Posted: 7/22/2015 8:05:34 PM EDT
| Im going to get a remington 700 aac-sd next as my first precision rifle and am wondering what scope to get. I have been looking at the vortex viper pst 4-16x50. It looks like the MRAD will be a better system for me. Im not sure if I should get a ffp or a sfp. I understand the differences between the two but not sure which one would be better for me. I will mainly be shooting at steel from 200-600 yards and 1000 if I get a chance. Whats your guys thoughts. Thanks! |
|
Quoted:
Thanks guys. If the scope is in mils do I have to zero the rifle in meters? No you don't. I use all mil scopes and all my data is in yards. You won;t be doing any ranging math in your head so it's a non issue. If you want to range get a mildot master. It's a simple tool that works fast and without batteries. |
| Again you won't be doing MOA calculations in your head either. The constant isn't 100 as is thought. That is for shooter MOA. True MOA, like the Vortex scopes, use a constant of 95.5 for ranging. No one who actually wants to hit their target does the math in their head when ranging with a reticle. It takes too long, is too confusing and under any stress it won;t be accurate. Get a mildot master as it can be used with MOA as well as mils. |
|
Quoted:
I really like how with the ffp scope I can range at any magnification. Not just range as ranging is one of the least useful things I have my FFP scopes for. Using the reticle for hold overs/unders, calling corrections on any power, wind holds and mover holds are all more useful to me. |
|
I mounted a Viper 6-24 FFP EBR2 on a 308 build I just did. Boy, that was a huge mistake!
Now I need one for my other LR guns! The last time I shot it was at 557yds. I could see the hits and adjust for POI. Excellent glass, excellent controls and perfect adjustments. Like I said, now I need to replace some other glass. FWIW, If you will be shooting out to 600+ why not go with the 6-24? It was perfect for this 600-800yd 308 build. |
| Alright you guys have convinced me to get the 6-24 ffp! I was at bass pro yesterday and it looked like an excellent piece of glass. I figured I might as well buy it used because vortex has such a good warranty if something goes bad it will be fixed. There have been some good deals on the EE. Im looking at the ebr-1 reticle. The ebr-2c looks a little too busy for me and covers a lot of the bottom part of the scope. I dont need all the precise holdover points anyways because I will dial in elevation and hold off for windage. Any thoughts? Thanks guys! |
|
You are right on the boundary for FFP vs. SFP. My lower powered scopes are all SFP so that I have a usable reticle that is clearly visible at lower power and in low light.
Above 14x I start thinking FFP, especially at 16x and above.. If you think you will not be using the scope in close or at moving targets or in low light where you will need a conspicuous reticle, then FFP makes sense. Also, if you are just going to crank the scope up to 16x all the time, it really does not matter, and just get the reticle that works best for you. If you think you might need to dial back magnification and still need an accurate reticle, then FFP would be a must. I'm not a long range expert, but have been shooting at extended range enough to realize that really high power, like 24x can have serious mirage issues, less so at 14x. I don't think I've had to pull down below 14x to deal with mirage, but maybe others here with more experience have had to go lower. Just a few thoughts from someone still learning about precision shooting with high magnification. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks guys. If the scope is in mils do I have to zero the rifle in meters? No. Totally irrelevant. Your zero wherever you want. Use ballistic software to get close to your holdovers. The software usually has scales for distances in yards, meters, or both. Do your ranging with a laser rangefinder, or know range on the basis of the size of the target and how it fits into the subtensions on the scope reticle. |
| The 6-24x FFP will work fine. I have been running 5-25x FFP optics in matches for many years and still run a 4.5-27x now. If mirage is a problem he can just dial down. I shot a match this past weekend and didn't dial above 12x and it worked fine. A 6-24x optic will be more versatile. |
|
Quoted: If you get a PST I'd get the 6-24, many say the glass is better than the 4-16. I have the PST 6-24 ffp mil and love it. However if I were to do it again now I'd get the Burris XTR II 5-25 with the SCR reticle. The SCR wasn't out when I bought my EBR 1 PST. I almost agree. I bought the 6-24x50 EBR2-C version, but earlier today I heard the Burris XTR II was much better. He said the glass quality was in between the PST and HD series. I don't know personally, as I just heard about the Burris today but now I'm curious. It's definitely worth a look. That being said, I'm extremely happy with my PST. |
|
Quoted:
I really like how with the ffp scope I can range at any magnification. I don't buy all the hype about FFP. If something is far enough away that I have to range it with the reticle, I'm going to have it on max power anyways. I'd rather have the reticle that doesn't change size with varying magnification. |
|
Quoted:
I don't buy all the hype about FFP. If something is far enough away that I have to range it with the reticle, I'm going to have it on max power anyways. I'd rather have the reticle that doesn't change size with varying magnification. Quoted:
Quoted:
I really like how with the ffp scope I can range at any magnification. I don't buy all the hype about FFP. If something is far enough away that I have to range it with the reticle, I'm going to have it on max power anyways. I'd rather have the reticle that doesn't change size with varying magnification. You need to learn about FFP more as ranging is just one of the least useful things to do with the reticle. Using it for hold overs/unders, movers, holding wind and calling actual corrections on any power. You don't need to have to be on a specific power. But on that point first as you mentioned it, what if it was hot and mirage was cranking and you had to dial down power? You won't be on max power and won;t be able to use the reticle without doing more math. And something else people confuse is that SFP reticles don't stay the same size when magnification changes. It actually covers more of the target from the max power where it subtends correctly. Nor is it thinner than a FFP reticle as most think. It is only thinner if the SFP retice is designed to be thinner at it's highest power, or specific power where it subtends, to be thinner than a scope with a FFP reticle thickness. If it subtends at a mid range power than as it gets higher than that it will actually cover more of the target. SFP reticles are not automatically thinner than a FFP reticle. A SFP reticle can be thicker than a FFP reticle. My FFP Razor II only covers .03 mils or .108" at 100 yards or 1.08" at 1000 yards. The SFP NF ATACR 5-25x Mil-R reticle covers .04 mils or .144" at 100 yards or 1.44" at 1000 yards. That is at 25x. At 12.5x my Razor II FFP scope still covers the same amount of the target as it does at any power being FFP but the NF ATACR SFP scope covers twice as much as it did at 25x or .288" at 100 or 2.88" at 1000 because the target size got smaller with the power but the reticle did not stay in proportion and actually now covers more of the target. My whole point is that a reticle will not stay thinner in a SFP scope nor will it be automatically thinner than a FFP scope. It comes down to the specific reticle and it's design. Both have their place and uses but SFP doesn't stay the same size when dialing down. |
|
Quoted: Thanks guys. If the scope is in mils do I have to zero the rifle in meters? I.E. You sight in at 100 yards. A human target is 2 yards tall (for estimation purposes), if you measure the person as 3 mrad on the scope. 2 X 1000 / 3 = 667 yards away. Or if you go meters: Deer is 1m tall Hoove to Shoulder, you are 0 at 100m. You measure the deer at 4mrads on the scope. 1x1000/4 = 250m away. Then you use your DOPE to make adjustments or holdover. |
