this is a video of the LRHS, if your too board to watch the entire video fast forward to the 5 minute mark. look at how terrible that reticle looks at 3x. I don't know about you guys but I typically leave my scopes on the lowest power setting when I am hunting and only switch to high power if I need to use the turret and thus use the features of the reticle. Even if the scope is dialed to 4, 5, or 6, IMO the reticle still looks poor. This isn't because the optic is bad or even that the reticle is poorly designed, its just the nature of being FFP. I don't see why if your taking a long range shot why you would not be on high power with a scope like this. if thats the case why not have a more useable SFP reticle on low power where the scope is likely to spend most of its time in a hunting application.

Sometimes I think there needs to be a dose of reality. There is a ton of group think and pack mentality out there with people thinking the scope must be FFP. FFP has distinct disadvantages. Flame suit on,

Somehow there are plenty of guys stacking up big critters with that scope.... Funny how that works...

Tanner

Can't imagine that video camera does the reticle justice. I can't see the fine crosshairs at all on low power or the mil adjustments on high power.

Yeah, the beauty of the FFP scopes is that you can make the reticle any size you want. Try that w/a 2nd focal plane. My S&B 3-12 Klassic can be used on 3 power in daylight and 7-9x at dusk w/the same lethality. powdr

I'm willing to bet fifty cents against anyone's quarter that the majority of posters here have never used a FFP scope and yet every year kill stuff in low light in early morning or late afternoon. Some here like fixed magnification scopes and others prefer variables. The ones with the variable kill stuff on all different settings despite not being able to change the size of the reticle.

Yes. It's called skill, knowledge, and experience. Of which you constantly seem to want to show that you lack.


This is easy- have you used the scope and reticle in question? Have you done what you constantly smack talk in competition, military or training?



It is not personal, however, no one should care about shooting at coyotes when you consistently show a lack of basic understanding of some pretty simple concepts in equipment ability.

did you mean the opposite of what you said? FFP the reticle is the same subtention (size) relative to target regardless of scope power. it size changes in apperances but doesn't relative to the target. SFP is the one that changes in subtension relative to scope power. you can't change the size of a FFP reticle Its the same SIZE at all powers.

form, go keep being a sniper ninja tacticool dude.

I personally want my reticle to be big and bold on low power in the black timber and thinner at long range on my hunting rifles.
I'm not in the military, competition, or training.
SFP works best for me.

CC why not just buy one and try it out,if you aren't happy with it just ask Bushnell for a refund, maybe you will be pleasantly surprised!

Why didn't you answer the questions?

How many animals have you killed in the last year with both FFP and SFP scopes? Types?

How many rounds and under what conditions have you shot in the last year with both FFP and SFP scopes?




....Don't think I'd be trying to interject "reality", when it is a reality that I'd never experienced....

I use both heavily. Dedicated LR guns get FFP scopes almost exclusively. The value with FFP is that the reticle subtentions are correct no matter what power it is on.

The "size" of the reticle never changes with a FFP system Rich. You can keep the quarter though.

FFP for big game hunting.
SFP for target work.
SFP is and always has been inferior to FFP for big game hunting.

dave

To clarify, a FFP reticle most certainly does change size as magnification changes. What stays constant is angular subtension.

+1

How and why? Honestly don't know, never played with a FFP scope.

No offense Dave, but you are stating an opinion as was I. If you select a bold enough reticle for low light, than the "growing" reticle offers no real advantage, IMO. To be clear, I'm talking about ranges where we're "holding on hair" or where sub-tensions aren't needed do to distance, say under 300 yrds with flat shooting rounds.

What changes in "size" is the entire image, not the reticle only.

I bought two of these scopes this fall thinking they would be the end all be all for a hunting scope. I realized I do not like FFP scopes that go to 3 power. The reticle is useless below 5 power for me. I shot a buck at about 150 yards through thick timber and had to put the scope on 6 power to see the center of the reticle. A follow up shot would have been very difficult (if needed) due to lack of field of view.

