FFP or SFP for Paper Punching with Air gun

[2manyAirGunz]

My experience is with SFP, exclusively. With new rifle currently in the pipeline (FX Impact X, primarily to be used in .25 cal, for target shooting to 100 yards), is there any benefit in opting for the FFP scope -- i.e. Athlon Helos BTR 6-24X50 FFP MOA.

P.S. Please don't recommend the Aztec scope. As I received that scope today and mounted it on my new Vulcan2 .25 cal. I must state that I regret the scope choice due to the unbelievably thin reticle, that also lacks the illumination feature. ?

Never again!

 

[addertooth]

It really depends on how good your on-the-fly math skills are. With FFP one MOA (or one MIL) is the same at all magnifications. With a SFP scope, your MOA/MIL is only accurate at one magnification (not uncommonly 10X, but other values do exist). So if MOA/MIL is accurate at 10X, and you change to 20X magnification, the MIL/MOA is now off by a factor of 2. Compensate accordingly.

I have both, and to be honest, I tend to leave my SFP scopes at the magnification which the MIL/MOA is accurate at. My FFP scopes, I tend to make my magnification match the need with no worries, and no math. And yes, my FFP scope is an Athlon Argos 8-34 X 50.

 

[2manyAirGunz]

I think I'll call UA first thing tomorrow and change my order to the Athlon -- canceling what would have been my 2nd Aztec purchase -- before my order is shipped.

Your help is greatly appreciated.

 

[addertooth]

Glad I could help. Best of wishes to you.

 

[2manyAirGunz]

+1 ?

 

[frank320]

It really depends on how good your on-the-fly math skills are. With FFP one MOA (or one MIL) is the same at all magnifications. With a SFP scope, your MOA/MIL is only accurate at one magnification (not uncommonly 10X, but other values do exist). So if MOA/MIL is accurate at 10X, and you change to 20X magnification, the MIL/MOA is now off by a factor of 2. Compensate accordingly.

I have both, and to be honest, I tend to leave my SFP scopes at the magnification which the MIL/MOA is accurate at. My FFP scopes, I tend to make my magnification match the need with no worries, and no math. And yes, my FFP scope is an Athlon Argos 8-34 X 50.

+1. Agree with above assessment 100%. I picked up an Athlon ARES BTR 4.5-27X Mil FFP and after using it, all scopes in the future will be FFP for me if possible.

 

[Chachoze]

I am curious, why would you need the illumination feature if your shooting paper at fixed range? Do you shoot a lot during the early morning or late evening hours wjere that might be usefull

 

[hawkeye69]

+1 ...I much prefer my Athlon over my Aztec. In addition to the reticle, I also find the Aztec's eye relief is very finicky.

 

[2manyAirGunz]

"I am curious, why would you need the illumination feature if your shooting paper at fixed range? Do you shoot a lot during the early morning or late evening hours wjere that might be useful"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have an indoor range where lighting is merely adequate. Although, when testing the scope outside in the sunlight, the thin reticle was not easily discernible. I have not had this problem with my Hawke, MTC or UTG scopes, indoors nor outdoors. 

With that thin reticle, illumination would assist in locating the reticle for precise target shooting. I will admit, however, the Aztec scope does have clear glass.

Have you had any opportunity to use the Aztec scope?

 

[bubblerboy64]

Sometimes more is less with scopes. I too found the Aztec unacceptable for similar reasons. I've also sold all my high end nightforce scopes and am using more modest priced class. Just wasn't helping my shooting enough to justify. I like the BDC reticles in the Nikon line

 

[likkitysplyt]

I'm in the market for 2 new scopes … one for a Edgun RM5 and one for a RAW in .25 which I will be buying in the next couple of weeks. I have a Hawke 8-32x56 on an Impact and an Aztec 5.5-25x50 on a Wildcat. Love the reticle on the Aztec but it does get a little hard to target shoot once you have knocked out the center of the bullseye and trying to guess where dead center is because you can no longer see the dot at the intersection of the cross hairs. I have read several reviews for the Athlon and the only points that I have a serious problem with is that MANY people say that the glass gets VERY unclear once you go past 24X magnification and the other point is that many say that the turrets are mushy feeling and hard to detect clicks, nor does it have a lock down feature for the turrets. I am at a quandary as I was hoping to keep the price down to the $400 to $500 range … any other suggestions? 

 

[hawkeye69]

The clicks on the Athlon are very distinct, much more so than the Hawke. They do not lock down but that hasn't been a problem for me. If I have any complaint it's that the focus isn't accurate regarding distance. Focusing at 25 yards reads just over 30 on the knob, but that's what rangefinders are for. Mine only goes to 24x and is clear, so I can't comment on anything past that.

 

[pocholoss]

Hi, i have the Athlon as well and is aceptable clear at 24x, about the clicks you have to clean a little factory grease off and it gets better and loss that mushy feeling, and other feature is with a washer you can get a zero stop on the models that dont come with that feature. i really like mine. and i have hawke, mtc, utg and my favorite for the ffp is the athlon

 

[addertooth]

I will toss in an opinion on clarity and turrets. The turrets with the thick factory grease can feel mushy. Wipe off the thick grease and replace it with a thinner lubricant and it clicks sharply. As for locking turrets, this is true, they don't lock. However, if you send an E-Mail to the kind people at Athlon, they will send you a plastic washer kit to set a zero point on the vertical turret. When installing the washers, make sure your vertical turret knob is aligned with zero. I think the non-clarity at higher magnifications comes into play from a perceptual thing. As magnification goes way up, the eye-box (the sweet spot for your eye to be in behind the scope) gets smaller. At 34X, precise eye placement becomes very critical, and being slightly outside the sweet spot gives a reduction in visual quality. This last factor is true on a lot of scopes at 34X power. At 100 yards, I can read the small print at the bottom of the paper target through my scope, so being able to resolve 1/8th of an inch text at 100 yards is not a bad standard for clarity. I will also agree that the parallax distance marks did not match actual distance for me. I purchased a snail-style sidewheel, went to the range, and calibrated the snail.

 

[likkitysplyt]

Yeah, I see what you were talking about … found a video on YouTube that shows how the factory grease can make the turrets very mushy. It shows the guy cleaning it out from the cap and the inner turret and applying a lighter grease to get back the tactility (if that's a word) to the adjustments. Didn't know about the availability of a plastic washer kit to reset zero. I am aware of what you are talking about when referring to the sweet spot on distance from the eye piece as my Hawke gives the same problem, but once you are settled in to shooting the sweet spot seems to come automatically once you are used to the scope.

Well, yall have certainly eased my mind on the Athlon brand and I'll most likely get at least one Athlon for these two rifles. Thanks for the info and help, you guys are great!

 

[riazp]

Look at the Midas in sfp or ffp, ed glass is just amazing, crystal clear glass really has to be seen to be appreciated. 

Dont let the minimum paralex in the sfp model deter you from purchasing as it focuses down to about 15 yards on lower magnification.

if I lived in the states I would have to send mine to Cyclops for a review as the Midas are practically unknown by airgunners.