Nightforce Atacr 4-20 x50

A.Huggy

Private
Minuteman
Nov 19, 2019
54
66
Who's this for? The ATACR lineup already seemed complete to me. I'm trying to think of an application where this would fit but the 5-25 wouldn't also do the same job.
 

R0CKNR0LLKL0WN

Sergeant of the Hide
Hessian
PX Member
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2019
140
28
Enterprise, AL
Who's this for? The ATACR lineup already seemed complete to me. I'm trying to think of an application where this would fit but the 5-25 wouldn't also do the same job.
With parallax stated to go down to 11 yards, I think this might go nice on someone’s precision rimfire. A good amount of elevation adjustment too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deersniper

RTV

Rock the Vote
PX Member
Minuteman
Nov 30, 2019
222
119
I am aware. Still waiting for someone to sell me their gently used ZCO420. I can't seem to shake any loose though....

I'm sure there will be a flood of them on here once the reviews start coming in on the ATACRs
 
  • Haha
Reactions: deersniper

beetroot

Major Hide Member
PX Member
Minuteman
Apr 10, 2018
1,159
909
Leupold sued Nightforce for patent infringement for the Zero Hold and won.
On one hand it was clearly a copy, on the other the ZL turret is excellent and it'd be nice to see it attached to some good scopes.....
 

rydah

Moons out goons out.
Supporter
Commercial Supporter
Minuteman
Feb 12, 2019
60
144
Swing and a miss.
Shame, I love nightforce scopes.
 

beetroot

Major Hide Member
PX Member
Minuteman
Apr 10, 2018
1,159
909
Swing and a miss.
Shame, I love nightforce scopes.
In what regard? Other than potential tunneling and arguably overpriced this is more or less what one would expect from another ATACR model as far as price, size, features and weight goes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: charnicus

RTV

Rock the Vote
PX Member
Minuteman
Nov 30, 2019
222
119
In what regard? Other than potential tunneling and arguably overpriced this is more or less what one would expect from another ATACR model as far as price, size, features and weight goes.

Its not that its a bad scope.
Its just TERRIBLY positioned in the market.

People don't want a 4-20x50 that weighs 35oz and is 14" long.

They want a 3-24 or 2.5-20 that weighs 32oz or less and is 13" max.

Big and heavy scopes have been being made for so long no one cares about a new one because someone else has already made it.

Which brings me to my next point at 3000$ this scope is terribly positioned against the ZCO 420 which is widely regarded as the best 4-20 scope in the world at 3590$ AND their own ATACR 5-25 at only 2oz heavier and an inch and a half longer which If the scope is already 14" no one would really care about and that one Is only 2800$ on eurooptjc currently.

EDIT:
The only thing I can come up with that makes sense to me because I know nightforce isn't this out of touch with the market is that they made this for a mil contract.
 

5RWill

Optics Fiend
PX Member
Minuteman
  • Oct 15, 2009
    5,264
    1,490
    30
    Mississippi
    The description kind of cracks me up "smaller and lighter than the 5-25" I mean, yes it is. By a whopping 2.4oz. Oh well at least there are 2 nice 4-20s on the market. Maybe used they will come down in 9 months or so.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: RTV and deersniper

    rydah

    Moons out goons out.
    Supporter
    Commercial Supporter
    Minuteman
    Feb 12, 2019
    60
    144
    In what regard? Other than potential tunneling and arguably overpriced this is more or less what one would expect from another ATACR model as far as price, size, features and weight goes.
    Looking at other products in that category I don’t see why many would choose it when the compact and lightweight segment of that category go to is the 5-20 ultra short and the optics performance go to is the zco 4-20. Both which are priced similar.

    A Kahles 5-25 is lighter and only slightly longer also.

    For it to be positioned well in the market I would have said it needed to be same size and weight as the 4-16x50 or very close.

    I really like nightforce scopes but this has me scratching my head a little.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 5RWill

    SRPowah

    Gunny Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    793
    215
    NoDak/SoDak
    I love my NF optics. The only reason I keep buying NF is because I keep buying them used for well below street price. I LOVE my 4-16 ATACR with the low profile turrets. If they could give me that optic with a 20x top end for $2500-$2600ish at the expense of maybe a little length, I would probably pay it and upgrade.

