Rifle Scopes NX8 4-32 vs. ZCO 4-20?

[MtnGhost]

Wondering if anyone has had trigger time behind both optics and could provide any comparisons of the two?

I've been running a 4-32 (MIL-C) in NRL22 for a while. I've looked though a 5-27 (MPCT3) and loved the larger sight picture. The weight and size does concern me a bit, but I'm thinking a 4-20 could have some advantages to a 5-27 and the 4-32.

I'd also be looking to run it for bench shooting at primarily 100y and steel from 100-300y (not sure how well a 4-20 would fair shooting small bore to 300y though).

Thanks in advance!

 

[Threadcutter308]

I have not been behind either of those specific models. I do have multiple ZCO 5-27's and a TT. As I understand, the ZCO 4-20 is supposed to be even nicer than the 5-27, if only by a little. If it were me, I'd go with the ZCO 4-20 and not look back.

FWIW, I really like my TT, but all things considered/less money, I'd go with ZCO. I agree with what most have said about the TT image being better, but it's only very slightly better and ZCO punches more of the right buttons for me. Again, nothing wrong with the TT, I just prefer the ZCO's.

 

[waveslayer]

The ZCO is superior over the NF NX8 line of glass that's for sure.

 

[Covertnoob5]

Get a 527 or 840 for small bore. The NX8 doesn’t compete with any ZCO.

 

[wildcats]

Sold my NX8 4-32.The tunneling issue above 22 power made it really tough for my eyes
Tried using a taller mount,and it helped with alignment ,but still wasn't happy. glass was nice and clear .
You can't compare both. never been behind a Zcomp.

 

[hafejd30]

NX8 will struggle to compete with the ZCO. ATACR would be a better comparison

 

[MtnGhost]

NX8 will struggle to compete with the ZCO. ATACR would be a better comparison

I ran a 7-35 for a while in NRL22. It was tough finding close range targets, but more forgiving to shoot from the non-support side / non-dominant eye.

The glass on that 7-35 was abnormally good for a 7-35. I have no idea why that was, I had the T3 version and it just seemed brighter and sharper than a MIL-XT that I looked through on another rifle (side by side with my rifle). I just didn't care for the size of the 7-35 for PRS and the T3 wasn't ideal.

Get a 527 or 840 for small bore. The NX8 doesn’t compete with any ZCO.

Yeah I think the biggest question I have is would a 420 be able to see the splash / misses from a small bore at 200y? That's not really been an issue with my 4-32.

 

[Spock]

I’ve been running the Nightforce on my Voodoo. Been pretty happy. It does get tight in the higher mag ranges (above 25x). But no problems with close targets. ZCO will have better glass for sure but have not spent anytime behind that particular model. I would think 250-300 you should still see impacts pretty well.

 

[Dustyplyr]

I ran a 7-35 for a while in NRL22. It was tough finding close range targets, but more forgiving to shoot from the non-support side / non-dominant eye.

The glass on that 7-35 was abnormally good for a 7-35. I have no idea why that was, I had the T3 version and it just seemed brighter and sharper than a MIL-XT that I looked through on another rifle (side by side with my rifle). I just didn't care for the size of the 7-35 for PRS and the T3 wasn't ideal.


Yeah I think the biggest question I have is would a 420 be able to see the splash / misses from a small bore at 200y? That's not really been an issue with my 4-32.

You will be able to see splash just fine. I've ro'd the king of 0.28 mile 22 match for the last several years and with subpar glass in sig kilo3000bdx binos i had no issues spotting impacts at 300+. When I shot the match I ran my kahles k624i at 12-14 power for the entire match and had zero issues. The zco is optically superior to the k624i and would be even easier. High zoom isn't the answer to seeing splash, proper npa and rifle setup is

 

[ToKeepAndBear]

The Steiner T6Xi 3-18x56 is now on my Tikka T1X 22LR. It is an excellent optic for that role with the MSR2 reticle. Nice, easy sight picture and the turrets are sweet. I really like mine.

By the way, a fellow air gunner here. I have always enjoyed your posts on AGN.

