You are Here:
Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?

Author (Read 1223 times)

Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« on: October 09, 2016, 01:10:35 AM »
 

DenverDave

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 31
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
This question is probably pretty elementary but I could use a hand understanding how FFP optics work.

As an example, scope A is a Burris XTR II 2x-10x magnification. Scope B Is a XTR II 5x-20x. Both scopes have the same reticle and are FFP.  At 10x magnification does the reticle appear to  be the same size on both scopes A and B?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Re: Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« Reply #1 on: October 09, 2016, 10:20:03 AM »
 

Alpine

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 38
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
I cannot speak for the specific models of Burris scopes you list, but often, manufactures make the reticle lines thinner on higher magnification models on FFP scopes.  There's a fine line, so to speak to not have the reticle lines to thin at low magnification, and/or to thick at high magnification.

A good example of what some manufactures do, for example my March 5-40 FFP has a reticle that has its reticle lines taper down (taper thinner as you get to the center), which is a solution to address the above mentioned problem with varible power power FFP scopes.
 

Re: Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2016, 03:41:37 PM »
 

DenverDave

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 31
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
I cannot speak for the specific models of Burris scopes you list, but often, manufactures make the reticle lines thinner on higher magnification models on FFP scopes.  There's a fine line, so to speak to not have the reticle lines to thin at low magnification, and/or to thick at high magnification.

A good example of what some manufactures do, for example my March 5-40 FFP has a reticle that has its reticle lines taper down (taper thinner as you get to the center), which is a solution to address the above mentioned problem with varible power power FFP scopes.


This is exactly why I am asking this question. I have a 4-20 XTR II, at 20x the reticle is large, pretty much unusable for targets smaller than 20" at the 1k range I shoot.  I am considering getting a XTR II 5-25x for a new rifle but if the reticle/crosshairs aren't tapered or made smaller in one way or another I will have. I will have no use for the higher magnification range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Re: Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2016, 10:25:51 AM »
 

Jeff M

  • Paint Removal Specialist
  • Administrator
  • Steel Ringer
  • *****
  • 702
    Posts
  • Karma: 100
    • Road To PRS
I also have no experience with the specific scopes you mention, but I would consider looking at a different manufacturer.

I have no problem shooting half MOA targets with my Vortex Gen2 Razor at 27x.  April Dawn has no problems with her Gen1 Razor at 20x either.
Every time you make a typo, the errorists win.
 

Re: Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2016, 02:28:39 PM »
 

CavReconScout

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 25
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
I have a Burris XTR II 4x20 and have shot at full size IPSC targets out to 1100yds. I also used it last year to compete in local PRS type matches. The G2B reticle, which is bold and easy for me to see, measures .18"@ 100 yds, or .05 mils. This would equal a reticle thickness of less than 2" @ 1000yds. If you want a thinner reticle and you want to stay with that brand, the SCR reticle is thinner at .03 mil, or .11" at 100 yds. IMHO I think sometimes the FFP scopes mess with the mind as the reticle grows, rather than staying the same size as with SFP scopes. You just have to remember the target is also growing proportionally in size as you zoom.

Having said all of that, I just switched to a Vortex Razor and it has a noticeably thinner reticle. Haven't shot any matches with it yet though I think it will work great.
 

Re: Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2016, 08:24:46 PM »
 

DenverDave

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 31
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
I have a Burris XTR II 4x20 and have shot at full size IPSC targets out to 1100yds. I also used it last year to compete in local PRS type matches. The G2B reticle, which is bold and easy for me to see, measures .18"@ 100 yds, or .05 mils. This would equal a reticle thickness of less than 2" @ 1000yds. If you want a thinner reticle and you want to stay with that brand, the SCR reticle is thinner at .03 mil, or .11" at 100 yds. IMHO I think sometimes the FFP scopes mess with the mind as the reticle grows, rather than staying the same size as with SFP scopes. You just have to remember the target is also growing proportionally in size as you zoom.

Having said all of that, I just switched to a Vortex Razor and it has a noticeably thinner reticle. Haven't shot any matches with it yet though I think it will work great.

My XTR II 4-20 has the G2B reticle. It's nice to know that the SCR is thinner. I am thinking of getting another XTR II for my new rifle and am considering the 5-25. My range has plates as small as 4" at 1k yards so the the G2B crosshairs taking up 2" it defiantly abstracts the view of the smaller targets. I will agree with you the mental effect amplifies the perceived size of the cross hairs. Will look at the SCR.  For the money I think the XTR II scope is a great piece of kit. Unfortunately for me I can't really afford to spend much more on a higher end optic and I have not seen an alternative in the price range that performs better than the Burris.

Which Razor do you have? Gen 1 or 2?

Thanks for chiming in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Re: Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2016, 10:53:58 PM »
 

CavReconScout

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 25
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
I am happy with my XTR II. It tracks perfectly, the parallax works with my prescription glasses, the eye box is great on the lower magnifications, and is still usable at 20x. IMHO the glass isn't as good as my Razor (gen 1) but it cost a lot less too. For shooting matches it worked great and is still my backup scope. I really like my Razor, I have shot a couple rifles with the Gen II Razor and it was very nice but too expensive for my budget.
 

Re: Reticle Size Relative to Magnification on FFP Optics?
« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2016, 06:24:55 PM »
 

DenverDave

  • Target Painter
  • *
  • 31
    Posts
  • Karma: 1
  • FNG
I just sent Burris an email to see what the charge would be for them to swap out my G2 reticle for the SCR. Will see what they have to say...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk