Got to agree with the Professor here in a big way. For those of us involved in the T5XI debacle this is nothing! The fact that we have representation and monitoring from a Nikon representative is really positive. Lets not chase him away like the NightForce rep if you remember that one!
Rifle Scopes Nikon FX-1000
- Thread starter lennyo3034
- Start date
Got to agree with the Professor here in a big way. For those of us involved in the T5XI debacle this is nothing! The fact that we have representation and monitoring from a Nikon representative is really positive. Lets not chase him away like the NightForce rep if you remember that one!
I'll have to admit one thing for sure. It shows it was designed by someone who shoots a lot at different ranges. Windage and elevation both have multiple UP and RIGHT arrows.
Geez after reading this thread (and multiple others) I am torn yet again.
I was pretty much set on getting a Ares btr , but now I'm wondering if I shud give the Nikon another look.
I have played with the Nikon @ sportsmans warehouse and very much liked it.
Only reason I was leaning to the Ares was the tree style reticle.
This is my very first long range optic and I was trying to stay at this price point.
I liked the pst gen 2 but as someone stated earlier it's almost double the price as the Nikon.
Any advice for a first optic in this price point?
Will I really miss the tree reticle ? I feel if I get the Ares btr I know I'm sacrificing in the turrets dept. I've read and seen multiple people say the Nikon beats the Ares hands down on turrets.
Possibly better glass with the Nikon also. I know this is entry level scope and prices but it's a big purchase for me, so I wanna make sure whichever way I go I will be happy for a couple years.
I was pretty much set on getting a Ares btr , but now I'm wondering if I shud give the Nikon another look.
I have played with the Nikon @ sportsmans warehouse and very much liked it.
Only reason I was leaning to the Ares was the tree style reticle.
This is my very first long range optic and I was trying to stay at this price point.
I liked the pst gen 2 but as someone stated earlier it's almost double the price as the Nikon.
Any advice for a first optic in this price point?
Will I really miss the tree reticle ? I feel if I get the Ares btr I know I'm sacrificing in the turrets dept. I've read and seen multiple people say the Nikon beats the Ares hands down on turrets.
Possibly better glass with the Nikon also. I know this is entry level scope and prices but it's a big purchase for me, so I wanna make sure whichever way I go I will be happy for a couple years.
Last edited:
I'll say, I entertained the FX1000 for a good long while (tantamount to analysis paralysis), I was impressed with the Nikon's features for the price point, but the turret issue put me off. I have an older Nightforce NXS that as served me well and I bought another NF instead based on reliability and the old SH adage "buy once, cry once." Sure, the NF's expensive and heavy, it's 34mm tube so I'll have to shell out for another set of rings too, but at this time I don't have time to mess around with shipping things back and forth and negotiating with customer service. I can afford a(nother) NF, but I just don't want to have to. Besides the NF's American-made; so there's that.
I have other rifles that I could use the Nikon on and if the FX1000 clockwork proves to be a non-issue from here on out, then I'm still in the market, especially if additional Mil reticle options are added. Today though, I will pay an admittedly hefty premium not to deal with any product QC oversights. Looking forward to the future.
I have other rifles that I could use the Nikon on and if the FX1000 clockwork proves to be a non-issue from here on out, then I'm still in the market, especially if additional Mil reticle options are added. Today though, I will pay an admittedly hefty premium not to deal with any product QC oversights. Looking forward to the future.
Pilot, I've been playing with a *cheap* .223 Rem setup for the local steel matches for the last couple years. I think I have less than $1000 in the entire setup (including suppressor!) and I am using a $250 Vortex Viper 5-20 SFP MOA/MIL. I routinely place mid-pack of 10-20 people with $10,000 rifle packages who take the sport more seriously than I. In my opinion, the FX1000 would be a far better option than the Viper I'm using and would simplify a lot of the courses of fire I see on a regular basis and eliminate some of the rookie mistakes, like being a rev-off your zero. If you get a Nikon with reliable adjustments and you learn to use the reticle you should be good to go "for [at least] a couple years."
Remember it's how you shoot, not what you shoot.
Awesome fred thanks for the advice. I'm definitely going to take another hard look at the Nikon.
Especially with the free mount deal right now seems like it's pretty tough to pass up.
And i was rethinking about the reticle. I have a basic understanding of the mil system so perhaps the simpler reticle on the Nikon would be better for me to learn on?
