bladeracer wrote:Biscuits wrote:Just on your earlier comment that if you did it the FFP/milrad way, you need a scope for each rifle. I think you would not.
I only have a scope for each rifle for convenience. I could put any scope on any rifle or only have one scope and they would be dialling the same elevation for a given distance on each rifle. Only the ergonomics or the scope would change.
In fact I moved a scope from a 6.5 to a .300, then bought another scope for the 6.5, and I did not need to relearn or recalculate anything on the 6.5. And I could use the scope at any magnification without thinking or even noting what magnification I’m using.
The difference in price between a Hawke SFP BDC scope which OP linked and a FFP milirad turret/millirad reticle scope is less than $200. For that small price difference, would you still recommend the BDC?
Then I must be misunderstanding your comments about having turrets that match your ballistics? I figured you meant the custom turrets that list distances rather than minutes or mils. You can make them yourself if you only use a specific load and some manufacturers offer custom turrets. Lase your target and dial your turret to that distance.
I don't like mils, but I understand why some do. I find mils a bit too coarse, but if it's what you're used to it works just fine.
I wouldn't recommend an FFP scope for any purpose I can think of so I wouldn't suggest anybody pay the premium it demands. I consider FFP to be nothing more than brilliant marketing to get more money out of customers. They tell the public that they absolutely must use an FFP scope if they want to shoot well and people simply accept it as truth and hand over the money.
I'm not against gridded reticles but I think they're mostly unnecessary. With low-velocity cartridges like .22LR, a grid with all the minutes/millirads can be useful, particularly for a new shooter starting out into longer range shooting and learning to deal with wind. But really you only need a handful of holdover marks, they don't need to be any specific BDC but it is more useful if they increase in graduation as that's how ballistics works. Bullets only follow a parabolic or symmetrical curve in vacuum, in the real world they follow a ballistic curve that steepens as the bullet loses velocity due to drag. At the end of the curve the bullet is falling near vertically when it started out in near-horizontal flight.
To clarify your earlier post - I'm talking totally standard FFP milrad scopes. I don't do custom turrets. I'm recommending what I actually use myself.
I've been shooting for a while, but I have only made it a primary hobby about 8 years ago. My liking for FFP millirad turret-millirad reticle is based on experience.
I started with a mid-range Vortex SFP scope and I started off shooting paper targets at fixed distances. It was ok for that, but it didn't have the optical quality to allow me to use the full 16x (or might have been 20x, I can't remember) zoom which the SFP reticle was calibrated for. I found if I wanted to correct a miss being SFP, then I'd need to zoom in to 16x to scale off the reticle direct. Then zoom back out. Or use 8x power, in which case there was a scaling factor of 2 on the reticle marks. It was prone to fogging up when it rained, so you couldn't shoot.
Based on that experience, I:
- Spent more money, for better optical quality and something which would work better in poor weather
- Went to FFP, so I did not need to think what zoom power to use
I now have four FFP milrad turret/milrad reticle scopes across 4 rifles, now used mostly for steel plates at random distances or hunting. I have a few WW2 open sight rifles and a red dot rifle too. I like the FFP scopes as they are consistent and they are general purpose, suitable for almost anything. I could swap the scope on the 22LR, to the 6.5, to the .308, to the .300 and the number of clicks if I dial, or the position of the target in the reticle if I hold over, remains the same regardless of scope. Obv, I need a different aiming solution depending on rifle/caliber/load. I accept there are negatives to FFP, the main one being that zoomed out, it is hard to see detail in the reticle and the lines are too thin. If you shoot at dusk, using an illuminated reticle will fix that, but it is a genuine criticism of FFP if you use it in bright daylight at low zoom power.
I agree a grid/christmas tree reticle isn't really necessary; one of my scopes has it, not sorry I bought it but probably wouldn't buy another. It makes the reticle look a bit too busy.
OP could buy a SFP, but I would still recommend an even reticle scale of millirad or MoA and not a BDC reticle.
Although BDC works (and works well in your case), you have to put more learning into it for each and every caliber and ammo type within that caliber. I also feel that unless you are quite experienced, BDC would create a disconnect between seeing your misses in the scope reticle and knowing how many clicks you need to dial in order to correct it.