I will be selling both of the scopes and go back to SFP for hunting. If I am shooting far enough to hold for wind I will be on the highest power anyway so I don't need FFP. For close shots and shots at dawn and dusk I will have a nice thick reticle on whatever power I choose.

Everyone has an opinion and knows what they like. I like SFP for hunting and a power range of 3-12 or 4-16 for big game.

The men who designed this scope certainly know what they are doing and should get respect for their accomplishments, this scope just doesn't work for me and I have used it.

My .02, Gary

Whatchasellin?

David

The bet wasn't whether someone would respond, but that most here have not used a FFP scope. I'll take your quarter, though.

Based on the number of users or game killed or what?

The Scope in question...bushnell lrhs 3-12.

whatyabuyin?

flashdot can be seen on any power

I have so pay up.......

FFP withe right illumination system can be seen on any power day or night rather easily and precisely

Agreed. I know where Dave is coming from and I respect his opinions.

I have used both and just can't afford FFP or see a big enough diffrence to get to excited about if I were hunting people that might be diffrent. I only shot about ten thousand rounds this year so I might be behind

I use both heavily. Dedicated LR guns get FFP scopes almost exclusively. The value with FFP is that the reticle subtentions are correct no matter what power it is on. [/quote]

I can see this feature being of value for ones that are using 20+ power scopes so one can dial down to say 10 power to reduce mirage and such.

For someone such as myself who uses nothing over 10 power out to 1000 yds I see it as being of no value.

For shots out to 300 yds I use the lowest power setting of 2 or 3 because I prefer field of view not to mention my longer range rifles are sighted at 200 yds so dead on hold to 250 works and if ranged at 300 just hold 6"

Anything beyond 300 the scope is turned up to 10 power and the turret math is taped to the stock.

Pretty phugging simple if you ask me.

Shod

notice I did not say all FFP scopes suck I just said in a hunting application I personally think they do. I use the video to show and explain why, form did you even bother to watch? FFP does work in certain scopes but not in the type that would make a good long range hunting scope. FFP does have some very distinct disadvantages, I am simply pointing them out.


form, why are you taking this as an attack on you and thus attack me and what kind of hunting you THINK I do. Yes one of my hobbies is long range coyote hunting. its a demanding target because its much smaller than a big game animal. It also gives me the chance to hone my craft all winter, not just during that big game season. One trip out to montana and you think your an expert long range hunter, don't you live back east or something? instead of taking this personal and taking shots at me. why not look at the substance and merits of what I am saying instead of backing into your corner and saying. I shoot all types of scopes daily and you only shoot coyotes. I don't post pics of what I shoot here, WHY because to me its kinda weird. I liken it to bragging or needing acceptance from others. I don't brag about my exploits and I don't care if people think I am some kind of magic hunter or not.

I use all 3 types (FFP,SFP & Fixed)in hunting applications and never had a problem with any of them doing the job...

I have experienced hunters using SFP scopes with BDC/Hash Mark reticles miss shots due to having their scope set on incorrect power settings which would not have occurred if their optic was FFP... Four just this year as a matter of fact... Ziess Z800, Leupy with LRD, Leupy with B&C and a NF with MV... I understand that these scopes aren't offered with these reticles in the FFP but if one chooses to use these HSLD reticles then one should also know how they work... Same goes with dialing for elevation... A guy needs to know where his turret is before he squeezes off... That happened this year as well... Hunter dialed for a 460 yd shot, shot didn't happen, closed the distance and missed a buck twice at 80 yds as his turret was still on 460 yd dope...

I've used the scope in the video quite a bit and at no power setting had a problem distinguishing my aiming point on the reticle including 3x... My FFP NF F1 at 3.5x I can still see my hash marks if I desired to do so, but on that power I don't see why a guy would need to see his 8 mil hash mark to make a shot...

