They're the neo-SSPX twenty years ahead of the neo-SSPX.  They did the deal.

I wouldn't mind going to confess to one of their priests, but I'd want to make sure that priest was left over from the original deal and was unquestionably ordained.  Not all their priests were ordained by an Old Rite bishop in the Old Rite of ordination.

I consider the FSSP to be NO. I wouldn't go to them to the sacraments because I consider there orders to be doubtful because (I think) many of their priests were ordained by Novus Ordo Bishops instead of traditional Bishops and I consider the New Rite of consecration of a Bishop to be doubtful. If you think the New Rite of consecration is fine, then you could go to them for the sacraments.

The FSSP is novus ordo.

They still do not have a bishop.

Now, it's probably that their priests are ordained in the pre-1968 rites but these rites are conducted by post-1968 bishops.  Can someone give what they don't have?  

If Vatican II and the changes in the Mass were merely to "update" the church and make minor changes here and there to make the church a more comfortable environment for newcomers, then why did Paul VI change the rites of ordination and the rites of consecration?  Those changes are striking at the root of the tree.  

99% of Catholics will never see an ordination or a consecration in person.  92% of Catholics will never see either except for a short video on youtube.  So, since no one is seeing the ordination and consecration, then the change in these rites was to alter the priesthood.  

So, the FSSP is novus ordo.  They do a lovely mass and it's a great floor show.  I'll just bet that their lace is superior to the lace in the SSPX.  

The original FSSP priests are validly ordained by the SSPX.  

They do not have a bishop which means that every time the FSSP wants to have a Confirmation for all those pretty girls in their lace mantillas, they must bring in some novus ordo bishop who will have a smirk on his face as he fumbles through the ceremony.  It just ain't right.