Reticles are sort of a personal thing. If the Xmas tree style is too busy and visually ditracting, then go with something else. Whatever you get, learn it by using it; it will become second nature after a while. Learn your rifle, your dope and your supporting equipment and you will be a better shooter. Shooting is the best use of your money, don't chase the Gear/Gadget rabbit hole. Once you have a couple thousand rounds down range you''ll be familiar enough with your equipment to know what works for you and what doesn't. Then you can make cost-effective changes.
I have both the Ares BTR 4x27 and Nikon 4x16. To my eye the glass is pretty even both are bright and clear. The eye box on my Nikon is a little more forgiving to me it's easier to get settled behind when shooting support side.
The turrets feel a little more positive on the Nikon but I've had no problems with my Athlon. Some have commented on "ghost" clicks with the Nikon , I don't seem to have that issue on my scope.
I do however have an issue with the zero set collar. Even with all 3 set screws removed it only screws down appx 1/8 of a turn not bottomed out at all then the turrets start to click changing my zero. For now I'm running it without the stop, untill I decide if im going to send it in. By comparison the Ares stop was a breeze. Neither system is overly complicated I've just got something going on with mine.
The Ares reticle can get a little distracting at times but over all I truly like it. It makes life simple on hold overs on days with wind. Pretty much every day in Arizona.
Nikon reticle is clean and simple for me it helps to focus on the basics. I like the open .5 , 1.5 mil ECT. wind holds. The stadia lines do get just a little thick at extended ranges but not a deal breaker.
The 4x16 Nikon is on my .308 and looks to be tracking right. Time will tell if it holds up. If I can get the zero stop worked out it'll be a good 8-900 yard scope that won't hold me back in club matches within MY effective 308 range.
In short buy the scope and reticle that fits your eye. Buy within your budget and leave room for ammo!
Everyone has pretty much the same warranty and if you search you'll find examples of every brand having a QC issue at times. The real difference is the customer service rep and how they treat you. Good luck.
Regarding 'ghost' clicks mentioned earlier in this thread....
I had purchased the 4-16x mrad-illuminated version back in April and noticed that for every other click in elevation, I would sometimes get an additional click in felt feedback. It was more noticeable when turning the elevation turret slowly. The windage turret seemed to be ok and had a more positive and distinct sound versus the elevation. Outside of this issue, the scope worked fine with no noticeable issues. Unfortunately, I did send it back for a refund since I couldn't get past the extra feedback in the elevation turret.
I had purchased the 4-16x mrad-illuminated version back in April and noticed that for every other click in elevation, I would sometimes get an additional click in felt feedback. It was more noticeable when turning the elevation turret slowly. The windage turret seemed to be ok and had a more positive and distinct sound versus the elevation. Outside of this issue, the scope worked fine with no noticeable issues. Unfortunately, I did send it back for a refund since I couldn't get past the extra feedback in the elevation turret.
Last edited:
Thanks for taking the time to reply about these two scopes. This is exactly the two I'm trying to decide between for my first "starter" scope. I'm leaning now to the Nikon because I can get hands on with it @ my local sportsmans, and get it at better deal at the moment. I like the turrets they have good feel etc. Glass looks good and so on.
I wish we had a Athlon dealer so I could compare them side by side. But for my first scope I'm thinking the Nikon won't disappoint. I would purchase it tomorrow if my fiancee wouldn't kill me. We are saving for our wedding which is less than two months away. So after that I'm thinking I'll be able to pull the trigger on a scope. Thanks for all the help guys I appreciate it.
All right, I posted on here that I had gotten my new Nikon in, and was initially happy with it. I got it mounted up and took it to the range on Monday to give it a good run. There are good things about this scope, but also things that I’m not so happy with.
Turrets are pretty nice. Good clicks that are crisp and audible. Nice clear markings that are easy to read. I had no ghost clicking as others mentioned. The zero stop is great. It is very simple to use. It is so simple to be honest, I don’t know how you could screw it up. Nikon did a great job with that.
The reticle is very usable with the .2 mil hash marks. Something Nikon did was to leave a little gap at the .5 mil mark. I thought it was a little goofy when I first saw it, but when getting on targets, I very quickly came to like it a whole lot. It is very easy to center stuff up using the little gaps. I don’t really know how to describe it, but it worked really good. I REALLY wish that the reticle was thinner in the middle, it is a little thick, but it’s not a deal breaker. It is not too thick, but it could be, and should be a little thinner. To be honest, I haven’t put the battery in it yet. I like a black reticle. I know others prefer an illuminated reticle and that is fine, but I wanted to get to the range and put some rounds on target.