Its all a personal choice for what a guy likes and chooses to use... IMO the FFP does have its advantages over a SFP in some hunting situations but either will work fine as long as the operator doesn't attempt something out of his pay grade...

YMMV...

Good post. You would think guys dropping coin for hunts would pay more attention to this stuff.

Thanks Bob and I agree 110%...

Sad thing is, every year more and more guys show up, with their $6500 rifle, $3000 optic, Dope chart taped to the stock and think they are gonna run out and hammer stuff at 800 yds because they paid for the equipment to do it...Hell, they watched the video and the snakeoil salesman told them it'd do it... Most don't put in the time at the range, or prepare for the hunt to allow the stamina to stalk an animal... They show up in their new Kenetrek's ready to shoot long range without the ability to do so...

I love to see guys show up with their ?2.5-12? optic, duplex reticle, capped turret scope sighted in at 300 yds... Raggedy ole boots from miles of walking and ready to hunt... They are at PBR from 0 out to 350 or so and if its further than that we can creep in and get stuff killed... Those days are gone...

A German praising a Japanese scope.....hilarous.

Nearly all my variable scopes are FFP and are mostly used for hunting...

I have a S&B PM11 and a Falcon Menace with Mil dots, but three or four other FFP variables with the German No4 (or variations there of)and I find all, except maybe the Falcon, excellent in the deep woods and at last light..

Currently, I only have one cheapo SFP scope that is on an air rifle, and only because I can't get a FFP scope at the appropriate price point...

If you simply don't like or don't get, FFP scopes, fine, pay your money and use a SFP..

So what about my Zeiss 2.5-10 x42mm with German No4 with capped turrets? No good because its a FFP or because its not a $200 cheap Chinese optic?

I'm certainly not getting rid of my Kahles 1.5-6x42 FFP anytime to quick.

I don't know about you, but I use FFP scopes for hunting. I have some decent SFP scopes that are maybe better for good light conditions and longer range, but that's only because they are higher magnification scopes. My 2.5-10 FFP is a much better low light scope and handles range much, much better in low light than any SFP scope I own.

You might want to spend some time behind a 1.5-6x42 Euro scope in FFP before you tell the world they suck for hunting scopes. 500-600 yards is easy enough for them and the game that gets shot outside that distance is a pretty tiny percentage of what hunters kill every year. As light fades and distance grows that reticle becomes ever more important. FFP reticles designed for low light and optics to handle low light are what those 1.5-6x42s are designed to be used for, by people who have a pretty good idea of what they're about.

Thou doth protest too much.

One other point about SFP's scopes I have used that I have noticed is that in certain light conditions, the reticules tend to "silver out"??

I have no idea if this is common to all types of SFP or whether its an issue particular to the construction/ type of reticule used in the bottom/medium end SFP I was using?

I agree with you there. I have one of these, and it does work brilliantly for short and medium ranges, daylight and dark. Hunting is all I use it for.

Mind you, I do have a mix of FFP (including fixed of course) and SFP scopes, so I have no particular dog in this fight. One advantage of the FFP variable that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned is the fact that it wont change POI with magnification changes, something inherent to the SFP design (though minimised in really good scopes).

My Swarovski z5 turns golden.

That just.means it's. Wire reticle not etched glass typically

As stated before, a FFP with good illumination system (flashdot for example) never loses the reticle no matter the power setting or light condition

Same here.

Great post, btw.

Right on RD. I guess I never knew what I was missing.

EHG: Well.....they aren't gone forever.

What you run into is a form of "target panic" aka a subtle form of buck fever brought about by a lack of preparation and too much to worry about when it comes time to kill.

All the technology is not always a benefit.

I see the same type come through here ever so often. They seem to underestimate this thing called "wind", or worse "swirling,gusting wind". Make's fools out 'em.

I'm a creeper.

Not to flame anyone, just an observation!

