I am in the market for new scope and wanted to move up to NightForce. The only thing is, the budget is tight. I do mostly bench and prone shooting our local range at 200 yards. But I do hope to got to Storm Mountain this spring for a class. What is you opinion on the Benchrest line? Or should I go to a Vortex PST? Any input would be greatly appreciated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Rifle Scopes What is the differance between the NightForce NXS and the NightForce Benchrest scopes?
- Thread starter SniperJoe
- Start date
Side parrelex adujstment, zero stop, and magnifigation are the major differences. If your going to shoot bench rest only the bench rest model would probably be sufficient. I believe the nxs and pst are more tactical scopes made for hunting and durability.
I would go NF over Vortex PST anyday. Instead of buying new benchrest buy used NXS. NXS will most likely have 1/4 MOA turrets or .1MRAD turrets and a better selection of reticles. IThe NXS full size will be a tougher scope with uncapped turrets and a side parallax. The power ring is also much tougher. What is your budget? 200 yards doesn't take much scope wise for most rifle work. What will be your hopes and expectations with your shooting in the future. Will your shooting change much!
I would disagree I have owned several night force scopes and although there reliabilty is unbeatable there is reason everyone is switching to vortex. I think my pst has better glass than any nightforce I owned and the lifetime warranty is a definite plus. I have never had a problem with tracking on my pst even after abusing it and using it on at least 5 rifles.
Thanks for all the input. As far as my budget goes, it is about $1100. I also hope to be shooting 500-600 yards next year.
I'd buy a bushnell 6-24 elite tactical before I'd buy the vortex, but the vortex 6-24 gets excellent reviews and would serve your purposes very well.
Personally, I would not compare the PST to the Nightforce. They occupy two different niche's and it isn't fair to the PST. The NIghtforce NXS line has never been known for their glass, but they are known for rock solid reliability, excellent tracking and high quality construction.
I am going to be doing a review of the Sightron 2.5-17.5 S-Tac scope very soon. It is a SFP scope, does not have zero stops but otherwise appears to be a very strong contender in the sub-1000 scope battle.
For primarily bench shooting, the SFP scopes are normally preferred.
Personally, I would not compare the PST to the Nightforce. They occupy two different niche's and it isn't fair to the PST. The NIghtforce NXS line has never been known for their glass, but they are known for rock solid reliability, excellent tracking and high quality construction.
I am going to be doing a review of the Sightron 2.5-17.5 S-Tac scope very soon. It is a SFP scope, does not have zero stops but otherwise appears to be a very strong contender in the sub-1000 scope battle.
For primarily bench shooting, the SFP scopes are normally preferred.
I believe I paid 650 for my vortex and 1499 for a new nightforce. The nightforce is known for reliabilty and are rock solid scopes but if your not out putting your life on the line I think I would go with the 1/2 price one with better glass imo. My local dealer has a shelf full of nightforce scopes at very good prices but cant hardly keep vortex pst or razors in stock.
Again,,,, thanks for the input. As far as the Focal Plane goes, I like to shoot small targets ( sometimes 3/4" dots at 200) and I was wondering if using a First Focal Plane scope will the Reticle lines become too heavy to see the dots using the scope at 24 power?
Just my opinion but I wouldnt by a ffp unless I was going to range with the reticle on a regular basis. I range occasionally with a sfp recticle but it has to be set on 24 or whatever the scope specifies. If your going to use your recticle for hold overs at lower powers it make diiference also, but I think you would seldom be doing that off a bench.
It depends on the reticle.
I have no problem using my IOR 3-18 ffp with 3/4'' dot targets at 200 yards.
However, if you are primarily target shooting at the range, SFP would be a better choice.
What the hell do most of the posts in this thread have to do with the difference between Nightforce NXS scopes and Nightforce BR models? I don't think the OP asked about Vortex or Bushnell.
Nightforce BR scopes are great scopes for range work. The NXS has the parrelex adjustment and zero stop which is nice. If you abuse your toys the NXS is the way to go, if you baby your toys then you will be happy with the BR models. Not all bench rest shooters use a tactical reticle. That falls into personal choice.
I could see it giving you vertical and horizontal greif.
I use 1" dots at 100 and 3" dots at 300 and set the magnification so they look the same at either distance.
Nightforce BR scopes are great scopes for range work. The NXS has the parrelex adjustment and zero stop which is nice. If you abuse your toys the NXS is the way to go, if you baby your toys then you will be happy with the BR models. Not all bench rest shooters use a tactical reticle. That falls into personal choice.
I could see it giving you vertical and horizontal greif.
I use 1" dots at 100 and 3" dots at 300 and set the magnification so they look the same at either distance.
Last edited:
Well, I guess you didn't bother to read his whole fucking post then, did you?
OK,,,, From what I am set on from everyone's input is,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Since I probably not going to range with my scope and I shoot small dots at a bench, then a SFP scope would be a good choice.
So I think my choices are between a Vortex PST 6-24 SFP or a NightForce Benchrest 8-32 (which I assume only comes in a SFP)
I know the NF is $380 more, but if your budget worked with either one, then which would you choose??
Since I probably not going to range with my scope and I shoot small dots at a bench, then a SFP scope would be a good choice.
So I think my choices are between a Vortex PST 6-24 SFP or a NightForce Benchrest 8-32 (which I assume only comes in a SFP)
I know the NF is $380 more, but if your budget worked with either one, then which would you choose??
Last edited:
Apples to oranges again.
a 6-24 vs an 8-32.