 

[MtnGhost]

I’ve been running the Nightforce on my Voodoo. Been pretty happy. It does get tight in the higher mag ranges (above 25x). But no problems with close targets. ZCO will have better glass for sure but have not spent anytime behind that particular model. I would think 250-300 you should still see impacts pretty well.

Yeah, my 4-32 can get sketchy above 24x when it's not like 12pm on a sunny day lol. I'm not going to say that it's useless at that power, but it also gets very hazy around 280 and beyond.

I can usually see POIs in the dirt at that range, but I've never been able to make out impacts on splatter paint paper targets beyond 280 with the 4-32 (whereas the 7-35 had enough detail to see them to 320y on a no mirage type day). I still have high regards for the 4-32 though.. it's a solid optic with excellent versatility.

You will be able to see splash just fine. I've ro'd the king of 0.28 mile 22 match for the last several years and with subpar glass in sig kilo3000bdx binos i had no issues spotting impacts at 300+. When I shot the match I ran my kahles k624i at 12-14 power for the entire match and had zero issues. The zco is optically superior to the k624i and would be even easier. High zoom isn't the answer to seeing splash, proper npa and rifle setup is

King of 0.28 mile sounds cool! I absolutely agree with that last statement too. Called CSTactical and ordered a 420 with the 3x reticle. Thinking it'll work just fine for NRL22 considering ~50% of the targets are under 100y anyway lol

The Steiner T6Xi 3-18x56 is now on my Tikka T1X 22LR. It is an excellent optic for that role with the MSR2 reticle. Nice, easy sight picture and the turrets are sweet. I really like mine.

By the way, a fellow air gunner here. I have always enjoyed your posts on AGN.

Thanks! My old Tikka was my gateway to building rimfire-comparable airguns LOL! Had one of the first T3x's that came out (also had a Sako in 300WSM at the time). That Tikka was just SOLID and an excellent shooter, until out of the blue the barrel stopped liking the lot of ammo that I had been using with it exclusively. I kind of went on a neurotic bender and got another action/barrel, bad luck with dozens of different ammo lots, and I couldn't ever get it to shoot better than 1.5 MOA at 100 (usually 2-2.25).

How is the glass on those 3-18's btw? I've never looked through one of those, but that mag range is awesome and I've always thought that they'd be good in dim environments with that 56mm objective.

 

[ToKeepAndBear]

How is the glass on those 3-18's btw? I've never looked through one of those, but that mag range is awesome and I've always thought that they'd be good in dim environments with that 56mm objective.

I have a ZCO 420 as well. I have not compared it directly to the Steiner yet side by side. The Steiner 3-18x56 glass is surprisingly good though. I would roughly guesstimate 85-90% of the ZCO optical quality for less than 1/2 the price. I actually might like the Steiner turrets a little better but they are both very nice.

You will not be disappointed with the ZCO. It is a very nice scope. I love mine. I have it on my ELR 338 Lapua Sako TRG 42 rifle. (I am a sucker for Sako and Tikka rifles!) It just seems like rapidly diminishing returns above the price point and quality of the T6Xi. The ZCO costs twice as much, but for a 22LR scope, I can’t say it is twice as nice.

I have compared the Steiner directly to my Hensoldt 3-12x56 and 4-16x56. Again, I was very impressed with the Steiner for the money. The lowlight and overall optical quality is very good. It is also nice that if something happens to it, it is made in the USA. I am kind of out of luck with my Hensoldt scopes. Thankfully, I have never had any problems out of them. They are awesome night scopes with a clip-on! The Steiner works well in that capacity as well.

Have fun with that ZCO!

 

[Rob01]

Getting in those price ranges have you looked at the Zeiss LRP S3 4-25x50? has a ton of elevation and would be worth a look.

 

[cjs88]

Thanks! My old Tikka was my gateway to building rimfire-comparable airguns LOL! Had one of the first T3x's that came out (also had a Sako in 300WSM at the time). That Tikka was just SOLID and an excellent shooter, until out of the blue the barrel stopped liking the lot of ammo that I had been using with it exclusively. I kind of went on a neurotic bender and got another action/barrel, bad luck with dozens of different ammo lots, and I couldn't ever get it to shoot better than 1.5 MOA at 100 (usually 2-2.25).