None taken RD.
Yes I am.
Just looking at the scope in the pic up top I'd say its a poor excuse for a FFP reticle.
Its to thin.
Most euro FFP reticles in hunting scopes have alot more coverage than that thing.SO its no surprise that when you turn the power down you cant see it.
Poor execution of a european idea by a chi-com company for an american consumer.
I will give them credit for trying.
Other thing I see here is why, when woods hunting, carrying a scope on lower power, would a person care if you could see all the ghost rings mil-dots and christmas trees when the shots you'll be taking in the woods would be what 75 100 150 yards?
On the FFP reticles I 've used from Zeiss and S&B.The reticles are heavy enough that at the lower powers i've never had a problem. And I have done quit a bit of the running and jumping stuff at close range in thick crap.


This.

This.
Flash Dots and illumination have a whole different level of
flexability.

I have always found that guys that came up on leupold variables have a problem with euro FFP reticles.In the beginning.Its an acquired taste.Some guys never acquire it.
Thats fine to.But for low light.And not shifting POA during power changes.
Its very difficult to beat a FFP reticle.

dave

This is awesome! A "dose of reality" is maybe what the guys who designed the scope were using when they did so. Heck, I'd bet one of these scopes in MT has been used to make more dead coyotes than the scopes the OP has in total.

I and I imagine everyone else realizes CC doesn't like FFP scopes. The rants occur often enough... I have 1 FFP scope I hunt with and it has worked for me. I plan on using it next year on pronghorns again and am considering switching some of my others to FFP as funds allow.

Form- Take it easy on him, he posted a pic of him with a coyote once...

[color:#FFFF33][/color]

Astute.......

Based on recent purchases - to me - this FFP reticle was made for playing sniper. SS MQ.



And this FFP was made for killing game. Meopta 4C Illum.

Thanks Jordan, I was hoping someone would come along w/some brains. These asshats that have never used one or don't know what they're talking about always spew chit out their azz. The reticle does in fact get larger and smaller as the power is increased and decreased. Anybody w/one brain cell would know if they ever looked through one and rotated the power ring. I can hunt brush w/mine on 3 power and a small, easy to see reticle or put it on 8 or 9 on a moonlit night and make a kill. Until you arm chair QB's buy and use one go play w/your erector sets you got for Christmas and leave the hunters alone. powdr

There's a lot of emotions displayed here.

Sorry Ringman, but I get tired...no exhausted when you come around and start posting, basically calling a guy a liar that has owned a certain scope for 20 years. I can see what cummins cowboy was thinking but he was thinking the opposite ...not me. I don't post about killing elk because I've never killed one but I do have a good idea about how I would go about it and w/what gun and bullet I would use. Both FFP and SFP scopes will work and I happen to like my S&B 3-12x42 w/#4 reticle. Like I said... I CAN MAKE THE RETICLE ANY SIZE I WANT! powdr

powdr's never killed an elk! Dude, you really ought do something about that! LOL

I've never killed an elk either.

But that's not due to the scope.




Travis

Power,
I have no idea what you are talking about.

Too funny!

Take a deep breath and relax bro. When I said that the reticle does not "grow" in size I should have said that the reticle does not cover more of the target you're aiming at. IOW, if your vertical (or horizontal) wire covers say 1/4 of an inch of target at 100 yards at 4X, it won't cover a half inch if you increase the power to 8x at 100 yrds. Make sense now ? That's the beauty of FFP reticles in that they can be used at any power setting and coverage values remain constant. Image and reticle increase or decrease is constant.

Finn I don't have a problem w/you...your a stand up guy. powdr

Well, I appreciate that sir. It's pretty obvious that folks here haven't actually used FFP scopes, at least on paper or used them to guesstimate holdover. I used to think the exact same thing as many here are saying when they say the reticle gets larger or smaller as you monkey with the power settings. Perhaps we're all just mis-stating what we're really trying to say, myself included. To me, it makes very little sense to have a mil (or any other type ranging reticle) in a variable power SFP scope as the hash values are only true at one power setting, usually the highest setting. Sure, you can do the math on the fly if you have very cooperative live targets, but I don't seem to have many deer in my hunting areas that are willing to stand there while I run the numbers through a ballistic program app on my cell phone. It's rare, at least where I've hunted whitetails, that they just stand there while I finger [bleep] a cell phone.

