Never owned a FFP riflescope so I don't know what I am missing. The bushnell LRHS seems pretty cool what does FFP bring to the party when almost all of your shooting is 300 yards or less? Living in the southeast 300 + yard shots can be a rarity.

SFP will be fine. The main benefit for FFP is not to be able to range, its to be able to use the reticle at all magnifications for wind and elevation holds. Really only beneficial in scopes with powers higher than 12x-15X.

After I ordered my new Tract, I played a bit with their online calculator. Plugged in the figures for Hornady factory 123gr SST 6.5 Grendel ammo. Using the SFP Tplex, I found some good combinations of zero and scope power that will allow me to use the bottom post as a holdover at longish range (for me). I'll have to verify it on the range, but it's a nice feature.

I know guys have been doing the same thing for years on their own, but the mathematically-challenged like me will appreciate this, I believe. It doesn't limit you to 100 yard increments either, but rather 10, IIRC.

We can't all be mathman.

That's a load of a scope for 300 and closer.

You can't win. we have gone over the edge.

Whatever comes in a 6x42 scope.

Officially.

Aren't those Meoptas still serving you well?

Yes, I like them very much.

For a long time I have been using FFP 1.5-6x42 scopes for deer and I have no use for ranging and probably never will shoot a deer past 300 yards.

But... I will never be without one as my main hunting glass. If you can get you hands on a Meopta Artemis 2000 it compares quite well with anything from Zeiss, S&B and Swarovski. It will be much, much less expensive. You get the super low light capability, the reticle is just as important as the glass.

What power of scope do you want. Imo scope power should be the biggest factor sfp or ffp. Unless you would dial below max power for some reason to make a long range shot sfp. Above about 16x consider ffp below that stick with sfp............generally. To me a long range hunting scope doesn't need more than 15x max. So I choose sfp

I thought so as well, but now everyone has to have a tactical scope! I think for the money I beginning to think I will roll the dice on a tract toric and see how long it lasts. I have a range I can visit to shoot out to 800, but I have not been there yet....

FFP scopes have two fundamental benefits:

a) They are inherently more reliable indicators of point of aim. In zoom scopes, the erector lenses (those after objective and before eyepiece) move forward and backward. This movement causes some wobble in their lateral position so they will not produce the same exact image center at the SFP. If your reticle is before these lenses (i.e FFP), you don't need to worry about this flaw. In most high-end scopes with SFP reticle, this wobble error is generally kept to less than 1 MOA but it is still there. I know that only ultra high-end Hensoldt scopes designed for military applications have this issue positively mitigated (their engineers told me that it costs approximately $200 per scope to check and eliminate this error).

b) The reticle remain the same size compared to target at all magnifications. So, they can be used for range finding, bullet drop estimation etc. at all magnifications.

None of these are critical for deer or general big game hunting at reasonable ethical ranges. So, feel free to choose a good SFP scope from brands that you trust.

Sincerely,
-Omid

Where does "reasonable ethical range" begin and end?

Distance/conditions that you can't put the bullet where it belongs with 100% certainty

Sucks the LRHS G2 reticle is not illuminated. Funny the NF SFP scopes have such a problem, 1 MOA or 5 inches off at 500 yards? I had not heard of that, surprising

That is because it's not happening. Don't believe everything you read

I was being sarcastic, I have an NXS 2.5-10 x 42.

As I mentioned in my original post, in good SFP scopes, the point-of-impact shift due to zoom is controlled to about 1 MOA or less. This would be barely detectable in a normal-power hunting scope such as your 2.5-10X (It is hard to aim accurately at 2.5X and we can't tell if a shift in point of impact or group size is caused by us or by the scope or by other factors). If you have a bore sighter, you might be able to see if your scope has a shift during zoom. But even with a bore sighter the grid shown by the device is not easy to see at 2.5X. The shift in point of aim of an SFP scope -if it exist- becomes detectable only when the scope's minimum power is high, say 6X or 8X.