There is no Christmas tree of course, but I can live with that, as I almost always dial for elevation, but hold for wind, so that is ok.
The mount that comes with the scope is pretty nice. Since this was going on an AR10 in 6.5 Creed, I got the model with a little cantilever and 20 moa. The scope mounting was pretty straight forward and went smoothly. I like the mount and the way that it is designed to give a lot of gripping area. If you like to put a lot of stuff on your tube like red dots, be aware that this mount takes up a lot of tube space. There was plenty of room for a level, but just know that not a lot else is going to fit. I’m good with it. Like I said, lots of gripping area for the rings.
So far so good, but now we get to an important part, glass clarity. The glass in my scope is not up to par. It is bad enough that I would say it is unacceptable. The problem with it, is that it looks “foggy” when you look through it. This was bothering me as to how foggy it was, so I put it side by side with my Gen 1 Bushnell ERS. The Bushnell is much clearer with no fog. I’m not sure why this scope is like this, but it’s bad enough to bother me when I look through it. Also, I couldn’t get it to really, really focus on high power. The Bushnell wouldn’t focus as crisply as usual either, so I’m calling that a wash. To be honest, I’m getting older, and my glasses are several years old and I know that I need new ones, so it my not be the scope. It was a cool morning with no sun so there was no mirage.
So, now I’m torn. The glass should be better. If an optical device says Nikon on the side, you would think that the part they would get right, would be the glass. They other side of the coin is, this scope WITH a pretty nice mount is only $700 dollars, so what kind of glass do you expect? (I still expect better)
I did not do a tracking test. I know this is one of the most important items, and that is coming up. I have an Athlon Ares ETR on the way (at some point in time) and will give the scopes a side by side test then.
Overall, I’m going to keep the scope. I really like the turrets, but every time I look through it, I’m going to wish the glass was better, but like I said, it’s only $700 dollars, so shut up and shoot. You can’t compare it to a $2500 Razor, because it’s simply not.
Turrets are pretty nice. Good clicks that are crisp and audible. Nice clear markings that are easy to read. I had no ghost clicking as others mentioned. The zero stop is great. It is very simple to use. It is so simple to be honest, I don’t know how you could screw it up. Nikon did a great job with that.
The reticle is very usable with the .2 mil hash marks. Something Nikon did was to leave a little gap at the .5 mil mark. I thought it was a little goofy when I first saw it, but when getting on targets, I very quickly came to like it a whole lot. It is very easy to center stuff up using the little gaps. I don’t really know how to describe it, but it worked really good. I REALLY wish that the reticle was thinner in the middle, it is a little thick, but it’s not a deal breaker. It is not too thick, but it could be, and should be a little thinner. To be honest, I haven’t put the battery in it yet. I like a black reticle. I know others prefer an illuminated reticle and that is fine, but I wanted to get to the range and put some rounds on target.
There is no Christmas tree of course, but I can live with that, as I almost always dial for elevation, but hold for wind, so that is ok.
The mount that comes with the scope is pretty nice. Since this was going on an AR10 in 6.5 Creed, I got the model with a little cantilever and 20 moa. The scope mounting was pretty straight forward and went smoothly. I like the mount and the way that it is designed to give a lot of gripping area. If you like to put a lot of stuff on your tube like red dots, be aware that this mount takes up a lot of tube space. There was plenty of room for a level, but just know that not a lot else is going to fit. I’m good with it. Like I said, lots of gripping area for the rings.
So far so good, but now we get to an important part, glass clarity. The glass in my scope is not up to par. It is bad enough that I would say it is unacceptable. The problem with it, is that it looks “foggy” when you look through it. This was bothering me as to how foggy it was, so I put it side by side with my Gen 1 Bushnell ERS. The Bushnell is much clearer with no fog. I’m not sure why this scope is like this, but it’s bad enough to bother me when I look through it. Also, I couldn’t get it to really, really focus on high power. The Bushnell wouldn’t focus as crisply as usual either, so I’m calling that a wash. To be honest, I’m getting older, and my glasses are several years old and I know that I need new ones, so it my not be the scope. It was a cool morning with no sun so there was no mirage.
