Someone Please Explain FFP And RFP Reticles To Me And Which Is Better

[10TH AMENDMENT]

I need a good tutorial on this because I want to make certain that I have the difference between Front Focal Plane and Rear Focal Plane down pat!

Thanks for the great replies! I think I get it now!

[Jicko]

FFP is mainly for "ranging" reticle.... mil-dot and alike....

FFP means that the reticle will scale with your magnification setting.... therefore, at ANY magnification, what you see/count thru your reticle is accurate.... ie. at ANY magnification, your 1 Mil is still 1 Mil (3.6" @ 100yds)

The non-FFP means that the "ranging reticle" will only range at a certain magnification, for Leupolds, they range ONLY at the MAX magnification. So your 1 Mil is ONLY 1 Mil if you dial your magnifcation to the max.

And OF COURSE ... FFP is better... (except for the extra money you are paying for it)

One example usage, you have a 6-24x FFP scope, you are set @ 14x, you fire a shot and see that the impact is 3/4 of a mil LOW, and you change your setting to 20x now, and you can now hold under for still 3/4 on your reticle and that would be EXACT..... this CANNOT be done without the FFP, since on a non-FFP scope, all bets are off "visually" if you are changing your magnifications (not easily compensate or figure out without quite some extensive calculations....)

[rksimple]

One example usage, you have a 6-24x FFP scope, you are set @ 14x, you fire a shot and see that the impact is 3/4 of a mil LOW, and you change your setting to 20x now, and you can now hold under for still 3/4 on your reticle and that would be EXACT..... this CANNOT be done without the FFP, since on a non-FFP scope, all bets are off "visually" if you are changing your magnifications (not easily compensate or figure out without quite some extensive calculations....)

This isn't exactly true. Even with a sfp scope, if you see your own impact through your scope, no matter what the magnification setting, you can hold off for correction. Its your scope and mag setting you're using for reference. Its if someone else is calling impacts for you that the problem begins.

Everyone seems to think that a "ranging" is the only time you'll need ffp, and that you can "range" at any power. Thats not even close to the best advantage of ffp. Being able to hold windage and elevation, under time constraints, at any magnification is probably the best thing going for a ffp scope.

With a short dot, given the magnification, I don't really think ffp vs sfp is going to matter. For holding off at distant targets, you're most likely going to be on max mag anyway. Its when, in sfp scopes, reticles are calibrated at high powers, like 15x and above, that things get difficult. With such a narrow FOV, target acquisition becomes more work. With low mag scopes, you won't notice much of a difference.

[ar15barrels]

Being able to hold windage and elevation, under time constraints, at any magnification is probably the best thing going for a ffp scope.

Exactly.

If you have your elevation and wind card and know how to use it, the mil scale needs to be accurate.
If it's only accurate at one power, you can only use the scope at that power.
Might as well get a fixed power scope.

Something that some people might not think about is that ffp vs. sfp only matters in variable scopes.
Fixed scopes behave like a ffp without variable power.

[Mute]

SFP scopes can be useful if you're purely shooting targets at fixed distances. They allow for higher magnification without the reticle increasing in appearance. This can allow for a finer aiming point than a FFP scope where the reticle's appearance can appear to be thicker.

For field use, though, I prefer FFP. Just plain simpler.

[trinydex]

does anyone ever have problems with the reticle growing too large and being annoying in a first focal plane optic?

i read this

http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?tid=13625

and that seems to be the biggest complaint.

that and shooting at dusk you might not have enough light to see the reticle and have to increase mag to increase size... but that darkens the image. an illuminated reticles fixes this though right?

[rksimple]

does anyone ever have problems with the reticle growing too large and being annoying in a first focal plane optic?

No. Not at all. Its still the same size in relation to the target.

I have a p4fine in my S&B that is the PERFECT size for everything I do from hunting to competition.

[Jicko]

I have a p4fine in my S&B that is the PERFECT size for everything I do from hunting to competition.

