FFP vs SFP in a 1-6/8 variable

[JoshNC]

I looked at the Mark 6 1x6, no capped turrets. That disqualified it.

Doesn't the fact that the turrets lock and are turned only after engaging a push button obviate the need for capped turrets? Just curious why capped turrets are a must for you.

[JoshNC]

I find it to be very reticle dependent.

With that in mind, what are your thoughts on the CQBSS with H27 and Mk6 1-6 with CMR-W? Thanks.

[sjc3081]

Doesn't the fact that the turrets lock and are turned only after engaging a push button obviate the need for capped turrets? Just curious why capped turrets are a must for you.

My knowledge of battle scopes is at the kindergarten level. I figure you drop or fall of your rifle you could push the locking cap and accidentally change your zero.

[e0603]

I really like the DFP idea and if S&B ever gets their 1-8 Short Dot released and it proves reliable, that would likely be my ideal optic with the dot in SFP and H58 in FFP.

Have you considered the US Optics SR-8c with the CDMIL reticle?

Should be available very soon (like actually soon, not S&B 1-8 "soon" ). The SR-8s, which has an illuminated but not daylight visible FFP reticle, has been out for a few months and everything I've read has been very positive. The SR-8c is the same scope but sports a SFP daylight visible dot with a non-illuminated FFP reticle. Nice summary with pics and reticle detail of the SR-8s version here, and recent thread here. There are some pics from SHOT on TOS of the dot on the SR-8c. I'm not usually the early-adopter sort but I've been thinking real hard about one of these.

[JoshNC]

Have you considered the US Optics SR-8c with the CDMIL reticle?

Should be available very soon (like actually soon, not S&B 1-8 "soon" ). The SR-8s, which has an illuminated but not daylight visible FFP reticle, has been out for a few months and everything I've read has been very positive. The SR-8c is the same scope but sports a SFP daylight visible dot with a non-illuminated FFP reticle. Nice summary with pics and reticle detail of the SR-8s version here, and recent thread here. There are some pics from SHOT on TOS of the dot on the SR-8c. I'm not usually the early-adopter sort but I've been thinking real hard about one of these.

It sounds great in theory. I have just heard of too many issues (years ago) with USO scopes sh&$!ing the bed that I would prefer to go with a more proven brand. I think I will be buying either the h27 CQBSS or mk6 1-6 CMR-W. I'm leaning toward the CQBSS.

[Failure2Stop]

With that in mind, what are your thoughts on the CQBSS with H27 and Mk6 1-6 with CMR-W? Thanks.

I think that the mentioned reticles do very well in those optics when doing what they are designed for. I think that the CMR-W would benefit from a little tweaking, but it is very usable.

I was just in a very interesting conversation with a few experienced, well versed, highly proficient users, discussing TRMR2 versus H59 reticles, and it was only slightly more polite than a stand-off between Occupy protesters and UC Davis police.
Seriously though, both were unwavering in their support of their preferred reticle design, and I am of the opinion that training and repetition with a reality-based system that works is of more importance than what exact reticle is used.

[ra2bach]

I think FFP is pretty useless below 6X. You won't find many scopes in the 1-6 1-8 range with FFP and a good daylight bright illumination. For this power range give me a SFP any day. Now for precision scopes from 10x and up give me FFP.
Pat

yup. the benefits of FFP are that it keeps the reticle in ratio to image size regardless of power setting. but trying to range with a FFP scope at anything less than 10x is like trying to play that Milton Bradley Operation Game (you older guys will know what I mean... )

[JoshNC]

<snip>. trying to range with a MRAD scope at anything less than 10x is like trying to play that Milton Bradley Operation Game (you older guys will know what I mean... )

Hey, I'm really good at that game.....

[JoshNC]

I think that the mentioned reticles do very well in those optics when doing what they are designed for. I think that the CMR-W would benefit from a little tweaking, but it is very usable.

I was just in a very interesting conversation with a few experienced, well versed, highly proficient users, discussing TRMR2 versus H59 reticles, and it was only slightly more polite than a stand-off between Occupy protesters and UC Davis police.
Seriously though, both were unwavering in their support of their preferred reticle design, and I am of the opinion that training and repetition with a reality-based system that works is of more importance than what exact reticle is used.

Thanks. That is good advice. Much appreciated.

[ra2bach]

Hey, I'm really good at that game.....

the "wrenched" ankle and the funny bone were real easy but the wishbone always got me...