You could compare the PST 6-24 to the Sightron SIII 6-24, they com in at a similar cost, are the same mag range and have similar features,
you could then compare the Sightron SIII 8-32 to the NF 8-32.
a 6-24 vs an 8-32.
You could compare the PST 6-24 to the Sightron SIII 6-24, they com in at a similar cost, are the same mag range and have similar features,
you could then compare the Sightron SIII 8-32 to the NF 8-32.
Really? Your PST has better glass than any Nightforce you owned?
I've owned the king of PSTs and it didn't compare in the slightest.
Really? Your PST has better glass than any Nightforce you owned?
I've owned the king of PSTs and it didn't compare in the slightest.
Believable. My last NF 5-22 had glass on par with my 300 dollar super sniper.
As for the difference, pretty much turrets. At the end of the day its still a sfp with maching turrets and marginal glass compared to its peers.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Really? Your PST has better glass than any Nightforce you owned?
I've owned the king of PSTs and it didn't compare in the slightest.
You might want to get your eyes checked
I own both a 12-42 NXS (no zero stop version, I see it as a useless feature on a target scope) and an 8-32BR. For shooting at 3/4 inch dots at 200 yards (or 300 or 600 for that matter, it's where I do load testing) there is no substitute for a thin reticle and high magnification. For your purposes the 8-32BR is a bargain used. A lot of F class shooters have used them and now have higher mag optics and they sell for about $1000 to $1200. For target work I like the .125 (1/8) moa turrets, and a lot of the scopes you'll see used have them.
The NXS versions of the 8-32 and 12-42 both have more erector travel than their BR counterparts. The 42BR is really limited at something less than 40MOA of total travel if I remember correctly. The 32BR has more like 42MOA total (I didn't look those up, going from memory) If you are ever planning to shoot to 1000 you need to find out how far off of the bottom you are at 100 and then look at the necessary come up to get to 1000 and buy the appropriate rail to get there. My Remington 700 build needed a 30MOA, my Defiance Rebel needed a 20.
I do nothing but target shooting with these scopes so I really like the NP-2DD reticle, but reticles are personal. What one person likes another may hate.
There were some March, a few Sightrons and the rare Leupy or S&B on the line at the F class Nat/Worlds this yr, but the other 90% of the scopes out there are one of the NF varieties. You're not going to get a better variable power high magnification target scope w/o spending at least another $1000, and really, it's a black target on an open field. I'm not sure that any of the others actually make any difference other than maybe improving your balance by lightening your wallet.
The NXS versions of the 8-32 and 12-42 both have more erector travel than their BR counterparts. The 42BR is really limited at something less than 40MOA of total travel if I remember correctly. The 32BR has more like 42MOA total (I didn't look those up, going from memory) If you are ever planning to shoot to 1000 you need to find out how far off of the bottom you are at 100 and then look at the necessary come up to get to 1000 and buy the appropriate rail to get there. My Remington 700 build needed a 30MOA, my Defiance Rebel needed a 20.
I do nothing but target shooting with these scopes so I really like the NP-2DD reticle, but reticles are personal. What one person likes another may hate.
There were some March, a few Sightrons and the rare Leupy or S&B on the line at the F class Nat/Worlds this yr, but the other 90% of the scopes out there are one of the NF varieties. You're not going to get a better variable power high magnification target scope w/o spending at least another $1000, and really, it's a black target on an open field. I'm not sure that any of the others actually make any difference other than maybe improving your balance by lightening your wallet.
Last edited:
I know I'm going to get beat down for this but I avoid Vortex like the plague. I agree with RobertB at the top. Look around for a used NF NXS. They have more options and are tough as nails.
On a budget - I would very highly recommend Sightron scope for what you want to do. It will be quite a bit cheaper than NF BR and has perfect tracking and better glass (unless 2014 ED glass on NF is much better, but I haven't looked through it yet).
The new glass IS night and day different. Much better! In fact, strictly comparing glass, it blows away the March, IMO. That's saying something.
It's saying something, alright. Surely you are not talking about "X" line? The best glass I've ever looked through was March X 8-80; if NF is anywhere near in clarity at 50x (and $1000 less) - I'll buy one ASAP!
From the reviews I've seen - the "new" scope is better than old Nightforce - unfortunately that doesn't mean much to me
Last edited:
I was testing a NSX 2.5 -10 x42 against a Leica 3-12x50 in very low light out to 300 yards and I frankly didnt see any difference and Leica glass is damned good.
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk
Nightforce did not change the glass on existing scope models. The new glass is only in their new scopes, BEAST, ATACR, F1, and Competition. In fact, I'm not even sure about the F1. The BR series does not have new glass nor does the NXS.
The 12-42 NXS is discontinued. I found a good deal on one at a dealer right after they discontinued them. Might still be some around.
The 12-42 NXS is discontinued. I found a good deal on one at a dealer right after they discontinued them. Might still be some around.
The instance that I'm directly referring to was comparing the 15-55 comp nf to, I think a 10-60br march. At the various ranges where I compete, there are several each, March NFbr and nxs scopes, as well as others. And yes, at least to me, the nf comp looked much brighter with better contrast than the March. Comparing it to a 12-42br nf is shameful for the br, even with both set at max magnification, the comp being 55x and the br 42...amazing really! I'm not aware of the x model march having different glass than the other competition scopes from March, but I could be wrong about that.It's saying something, alright. Surely you are not talking about "X" line? The best glass I've ever looked through was March X 8-80; if NF is anywhere near in clarity at 50x (and $1000 less) - I'll buy one ASAP!
From the reviews I've seen - the "new" scope is better than old Nightforce - unfortunately that doesn't mean much to me