Finn I have no use for the tactical, busy reticles. Mine's a standard #4 and works great. powdr

I hear you. My favorite hunting reticle here.....in a Elite scope. I think Bushnell used to call this a 3-2-1 before they added that glow in the dark crap to it.



...second favorite...in a Leica ER scope

hers some more info on wire vs etched reticles and ffp vs sfp

"There are wire reticles, and there are wire reticles, most often mounted in the rear focal plane because they can be small enough to prevent blocking out the target with their subtense. Some "wire" reticles are etched chrome foil, with thickness only around .001-inch, others are constantan wire up to .003-.005-inch diameter, some are flattened to give duplex(wide outer wires and fine intersection.) In most cases, wire forms are located in the second focus, where they are hard-mounted to the body tube, subject to shocks suffered by the outside envelope.
Glass substrata contain (floating, seemingly unsupported) sight patterns of very small vacuum-deposited chrome lines or diamond-scribed and pigment-filled (for illuminated, low-light sighting) details, usually in the front focus. Front-focus glass is much more shock resistant than rear-focus wire, because the glass sits in the movable erector tube that cushions and softens recoil or field handling shocks with the bias spring installed to eliminate thread backlash and looseness in the E&W adjust screws. Also, the wire reticle is unsupported over a length up to .5-inch across the reticle frame (field stop in optical terms,) where the glass reticle with its substrate and cover plate is supported in the smaller diameter front focus by a sandwich that is nearly .25-inch thick."

RD, I can really dig that reticle in the Elite, but that Leica would need a dot in it for my 54 yr old eyes to use it. That Meopta 4C is a killer setup as well.

leica too thin xhairs for me without some kind of illumination

...probably why Leica now makes the ERi scopes with illumination. I agree that the cross hairs would be better if they were thicker. Having the distance between the crosshair intersection and where the wider outer bar starts doesn't help matters either. One thing that is sort of strange and BobinNH noticed this as well with his S&B Summit, is that because of the superb optics in these scopes helps you see the reticle better in low light than you would imagine w/o seeing it. If the Leica had the same quality optics as say the Elites, the reticle would basically quit working altogether in low light. As it is though, it works better than you'd imagine in 99% of any 1/2 hour before/after sunrise/sunset condition. I haven't located the perfect scope yet where durability, tracking, glass/hydro coatings, ER and doesn't weigh 7 lbs etc...all come together in the same package. Here is a different view of the Leica plex reticle....

Very well said...I have both and use both for hunting but could understand it if someone said they had trouble seeing a FFP reticle at low power when taking a shot in the dark timber. Good eye sight and practice go a long ways making hunts go well.

Despite reading about all these sexy European optics and hard built expensive turret twisting scopes, the simplicity of the Leupold VX3 keeps me coming back. I've been ready to roll out the dough for scopes costing 4x but when I think about what I would use them for while hunting it makes no sense to me. I'm not a good enough shot to take advantage of them and don't have a place to regularly shoot over 400 yds.

These are the problems of a southern red neck;-)

I'd like to see that Elite reticle as a #4. powdr

notice how the usual suspects pipe in and say oh you only shoot coyotes. without really a clue of what I do hunt, because I don't feel the need to brag about it to anyone. They are also the same ones who attack and accuse me of not knowing anything. whats funnier is they live in eastern states where heck it may not even be legal to hunt with a centerfire! Instead of admitting YES FFP does have some draw backs but in this case it worked better for me. I don't think they even watched the video I posted where the FFP reticle nearly washes out, good luck seeing that in low light!!! or even less than ideal light. if your reticle is a simple one that is basically a duplex and its a FFP reticle all this discussion really doesn't apply to your application. Thats because there aren't really any features your need to use on a basic reticle. a duplex reticle isn't that much different if its FFP or SFP.