How is the glass on those 3-18's btw? I've never looked through one of those, but that mag range is awesome and I've always thought that they'd be good in dim environments with that 56mm objective.

Having compared the two, to my untrained, amateur scope using eyes, I can't tell a difference. The ZCO might have a slight edge in clarity but for 1/2 the price, the T6xi's are really hard to beat IMO. Just need to decide if I want another 3-18 or the 5-30 for my Tac Ops coming later this year.

 

[Birddog6424]

I run a 3-18×50 XTRIII on my rimfire set up. I've had it on my rifle for three years now, all the way up to the PRS Rimfire Finale. Needing high magnification on a rimfire is a myth.

Most shots are well within 300 yards. And just like I do in centerfire, I spend 90% of my match at 16x.

The ZCO is far superior to the NX8 in pretty much every category except FOV.

 

[Chickentoast]

NX8 might be better than a Tasco from 1989.

 

[MtnGhost]

I run a 3-18×50 XTRIII on my rimfire set up. I've had it on my rifle for three years now, all the way up to the PRS Rimfire Finale. Needing high magnification on a rimfire is a myth.

Most shots are well within 300 yards. And just like I do in centerfire, I spend 90% of my match at 16x.

The ZCO is far superior to the NX8 in pretty much every category except FOV.

Yep I broke 400 once during an NRL22 match shooting with my EXPS3-4/G33

Having compared the two, to my untrained, amateur scope using eyes, I can't tell a difference. The ZCO might have a slight edge in clarity but for 1/2 the price, the T6xi's are really hard to beat IMO. Just need to decide if I want another 3-18 or the 5-30 for my Tac Ops coming later this year.

I've always liked Steiner as a company and their reticles look really well thought out too!

 

[carbonbased]

As others have mentioned, comparing an NX8 with a ZCO…I dunno. Not the most apt comparo.

I don’t own a ZCO, but I do own a NX8. Can’t really give you an honest opinion about it as I haven’t used it in anger yet. Just done some target shooting.

What I can say is that it seems the early NX8 4-32 and 2.5-20 scopes weren’t the best for some reason. That’s why you see lots of bad reviews.

@Glassaholic and others later noticed the newer NX8’s were much better, like NF implemented some unheralded mid-life improvements. They are better than the 5-25 PST II but also have a shallower DOF than that scope. I wish it had a locking elevation turret.

I have noticed no finicky eyeboxes, and I hate tight eyeboxes. Can’t comment on overall DOF past 100yds yet.

edit: I’m a dumbass, you already own an NX8 lol. Whatever. I’ll leave my post here for some PST owner.

 

[Glassaholic]

As others have mentioned, comparing an NX8 with a ZCO…I dunno. Not the most apt comparo.

I agree but that’s what the OP is looking at so he’s curious I get it. I’ll say this, the ZCO 4-20 is the best ultra short made, it has amazing DOF and parallax forgiveness with a great eyebox, you’re comparing it to a scope that has an 8x erector and anytime you increase that mag range you’re introducing the potential for more compromises. Let me ask this, what are you hoping to gain with the ZCO that you’re not getting from the NF? Maybe the NF NX8 gets a little finicky above 20x but if all you really need is 4-20 then maybe your 4-32 does just fine from 4-20, is it really worth changing out? Now, if you’re kind of over the 4-32 and looking to justify a ZCO, I get that too and you won’t be disappointed but it requires brand new rings or mount to boot and runs a bit heavier.

I don’t own a ZCO, but I do own a NX8. Can’t really give you an honest opinion about it as I haven’t used it in anger yet. Just done some target shooting.

I know what you mean, you can’t truly know how good a scope is until you’ve used it in anger

 

[carbonbased]

I know what you mean, you can’t truly know how good a scope is until you’ve used it in anger

In my case, preferably blasting pdogs!!

 

[MtnGhost]

In my case, preferably blasting pdogs!!

YES!!! PDog hunting is probably the most addictive type of hunting that one can experience. Had lots of fun in eastern WA / Idaho hunting them with 17HMR and 22 Grendel!

