All right, I posted on here that I had gotten my new Nikon in, and was initially happy with it. I got it mounted up and took it to the range on Monday to give it a good run. There are good things about this scope, but also things that I’m not so happy with.
Turrets are pretty nice. Good clicks that are crisp and audible. Nice clear markings that are easy to read. I had no ghost clicking as others mentioned. The zero stop is great. It is very simple to use. It is so simple to be honest, I don’t know how you could screw it up. Nikon did a great job with that.
The reticle is very usable with the .2 mil hash marks. Something Nikon did was to leave a little gap at the .5 mil mark. I thought it was a little goofy when I first saw it, but when getting on targets, I very quickly came to like it a whole lot. It is very easy to center stuff up using the little gaps. I don’t really know how to describe it, but it worked really good. I REALLY wish that the reticle was thinner in the middle, it is a little thick, but it’s not a deal breaker. It is not too thick, but it could be, and should be a little thinner. To be honest, I haven’t put the battery in it yet. I like a black reticle. I know others prefer an illuminated reticle and that is fine, but I wanted to get to the range and put some rounds on target.
There is no Christmas tree of course, but I can live with that, as I almost always dial for elevation, but hold for wind, so that is ok.
The mount that comes with the scope is pretty nice. Since this was going on an AR10 in 6.5 Creed, I got the model with a little cantilever and 20 moa. The scope mounting was pretty straight forward and went smoothly. I like the mount and the way that it is designed to give a lot of gripping area. If you like to put a lot of stuff on your tube like red dots, be aware that this mount takes up a lot of tube space. There was plenty of room for a level, but just know that not a lot else is going to fit. I’m good with it. Like I said, lots of gripping area for the rings.
So far so good, but now we get to an important part, glass clarity. The glass in my scope is not up to par. It is bad enough that I would say it is unacceptable. The problem with it, is that it looks “foggy” when you look through it. This was bothering me as to how foggy it was, so I put it side by side with my Gen 1 Bushnell ERS. The Bushnell is much clearer with no fog. I’m not sure why this scope is like this, but it’s bad enough to bother me when I look through it. Also, I couldn’t get it to really, really focus on high power. The Bushnell wouldn’t focus as crisply as usual either, so I’m calling that a wash. To be honest, I’m getting older, and my glasses are several years old and I know that I need new ones, so it my not be the scope. It was a cool morning with no sun so there was no mirage.
So, now I’m torn. The glass should be better. If an optical device says Nikon on the side, you would think that the part they would get right, would be the glass. They other side of the coin is, this scope WITH a pretty nice mount is only $700 dollars, so what kind of glass do you expect? (I still expect better)
I did not do a tracking test. I know this is one of the most important items, and that is coming up. I have an Athlon Ares ETR on the way (at some point in time) and will give the scopes a side by side test then.
Overall, I’m going to keep the scope. I really like the turrets, but every time I look through it, I’m going to wish the glass was better, but like I said, it’s only $700 dollars, so shut up and shoot. You can’t compare it to a $2500 Razor, because it’s simply not.