    But at over an inch longer, tall turrets, and $3k? LOL I would rather buy a ZCO brand new at that point. I have to be missing something.
     
    Last edited:

    5RWill

    Optics Fiend
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 15, 2009
    5,264
    1,490
    30
    Mississippi
    The only thing I can come up with that makes sense to me because I know nightforce isn't this out of touch with the market is that they made this for a mil contract.

    Idk really. It took them FOREVER to get a decent Mil reticle out. Considering how long they've been around it was shocking to say the least how hard they leaned on Horus. I mean i suppose one could argue the same about leupold, but i expect it from a company that pushed Mil reticle/MOA turrets for nearly a decade.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: RTV

    Sprayed99

    WJK 4-9-18
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 9, 2012
    1,019
    309
    36
    Waxahachie TX
    looking at both specs of the ZCO and ATACR, I will happily pay a few bucks more for the ZCO.

    The things that kill it for me, weight, length, FOV @20x, and the ocular rotating the entire eye piece. I do love my 4-16x42, but this 4-20 just misses the mark for 3k.
     

    beetroot

    Major Hide Member
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 10, 2018
    1,159
    909
    Looking at other products in that category I don’t see why many would choose it when the compact and lightweight segment of that category go to is the 5-20 ultra short and the optics performance go to is the zco 4-20. Both which are priced similar.

    A Kahles 5-25 is lighter and only slightly longer also.

    For it to be positioned well in the market I would have said it needed to be same size and weight as the 4-16x50 or very close.

    I really like nightforce scopes but this has me scratching my head a little.

    I don't think the issue is it's too big and heavy, as the NX8 is their answer to your question.
    The real problem is this is priced with the ZCO and SBs.

    I'd argue that if it were smaller lighter and cheaper it wouldn't compete with the big boys but then it'd compete with their own NX8s and 4-16 ATACR.

    I think the problem is the NX8 was a bit over ambitious and the 2.5-20 especially seems to have been a little bit of a flop, and the ATACR series has gotten too close in price to the best of the best.

    In reality I'm sure this will sell well anyway as the NF fanboyism is very strong.
    The market it still open for a nice mid magnification, lightish weight, medium priced crossover scope. Maybe the illuminated XTR3 will fill that void, or Vortex has something up their sleeve.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: rydah

    jeffl838

    Private
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 20, 2013
    773
    348
    I don't think the issue is it's too big and heavy, as the NX8 is their answer to your question.
    The real problem is this is priced with the ZCO and SBs.

    I'd argue that if it were smaller lighter and cheaper it wouldn't compete with the big boys but then it'd compete with their own NX8s and 4-16 ATACR.

    I think the problem is the NX8 was a bit over ambitious and the 2.5-20 especially seems to have been a little bit of a flop, and the ATACR series has gotten too close in price to the best of the best.

    In reality I'm sure this will sell well anyway as the NF fanboyism is very strong.
    The market it still open for a nice mid magnification, lightish weight, medium priced crossover scope. Maybe the illuminated XTR3 will fill that void, or Vortex has something up their sleeve.

    What was a flop about the 2.5-20 nx8? Glass wasn't perfect, but it's a pretty neat scope.
     

    charnicus

    Padawan
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 29, 2018
    1,225
    624
    Leftist Coast, U.S.A.
    Maybe it’s overpriced or maybe it’s priced up there because it is there. I guess we shall see. I kinda doubt it but who knows. $600 bucks is $600 bucks though. I think the length is attractive as, and I’ve seen others say as well, that the ultra shorts can be too short. I felt that way about the K318i in my personal experience. 13.9” is pretty friggin short all things considered. I’m just a fanboy of the 4-16 so naturally my hopes are high.

    P.S. the MilR reticle is a decent mil reticle.
     