I agree but that’s what the OP is looking at so he’s curious I get it. I’ll say this, the ZCO 4-20 is the best ultra short made, it has amazing DOF and parallax forgiveness with a great eyebox, you’re comparing it to a scope that has an 8x erector and anytime you increase that mag range you’re introducing the potential for more compromises. Let me ask this, what are you hoping to gain with the ZCO that you’re not getting from the NF? Maybe the NF NX8 gets a little finicky above 20x but if all you really need is 4-20 then maybe your 4-32 does just fine from 4-20, is it really worth changing out? Now, if you’re kind of over the 4-32 and looking to justify a ZCO, I get that too and you won’t be disappointed but it requires brand new rings or mount to boot and runs a bit heavier.

I know what you mean, you can’t truly know how good a scope is until you’ve used it in anger

Yeah, in my case the ZCO will be more of a solution looking for a problem . The 4-32 is a fine optic and check most of the boxes for NRL22 (with the MIL-C reticle).

The main things that I expect to gain from the 4-20 is brightness, clarity, and one of the coolest reticles that I've ever seen. I don't usually dial between shots in NRL22 unless I'm strategically pre-dialing when I shoot in the airgun class. The specs indicate 92% light transmission, whether that's accurate or not it should be pretty bright and I would expect it to be a major step up for target acquisition during matches on dimmer days (they can be a real PITA to find once they're all shot up).

Build quality - I suppose that I'm interested to see what an optic is like that is built with the moniker of "zero compromises". I've owned numerous top tier optics, but I've been dedicated to NF for several years now, because I've never had one fail on me (call me superstitious).

Mounts - yeah, that stings already! Dropping a few/several hundred per mount wasn't something that I was looking forward to. Went with some Spuhrs (6001 and the 6601), so hopefully one of them works out!

 

[Glassaholic]

Yeah, in my case the ZCO will be more of a solution looking for a problem . The 4-32 is a fine optic and check most of the boxes for NRL22 (with the MIL-C reticle).

The main things that I expect to gain from the 4-20 is brightness, clarity, and one of the coolest reticles that I've ever seen. I don't usually dial between shots in NRL22 unless I'm strategically pre-dialing when I shoot in the airgun class. The specs indicate 92% light transmission, whether that's accurate or not it should be pretty bright and I would expect it to be a major step up for target acquisition during matches on dimmer days (they can be a real PITA to find once they're all shot up).

Build quality - I suppose that I'm interested to see what an optic is like that is built with the moniker of "zero compromises". I've owned numerous top tier optics, but I've been dedicated to NF for several years now, because I've never had one fail on me (call me superstitious).

Mounts - yeah, that stings already! Dropping a few/several hundred per mount wasn't something that I was looking forward to. Went with some Spuhrs (6001 and the 6601), so hopefully one of them works out!

That's good info. I've had the NX8 2.5-20 but never the 4-32 so I cannot comment specific to that scope and it would be unfair to compare the 2.5-20 to the 4-32 because they are different designs. Hopefully someone here actually has both (ZCO 4-20 and NX8 4-32) and can give you their opinion in the 4-20 range, but keep in mind that while we can provide opinions there is nothing like personal experience so if you could somehow get your hands on a ZCO 4-20 that would be ideal.

I'm not sure what reticle you have in your NX8 but the Mil-XT is well regarded for competition use, but so are ZCO's reticles. I will say this, the ZCO tree's are pretty thick with their solid horizontal stadia lines, if you prefer the less obscured view of the Mil-XT you might be disappointed with the MPCT series tree reticles. I am basing this on my own personal preference because I like as much of the image to be unobscured as possible and I find the tree reticles that have dots instead of solid lines are more to my liking - but that's me and there are plenty of ZCO owners who enjoy and actually prefer the thick solid lines (or circles) of the MPCT series tree reticles.

 

[MtnGhost]

That's good info. I've had the NX8 2.5-20 but never the 4-32 so I cannot comment specific to that scope and it would be unfair to compare the 2.5-20 to the 4-32 because they are different designs. Hopefully someone here actually has both (ZCO 4-20 and NX8 4-32) and can give you their opinion in the 4-20 range, but keep in mind that while we can provide opinions there is nothing like personal experience so if you could somehow get your hands on a ZCO 4-20 that would be ideal.

