Rifle Scopes NX8 4-32 F1 Questions

[rlsmith1]

For those of you who have time behind an NX8 4-32 F1 with the MIL-XT reticle, how is the reticle at minimum and maximum power?

Is it usable at minimum power without illumination?

Would I be disappointed if I traded my Mark 5 5-25 away for one of these?

This would be on a switch barrel rifle between 308 and 338 mag. The 4x low end and short form factor is appealing for use with a CNVD as well

 

[RussDXT]

I think you’ll be happy with it. I never turned on illumination on the whole hunting season with mine. I think it’s a scope in a class of its own in regards to durability.

 

[rlsmith1]

Glad to hear it! Are you comfortable shooting 4x during the middle of the day or what is your typical magnification you carry it on while hunting? Seems to be the place most FFP scopes give something up.

I've never figured out how to get a good pic through the scope but if you have an example of what the reticle is like on 4x that would be sweet

 

[RussDXT]

To give you a for instance, I run a 2.5-20 nxs ffp deer hunting in the Carolina’s. I turn the illumination on while I’m walking or if it’s early/late because I’m likely needing to shoot quickly, and I keep it on the lowest power. Out west that nx8 seems to pop enough at 4x power for me to not need the illumination though it is more thin than others (think not optimized for the hunter). In terms of reticle usage the swfa ffp beat them out un-illuminated. I prefer the Nightforce on my hard use rifles because they are the most reliable scopes I can afford. I am willing to sacrifice a bit in the reticle in order to have the peace of mind of the durability.

 

[rlsmith1]

To give you a for instance, I run a 2.5-20 nxs ffp deer hunting in the Carolina’s. I turn the illumination on while I’m walking or if it’s early/late because I’m likely needing to shoot quickly, and I keep it on the lowest power. Out west that nx8 seems to pop enough at 4x power for me to not need the illumination though it is more thin than others (think not optimized for the hunter). In terms of reticle usage the swfa ffp beat them out un-illuminated. I prefer the Nightforce on my hard use rifles because they are the most reliable scopes I can afford. I am willing to sacrifice a bit in the reticle in order to have the peace of mind of the durability.

I agree with that. Which SWFA are you comparing to, the 3-15 or 5-20?

It makes sense as both of those scopes have a smaller power range

 

[RussDXT]

I only have the 3-15. The 5-20 looks nice, but when you get to that price range your too close to a Nightforce for me to get one.

 

[msstate56]

For those of you who have time behind an NX8 4-32 F1 with the MIL-XT reticle, how is the reticle at minimum and maximum power?

Is it usable at minimum power without illumination?

Would I be disappointed if I traded my Mark 5 5-25 away for one of these?

This would be on a switch barrel rifle between 308 and 338 mag. The 4x low end and short form factor is appealing for use with a CNVD as well

Having used both, and still having a Mk5 5-25: in no way would I trade a Mk5 for an NX8.

 

[rlsmith1]

Having used both, and still having a Mk5 5-25: in no way would I trade a Mk5 for an NX8.

What makes you say that? I have no complaints with the MK5 other than size and if I'm feeling really picky, the reticle at 5x

 

[TheSunPope]

What makes you say that? I have no complaints with the MK5 other than size and if I'm feeling really picky, the reticle at 5x

I have both, and I prefer my Mark 5 personally. But if you're going to use a clip on I can definitely see size being an issue. The 4-32 is a solid scope I have no real complaints optically other than the parallax is kinda touchy. If I had to nitpick I'd say I wish the mag ring had a shorter throw. With the scope mounted low I can't really use the included throw lever without having bolt clearance issues.

 

[RussDXT]

I have both, and I prefer my Mark 5 personally. But if you're going to use a clip on I can definitely see size being an issue. The 4-32 is a solid scope I have no real complaints optically other than the parallax is kinda touchy. If I had to nitpick I'd say I wish the mag ring had a shorter throw. With the scope mounted low I can't really use the included throw lever without having bolt clearance issues.

I have a few NX8’s. I can only use the lever on a sig cross.

 

[Conqueror]

I have the NF 4-32 MilXT and a Mk5 3-18. I like the NX8 more. I definitely find the reticle usable throughout most of its mag range, though it is very fine indeed down at 4x. Glass is good and turrets are standard NF. If you want more mag than the Mk5 it’s a good alternative.

 

[rlsmith1]

I love my MK5 3-18 and don’t think I’d trade it for anything but a ZCO 4-20. But then that wouldn’t be a trade!

Which reticle is in your Leupold? I’m perfectly fine with the TMR in my 3-18 on low mag. Curious how the NX8 MIL XT compares at 4x

 

[Conqueror]

I have the CCH reticle in mine. The stadia and holdover dots seem beefier to me which helps at lower mag. But I am a mag whore so I tend to run scopes at higher power where I appreciate a little finer markings.

 

[msstate56]

What makes you say that? I have no complaints with the MK5 other than size and if I'm feeling really picky, the reticle at 5x

As others have mentioned- the parallax bugs me. On the Mk5, I can put the parallax on say 600 and shoot everything from 300-1000 without touching it during a stage, with every target still in focus. The NX8 is a lot more finicky. The glass on the NX8 is not as good to me as Mk5, and I love the locking turret on the Mk5

 

[msstate56]

I love my MK5 3-18 and don’t think I’d trade it for anything but a ZCO 4-20. But then that wouldn’t be a trade!

Which reticle is in your Leupold? I’m perfectly fine with the TMR in my 3-18 on low mag. Curious how the NX8 MIL XT compares at 4x

I too like the illuminated TMR in the 3.6-18 Mk5. On 3.6 it essentially acts like a duplex. The NX8 on 4 power was much harder to use, the NF reticle lines are very thin.