That said, I only have one SFP scope and I have not detected any shift in its point of aim under zoom. It is a Hensoldt 6-24X56 (pictured below). My other scopes are all FFP or fixed-power. But I also remember looking through a Schmidt and Bender scope at Shot Show of the type that has a reticle in FFP and a red dot at SFP. I could clearly see a shift in the relative position of the dot over the reticle during zoom. I was surprised as I was not expecting to be able to see that..

In summary, an SFP scope is susceptible to a shift in point of aim during zoom. This, however, is not a serious concern in good hunting scopes of nominal power.

Regards,
-Omid

You'd be way over scoped.

There is a third fundamental benefit of FFP scopes, that being the reticle increases in size as magnification increases. Non-illuminated FFP scopes resolve a better image in low light conditions at higher magnification where reticles are more heavily massed (larger) and are easier to see.

I'll just say that I bought a sfp scope and basically hated the thing for a hunting rifle. The problem for me is I tend to like to shoot scopes of 4x or less because at higher magnifications the perception of wobble is off putting to me. While the scale on a sfp range finder can be useful at top magnification in my case 12x turn your scope down to 4,5 or 6x and you have to tape a matrix printout to the side of your stock to keep up with the various ranges t that the marks on the reticle are zeroed to. Plus if you turn it down that much your first hash mark will likely be 600-800 yds so what are you to do at 525 yds? So my scope quickly went down the road and I decided that if I ever got anothèr one it woule a fixed midrange power and if a variable a ffp ymmv of course but I was really unimpressed by the technology. Im a old fart and frankly a 300 yd zero has served me well so I see the ranging reticle as a answer to a problem that doesn't really exist for me.

I can't believe what I am reading. with a FFP you can't see the freaking hash marks at 4x!!!!!! If your trying to shoot 600 yards on 4x your basically aiming at an area rather than anything precise. Are you trying to free hand the shot at that range?!?! you talk about wobble you aint going to hit jack crap at those distances without a steady rest no matter what kind of scope you have. to sum it up, if you need the features of the reticle unless your scope is over 15x on its max setting you should never need to dial it down from max if your shooting far enough to need the features of the reticle. IE hold off marks. So SFP is the only reasonable scope in this power range. If you want a higher power scope like say 6-24 where you might want to dial down because of mirage then FFP might have value to your situation. OR if yours some type of tactical shooter that needs to dial down because they want more FOV or some other reason related to competition. The more I am on forums the more I see that most people simply don't shoot all that much. Its like the guy that claims to shoot 50 coyotes a year and says vmax bullets never splash from his 22-250.

300 and under? I'm shooting fixed power so it's a moot point.

I think a lot of people jump on various bandwagons. FFP is a thing now.

Any SFP scope of your choice and sight it in for Max PBR for the cartridge and run with it. 300 yards is what we're talking about.

2x

Friend you need to take a powder and possiably enroll in some reading comprehension lessons . I simply stated that for my purposes I didn't find the technology very useful especially at 300 yds which was the question the OP asked. What is it about the ymmv statement do you not get. Geeze

Yep. I remember a few years ago the scope all the cool kids said was the greatest was Sightron. Best thing since sliced bread they all said. The next darling was Vortex. All the cool kids just had to have one, they were the GREATEST. Now it's SWFA, Toric and you sure don't know squat if your reticle's not on the right focal plane. Fuggin' scope geeks are like a bunch of little kids. Sheesh.

Personally, I wouldn't want that much scope on a rifle for 300 yards max range. The LR in the model number stands for Long Range...300yds is point and shoot range.

This, or perhaps a 2-7X32. A Weaver V-7 on an old Win 670 in 30-06 kept my freezer full from '79 through '95. I never had a problem hitting anything from squirrels to 300 yds to deer out to 400 yds.

Milling or ranging with either FFP or SFP has been replaced, by most part, by laser range finders. If the degree of accuracy doesn't require an 500 cold bore head first shot, such things as Leupolds BAS work pretty good, and has been around for quite a while.

