempted-especialy in the planned application-uber long range target shooting with a 22 rf -we are pretty well out of 'precision' territory ( 3+ inches on a calm day?) so marginals in scopes are a secondary concern.If your dream scope is not available,one that is should answer the basic issues-can it be done,and why? If the answer is a resounding affirmative,then 'upgrade' the scope...perhaps... :-)

Good luck with the venture-results will be interesting.

gbal

[Lowsider]

I have one of these on my HK416 D145RS and I'm very impressed especially for the price...

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/UTG-Compact-Buster-Picatinny-Sunshade/dp/B005UGIMNQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1436868391&sr=8-1&keywords=utg+bugbuster

 

3-9 zoom function.... 3yards to infinity paralax adjustment and 3 colour recticle..

[snc_2010]

the only real use for calibration is in ranging a known size target

 

It's useful for measuring and dialing (rather than holding) too. If you measure 1.5mil with a mil ret, you dial 1.5 on mil knobs. If you measure 1.5mil with a mil ret, what do you dial on MOA knobs? You have 1 second to answer.

 

 

Glad the croshairs issue has a solution- shame it needs Schmidt money though...

 

I reckon they're all about the same. Schmidt P3 is 0.07mil. A quick google found a Burris one thinner (0.05mil). There are probably some thicker but even if they were 0.15mil (over double the Schmidt P3), that still only comes out at 15cm at 1000m. I don't need any thinner.

[gbal]

snc-I think we all agreed many posts ago that having the same measure on turrets and reticule was sensible-the issue is rather for a 22rf-or indeed any rifle-are there substantial differences between F/S FP and mil/moa....not so far...the 1 second answer is that on my scope the shot was 1.5 moa low,so I hold 1.5 moa up ....can't see any advantage either way...except that youd need pretty good eyes to judge .5 mil, and superior sight to judge .7 accurately,at 200 y plus on bullet splash.

 

OK,reticule thickness is OK for you-but you can have any FFP reticule thickness in SFP too-there is no reason to choose the FFP for that reason (the 'thickness' issue was really from long range targeteers,but that does not apply to 22rf at 200y,and FFP may have upped their game anyhow (I wonder why,but they have?. The Schmidt will probably bust your £300 budget,which is why I didn't suggest it,fine or regular...

 

Let's conclude that on those two ,it's a draw....I'm not agin FFP/etc - just would like to see a coherent reason that is pertinent,and differentiates between the options in the application.

Perhaps more makers of 22rf scopes might like to,also?

 

At 200y plus, a better specification for most shooters is the 22 cf rifle.This may reduce the market for your 22rf specs even further.

 

gbal

[snc_2010]

I can't tell exactly what you're saying or asking. I do however know that I want a scope of the following specification and I welcome recommendations for one.

 

Mildot ret

Mil knobs

Fixed 6x ish or first focal plane 3-12x ish variable

Fixed or side parallax

Not huge

Under £300

[gbal]

snc: I am sorry you don't understand.....just delete "first focal plane" and you have plenty of choice;insist on FFP and you will have much less choice. Simples.

[terryh]

Actually CSR at 500!

 

Wrong tool for job then. I've shot a bit of CSR SO and use a SFP for this reason, yes it's 4.5X for service optic.

 

Think holding off for wind and dialing distance as it is fixed ranges and known target sizes would be a better approach for CSR IMH(but limited!)O.

 

Terry

[Dunc]

Wrong tool for job then.

Exactly! FFP not the best choice for this situation.

[FGYT]

Probably loses it on the Not huge requirement New Falcon

 

[snc_2010]

Falcons are good (I used to have one) but yes, large.

[snc_2010]

Spent more money and got a Vortex. It's a hashmarked ret rather than a plain mildot but other than that it's what I want.

 

Conclusion: Idiotically specified scopes in the majority at low price points (but still available at all price points).

[AnthonyR]

Which one did you get?

[snc_2010]

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product/vortex-viper-pst-2-5-10x32-ffp-riflescope-with-ebr-1-mrad-reticle