Rifle Scopes Nightforce VS. IOR

Hoyt7mm

Bow Shooter
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter
Apr 6, 2017
1,021
292
Wisco
I am finishing a 6.5 creedmore build and I am trying to determine an optic. Roughly between 1-2k. I'm torn between some of the Nighforce Optics (SHV and NXS) vs the IOR Valdata 3-18x42 35mm. This will be used as a crossover rifle for both target and hunting applications. Looking for thoughts on reliability, durability, clarity and turret adjustment.
Thanks!
 
In your price range, just about anything from Vortex, Bushnell, NF, Steiner, Burris will perform well for you. IOR has a bit of a mixed history. What specifically draws your attention to the IOR?
 
I am intrigued with the larger 35-40mm tubes IOR has available. What specifically has their issues been?

Also, of the Nightforces, which would be my first choice? So far +1 for the SHV
 
Scopes are like cars....Honda and Toyota (Nightforce), Mercedes (Schmidt), Ferrari (Tangent Theta).

I have one Chinese made rifle scope (vortex strike eagle 1-8). I trust this scope much more than I ever did my IOR's.

 
I am intrigued with the larger 35-40mm tubes IOR has available. What specifically has their issues been?

Also, of the Nightforces, which would be my first choice? So far +1 for the SHV

The only reason I would choose an optic that had a 35mm tube would be if it just had a ridiculous amount of internal adjustment. The IOR with a 35mm tube has a same amount of adjustment as a Vortex PST with a 30mm tube. So I really see no value in its additional size a weight.

The optic that fdkay mentions above has a 34mm tube with 8mils more internal adjustment and much better track record than the IOR. That Bushnell is a fantastic deal. The SHV you previously mentioned would also perform very well, and between the SHV and IOR, I would pick the SHV every time.
 
Wouldn't recommend IOR to an enemy. You should also look at the Vortex Razor 5-20x in that price range as well.
 
I wouldn't even consider IOR. You could just flush the money down the toilet and consider yourself ahead in the frustration department. You could pick up a gen one Razor that has a 35mm tube. I wouldn't go down that avenue. Most common is the 34mm tube. You could find a gen2 Razor 3-18x50 34mm tube for $1750 used here in the optics for sale section. Almost all 34mm tubed scopes are going to be a little heavy on the hunting side of things.
 
I appreciate the input. I was leaning towards Nighforce anyway so my decision should be pretty easy. Could someone please give me an example of the IOR problems?
 
I already did, with the mounting issues.
They also have a track record of not holding up, though in all fairness, the Gen 4's have apparently proved pretty damn reliable.
I am actually a fan of IOR, and purchased one many years ago, because NO ONE made an intermediately priced tactical scope, this was before the PST and Weaver Tactical scopes, let alone the Bushnell and other scopes that have hit the market.
Now, they are rather overpriced for what you get, though the glass is fantastic.
 
I had the 3-18 IOR. no issues with it, other than what was mentioned. hard to get rings to mount well with it. I had to "modify" the rings to get the second zero marker to work correctly.

I liked the scope, but think in that price range I would go with either the 5-20 vortex gen 1 or even a used leupold mark 6 3-18. both are better than the IOR in mult arenas in my opinion
 
I've had a couple IOR scopes and still currently have one of the 3.5-18x50 IOR scopes (newer generation). Yes, they've definitely had lots of issues and don't have the best following now-a-days compared to many other scope companies because of their issues. Fortunately, I myself have not experienced any of those negative problems that so many others have... Keeping my fingers crossed here. Both have tracked great, returned to zero each time, and yes they do have really good glass. However, I do prefer my NF Atacr F1 4-16 and other scopes. My 3.5-18 is kind of heavy for what it is. Hell, i think it weighs more than my Gen1 Razor. Anyways, if I was looking for a cross-over range/hunting optic right now, IOR would not be one of the scopes I'd choose. For me, I'd be looking at the MK6 3-18, AMG, Bushnell LRHS, or I'd get another Atacr F1. The Gen1 Razor is a good scope, but I would save up a few more bucks and spring for something in that next tier of glass.
 
I've got two IORs. Haven't had a problem with either one. I have the 3.5-18x50 on a custom 308, and the totally awesome 12-54x56 terminator on my custom 6.5 creedmore. All either one does is ring steel. Great scopes. Schott Glass, it just don't get any better.
 
Have to admit IOR has a lot of mixed feelings. But are they really warranted ?? just curious. I've had my 3-18 x42 sfp for over 12+ years and no issues.
See for yourself. Pulled these cause I remember reading them. Searching the riflescope forum for valdada brings up more.
The reason they are in the Rex videos is that we slew them over and over so IOR needed to find an outlet to talk about them.