    A.Huggy

    Private
    Minuteman
    Nov 19, 2019
    54
    66
    Maybe they’ve done some work to put the image quality on par with the ZC or some other subjective attributes we’re not seeing in the specs. Maybe that’s too optimistic.

    I’m imagining the NF engineering and marketing teams pulling their hair out reading this thread... unless this design was driven by a MIL contract 🤔
     

    SRPowah

    Gunny Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    793
    215
    NoDak/SoDak
    Maybe it’s overpriced or maybe it’s priced up there because it is there. I guess we shall see. I kinda doubt it but who knows. $600 bucks is $600 bucks though. I think the length is attractive as, and I’ve seen others say as well, that the ultra shorts can be too short. I felt that way about the K318i in my personal experience. 13.9” is pretty friggin short all things considered. I’m just a fanboy of the 4-16 so naturally my hopes are high.

    P.S. the MilR reticle is a decent mil reticle.

    Lets assume it isn't considered an ultra short and doesn't make any of the trade offs normally needed to cut package size. ZCO still sits in a similar price tier while maintaining sub-13" length and is regarded as an optic that makes almost no obvious compromise (lol @ their name). At that point, the smaller package is just a bonus. This NF better have some damn good optical performance that clearly outperforms their current offerings for me to not spend a little more.

    I love the Mil-R.
     

    RTV

    Rock the Vote
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 30, 2019
    222
    119
    The market it still open for a nice mid magnification, lightish weight, medium priced crossover scope. Maybe the illuminated XTR3 will fill that void, or Vortex has something up their sleeve.

    Not really mid range in price (2500$) but I am really excited to get some good info on the new March 1.5-15 x42.
    Its 21oz and only 10.5" long

    Only gripe is that its SFP with no tree reticle which im sure would be a minor thing for many.
    I am hoping however that this is just the first of a few new scopes and they release a FFP version and keep the capped turrets.

     

    Glassaholic

    Send it!
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 30, 2012
    4,720
    3,665
    Black Forest, CO
    What was a flop about the 2.5-20 nx8? Glass wasn't perfect, but it's a pretty neat scope.
    Apparently you haven’t looked through one. Very finicky Eyebox and parallax, significant edge distortion, mushy turrets. What I did like - center resolution was impressive, reticles and illumination. I agree, it is a “neat” scope, but it just does not compete with other scopes at its price point and even less for the above mentioned parameters.
     

    Glassaholic

    Send it!
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 30, 2012
    4,720
    3,665
    Black Forest, CO
    Maybe they’ve done some work to put the image quality on par with the ZC or some other subjective attributes we’re not seeing in the specs. Maybe that’s too optimistic.

    I’m imagining the NF engineering and marketing teams pulling their hair out reading this thread... unless this design was driven by a MIL contract 🤔
    I don’t think NF gives a rip about this thread but I may be wrong. I think of Nightforce like Nike, they have a great brand name that sells most of their products and they have some decent products but there is stiff competition that offers more bang for the buck as it were.

    That being said, I’m hoping you’re right and that NF (or rather LOW engineers) have done something really special with this scope. If it’s on the 32+ ounce range then it will be meh for me and I’d rather just get another ZCO 4-20.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: beetroot

    Strykervet

    Lanolin Lube 4U
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 5, 2011
    5,567
    4,252
    45
    Pierce County, WA
    I kinda wonder how some of you value optics. 2 oz.? 1 inch?

    I have a 4-16 on order and just contacted NF to see if I can modify the order for one of these instead. I could GAF if it's the latest/greatest.

    All the other shit aside, it has 130 minutes of elevation compared to 89 minutes for the 4-16 --that's HUGE and for me, is one of the main attributes I'm looking for in a scope. That and the fact it has a 50mm OBJ is probably where you weight comes from, and if that's all it added then maybe they did work some magic here.

    It's not advertised with Zero Hold but it does come with Zero Stop. I know they ain't the same thing but it's not featureless.

    In fact, I think it has the most useable elevation of any of them? Certainly more than 4-16, 7-35 and I think it's like 10MOA more than the 5-25 too.
     

