FFP or SFP ?

[Frederick]

Firstly , I should mention I'm a beginner when it comes to fullbore . I shoot smallbore on a regular basis . So please bear with me 😀

Am I right in assuming that most shooters in F class use second focal plane ? 

I must admit most of the scopes I can afford seem to offer more FFP than SFP . I can see that FFP could be useful if you simply want to holdover for E/W regardless of the mag . Can't really spend more than 1500.00 on glass . Its  to sit on a 6.5 Creedmoor 🙂

 

 

[markymark]

Loads of great options around the £1500 mark. What sort of shooting do you do?

Logical would be to recommend FFP and mil/mil but depends on your use.

If you looking at new I would suggest for your budget:

Delta STRYKER ED 4.5-30x56 HD
Vortex PST gen II 5-25

Bushnell DMR

If you don’t mind using used you can start even picking up S&B PMII 5-25 or other high end glass, kahles etc  

Don’t forget to budget for a decent set of mounts. 
 

But until we know a little bit more about your shooting it’s hard to recommend FFP vs SFP.

 

ps what creedmoor rifle do you own?

[Frederick]

Ordering a Sabatti Evo Tactical. Intending to shoot at Bisley at all ranges if I can .Maybe an F class open comp , simply for my own enjoyment . I'm a little to ancient to get into it seriously ( famous last words ) 🙂

[Popsbengo]

there's plenty of good stuff for your budget. 

I use both ffp and sfp scopes for targets.  I don't see any benefit of ffp over sfp if you are just punching paper.  Hold over is easy to estimate from the target rings without recourse to measuring with the reticle.  Where ffp really comes in is at long ranges with steel plates etc,  where off target splash can be measured and transferred to you firing solution quickly and easily.  I've never found that necessary with paper targets out to 1200yds.  Also, some cheaper end ffp scope reticles become quite thick at extended magnification.

Both the Delta & Vortex scopes mentioned by markymark are excellent, I've no experience of the Bushnell.

[Nick 53]

Sightron scopes are in your budget, but MOA is my preference for fclass and benchrest shooting. 

7mm fclass open sightron 10-50x60 LRMOA 

6br Fclass and benchrest sightron 8-32x56 LRMOA. 

Thanks nick 

[ejg223]

For me only FFP, will evtl. get rid of all SFP.  Saves so much ammo when zeroing, even starting at say 40yds adjustments work. Guessing/measuring  the tolerance of wind judgement etc. even when hunting.

There is also still the doubt that zero on a SFP scope is different at different magnifications.

edi

[Popsbengo]

10 minutes ago, ejg223 said:

For me only FFP, will evtl. get rid of all SFP.  Saves so much ammo when zeroing, even starting at say 40yds adjustments work. Guessing/measuring  the tolerance of wind judgement etc. even when hunting.

There is also still the doubt that zero on a SFP scope is different at different magnifications.

edi

Maybe on cheap scopes but I've plenty of trial evidence of quality SFP scopes that says your probably mistaken about zero drift.

A simple squared paper target will give you everything that's needed to zero quickly and efficiently

[ejg223]

It is the nature of the beast. Just try and complain about a SFP scope not being on zero.... that is what one will be told. Of course some scopes are better than others. Either way I don't want a SFP scope.

edi

 

[Popsbengo]

5 minutes ago, ejg223 said:

 Either way I don't want a SFP scope.

edi

Your prerogative edi  but the OP was asking for advice about the relative merits

[jcampbellsmith]

I'm a little biased and favour SFP having used it for over 50 years.

https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2017/7/10/first-focal-plane-or-second-focal-plane/#:~:text=A riflescope's reticle is placed,same size regardless of magnification.&text=One advantage is that you,even at the lowest magnification.

I do however see some benefits for FFP in for instance PRS. 

There are two other scope criteria to consider as  well - 

• CW or CCW turrets
• MOA or Mils

One consideration is to use what your peers are using in the same niche. F-Class favours MOA, PRS favours Mils. Deer stalkers favour SFP. 

and lastly, there's the whole arena of reticles..... Try the reticle before you buy it. Scopes at least don't depreciate like rifles and cars.

Best regards

JCS

[ejg223]

4 hours ago, Popsbengo said:

Your prerogative edi  but the OP was asking for advice about the relative merits

Well I did say why.  Also, those whose lives depend on scopes mostly use FFP for a reason. S&B explained it a few years back in their Q&A page, firstly that FFP scopes are more robust by design and don't have the flaw of change of zero with mag change. I also think one can do more with a FFP scope.  Lets say you guess the wind to be between 10 & 15mph overall. Take the difference between the two and check on your animal where your shot could go worst case. Just about every time I go shooting with my SFP scopes (I have a few) I am annoyed about the missing functions. Maybe you have a point in F-Class shooting I don't know. In F Class it is not really important if you hit or don't... with hunting it is.

edi

 

[Frederick]

Thanks for the replies 🙂

[palo]

For F class  sfp is the obvious choice. 

[Shuggy]

Probably the vast majority of target shooters prefer SFP and MOA, with a fine reticle. If you dial for wind, a ‘plot sheet’ will give you the corrections based on the marked fall of shot at each range. However, quite a few people seem to like getting a rough zero and then holding for wind.

However, once you try FFP Mil/Mil, you will never want to go back, for all the reasons that Edi explained. It’s just so much easier.

[Kipper]

Sfp as you need a fine cross hair ( imagine trying to see a target at 1000yards with a magnified reticle) and definitely moa turrets for fclass.. like popsbengo said, its a known distance with rings at moa spacings so hold over is easy regardless off magnification used..

 

That's my penny's worth

[Shuggy]

38 minutes ago, Kipper said:

Sfp as you need a fine cross hair ( imagine trying to see a target at 1000yards with a magnified reticle) and definitely moa turrets for fclass.. like popsbengo said, its a known distance with rings at moa spacings so hold over is easy regardless off magnification used..

 

That's my penny's worth

Personally, I think too much is made of this. The centre of the P4FL reticle on my FFP PMII will subtend just 1.3 inches at 1000 yards. That’s plenty fine enough to quarter the bull. But I quite agree that a SFP fine reticle is more popular for pure target work.

[Popsbengo]

12 minutes ago, Shuggy said:

Personally, I think too much is made of this. The centre of the P4FL reticle on my FFP PMII will subtend just 1.3 inches at 1000 yards. That’s plenty fine enough to quarter the bull. But I quite agree that a SFP fine reticle is more popular for pure target work.

I agree re PM2,  I have one as you mention for extreme long range however a Vortex FFP I owned was like looking at two thick bars at 25x mag