I'm not sure what reticle you have in your NX8 but the Mil-XT is well regarded for competition use, but so are ZCO's reticles. I will say this, the ZCO tree's are pretty thick with their solid horizontal stadia lines, if you prefer the less obscured view of the Mil-XT you might be disappointed with the MPCT series tree reticles. I am basing this on my own personal preference because I like as much of the image to be unobscured as possible and I find the tree reticles that have dots instead of solid lines are more to my liking - but that's me and there are plenty of ZCO owners who enjoy and actually prefer the thick solid lines (or circles) of the MPCT series tree reticles.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of thick reticles or cluttered stadia lines, but one thing with the MIL-C reticle that has really tripped me up time and time again with my holdovers are those 1/2 length subtensions. It's great that they clear up real estate along the reticle, but every so often during PRS matches I get distracted by something and wind up miscounting them! It's like if I don't shoot / train with the optic for a while, I space out momentarily on the fact that that they're in a sequence of 0.2 (left side) - 0.4, 0.6 (right side), 0.8 (left side) then a full MIL line:

So in those instances I wind up having a POA error in my holdover, because my mind gets disoriented in some way that counts them as 0.1. Hard to explain, but it's just some personal phenomenon that is probably unique to my aging brain, but if I let it really get to me during a match, I wind up dropping shots thereafter.

In those specific regards, I prefer the full hash marks on the 3x reticle over the added real estate:

But I do agree that personal experience trumps all else! I pulled the trigger on a 420/3x yesterday from CSTactical, and it should be here tomorrow. Never had the chance to check out a 420 in person, but I had already spent some time (although brief) behind the MPCT3x in a 527. To my eyes, the reticle/stadia lines are close to perfect (and somewhat transparent compared with some others like the T3 in my 7-35).

I like the MIL-XT reticle, but I don't think it would work for my eyes in a 4-32 shooting PRS in dim conditions. Target finding has been doable with the cleaner MIL-C, but I think it would have been challenging in many of the NRL22 matches that I shot in the dark/cloudy/rainy/foggy days in the PNW during the fall and winter months had it been the MIL-XT.

 

[CSTactical]

That's good info. I've had the NX8 2.5-20 but never the 4-32 so I cannot comment specific to that scope and it would be unfair to compare the 2.5-20 to the 4-32 because they are different designs. Hopefully someone here actually has both (ZCO 4-20 and NX8 4-32) and can give you their opinion in the 4-20 range, but keep in mind that while we can provide opinions there is nothing like personal experience so if you could somehow get your hands on a ZCO 4-20 that would be ideal.

I'm not sure what reticle you have in your NX8 but the Mil-XT is well regarded for competition use, but so are ZCO's reticles. I will say this, the ZCO tree's are pretty thick with their solid horizontal stadia lines, if you prefer the less obscured view of the Mil-XT you might be disappointed with the MPCT series tree reticles. I am basing this on my own personal preference because I like as much of the image to be unobscured as possible and I find the tree reticles that have dots instead of solid lines are more to my liking - but that's me and there are plenty of ZCO owners who enjoy and actually prefer the thick solid lines (or circles) of the MPCT series tree reticles.

@Glassaholic just an FYI ZCO reticles are actually as fine or finer than most other F1 scopes on the market they subtend .030 - .036 mil depending on the model compared to the Mil-XT that subtend .033-.043 also model dependent. Now ZCO's reticle appear darker than most due to the plasma process they use which is above my paygrade

Mil-XT https://www.nightforceoptics.com/technology/reticles/mil-xt
ZCO reticles on .pdf http://www.zcompoptic.com/en-us/products

 

[Northernjets]

So I have both, the NX8 4-32 MIL-C and two ZCO 420 MPCT3. The NX8 sat on my CZ 457 for a while and was used out to 300m/328yds at the range and in the field against gophers and the like. It has served that purpose quite well. With the 30moa scope base on my CZ, I have no issues dialing out to 300m with a little bit of room to spare. I can tell you with 100% certainty that any misses are my own and not from my NX8.