    Strykervet

    Lanolin Lube 4U
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 5, 2011
    5,567
    4,252
    45
    Pierce County, WA
    I kinda wonder how some of you value optics. 2 oz.? 1 inch?

    I have a 4-16 on order and just contacted NF to see if I can modify the order for one of these instead. I could GAF if it's the latest/greatest.

    All the other shit aside, it has 130 minutes of elevation compared to 89 minutes for the 4-16 --that's HUGE and for me, is one of the main attributes I'm looking for in a scope. That and the fact it has a 50mm OBJ is probably where you weight comes from, and if that's all it added then maybe they did work some magic here.

    It's not advertised with Zero Hold but it does come with Zero Stop. I know they ain't the same thing but it's not featureless.

    In fact, I think it has the most useable elevation of any of them? Certainly more than 4-16, 7-35 and I think it's like 10MOA more than the 5-25 too.

    Well, I had to go back on that, keeping my order.

    Turns out the ZeroHold, slightly greater FOV, 1" less length and 5oz. less weight (it's 5oz. lighter, not 2oz.) is worth more than 4x mag and 41 minutes of elevation if it's going on a 20" 7.62 with a max range of 1000m.
     

    5RWill

    Optics Fiend
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 15, 2009
    5,264
    1,490
    30
    Mississippi
    Well, I had to go back on that, keeping my order.

    Turns out the ZeroHold, slightly greater FOV, 1" less length and 5oz. less weight (it's 5oz. lighter, not 2oz.) is worth more than 4x mag and 41 minutes of elevation if it's going on a 20" 7.62 with a max range of 1000m.
    So they weight is 32oz? Cause their site says 35.2oz while the 5-25 is 37.6oz.

     

    Glassaholic

    Send it!
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 30, 2012
    4,720
    3,665
    Black Forest, CO
    So they weight is 32oz? Cause their site says 35.2oz while the 5-25 is 37.6oz.

    That is essentially what I predicted, the ATACR's are heavy scopes and while there is certainly application for this, the fact that FOV is even worse at the low end baffles me (unless they did this to eliminate edge distortion). Looks like the ZCO will continue its reign as the top ultra short out there simply for FOV alone; however, similar to other ATACR designs while FOV is poor at the low end it appears to pick up by the top end, question is how quickly does this occur throughout the mag range. Sounds like a side by side with the ZCO is in order, who's going to take on this challenge?
     

    Sprayed99

    WJK 4-9-18
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 9, 2012
    1,019
    309
    36
    Waxahachie TX
    That is essentially what I predicted, the ATACR's are heavy scopes and while there is certainly application for this, the fact that FOV is even worse at the low end baffles me (unless they did this to eliminate edge distortion). Looks like the ZCO will continue its reign as the top ultra short out there simply for FOV alone; however, similar to other ATACR designs while FOV is poor at the low end it appears to pick up by the top end, question is how quickly does this occur throughout the mag range. Sounds like a side by side with the ZCO is in order, who's going to take on this challenge?
    I put in a call to my dealer to try and get one, haven't heard back yet, but I still want to compare them because I love my 4-16x42s.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Glassaholic

    jeffl838

    Private
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 20, 2013
    773
    348
    I kinda wonder how some of you value optics. 2 oz.? 1 inch?

    I have a 4-16 on order and just contacted NF to see if I can modify the order for one of these instead. I could GAF if it's the latest/greatest.

    All the other shit aside, it has 130 minutes of elevation compared to 89 minutes for the 4-16 --that's HUGE and for me, is one of the main attributes I'm looking for in a scope. That and the fact it has a 50mm OBJ is probably where you weight comes from, and if that's all it added then maybe they did work some magic here.

    It's not advertised with Zero Hold but it does come with Zero Stop. I know they ain't the same thing but it's not featureless.

    In fact, I think it has the most useable elevation of any of them? Certainly more than 4-16, 7-35 and I think it's like 10MOA more than the 5-25 too.
    The 4-16 ATACR with the locking turret is my favorite scope of all time. As much of a pain their clutch system is on that locking turret, being able to go 2 full mils under is a feature I wish I had in my PM2