FFP in the US "caught on" about 2000 and with it and some other things scopes say an incredible improvement, in all areas. Have been using FFP Swarovski 2.5x10 PH with German #4 since they came out, and they were great scopes for hunting.

SWFA got going before either Sightron or Vortex and they simply remove the middle man to give the buyer a better deal. All their scopes are built to take a 50.

Their MilQuad reticle was a result of several market "forces" that occurred at that time. US Optics had the ability to design any reticle you want and the one designed by GAP precision rifles was very popular. As a consequence IOR jumped on the wagon with their Snipershide edition and a short time later SWFA came out with the MilQuad.

Using FFP on a 1x6 or in that range has the advantage of making the holdovers "disappear" at low power , and very "fast" on target as in a 3 gun match as an example. and on the higher power the "hold overs" come into view.

Most good SFP scopes can be dialed in at any magnification with good results, and you can "cheat" by reducing the power to "lift the barrel" for extended distance such as the BAS system.
Most good SFP scopes with hold over reticles can be "tweaked" to gain/lose MOA or Mills even at the hold interval for greater accuracy because they have very good parallax correction.. NF bench are an example.

most hunting type shooting is area shooting

few shooters run box tests or tall ladders to see if their scopes do "track" or even hold zero, let alone how long they will do it. ( over a number of rebarrels on the same action and stock)

The biggest advantage on the higher power variable FFP is exactly that you can make the reticle small for close shots or if time/setup allows bring more information into the view by dialing up. This has advantages in changing light.

SFP scopes reticles must be designed, and their "density" as a compromise.


Everyone has their pet peeve on scopes. Mine is advertisements that say or used to say Nitrogen filled. Hmm isn't air something like 60% nitrogen.

That's certainly one of the biggest advantages. There are others, but they're mostly in play beyond 300...

The problem is much bigger than you have described it. The movement of the reticle is NOT linear with the zoom. Nor is it repeatable. Returning to max. power does not mean that the reticle is in the same position as before.
For long-range target shooting this may not be an issue. But for long shots on a hunt SFP scopes are a major risk if you have played with the zoom ring since the last sight-in.

Before I came aware of this issue I had a Leupold VX-6 2-12-42. With this scope I had unexplainable shifts in POI of up to 2 MOA during range sessions. I went to my smith and he put the scope in a collimator. There I could really watch the reticle wander about on altering the zoom.

SFP = never again!!

HMMM

you better get this information to Nightforce as soon as possible, I don't think they know about this.

My Zeiss Victory 6x24 x56 with 1000 yd. reticle is very repeatable, I guess I should send it back, it sounds broke.

I think you have a bad scope. I took two brand new Tasco scopes to a friend who is an optics critic. He made a device to check both what you are talking about and shift when one changes the parallax setting. The 2 1/2-10X Tasco moved horizontally 3", repeatably when adjusted from 2 1/2-10X. The 4-16X didn't move at all. Even when he tried it several times it did not move. When I mounted a Bushnell 2-6X32 on a friends Ruger .44 Magnum Redhawk I fired three shots on 2X and three shots on 6X from the bench on sandbags. To your surprise the group on the 100 yard target measured 2 15/16" for the six shots.

Send your scope in for a repair.

Not only Nightforce, all optics manufacturers know about this problem. It is technically inherent on SFP scopes. But of course none of them walk about advertising it.

Ask any of the premium manufacturers directly. They will tell you that they guarantee an offset of 2/3 MOA or less, but they admit that it exists.

Closer to 80%, but the remaining 20% or so which isn't nitrogen makes a significant difference to a number of processes. You'd certainly notice it if it wasn't there.

Im sure they admit a lot of things exist, not the least of which is that some of their models don't track, which is a far greater problem than inherent scope designs. Its in the execution.

Only thing I'm concerned with is water vapor, the rest of the diatomic molecules can go play with themselves.

Yep.