So I have almost made up my mind to get the Ares ETR. No one around me has them in stock or knows anything about them. From what I see here and other places they are getting pretty high praise. I can get this scope for $1000. I am looking for something to put on my Tikka CTR with bravo chassis. It’s main purpose is just for target shooting and weight is not a problem. Is there anything else I should be looking at or should I get the Athlon? Have debated the pst gen 2 but from what I see this is a better scope. Not a lot of try before you buy from my location. Not too many to look at. The $1000 is pretty much where I want to stay.
Rifle Scopes Athlon Ares ETR or........
- Thread starter smokinbobf4
- Start date
If you are getting the ETR for $1000, then that's the scope to get. You won't be disappointed.
The reticle is pretty small at the low end, but it really won't matter because you probably won't be ranging anything with it bottomed out anyway. It's still legible enough for wind hold-offs.
On the high end it's not too thick, and the floating center dot is visible but tiny.
On the high end it's not too thick, and the floating center dot is visible but tiny.
I have the Ares ETR and the Midas Tac. If you don't need illumination and the slightly nicer features/glass of the ETR, the TAC is a great option around $500 because it has the same turret technology of the ETR. My ETR is also on a Tikka with Spuhr mount, albeit T3A1 TAC. great combo you are considering, can't go wrong really.
Is the etr worth the extra money over the Midas Tac? I don’t think I need the illumination but would like decent glass. I am hoping to shoot to 1200 yards with this and would like the best resolution I can get in this price range. I will spend the money if the etr is that much better but wouldn’t mind saving it if not. I am going to try to make a fairly heavy rifle and the weight of the etr would be a benefit for me also but there are cheaper ways to add weight
What price range are you talking about? $600 TAC or $1100 ETR? I can tell you that I’ve tested pretty much every Athlon scope. The TAC is by far the “best bang for your buck” scope out there. Nothing even comes close. I’ve taken the TAC out to 1200 and didn’t have a problem seeing anything. Is the glass as good as a $3000 scope, No. but it is amazing at its price point.
If I was spending the money, I would either get the TAC or just save a little and buy the Cronus. I feel you are getting more for your money that way. However, the ETR is a really nice scope too. Athlon optics makes some really nice products. You can’t go wrong with them.
I am wanting to keep it right around 1000. I have never used a $3000 scope nor do I plan on getting one so I am just looking for the best I can afford. Just didn’t know if the etr is $400 better than the tac.
The ETR gives you a 34mm tube instead of a 30mm, a 56mm objective lens instead of a 50mm, 4.5-30x magnification instead of 6-24x, ED glass instead of HD glass, and illumination. If that's worth the extra $400 over the price of a Midas TAC to you, then go for it.
I’d caution on the advice above around the Cronus. The Cronus is an older model turret design than the Ares ETR so many believe its the better scope until the Cronus is redesigned. Cronus does however have marginally better glass from Japan as opposed to China.
The ETR is a great scope for that price however if you can Find an SHV 5x20x56 nightforce for 1000 I like it better as I have both and also I just bought a Steiner P4Xi 4x16x56 with a 34mm tube that I like better as well I got the Steiner for 950 this is my personal experience and opinion. I take nothing away from the ETR the only difference in going with the nightforce is it is a SFP
Since you were referring to my post, I have a question for you. Have you used both? Your statement is like saying the Schmidt Pm II is not as good as the MTC version because it’s older. However, myself and many others prefer the DT turrets to the MTC turrets. Just because something is older doesn’t mean it’s not better.
Back to the Cronus, TAC, and ETR turrets. I will tell you the TAC and ETR are harder and more tactile, however I find the Cronus turrets easier to manipulate. Just my two cents.
Ok that was what I was wanting to clarify, so you believe that the turrets on the ETR are more tactile than the BTR Cronus?
I currently have a 1st gen Cronus and was borrowing an ETR for about a month or so. The ETR is a very nice scope for the money, I have seen several people with QC issues on the ETR. This didnt really scare me off the ETR since Athlon has good CS, the glass on the 1st gen Cronus is better than the ETR in really every aspect and it being a LOW built scope I trust it more mechanically. If you could get lucky and find one used cheap I would personally prefer it over the ETR. The midas Tac I used was very nice for the money but the ETR is a big step up.
I actually have a shv 5-20x56 on the way. Should be here any day. Just want to get a ffp scope and would like more mag than the 4-14 that they offer in ffp.
Really I would love to get an ATACR f1 but it is just not in the cards. After a failure with a scope this last year I have bought an nxs and shv simply because of there track record of durability and tracking. I am no glass snob as I have never even looked through a scope better than the nxs. Tracking and durability are my main concern.
Here is a brown Ares ETR mounted with a Spuhr on a Tikka TAC A1, next to a CZ 457 Varmint wearing a 4-16x44 Midas TAC. Since the CZ is .22LR, no need for the higher magnification for my purposes. I like the clicky mechanical feeling of the turrets on both scopes, but agree the ETR is significantly nicer overall.
I am 90% sure I will get the etr. My local gun shop ordered one and said I don’t need to buy it if i don’t like it.
I have both an Athlon Midas TAC and an Ares ETR. For their respective price points both are very hard to beat. The only other scope that I would put in the same valuefor the dollar is the Tract Toric 30mm HD. It is a little more money than the ETR but if you get iton one of their 10% off sales the price is really close. It is a Japanese made optic and I would compare it to optics in the $2000-2500 price range and not the $1000 price range. The glass and turrets are just that good. The things the Ares has over the Tract is the 34mm tube giving you more elevation, the larger objective, more magnification and a tree style reticle. Those options are why I own both and not just a bunch of Tract Toric optics. I do own 2 however.