So, now I’m torn. The glass should be better. If an optical device says Nikon on the side, you would think that the part they would get right, would be the glass. They other side of the coin is, this scope WITH a pretty nice mount is only $700 dollars, so what kind of glass do you expect? (I still expect better)
I did not do a tracking test. I know this is one of the most important items, and that is coming up. I have an Athlon Ares ETR on the way (at some point in time) and will give the scopes a side by side test then.
Overall, I’m going to keep the scope. I really like the turrets, but every time I look through it, I’m going to wish the glass was better, but like I said, it’s only $700 dollars, so shut up and shoot. You can’t compare it to a $2500 Razor, because it’s simply not.
the one ive been looking at @ sportsmans is crystal clear. I took the time to set the diopter to my eye, and played with the paralax. Granted i was indoors and only looking at max 150' , but the glass was crystal clear (to me).
I once again then picked up the pst gen 2 and honest to God i couldnt tell that much a difference between the two. Both were very clear....
Then i picked up the $3500 ATACR.. and I immediately got depressed and came home, to waste away on forums. Talking about scopes i wish i could have..
I once again then picked up the pst gen 2 and honest to God i couldnt tell that much a difference between the two. Both were very clear....
Then i picked up the $3500 ATACR.. and I immediately got depressed and came home, to waste away on forums. Talking about scopes i wish i could have..
Pilot--Feel your pain. I too have champagne desires but a beer budget.
I took this scope out again Saturday evening for some dryfire practice. What i discovered is, it is very sensitive to sun positioning. The sun was facing me, but not directly in my face, and once again it was washed out. However, once the sun dropped behind some trees, things cleared up considerably. When i was at the range earlier last week, it was 11am, and while bright out, the sun was not in my face, so i did not expect the picture to be so washed out. I did not have the extended shade with me either time, and that may be a simple fix to this problem.
How much is your car payment? In 10 years your car will be almost worthless and worn out. An ATACR should still be workin' fine in 3 times as long. Besides, if you're young and intend to keep shooting, then that NF's only $9.75 a month over the next 30 years.
Hahaha very true... I'm fairly young still (35), so I get your thinking on this matter haha now tell me how to explain this to my wife to be. If only I could get her onboard lol..How much is your car payment? In 10 years your car will be almost worthless and worn out. An ATACR should still be workin' fine in 3 times as long. Besides, if you're young and intend to keep shooting, then that NF's only $9.75 a month over the next 30 years.
Simple: Don't tell her, or better yet, tell her and if she freaks out, she's not "the one." She should love you for you.
How much did the engagement ring cost you? How big ($$$) is the wedding going to be, and for what exactly? If you're not even married yet and you have to clear expenses with the GF, how's that going to look after you're married? $3500 now is a lot less expensive than a divorce later. Just sayin'.
The great thing about money is that they're printing more of it every day. It's a renewable natural resource; sustainable. haha.
How much did the engagement ring cost you? How big ($$$) is the wedding going to be, and for what exactly? If you're not even married yet and you have to clear expenses with the GF, how's that going to look after you're married? $3500 now is a lot less expensive than a divorce later. Just sayin'.
The great thing about money is that they're printing more of it every day. It's a renewable natural resource; sustainable. haha.
I tried to tell a buddy this exact same thing a few years back. He'll never admit it but he knows I was right now.Simple: Don't tell her, or better yet, tell her and if she freaks out, she's not "the one." She should love you for you.
How much did the engagement ring cost you? How big ($$$) is the wedding going to be, and for what exactly? If you're not even married yet and you have to clear expenses with the GF, how's that going to look after you're married? $3500 now is a lot less expensive than a divorce later. Just sayin'.
The great thing about money is that they're printing more of it every day. It's a renewable natural resource; sustainable. haha.
lol no shit man, when you add up the ring and wedding expense a scope is nothing in comparison. Unfortuntaly neither of our parents are involved so were having to pay for everything on our own, but yeah once all that is over with , its game on for some new equipmentSimple: Don't tell her, or better yet, tell her and if she freaks out, she's not "the one." She should love you for you.
How much did the engagement ring cost you? How big ($$$) is the wedding going to be, and for what exactly? If you're not even married yet and you have to clear expenses with the GF, how's that going to look after you're married? $3500 now is a lot less expensive than a divorce later. Just sayin'.
The great thing about money is that they're printing more of it every day. It's a renewable natural resource; sustainable. haha.
