FFP for stalking and Precision advice

[ashcroft]

Hi all

Hoping to draw on first hand experience from anyone who uses FFP scopes

Hoping to find a reticle and scope that is not too fine on low power for stalking low light (5 or less) and can also use to MIL range/holdover etc for using on longer range precision  stuff like PRL type shooting

Will be my first venture to FFP so equally useful to know any that are unsuitable on experiences you've had

 

Thanks 

 

 

[John MH]

My advice if worried about being able to see the ret on a FFP scope at low mag would be to get one with an illuminated ret where only the centre + is illuminated. For PRS type shooting using low mag is often a better option if in an unstable position.

[Scotch_egg]

Keep shooting what you got. 
 

you can shoot very well. It’s not the scope that held you back. 

 

[John MH]

14 minutes ago, Scotch_egg said:

Keep shooting what you got. 
 

you can shoot very well. It’s not the scope that held you back. 

 

Good point, take a look through someone else FFP scope before switching. For wind holds a SPF scope is usually ok if holding left or right hand edge and you can usually see a splash for referencing your left or right hold. Problem only really occurs for elevation holds when shooting multiple targets at different ranges when you don't want to or don't have time to dial in. You might get away with holding top, centre or bottom of target if they are reasonably close together say (250, 300, 350) but that depends on how big the target is and how flat your bullet shoots. If shooting two targets at say 200 & 400 yards with no time to dial then a SFP scope may cause problems but they do usually have a zoom setting where they are mil for mil or moa for moa, that may be in the scope literature (manual) or you may have to do a test/trial to figure it out for yourself.

[ashcroft]

Thanks for the feedback appreciated. 

Compromises whichever way you go i suppose, unless a dedicated rifle for each 

[CameronWilson]

My advice would be to avoid anything with a large magnification range (go for 3-9x or 4-16x for instance, rather than 4.5-27x etc.), because the reticle designers have to make the reticle chunky enough to be visible at the low mags, that by the time you increase the magnification it's like looking through a chessboard (the IOR Recon 4-28x50 is a perfect example of this). If the designers prioritise a fine reticle at full mag, then you end up with a reticle that is too fine to see at lower mags. The Schmidt & Bender P4FL is a well balanced design, only the floating centre crosshair illuminates, and at 3x it's like looking through a red dot sight like an EOTech or similar. Also Vortex's EBR reticles scale well, but they fully illuminate the entire Christmas tree, which can be a bit distracting in low light.