My ZCO 420s have not been used on my 22 yet, they currently reside on a 223 and 6.5. Considering I can see 223 holes at 300m, I wouldn't worry about missing any splashes due to the optic. You've already been behind a ZCO, so you seem to be well aware of optical advantages so far like the image pop and generous DoF. Mechanically, you should be able to squeeze out more use-able elevation vs the NX8 for really reaching out there.

As far as replacing your NX8 goes, I think that'll really come down to what it's worth for you. I absolutely love my ZCOs, it's always a joy getting behind them and I don't think I could ever bring myself to get rid of them save for trading towards the MPCT3x reticles. My NX8? I kind of just see it as a means to an end. It works but nothing about it really 'wows' me. Having said that, it pains me to say that I don't think the ZCO brings enough to the table vs the NX8 for my uses to justify the cost on a 22. Up here in Canada, I can almost buy two NX8s for the cost of one ZCO and without any local 22 matches to take advantage of in my area, I just can't justify such a jump in cost. The ZCOs are amazing though, so if you can swing it and justify the money, I say go for it.

 

[Glassaholic]

@Glassaholic just an FYI ZCO reticles are actually as fine or finer than most other F1 scopes on the market they subtend .030 - .036 mil depending on the model compared to the Mil-XT that subtend .033-.043 also model dependent. Now ZCO's reticle appear darker than most due to the plasma process they use which is above my paygrade

Mil-XT https://www.nightforceoptics.com/technology/reticles/mil-xt
ZCO reticles on .pdf http://www.zcompoptic.com/en-us/products

You can give me PDF’s and dimensions all day, but what really matters is how the reticle looks in the real world and ZCO’s reticles are too distracting for my taste. Let me explain what I mean, the Mil-XT and similar designs (Gen3 XR, MR4, FML-TR1 et al) that incorporate simple dots in the tree are much less distracting to my eyes. The MPCT3 uses circles and too many dots - too distracting, the new MPCT2X still uses solid lines in the tree - too distracting. I wish ZCO had a reticle that just had dots and no solid lines in the tree, I’ve been asking ZCO for this ever since they came out, love their scopes but don’t care for the reticles so they don’t tend to last very long on my rifles. Would love to check out the new 10 mil per rev turrets but without a reticle I like I’m not sure if I’ll do that. Like I mentioned above, this is purely personal preference and I don’t expect ZCO to cater to my needs, I will continue to promote ZCO scopes because I think they are one of the best thought out designs on the market but until they have a reticle that I like I just don’t see spending the money on another as there is plenty of good competition with reticles I prefer.

 

[CSTactical]

You can give me PDF’s and dimensions all day, but what really matters is how the reticle looks in the real world and ZCO’s reticles are too distracting for my taste. Let me explain what I mean, the Mil-XT and similar designs (Gen3 XR, MR4, FML-TR1 et al) that incorporate simple dots in the tree are much less distracting to my eyes. The MPCT3 uses circles and too many dots - too distracting, the new MPCT2X still uses solid lines in the tree - too distracting. I wish ZCO had a reticle that just had dots and no solid lines in the tree, I’ve been asking ZCO for this ever since they came out, love their scopes but don’t care for the reticles so they don’t tend to last very long on my rifles. Would love to check out the new 10 mil per rev turrets but without a reticle I like I’m not sure if I’ll do that. Like I mentioned above, this is purely personal preference and I don’t expect ZCO to cater to my needs, I will continue to promote ZCO scopes because I think they are one of the best thought out designs on the market but until they have a reticle that I like I just don’t see spending the money on another as there is plenty of good competition with reticles I prefer.

Happy (early) Valentines Day @Glassaholic

 

[Glassaholic]

Happy (early) Valentines Day @Glassaholic

Talk to my kids and my friends and they would wholeheartedly agree.