I have used both the Cronus BTR and the Ares ETR. I would 100% buy the ETR over the Cronus BTR until they redesign the turrets of the Cronus, because there's a huge difference between the two. The Chronus BTR still has turrets that feel a bit "mushy" and have some play in the clicks, it's not as precise or intuitive to use as the Ares ETR turrets IMO.
The Ares also has a better reticle with the floating dot. The floating crosshair in the Cronus BTR is completely useless because it's the same size as the rest of the crosshair, it's not any finer to avoid obstructing as much of your vision (which is the entire point of a floating dot/crosshair). You can see this in the photo below, the floating crosshair just seems out of place since it is the same thickness as the rest of the reticle.
Just in this thread alone we can see there are huge differences of opinion.
Also I think there are different shooting styles being represented, from hunters, to casual backyard shooters, to paper punchers with more of a benchrest bias, and the NRL or PRS type match shooters, each one favoring different things a scope offers.
For NRL22 IMO, I didn't like the thin + reticle in the Cronus BTR when I dialed because I tended to lose it at 12x in the background when holding off for wind. I holdover a lot so I didn't like using .5 mil on the main crosshair but rather favor .2 mils for that. That being said I like the Ares BTR with APLR3 reticle more. It's the right thickness and is in all .2's.
Regarding the TAC vs the Ares BTR, I've been back and forth about them too because I own both scopes.
I like the turrets on the TAC's more and the reticle in the Ares more. Reticle choice is a top priority so I prefer the Ares BTR. I haven't had occasion to use the illume in the Ares and I don't think it's daylight bright anyway.
If you don't need illume and aren't picky about .2's just get the TAC.
Well that is another thing I should have mentioned but don’t really like to here, is that I am moa. Many seem to frown apon that, but that is what I have shot for my whole life. I know the benefits of it and almost switched but there are zero people that I shoot with that is mrad so it just doesn’t make sense for me. I don’t want to get into that here so my reticle option is the +. I wish they had the floating dot in moa.
I am an MOA fan as well that all goes on preferences you can dial out Mrad much faster but as far as once you get your dope down I shoot both MOA and Mrad and both do what they are supposed to do, both are easy to use but MOA I have always been a fan of more than Mrad.
i was in the same boat, but moved from MOA to Mrad -nothing at all wrong with MOA if you know it and everyone in your group is shooting/ranging MOA. only reason i moved was people in my group were shooting Mrad or moving to it.. 1/4MOA clicks are super precise too.
They're not all that much more precise than 1/10th of a mil. 0.1 MRAD = 0.36 inches at 100 yards, 1/4 MOA = 0.26175 inches at 100 yards. The difference is less than a tenth of an inch, and unless you're shooting in a benchrest or f-class match the odds of your rifle being able to shoot the difference between the two is slim.
that's an excellent point. these days, seems like so many folks are thinking in terms of 800-1200 yards though, those are actually F class and longer PRS ranges. i know i'd take a free inch of additional precision at 1000 yards, but my scopes are Mrad for the reasons stated above. for bob, it's just an advantage to him worth mentioning, although modest.
How often do you use the central aiming pointnin a scope. Do you dial windage always? I rarely do. Anything past 300 yards and sometimes closer, the center dot or crosshair isnt used.
I use it whenever I'm zeroing or doing load development. I usually do not for the longer range shots, and have since switched to a Tremor3 because I prefer to holdover when I have to engage multiple targets at different distances in the same stage.
When shooting groups or zeroing it's nice to have a very fine aiming point, and it's also nice to have if you're one of the people who dials windage.
At 8x you can't see the dot, but you do see a very fine crosshair. Since it's FFP you can still aim very precisely once the dot is too small to see.
I have not tried the TAC, but I will probably get one for a T1 when I decide to build a 22 match rifle. I really like the ETR that I bought a few months ago for my 22 BR build. I shot a practice match with it on my 6.5 in 8-18 mph wind and the reticle was great for the wind holds.
i think the TAC makes a ton of sense on a .22LR match gun. the Ares ETR is a bit overkill IMHO, but perfect for a 600 yard+ rifle. I just don't think you need the precision and glass on a .22LR given the max effective ranges of that round.
That's the new sale for the month of March. Please give us a call, 56-217-1000, and we can get you written up for the Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 @ $599.99 or the Ares BTR 2.5-15x50 @ $549.99
Have a great day
Doug
I tend to feel the floating dot reticle's appeal is overblown. I can't see the dot when I dial down to 10x-12x for movers, and much prefer the heavier + aiming point of the pre-BTR Cronus to the finer + on the BTR Cronus. For the same reason, I prefer the Ares BTR's reticle to the Ares ETR & Midas TAC's floating dot. It's kind of like being between a rock and a hard place - I really like the Midas TAC & the Ares ETR scopes (have several of both), but will stick with my pre-BTR Cronus & Kahles K624i AMRs on the CF PRS-style rifles because I generally dial lead, and really like a distinct, easy to pick up aiming point. I've shot pre-BTR Cronus scopes on several of my precision .22RF repeaters, and never felt that the heavy + aiming point covered too much of even a few tiny targets in those matches. To each his own - I've noticed my vision slipping a bit over this winter, and know I need the heavier/thicker aiming point reticles.
I actually just traded my Ares for the XTR. They are probably the same for everything, except the Burris has 34mm tube. The internal adjustments have the same value which I though was weird since the Ares is a 30mm tube. Ares glass is really nice, probably edges out the XTR. The xtr though is built like a freaking tank. You definitely get a warm and fuzzy holding it. The Ares has similar feel and construction as a vortex PST. Only reason I traded was I went from MOA to MIL. If you bought either scope I think you would be happy.
the Ares ETR has a 34mm tube also like the XTR. The Ares BTR has a 30mm tube. Just to clarify.
Similar threads