They were dying left and right, so excuse the few, "mine work great" as a broken clock is right twice a day. You never see them and when you do, it's someone who barely puts 3000 rounds downrange a year. They are the same as playing dice, roll the dice, take your chance.

The other reason this site slays them, they infringed on my trademark without permission trying to brand the 3-18x as a SH Edition scope. They were looking for a reticle, a dealer (Scott @ Liberty) came on here as a dealer for them and enlisted the forum to design their reticle. The members crowd designed their current reticle and so they felt my Trademarked Name and Logo were free to use in order to sell scopes. We never authorized it.

They have "great glass" because they use an old WWII / Cold War Era Communist Zeiss factory in Romania that was trapped behind the Iron Curtain when Germany was split up. However, they cannot make internal components to save their ass. Scopes are Telescopic SIGHTING devices, not spotters. So while glass quality is important, mechanics in the scope are more important as we have to dial our turrets in order to hit shit. If those mechanics don't work right, you cannot hit a target no matter how crispy the image looks through the scope.

We deal in volume, and not one-off anecdotal stories from people who rarely venture past 100 yards. We try to not waste people's money but if you are hell-bent on throwing it away, go for it.


 
C4C1454B-C02B-4B73-B9D8-AEFCB6E28FB4.jpeg
 
After damaging my LRHSi and pulling to send in for repairs I dropped my IOR 3-18x42 on my 6.5x47 to test an unproven load from a ladder.
Much to my disappointment it only shot a .318" 5 shot group at 100 yards including the cold bore shot on a clean un fouled barrel.
Totally unacceptable, I'm sure if it was a NF it would have been a single hole less than the bullet diameter ???
 
I agree that IOR has a mixed track record however the Valdada G2 made in Japan is awesome. I have used mine pretty hard for 15 months (11 two day matches and travel) and love it. Tracks great and the only time I have had to adjust my zero is when I changed barrels on my rifle. I prefer it over my S&B PM II, Leupold Mark 5 and Gen 2 Razor.
 
I agree that IOR has a mixed track record however the Valdada G2 made in Japan is awesome. I have used mine pretty hard for 15 months (11 two day matches and travel) and love it. Tracks great and the only time I have had to adjust my zero is when I changed barrels on my rifle. I prefer it over my S&B PM II, Leupold Mark 5 and Gen 2 Razor.
That G2 is made to Val’s specs in Japan and is not an IOR scope. Notice, there is no IOR label anywhere on the G2 4.8-30x56 scopes. Even so, I have had my own history with that company and would steer anyone in a different direction.
 
Ive had the IOR 3-18x42 we got on a group buy after designing the reticle on this very forum 10 or 12 years ago. First one crapped out at exactly the 500th round. Sent it back, got a newer generation one on them no questions asked within 5 days and its been fine ever since. I have not been nice to it- bounced out of a jeep type stuff on rocky roads and still ticking. Eye relief is too short and I find it heavy for its quality but I wouldnt turn my nose up at one if the price was right. That said there are better scopes with a less spotty history as many here will tell you. If my life depended on it Id grab my NF first but the IOR has taken enough abuse its more of a known quantity than some of my nicer scopes I tend to baby. YMMV
 
I agree that IOR has a mixed track record however the Valdada G2 made in Japan is awesome. I have used mine pretty hard for 15 months (11 two day matches and travel) and love it. Tracks great and the only time I have had to adjust my zero is when I changed barrels on my rifle. I prefer it over my S&B PM II, Leupold Mark 5 and Gen 2 Razor.

If I remember correctly, the G2 is basically the same scope as the Athlon Cronus with a bigger tube and an extra $1000 price tag.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
I had the opportunity to compare the G2 to the Athlon Cronus at the 2018 PRS Finale. While the Athlon is a nice scope it is not nearly as bright or as clear as the G2. I understand how one could draw that comparison. The G2 was much better optically (to my eyes) and to me it's worth the extra $$$ over the Athlon. I also prefer the feel of the turrets on the G2 more than that of the Athlon.
 
Hands down NF SHV. I have the SHV 4-14x F1 Mil-R and the glass is so nice and clear. I've shot out to 1k no problem. It mounted right up in a NF precision mount, no lapping. Plus you can shim the turrets for zero stops. Very tactile feel to the turret clicks. Still I can't talk about how nice the glass was for a 1200 dollar NF.

I tried less expensive optics like the Vortex Diamondback 6-24x and the glass wasn't as clear. Even though the Vortex had greater magnification I prefered the NF. I also tried an Athlon Ares BTR 6-24x. And same result. Glass was not as clear. Even if the scope goes 10x more on mag, it really didn't matter since the clarify is what allowed me to shoot more accurately out at distance.