Again I state I did not say ALL FFP scopes sucks. I just said ones typically used in a hunting application do. If you have a mega power scope that is 8x32 or something like that, YES get a FFP reticle in that scope, why because there is a high likelyhood of needing to turn that scope down. every application is different. but in a hunting application your going want SFP I stand by that.

One of my FFP scopes on 5x. Very good for close, low-light shooting. Bold posts. No confusing clutter visible:




Same scope on 15x (IIRC, either that or 12x):




And on 20x:




And I can tell you without equivocation that the camera certainly does not do the image nor the reticle justice...

Some people don't even need a scope to shoot themselves in the foot, so for them it probably doesn't make any difference FFP or SFP.

Ouch.

jordan why don't you move the reticle in the picture over so its against the trees instead of the sky. I think it will show what I am saying. Also in the first picture I can't see those dots hardly at all. if you move the reticle to the trees in that picture its going to wash out.

And you based that on a Youtube video, of just one example?

That's the idea.

How do these crosshairs look against the trees on low power

For some reason, I got the feeling early on that CC is the kind of guy that's convinced you need to be able to see your dots, even when your scope is turned down low.... For short range shots....

Tanner

+1

Jordan, I'd be curious to see the same pics at the same powers, reticle pointed at brush/dark background and not the bright sky. Thanks.

Sorry, I didn't see the request was already made......

I just looked at Nightforce's new International Hunting Reticle. A #4 w/a floating crosshair. Now I could hunt w/that. powdr

I must say that Meopta 4c Ill looks like a great timber reticle, I don't care what friggen plane it's in.
Also have that Bushnell Elite 4200 Firefly that RD posted. My favorite also.

it's .18 MOA crosshairs that's thinner than leica I believe

Unfortunately those pics were taken over a year ago, so I can't run out and do a quick comparison photo shoot right now. But I will get some low-light, reticle-on-dark background pics and post them up as soon as I get a chance.

The Europeans know how to make FFP hunting reticles. OP, don't throw all FFP reticles in one bucket. Some are better suited for hunting than others.

I am using a ffp scope. A swfa 3x15. I have previously shot a Leupold 6x18 fine duplex for the past 10 years. Used it for everything. I have found that the cross hairs on the swfa at 7x are the same as the Leopold on 6x. It has been working fine as a hunting scope for me. I also have the bonus of using the reticle for holding the wind at any magnification. Can't do that with a sfp scope. But most hunters don't need that anyway.

The IHR is terrible in application. If NF would offer a standard duplex reticle and lose the side parralax adjustment on the new 42mm SHV they would be on to something. As it stands with the reticles offered it is useless.

One thing that stands out about that NF image is the black tire effect...the image looks small,surrounded by,that,huge black donut


Is your post in jest? Or do you actually like that IHR?

No jest. Its terrible, you cant see it. The hollow portion of the wide section gets lost. If the solid portion extended the full length of the wide section it would help tremendously. The black donut is a product of the camera position and not the way it looks when you are behind it.

Ok the IHR is a good idea gone bad...they tried to make a hunting reticle a target reticle....IMO

Agree with,your assessment

Also side parallax on the 10x scope is overkill

The new 42 SHV is only offered with the IHR and MOAR reticle. Both are useless on a hunting rig without illumination, and I dont want illumination, just give me a reticle that I can see. How hard is a simple duplex, or at least firm up the IHR. One afternoon in my neck of the woods and NF would realize the inadequacies and get back to the drawing board on the double. I wonder if they have ever taken one in the woods?

While some of this is sort of silly I will go on record as saying FFP sucks with every available reticle.

Not saying some one might not come up with a viable FFP reticle but I sure have not seen one.

Of course that is like just my opinion and such.

