[ARCHIVED THREAD] - New FFP scope? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 7/29/2012 4:36:54 AM EDT
|
I would like to know more about the new 4x16 mil mil ffp scope Primary Arms us offering. What kind of recoil can it take. How does the quality of the glass compare to other scopes in the price range. I've been impressed with the optics I've bought from PA so far and I'm sure this one wod be no different. It just has a lot of features hor such a great price but for a little bit more money I could get a 10x SS. I'm guessing this scope is new as I've not seen any reviews on it yet.
|
|
Just saw this on the website.
Tell us more Marsh! ETA: Link 
https://www.primaryarms.com/Primary_Arms_4_14X_FFP_Scope_p/pa4-14xffp.htm |
|
Weight 1 lb 7oz . Length 12.9"
They came in last last week and I threw them up. With get more detail and a post in the new products section this week. The center section will fit in our deluxe mount and a ADM mount. I think that was one of the issues with the Falcon. It is a really nice AR scope for long distance!!!! Marshall |
|
Quoted:
Weight 1 lb 7oz . Length 12.9" They came in last last week and I threw them up. With get more detail and a post in the new products section this week. The center section will fit in our deluxe mount and a ADM mount. I think that was one of the issues with the Falcon. It is a really nice AR scope for long distance!!!! Marshall How's the parallax? Just picked up a CZ 452 and was thinking that would make decent glass on it. Maybe a bit overkill for a 22lr, but that's how things work around here. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Weight 1 lb 7oz . Length 12.9" They came in last last week and I threw them up. With get more detail and a post in the new products section this week. The center section will fit in our deluxe mount and a ADM mount. I think that was one of the issues with the Falcon. It is a really nice AR scope for long distance!!!! Marshall How's the parallax? Just picked up a CZ 452 and was thinking that would make decent glass on it. Maybe a bit overkill for a 22lr, but that's how things work around here. Side parallax adjustment |
|
Quoted: Weight 1 lb 7oz . Length 12.9" They came in last last week and I threw them up. With get more detail and a post in the new products section this week. The center section will fit in our deluxe mount and a ADM mount. I think that was one of the issues with the Falcon. It is a really nice AR scope for long distance!!!! Marshall So that makes it 3-4oz lighter and .5" shorter than the Falcon. Might be worth checking into. Dammit Marshall! You've done it again! Now we just need a FFP 1-6x mil/mil (The 300 BLK reticle would rock too!) with "tactical" or "target" turrets. *cough* 
|
|
Marshall.... Who would you consider the direct competition for this scope? NC Star range? Bushnell / Nikon class? Leupy and above?
I was look for Mount and Rings for my next build (precision bolt with budget in mind) and this scope popped up.... By spec it is DAMN tempting. The FFP is almost a deal sealer in and of itself. 
Edit to add... I need to just have a direct deposit done to you... I started with your "house" brand optics and have found you to be great source for other parts also... A Harris Bipod and a Streamlight Weaponlight for my EDC in the past few weeks from you.
|
|
Quoted:
Marshall.... Who would you consider the direct competition for this scope? NC Star range? Bushnell / Nikon class? Leupy and above? I was look for Mount and Rings for my next build (precision bolt with budget in mind) and this scope popped up.... By spec it is DAMN tempting. The FFP is almost a deal sealer in and of itself.
Edit to add... I need to just have a direct deposit done to you... I started with your "house" brand optics and have found you to be great source for other parts also... A Harris Bipod and a Streamlight Weaponlight for my EDC in the past few weeks from you. The closest thing in the marketplace I can compare it to is the Falcon Menace 4-14X that sells for $350. BSA makes a similar scope that I compared it to during testing. I think it is better glass than the BSA and close to the Falcon. FFP Bushnell and Leupolds are way more expensive and in a different class. Marshall |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Marshall.... Who would you consider the direct competition for this scope? NC Star range? Bushnell / Nikon class? Leupy and above? I was look for Mount and Rings for my next build (precision bolt with budget in mind) and this scope popped up.... By spec it is DAMN tempting. The FFP is almost a deal sealer in and of itself.
Edit to add... I need to just have a direct deposit done to you... I started with your "house" brand optics and have found you to be great source for other parts also... A Harris Bipod and a Streamlight Weaponlight for my EDC in the past few weeks from you. The closest thing in the marketplace I can compare it to is the Falcon Menace 4-14X that sells for $350. BSA makes a similar scope that I compared it to during testing. I think it is better glass than the BSA and close to the Falcon. FFP Bushnell and Leupolds are way more expensive and in a different class. Marshall Thanks for the info. Still roughing my build out and your new scope fits the "start" budget easily... Endgame on the rifle will be Nightforce. |
| First impressions: http://olegvolk.net/blog/2012/08/13/anderson-ar15-checks-out |
|
Quoted:
Marshall do you have any pics through the scope? Specifically throughout the zoom range and to see actual reticle width? Really pleased to hear it's an etched reticle fwiw. Thanks! I will ask Oleg if he can take a few pics for us. I kept it a little thicker at 14X so it is usable at the lower magnification. |
|
What ranges were you shooting at? How is the clarity? What do you think of the turret clicks? Was the reticle too thick at 14x or still quite usable?
