With the new Ares hitting the streets, and all of the hype, I ran these two scopes in a brief head to head comparison. I have more time behind the Nikon, with about 20 PRS stages, and several range trips. The Athlon is pretty new. I haven’t been able to get it to a match yet, but hopefully that will change in the near future. I’ve had it to the range on several afternoons, and have a good initial impression.
Each scope has its ups and downs, but both will get the job done. Let’s get too it.
First, there is a lot of discussion on where the scopes are made. Pretty simple- Athlon is made in China, Nikon is made in the Philippines. Got those straight off the boxes.
The Athlon power range is 4.5 x 30 with a 56mm obj.
The Nikon is a 6 x 24 with a 50mm obj.
For match shooting, I usually run around 14x, so this should be a wash, however, when you are at the range working on load development, the extra power of the Athlon does help, and it does make a big difference.
The reticles are also very different. The Nikon reticle is very usable, but it is thick. At 100 yards on full power, the crosshairs will completely cover a .30 caliber hole. This really doesn’t matter when you are holding on steel at distance, but again does matter when you are really bearing down at the range. The Athlon reticle is awesome. I have quickly come to love the floating dot center. You could literally shoot a 22lr at a blank piece of paper, and use the floating dot to shoot at that little bullet hole at 100 yds. Haven’t put it on steel at a distance yet, so my opinion might change, but my nod goes to the Athlon reticle.
Both pieces of glass are clear edge to edge, true color to my eyes. I know this is subjective, but both scope work good for me in this area.
Both zero stops work very well, and are very easy to set. They are different, but both work really good.
There has been talk of mushy clicks on Athlons. Not on this ETR. These clicks are so firm and audible that you can hear them from 40 feet away. To be honest they are almost “too clickey” if there can be such a thing. Almost rough clicks. The clicks on the Nikon are very distinct, audible but smooth. Much more refined. I prefer the turrets and clicks on the Nikon. Very nice.
Both scopes track properly on a vertical tracking test. I ran one rifle up to 8 mils, shooting it one mil at a time, and set it aside to cool, while I ran the other rifle up on a line beside the first test, then went back and repeated with the first rifle, etc, until I had a three shot group at each mil mark for each rifle. The scopes Performed well, I had nice groups, and straight tracking.
The Athlon was mounted in a mount from MPA. It is their 1.060” mount and worked great. Solid but sleek. Their mounting system is first class. The Nikon is also solidly built, but not quite as sexy, but it still works good.
So, the bottom line?, both scopes will work for you. The Athlon has more usable power, and a much better reticle. The Nikon has better turrets, and a thicker reticle, but is very usable on steel. The Athlon is a few hundred dollars more, and in my opinion, is worth it, however, if you are on a really tight budget, you won’t really lose anything by going with the Nikon.
Here are a couple pics of the controls. Tried to get pics of the reticles, but it is not easy to do and have it come out ok. The 5 shot group is one I shot with the Athlon. Joel Pendergraft in Chapel Hill NC builds one hell of a rifle
Each scope has its ups and downs, but both will get the job done. Let’s get too it.
First, there is a lot of discussion on where the scopes are made. Pretty simple- Athlon is made in China, Nikon is made in the Philippines. Got those straight off the boxes.
The Athlon power range is 4.5 x 30 with a 56mm obj.
The Nikon is a 6 x 24 with a 50mm obj.
For match shooting, I usually run around 14x, so this should be a wash, however, when you are at the range working on load development, the extra power of the Athlon does help, and it does make a big difference.
The reticles are also very different. The Nikon reticle is very usable, but it is thick. At 100 yards on full power, the crosshairs will completely cover a .30 caliber hole. This really doesn’t matter when you are holding on steel at distance, but again does matter when you are really bearing down at the range. The Athlon reticle is awesome. I have quickly come to love the floating dot center. You could literally shoot a 22lr at a blank piece of paper, and use the floating dot to shoot at that little bullet hole at 100 yds. Haven’t put it on steel at a distance yet, so my opinion might change, but my nod goes to the Athlon reticle.
Both pieces of glass are clear edge to edge, true color to my eyes. I know this is subjective, but both scope work good for me in this area.
Both zero stops work very well, and are very easy to set. They are different, but both work really good.
There has been talk of mushy clicks on Athlons. Not on this ETR. These clicks are so firm and audible that you can hear them from 40 feet away. To be honest they are almost “too clickey” if there can be such a thing. Almost rough clicks. The clicks on the Nikon are very distinct, audible but smooth. Much more refined. I prefer the turrets and clicks on the Nikon. Very nice.
Both scopes track properly on a vertical tracking test. I ran one rifle up to 8 mils, shooting it one mil at a time, and set it aside to cool, while I ran the other rifle up on a line beside the first test, then went back and repeated with the first rifle, etc, until I had a three shot group at each mil mark for each rifle. The scopes Performed well, I had nice groups, and straight tracking.
The Athlon was mounted in a mount from MPA. It is their 1.060” mount and worked great. Solid but sleek. Their mounting system is first class. The Nikon is also solidly built, but not quite as sexy, but it still works good.
So, the bottom line?, both scopes will work for you. The Athlon has more usable power, and a much better reticle. The Nikon has better turrets, and a thicker reticle, but is very usable on steel. The Athlon is a few hundred dollars more, and in my opinion, is worth it, however, if you are on a really tight budget, you won’t really lose anything by going with the Nikon.
Here are a couple pics of the controls. Tried to get pics of the reticles, but it is not easy to do and have it come out ok. The 5 shot group is one I shot with the Athlon. Joel Pendergraft in Chapel Hill NC builds one hell of a rifle
Last edited:
