Vortex PST 2.5-10x32 FFP: Opinions?

[ra2bach]

I like SFP scopes a lot more in this power range. The Vortex SFP version doesn't have the best glass.

The reticle is extremely fine at 2.5x. If you're set on 2.5x, you probably aren't holding or ranging.

On say a 6-24x, FFP makes much more sense. JMO.



No one jumped on this so I will. There is a sliding scale of value when it comes to optics. Meaning you start paying exponentially more for incremental increases in quality.

Example, my old Vortex 2.5-10x44 at first was very nice. Served me well given its price point. When it got below 30 degrees out, those nice tactile clicks faded away...

absolutely agree with preferring SFP vs FFP on a 2.5-10 or somesuch. reticle that seems so nice at 10x is near invisible at 2.5 with FFP...

[chairforce26]

I know the reticule is fine on 2.5 but I think the illumination might help a bit with that.

[Rockhopper]

I know the reticule is fine on 2.5 but I think the illumination might help a bit with that.

that's what's great about the illumination. it makes a nice plus sign to be used as a red dot. I personally think this optic is one of the best things going in AR platform

[Ironman8]

RE: 20MOA mount & FFP vs SFP

For a .223, a 20MOA mount is absolutely not necessary. The only reason I would see going with one is if you're swapping the same scope/mount between different platforms...and even that's a stretch depending on what kind of shooting you were doing. For .223 and 6.8, you'd do just fine with a 0MOA mount. Get whichever one you want, but don't feel like you're giving anything up with 0MOA

Case in point:
I was shooting my 16" (5.56) w/ 2.5-10x44 PST anywhere between 100-600yds this weekend (John McPhee Heavy Gunner course) and I didn't have to touch the turret once to dial elevation. I consider 600 yds to be about the longest practical range for .223....and that' still stretching it. You only need ~5 mils of elevation at 600 yds. The FFP Vortex PST scope gives you 9 mils to use in the reticle...which (I believe) should get you close to 700 without having do dial at all. If you're getting ~12 mils elevation adjustment in the scope turrets, then you're good to go way past any kind of practical distance.

Also, when I was trying to search/confirm a target, even at 600yds I was finding myself wanting to drop the magnification down a little to open up the FOV (and yes, I know you need to search outside the scope, but still). Having a FFP would have greatly simplified this by allowing me to drop some of the magnification and range/mil the target right away (and yes I also know I can drop it to 5x and range accurately there, but still that's more thinking that I want to do ). I also asked John McPhee about SFP vs FFP and he says he thinks it becomes useful on anything 8x and up...mostly due to the reticle being too fine on anything lower.

Just my $.02

[Rockhopper]

thank you for that great reply

[RHINOWSO]

While on this subject, can anyone chime in about the clarity difference of a 32 compared to a 44?

I owned a 44 briefly and as long as the 32 is better than "meh", it's better than the 44.

[Rockhopper]

I owned a 44 briefly and as long as the 32 is better than "meh", it's better than the 44.

the 44 has crap glass. the 32 has the best glass in the pst lineup IMHO.

[Ironman8]

the 44 has crap glass. the 32 has the best glass in the pst lineup IMHO.

So you've looked through both and compared side by side?
Have you compared EVERY scope in the PST lineup?
And remind me again how long you've owned the 32?
Also, care to expand on why the 44 has crap glass....other than what you've read on the internetz?

I've owned the 44 for close to two years now and have no problem with it's glass. Maybe I got lucky, maybe I'm just not an optics snob. The only thing that I will say about the 32 is that I got a chance to look through one at the McPhee course, and while I wasn't looking specifically to compare the glass between the two, it also didn't jump out at me as a HUGE improvement. What did jump out at me was the benefit to having FFP vs SFP.

[Slippers]

Rockhopper,

You own the x32 based on this thread: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...A-builds/page2

I'd say you're slightly biased towards the x32.

Seems a bit harsh to call the glass in the x44 "crap," however.

[Rockhopper]

The glass in the 44 is crap. Use one. You'll understand.