I'm no expert either, I've used both SFP and FFP. I've hunted dark timber in foggy/cloudy pacific NW weather enough to know that SFP works better for me. If I'm on the lowest power, I'm in the timber and need a BOLD THICK reticle. If I'm on the highest power, I'm taking a shot that's long enough that i want a thin reticle for precise aiming. A FFP reticle does just the opposite.

I've actually settled on a Swaro Z6i 2-12 with their #4 with the little red dot for my main elk rifle. Its just about perfect.

I do like FFP for tactical shooting. I have a FFP Steiner 4-16 on my LR260 that I compete with and its excellent. Its a heavy SOB though.

Guys that actually use stuff kinda get stuck in their ways,second nature and all that.

I personally have no use for a FFP in an optic of 15x or less.YMMV

That said I dont think i'd have an issue with the LRHS. Guys told me the NPR2 in my NXS was going to be worthless, used it for years without issue, even in low light without illumination.

we are seeing alot of scopes now days that are 10x with parallax adjustment. I wish it wasn't there its just more complicated.

Just started with the Meopta 4C Illuminated FFP reticle. I think it's going to work. The dot may be larger than some would want, a 4K may satisfy. I'll try to get some through the scope pics, eventually... IIRC, the 4C depiction is not exact.


What's best about the Artemis 2100, it's svelte, barely breaking 26 ounces! LOL.

marketing tends to encourage more complex or irrational products and the price points rises concurrently--probably a coincidence

for hunting, the genius of a 12oz scope with a readily visible crosshair reticle just isn't an industry profit center...

I don't think the Artemis 2100 was a marketing scope. It was built to be a tough SOB, do anything, low light uberwackenhuntinsight. The steel tube is for when chit really hits the fan, you can convert to pipebomb, billy club, jack handle, cheater-bar; really just about anything tubular!

And there it is.

I know that SFP works fine for what I do, but also that there are individuals with more and/or different experience who swear by FFP.

That's The tendency of CC that demonstrates he is FOS; he can't make that distinction and therefore speaks as universal what is particular to him and his (VERY) limited experience.

Not to mention he doesn't know the difference between your & you're or board & bored but that's for another discussion...

Hey, if you want to sale your SFP scope, have at it.

John, Swaro made a good duplex for their PH series that was nice and very useable in a FFP....but of course they don't make the scope anymore either.

The fact that you don't post about your hunts leads folks, definitely me, to question your field time with something. Bragging or not, I (we) don't know you and only know what you post. Maybe answer the questions asked and folks will quit busting your balls. Until then your opinion will be treated as talking out your ass from lack of experience. Notice how much less grief that folks whom post about their shooting/hunting get for similar comments as you made.

Yep, I live in state where centerfire rifle use is very restricted. But, I got a tip for you, I don't hunt just in my resident state. I've killed big game in 3 states that border UT this year. I do admit that compared to many this is a paltry amount of experience.

Then you have the guy that was driving force behind the design of the scope and reticle you have such a problem with. His bona fides are quite well respected in regards to both hunting and shooting long range. I'd hazard a guess that he has more and a wider breadth of experience than you... Yet, you think you can unequivocally claim FFP to be less effective for hunting than SFP. Heck, one of the scopes in the OP on one rifle has accounted for 16 big game animals in 2 years. Have you killed 1/4 of that amount of big game in the past two years with your scope of choice? That is why I can't agree completely with your version of a "dose of reality".

Can't a guy get a brake? It's two ruff aound hear sometimes.

Jordan's photo shows those who are objective the crosshair in fact does get larger as power is increased. Otherwise we could see the small hash marks on low setting.