Once that is over with, you’re done! The ring will be through your nose, and you better get used to saying “yes ma’am”. I’m just kidding. Don’t get mad. I’m married to a great girl. She lets me shoot, a lot, and doesn’t complain. She knows it’s my thing. The only time she tells me no, is when it legitimately won’t work money wise. She keeps the books and does a pretty good job of it. I got pretty lucky when I met her. Now, back to the scope talk and enough of this women talk. I’m starting to sound like a woman. Damn.
Simple: Don't tell her, or better yet, tell her and if she freaks out, she's not "the one." She should love you for you.
How much did the engagement ring cost you? How big ($$$) is the wedding going to be, and for what exactly? If you're not even married yet and you have to clear expenses with the GF, how's that going to look after you're married? $3500 now is a lot less expensive than a divorce later. Just sayin'.
The great thing about money is that they're printing more of it every day. It's a renewable natural resource; sustainable. haha.
bahahhahaha.... This is why my wife and I have have the OUR money account, and then we each take a percentage and have the my money account.
Hunting Dogs, guns, fishing gear etc come out of the MY money... and she don't say a thing lol.... that said, I don't ask where the PILES of shoes come from....
This scope would be higher on my list but I just don't dig the reticle... I've become a floating dot guy for sure
I need help with my Nikon. Took the rifle to the range on Friday and zeroed in at 100 yds. I'm new to long range and getting familiar with the equipment. Small steps and learning as I go. I followed the directions in the manual to the letter and I'm not sure what to expect of this problem. Or maybe it isn't a problem. In the first photo, I have the turret cap off and next to the turret. My understanding is that once I set the zero stop, which I did, the cap would go back on and bottom out at the horizontal 0 line. Adjustments would be up from there for longer distances. As you can see, the top of the turret itself is higher than the cap. Look at the second photo and you can see the cap isn't bottomed out. Hope this all makes sense? Is this normal? I'm shooting .300 WM. 
That is normal. It is not going to be on the zero line unless you get a lot more angled rail to mount it on. The zero stop just keeps the turret from going below zero and doesn't set the turret on the zero line.
Thank you
Great question and 1 that has been asked by others as well. Mord., Thank's for helping out with the right answer. I recently bought one but haven't done anything with it thus far, still deciding on which rifle to put it on. Should be a lot of fun once I do get it dialed in on a rifle.
Just picked up a 6-24 slightly used off ebay, I'm counting 20.5 mils of total elevation range, 5 more than advertised. Anyone else seeing the same or similar?
That is about right, S. They are bonus Mils! Use them wisely.
For those that have used Nikons warranty how long did it take to get your shit back? I checked on mine and it says product replaced but no tracking # yet. I’ve got hunts coming up and am starting to think I may need to move some scopes around. Nikon has had mine for 3 weeks now.
Pm inbound thanks a bunch Bart
Backcountryguide, Bart is good people and will give you the straight scoop.
When my scope was at Nikon, the “Product Replaced” Status meant they had evaluated your issue and had determined your scope would be replaced with new stock. In other words, the scope you sent in would not be fixed and returned to you. In my case it took a bit of time to get back a new replacement scope because Nikon had no product in stock to replace it with.
I am sure Bart will work on your behalf to get the replacement back to you as soon as possible. Nikon is most likely waiting to get new scopes delivered before they can send you one. The Fx1000’s have been popular and in short supply in many places. Hang in there!
When my scope was at Nikon, the “Product Replaced” Status meant they had evaluated your issue and had determined your scope would be replaced with new stock. In other words, the scope you sent in would not be fixed and returned to you. In my case it took a bit of time to get back a new replacement scope because Nikon had no product in stock to replace it with.
I am sure Bart will work on your behalf to get the replacement back to you as soon as possible. Nikon is most likely waiting to get new scopes delivered before they can send you one. The Fx1000’s have been popular and in short supply in many places. Hang in there!
Thank you for the kind words. While I do not work directly for Nikon I have worked with them for almost 10 tears and I will do my best to help you out. This goes to any of you that need assistance
Leozinho https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast...nel-podcast/id1367259793?mt=2&i=1000415107097. Episode 10. He ain’t saying but he came close to letting it out.
I've been using a SHV F1 on my hunting/ long range 260 for three years now with very little complaints.
Picked up a FX1000 4-16 for another like used rifle, and this far I'm quite blown away by this little optic. The glass is maybe, and I mean maybe a touch less sharp than the SHV during bright daytime, but in low light, it seems to show better clarity than either my SHV F1 or my NXS F1. Also the eye relief blows both NF scopes out of the water. That has always been my only real complaints with the SHV F1, and the NXS F1 eye relief is nothing to write home about. Sometimes hunting you get into some awkward positions, and a forgiving eye box is a huge perk.