WHEN it works..... too bad that S&B is an useless piece of junk....

[ar15barrels]

No. Not at all. Its still the same size in relation to the target.

I have a p4fine in my S&B that is the PERFECT size for everything I do from hunting to competition.

I shot a guy's 3-18 SH IOR and the first thing I noticed was how thick the reticle is at 18x.
While I understand that it's the same thickness in relation to the target at all powers, it really felt too thick for precision work for me.

[wildcard]

I shot a guy's 3-18 SH IOR and the first thing I noticed was how thick the reticle is at 18x.
While I understand that it's the same thickness in relation to the target at all powers, it really felt too thick for precision work for me.

I can attest to that comment. I will also say that it only applies when the dang thing is working..

[rksimple]

I shot a guy's 3-18 SH IOR and the first thing I noticed was how thick the reticle is at 18x.
While I understand that it's the same thickness in relation to the target at all powers, it really felt too thick for precision work for me.

I agree. I remember that scope had a thick reticle to begin with. Same with the standard p4 in the s&b. But even with that thick of a reticle in a sfp scope calibrated for max power, its going to obscure more of the target. Its the dilemma: Design the reticle for use at higher powers or make it usable at the lowest magnification. One end always suffers.

[Pthfndr]

Being able to hold windage and elevation, under time constraints, at any magnification is probably the best thing going for a ffp scope.

I too would agree with this. It's one less thing you have to think about. With a SFP scope, let's say you have a stage shooting steel plates off hand at 100 yards. You dial in your elevation, windage is not much to worry about at that distance, and to reduce the visible wobble you turn down the magnification from 15, 22, 25 (what ever you use) down to say, 5, 8 or 10x.

You next stage of fire is random targets at varying distances from 100 to 600 yards using only hold overs. You start shooting - and missing - everything past 200 yards, even though you KNOW your hold over values. After shooting up half your ammo you realize your magnification is still set at 8x. An oh sh*t moment.

With a FFP it wouldn't matter because the reticle changes size and all the values are consistent.

[buffybuster]

After looking through Ryan's S&B (When it was working), the P4 Fein is the BEST FFP reticle I have thus far seen. Not too thick at max mag and not too thin at min mag. Don't know how S&B was able to do that with a 5-25 mag range, but it was dang nice.... Then it went tits up.

[FMJBT]

One thing I like about SFP scopes is the ability to crank down to 1/2 the magnification that the reticle is calibrated to, which effectively doubles the spacing between mil dots. This can be useful when using the mil dots as holdover points at extended distances, when the standard mil spacing would cause you to run out of holdover points.

The new Millett LRS-1 scope has smaller hash marks spaced 1/2 way between the mil dots. The reticle is calibrated for 25X, so when dialed down to 12.5X (Marked on the power ring) you just treat the hash marks as mil dots since the spacing is now doubled, or 1 mil between them.

[ar15barrels]

One thing I like about SFP scopes is the ability to crank down to 1/2 the magnification that the reticle is calibrated to, which effectively doubles the spacing between mil dots. This can be useful when using the mil dots as holdover points at extended distances, when the standard mil spacing would cause you to run out of holdover points.

The new Millett LRS-1 scope has smaller hash marks spaced 1/2 way between the mil dots. The reticle is calibrated for 25X, so when dialed down to 12.5X (Marked on the power ring) you just treat the hash marks as mil dots since the spacing is now doubled, or 1 mil between them.

Make sure you check the calibration of your scope.
I would not bet on 12.5x being exactly correct.

Put a 36" long piece of wood out on the 100yd line.
Make sure you are exactly 100yds too, not 98 or 102.
Dial your scope down until that 36" long board is filling out exactly 5 hash marks and you have found your "doubling" point.

I found that on my 3.5-15 Nightforce NP-R1, that when I dial down to 1 line width past 8 that my MOA reticle is now accurate in MIL's.
So I print range cards in MOA and MILS now and use the MILS card for movers and multiple engagements where I need an accurate reticle at a lower magnification.