Right, but RD is correct. The entire image, including the reticle, gets larger with magnification. The subtension, or the amount of the image that the reticle covers, remains constant at all magnifications.

pointer yes you are one of the usual suspects. why is this about me and what I do and don't know RATHER THAN THE MERITS OF WHAT I SAYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! good lord dude. now its about me knowing nothing because I don't post pictures bragging about how great I am. I don't need accolades from people around here. I don't need acceptance. so no I am not posting any pictures thats personal to me and my friends. frankly one could kill 16 big game animals with open sites. people want to respond to this without even actually reading what I have said about FFP or not.

for the last freaking time FFP has a place in the optics world, YES is does. but the problem is the video I showed and even more pictures that jordan from alberta posted albeit unwittingly further illustrate my point. (btw jordan from alberta, take me coyote hunting up there calling canada is a dream of mine) If jordan takes that pic with the trees instead of the sky in the background you can't even see the reticle at all!

Look no doubt occasionally I like to kick the ant pile around here. yeah I like some drama, but as part of that I am kinda also looking to be proven wrong if it can be done. my views are subject to change based on reason, experience, and logic. but thats not what I see from those advocating FFP on HUNTING scopes. If we all met even ole formido we would probably shake hands and laugh, its all good. happy holidays

On a site like this there are a lot of people who talk out their ass. The only way for a person to pull the nuggets from the chaff is to be able to read sign.

So like it or not, it is about you, or rather your credibility as evidenced by what you post here. Some have lots of credibility by virtue of what they post, others not so much.

That's pretty much how it works.

That scope is not meant to be a 100% dedicated short-to-medium range, twilight, bush scope. The reticle was not designed with that solely in mind. It was designed to do LR very well, and short-range, twilight shooting good enough. Which it does. Those pics were taken at twilight, and you can still see the reticle against the trees plenty good enough to decisively arrange POI.

I think the saying goes- "always consider the source"

40 meter shot made with said scope set at 3X.....how did I ever pull that off? Maybe I just aimed down the barrel...

so what about FFP with illumination? how does that suck as a hunting scope

I thought only Schidt and Bendover scopes were worth owning?

Jesus dude - pick a handle and stick with it.

I thought only Take a knee said stupid schit like that.

Impossible, Rick killed him.

"Should have"

Crap....I bought new boots last year and chunked the worn our leaky ones

There hasn't been a YouTube video made on the topic but when there is one CC will let us know what we are to think about it for sure.

Stand by...

FWIW I could care less what comes from where....but I use both plane reticles. For most of my style of hunting, SFPs are as perfect today, as anything. For my tactical/ELR stuff, I do like the FFP, but it can be handicapped in certain scenarios, w/o illum OR w/o using in conjunction with NV/IR/thermal. That's all just me. Others should do whatever the feel a need to.

It doesn't. And that particular scope has an IR, should I feel the need to use it. Which I typically don't.

Where's your 200" mule deer?

Damn Pat that's a toad.. ! Is that a LRHS on your rig ?

It is. I'm liking it a lot!

Oh woww!, You shot the buck of my dreams!

How did you do it with bright blue tape on your scope? I thought an accomplished hunter would know that color spooks game.

Ahh, I remember the days when folks here thought everything with the Bushnell name was categorically junk. Me, I love their less expensive Elite 2.5-10x40's and for the coin, they too are a hellava scope.

I know, shaking my head, next thing he'll tell us is that he was using match bullets when he did it. Pat could probably do better with iron sights than I could with the best scope in the world.

I think an earlier poster was just a little envious of the success when the S&B comment was made.

Personally, I loved FFP the first time I used one and was going to switch all mine over but found my eyesight is bad enough that I have trouble focusing the reticle on most FFP scopes. For some reason, SFP does not give me that issue so I have some of both.

Stunt shooting at it's finest......

The earlier poster is an idiot who has reincarnated himself several times on the fire.

And he's just stupid. Don't try to over-analyze his single-celled brain with emotions such as envy. He's just plain dumb.

I like my Meopta because it has "RD Illuminated Reticle" Figured you must've been named after 'em...

Ater looking at a picture of the NF IHR reticle I change my mind. Not too swift in real life. powdr

Same here.

How are we supposed to know your experience if you never post about it? That was my point. Without creating some bona fides, I'm gonna consider that you are talking out your ass.

It's really not about you or the hunting stickers on your truck window...