In talking to Marshall he has told me this scope fits my interim needs quite well, just looking to get some pictures of the glass. The alternative is a Vortex PST at 4x the price. Would be nice to save some money up front while I work out to 500 yards and then upgrade glass later when I start shooting out to a grand consistently. |
|
Quoted:
What ranges were you shooting at? How is the clarity? What do you think of the turret clicks? Was the reticle too thick at 14x or still quite usable? In talking to Marshall he has told me this scope fits my interim needs quite well, just looking to get some pictures of the glass. The alternative is a Vortex PST at 4x the price. Would be nice to save some money up front while I work out to 500 yards and then upgrade glass later when I start shooting out to a grand consistently. Was only shooting at 50 & 100yrds as that was the limit of the range. The parallax focus allows it to dial right in for very good clarity. (It's on a .22lr ) The turret clicks were nice and solid, with the turret caps aligning perfectly on the static lines on the scope-body itself.
I didn't feel like the reticle was too big, it reminded me a lot of the 4-16x44 Primary Arms scope I have on my other rifle. I've consistently used it to ring steel out to 400yrds. Overall, I feel the scope is built like a tank. |
|
Quoted:
What about muzzle breaks??? Will they tear up the scope? I have ate too many cheap scopes with my 308 with a muzzle break on it. how would a muzzle brake cause problems. unless im just thinking about it wrong, a muzzle brake would help since it reduces recoil |
|
Quoted:
What about muzzle breaks??? Will they tear up the scope? I have ate too many cheap scopes with my 308 with a muzzle break on it. I have not tested with one but should not be a issue at all. If you want to give it a try I will gladly take it back and refund your shipping if there is any issue. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
What about muzzle breaks??? Will they tear up the scope? I have ate too many cheap scopes with my 308 with a muzzle break on it. how would a muzzle brake cause problems. unless im just thinking about it wrong, a muzzle brake would help since it reduces recoil Muzzle brakes create a 2nd recoil impulse. The 1st is obviously the round igniting and the rearward thrust it creates, The 2nd comes into play when the gases from the round hit the brake and "pull" the gun forward (reducing felt recoil to shooter, but the scope "feels" both impulses fully)... It essentially recoils backward, then forward. There are some super slow motion YouTube videos out there showing the forces a scope gets hit by. Scopes on a .50bmg look like a wet noodle getting shaken  lower calibers obviously less extreme, but the principle is the same. A muzzle brake does require more thought on optics.
|
|
Here is an article I found that really helps with understanding how to use mil dots in range estimation. Helped me a lot.
http://8541tactical.com/range_estimation.php |
|
Quoted:
So im a little new to the scope thing here.. building a SPR. I dont really need an illuminated reticle.. love the mil/mil adjustments! but is the mildot the same on all magnifications? No, SFP or Secondary Focal Planes are the ones where the Mildots are only calibrated for one power setting. With a FFP, the mildots grow in distance between one another as the magnification power is higher. This video explains it a little bit. (Didn't view all of the video, just the SFP vs FFP argument) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhhckOLuiQQ |
|
Quoted:
Picked one up today for a little t&e. Initial impression . . . The image is sharp at the edges at 4x and 14x. Please do a tracking or box test. I really want to pick one of these up but my other high power pa scope (4-16) did not track with sufficient accuracy. Hoping this is a feasible less expensive alt. to a falcon for a very low budget build. |
|
There is a pretty nice review of this scope which I just happened across that does have a very basic tracking test. Overall, it looks pretty good. I'll probably order one for a 223.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/10/foghorn/gear-review-primary-arms-4-14x44-mil-dot-ffp-scope/ |
|
Quoted:
There is a pretty nice review of this scope which I just happened across that does have a very basic tracking test. Overall, it looks pretty good. I'll probably order one for a 223. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/10/foghorn/gear-review-primary-arms-4-14x44-mil-dot-ffp-scope/ I actually saw this review about 1 week ago. It was the final thing I needed before making my purchase. Now have this scope with the AD mount and so far I love it. It has a very good picture. Everything is clear, the adjustments have nice clicks, re-settable turrets, plenty of zoom, and has held up fine to 100 rounds with a muzzle brake. I know 100 is not much, but I just got the thing and have only been out with it once. SO far so good and I can not wait to get back out to the range with this thing. |
|
Quoted:
Any recent reviews on this scope? Has the lack of illumination been an issue? I have one of these. Its a great scope for the money. The lack of illumination did come into play slightly when shooting at 600 yard steel down a wooded easement at dusk. The illumination on my NF didn't help that too much though either. At the price point, I don't deduct any points for this. I will say that I don't agree with the other posters in this thread that the turrets/clicks on this scope are good. For the money, they are adequate, but they are not positive in comparison to something like a NF (standard bearer IMO) or an SWFA SS offering. They have some mush to them, the clicks are tactile - but not extremely positive and/or audible, and the turret simply does not have the same positive feel of a $1000+ offering. Of course, this is talking about comparison to much more expensive alternatives, but I am just talking about this from a purely objective standpoint. My turrets also have some slop, that can make the turret essentially come to rest in between clicks, which is annoying. At the same time, I think the turrets and tracking are much better than almost all of those in the same price point. The reticle is properly subtended, and I have not noticed any tracking errors when dialing on elevation to date. The eyebox is somewhat tight on higher magnification -- this generally means I leave the scope at about 10x. Again, taking into account price, I think that's ok. I also have recently switched the scope over to a fixed a2 stock rifle, which seems to have helped me get more used to what I have perceived as a tighter eye box. Taking into account value, I give the scope very high marks. I won't compare to much more expensive scopes, but it is certainly much better than something like a Barska or Millet in the same price category. It's also head and shoulders better than the 4-16 offered by PA, which I have had and sold. Overall, it's a very acceptable scope for me to run on backup weapons, that still gives me FFP, mil/mil compatibility with my other platforms that wear higher end optics. I'll probably buy at least one more. |