Rifle Scopes Conquest vs. Nightforce.

[continentaldrifter]

Im looking for some new glass for my 300 WM,used for long range target/big game. I ve got a Conquest 6.5-20x50 on my 25-06 and have had great results. I was contemplating on the same scope for the WM and was ask why not a Nightforce. I was looking for stronger magnification such as from the NF 8-32x56.... I can honestly say i have not looked through the NF glass, although i see alot of quality talk about them. I've read the posts and sounds like a great quality set-up but what am i getting for an extra $500?

 

[fw707]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

The main thing you'll get is a lot more elevation adjustment for long range shooting with the Nightforce, but you could get a lot more out of the Conquest if you mount it on a 20moa base. It all depends on how far you want to shoot.
The glass quality is pretty close to my eyes. The Conquest might be a little better.

 

[continentaldrifter]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

I've got a Farrell 20 base and medium rings...

 

[BlackWhiskey]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

I have used both pretty extensively, and I like the reticle choices NF has as well as the clicks. They feel a lot better to me than the Conquest. Also, though I have not thoroughly tested the durability of the Conquest, after handling them both, I would be very surprised if the Conquest could take near the abuse that the NF could.

Also, as was mentioned previously, you will have a much greater amount of elevation travel in the NF, but since you have a 20 MOA base, that may not be much of a factor for you.

 

[fw707]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

The NF specs say 65 moa of adjustment, and the Conquest says 45 moa.
Either one would put you past 1000 yards according to a ballistic calculator.
Some of the folks on here with LR experience can give you some "been there, done that" advice. I'm a beginner!

 

[vman]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

Im a Nightforce fan thru and thru so I vote for the NF.

Both a great glass by the way.

 

[snewhouse]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

I think you would find the NF 5.5x 22 more versitle for LR/ big game hunting. It has 100 moa elevation and its 5.5 low power more useful hunting.

 

[KillShot]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: usmc80</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think you would find the NF 5.5x 22 more versitle for LR/ big game hunting. It has 100 moa elevation and its 5.5 low power more useful hunting.
</div></div>

+1

 

[pc3]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

Different scopes for different uses different price points you can't compare them really but I'd go for nxs I have owned 2 conquests and have a couple of nxs......but go for a 5.5-22 or 3.5-15 not an 8-32 in this instance.

 

[montana3gunner]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

I'd be concerned about a 32 power hunting scope giving you issues in low light. If you are like me, I am constantly needing my optics to seen in low light conditions during hunting situations. Plus, 10x is plenty of power to shoot big game at long range, so anything in the 14-20x is plenty for both hunting and target shooting. My 2 c. Best of luck!

 

[wdhigh]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

Does the conquest equipped with target turrets have some type of indicator showing how many revolutions you have made?

 

[fw707]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

My 6.5-20 has a thin silver line that becomes visible before the first full revolution of "UP" adjustment. It looks like a shim or washer a few thousandths thick that's between the turret and the scope body. I don't know if it's intended as an "indicator", but it can be used for that purpose.
Also, for your information, the elevation turret turns opposite most other turrets...clockwise rotation is "UP".

 

[Tactical_Tom]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

Nightforce, but maybe one of the new lower cost mil/mil FFP scopes which are coming out may be better. Nightforce really needs to get more FFP scopes out.

 

[gmbjr]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

Having owned both models, the Conquest is a lot lighter than the NF if weight is a factor in your decision. Also, the Conquest with target turrets will fit inside some models of plastic scabbards used on 4-wheelers/mules etc., the NF doesn't fit inside anything. I also will second what pc3 said, get the 5.5x22 if you are really planning to hunt with it.

If this is a hunting rifle first, I would be tempted to go Conquest to save weight and have a more compact set up however, if you are serious about target shooting then NF all the way.

 

[head2h2o]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

After owning several of both, I would say go with the NF. While the turrets and the reticles of the Conquest are not bad, they are not the same as the NF NXS. To me it would be hard to beat the NP-R1 for long range hunting. It is just a very user friendly reticle. I personally would choose the 5.5-22 for long range hunting.

 

[jimi]

Re: Conquest vs. Nightforce.

i have both and they are both superb optics. if elevation is really an issue, the 4.5-14x50 model as more elev than the larger mag versions.

that the conquest isnt a ground up designed tactical scope, but is still the best scope on the market for what you get at that price range.

my nightforce is on my rem 308, and the conquest is on my 223 varmint bolt action.

if i had the budget for only the conquest id get it again, and will do so for what ever my next rifle is, in a heart beat. but if you have the extra for a nightforce, it comes with more features and yes feels tougher (if you ever decide you need to hammer nails with yours for example hahha).

it kind of feels like conquest is a BMW and nightforce is a tricked out Landrover with a V8, diff locks, winch, lift kit and 38 inch tyres.

jim