I like the reticle more than the MOAR. It also doesn't seem to get as thick on max magnification.
Turrets are very tactile and accurate. As a hunter and not a competitive shooter, I've never been a fan of "high speed" turrets. Of all my scopes I like the SHV F1 layout. 10 moa per rev but the detents are far enough apart that it's very easy to see and feel where you have dialed, but that's a personal quirk.
Only a few months of testing, and maybe 600 to rounds underneath the FX1000, but so far I'm a huge fan and so is everyone who has sat behind the rifle wearing it.
I'm a fan, and will be purchasing another.
Picked up a FX1000 4-16 for another like used rifle, and this far I'm quite blown away by this little optic. The glass is maybe, and I mean maybe a touch less sharp than the SHV during bright daytime, but in low light, it seems to show better clarity than either my SHV F1 or my NXS F1. Also the eye relief blows both NF scopes out of the water. That has always been my only real complaints with the SHV F1, and the NXS F1 eye relief is nothing to write home about. Sometimes hunting you get into some awkward positions, and a forgiving eye box is a huge perk.
I like the reticle more than the MOAR. It also doesn't seem to get as thick on max magnification.
Turrets are very tactile and accurate. As a hunter and not a competitive shooter, I've never been a fan of "high speed" turrets. Of all my scopes I like the SHV F1 layout. 10 moa per rev but the detents are far enough apart that it's very easy to see and feel where you have dialed, but that's a personal quirk.
Only a few months of testing, and maybe 600 to rounds underneath the FX1000, but so far I'm a huge fan and so is everyone who has sat behind the rifle wearing it.
I'm a fan, and will be purchasing another.
What rifle?
IT takes 30 mil rings if that is what you are asking. Nikon has their BLACK Series mount's that work great. They can be had with 20MOA if needed.
Here's a pic of my BLACK FX1000 on my 6.5 CM. The bottom pic shows the flat mount and the top is the BLACK Series Cantilever mount which worked best for my AR application.
Here's a pic of my BLACK FX1000 on my 6.5 CM. The bottom pic shows the flat mount and the top is the BLACK Series Cantilever mount which worked best for my AR application.
I'm not sure how Nikon did it, but shooting today with a handful of FFP scopes available, and friends who got behind the FX1000 mentioned how nice and crisp the reticle stays even at max magnification. My SHV F1, NXS F1 and XTR2 (all very awesome scopes btw) like any FFP get a little thick at max magnification.
The Nikon remains so nice for target shooting and small varmint, something I've usually prefered a SFP for.
I dont know where the issues with the turrets came from, but I dont even like high speed turrets and these ones are nice. I've never had another turret "Buzz" like these when cranking as well.
Out to 810 yards and back to zero a handful of times, its tracking true and gaining around every time I shoot it. Really really impressed with this thing.
The Nikon remains so nice for target shooting and small varmint, something I've usually prefered a SFP for.
I dont know where the issues with the turrets came from, but I dont even like high speed turrets and these ones are nice. I've never had another turret "Buzz" like these when cranking as well.
Out to 810 yards and back to zero a handful of times, its tracking true and gaining around every time I shoot it. Really really impressed with this thing.
Im sorry, but that reticle is fat in the center. It will totally cover a 30 cal bullet hole. This reticle is great for steel at distance, but it is by no means a fine reticle for target shooting. Hard to do dot drills when the dots are covered up.
That was about the only thing I didn't like about it.
McMillan A5, Custom Rem700 SA 6.5CR, 24" X-Caliber, Timney Tigger, APA GII Little B.
Last edited:
I decided to go with the Badger Ordnance since I had a coupon. I bet my buddy who has an XTR II 5-25, that the Nikon will have better glass. I dont know this for sure but its my turn to pay at the bar anyways. I just wish the Nikon had a 34MM version. Thanks for the advice.
The Nikon reticle is .038 mils at 100 yards which puts it right in between the msr .04@100 & h2cmr/p4 fine .035@100 line thickness so it not too bad. The fx will cover 308 holes around 230 yards & a h2cmr/p4-fine covers them at 250 yards but compared to open centers you can see better, one reason I like my pst2 but but I like the msr & h2cmr on my benders but wish the Bender had the ebr-2c.
Similar threads