 

[Chickentoast]

You can give me PDF’s and dimensions all day, but what really matters is how the reticle looks in the real world and ZCO’s reticles are too distracting for my taste. Let me explain what I mean, the Mil-XT and similar designs (Gen3 XR, MR4, FML-TR1 et al) that incorporate simple dots in the tree are much less distracting to my eyes. The MPCT3 uses circles and too many dots - too distracting, the new MPCT2X still uses solid lines in the tree - too distracting. I wish ZCO had a reticle that just had dots and no solid lines in the tree, I’ve been asking ZCO for this ever since they came out, love their scopes but don’t care for the reticles so they don’t tend to last very long on my rifles. Would love to check out the new 10 mil per rev turrets but without a reticle I like I’m not sure if I’ll do that. Like I mentioned above, this is purely personal preference and I don’t expect ZCO to cater to my needs, I will continue to promote ZCO scopes because I think they are one of the best thought out designs on the market but until they have a reticle that I like I just don’t see spending the money on another as there is plenty of good competition with reticles I prefer.

Exactly why I dumped mine and won't go back until they make something with the thinness...

 

[MtnGhost]

So I have both, the NX8 4-32 MIL-C and two ZCO 420 MPCT3. The NX8 sat on my CZ 457 for a while and was used out to 300m/328yds at the range and in the field against gophers and the like. It has served that purpose quite well. With the 30moa scope base on my CZ, I have no issues dialing out to 300m with a little bit of room to spare. I can tell you with 100% certainty that any misses are my own and not from my NX8.

My ZCO 420s have not been used on my 22 yet, they currently reside on a 223 and 6.5. Considering I can see 223 holes at 300m, I wouldn't worry about missing any splashes due to the optic. You've already been behind a ZCO, so you seem to be well aware of optical advantages so far like the image pop and generous DoF. Mechanically, you should be able to squeeze out more use-able elevation vs the NX8 for really reaching out there.

As far as replacing your NX8 goes, I think that'll really come down to what it's worth for you. I absolutely love my ZCOs, it's always a joy getting behind them and I don't think I could ever bring myself to get rid of them save for trading towards the MPCT3x reticles. My NX8? I kind of just see it as a means to an end. It works but nothing about it really 'wows' me. Having said that, it pains me to say that I don't think the ZCO brings enough to the table vs the NX8 for my uses to justify the cost on a 22. Up here in Canada, I can almost buy two NX8s for the cost of one ZCO and without any local 22 matches to take advantage of in my area, I just can't justify such a jump in cost. The ZCOs are amazing though, so if you can swing it and justify the money, I say go for it.

That's the perfect way to sum up the 4-32! I mean this in the most respectful way, but the 4-32 is kind of like a minimum viable product of sorts that just barely checks all of the boxes that it needs to without excelling in any one single category. The poors might not get this analogy, but it's basically like how the Rolex Explorer is to "luxury" sports watches

I can't see letting go of my 4-32 though (probably ever). I have zero regrets getting it in the first place, but I bought it for the wrong reasons, in that I got it to replace a March 3-24x52 that I was running on my elk rifle. The March's tunneling / CA / turret issues bugged me, but I do have some regrets letting that March go (it was VERY light and compact, and the glass was pretty clear from ~18-20x).

All of the MPCT3/3x NRL22 shooters that I know have had a lot of success with them. They also seem to smile more running the ZCOs, so if anything I suppose that I have that to look forward to!

 

[MtnGhost]

Happy (early) Valentines Day @Glassaholic

LOL!!!! I'm sending that to about 100 people I know

 

[CSTactical]

Exactly why I dumped mine and won't go back until they make something with the thinness...

 

[Northernjets]

That's the perfect way to sum up the 4-32! I mean this in the most respectful way, but the 4-32 is kind of like a minimum viable product of sorts that just barely checks all of the boxes that it needs to without excelling in any one single category. The poors might not get this analogy, but it's basically like how the Rolex Explorer is to "luxury" sports watches

I can't see letting go of my 4-32 though (probably ever). I have zero regrets getting it in the first place, but I bought it for the wrong reasons, in that I got it to replace a March 3-24x52 that I was running on my elk rifle. The March's tunneling / CA / turret issues bugged me, but I do have some regrets letting that March go (it was VERY light and compact, and the glass was pretty clear from ~18-20x).

All of the MPCT3/3x NRL22 shooters that I know have had a lot of success with them. They also seem to smile more running the ZCOs, so if anything I suppose that I have that to look forward to!

Yeah, I also bought my NX8 with the intention of running in on a hunting rifle due to the insane pricing of the MK5 up here. I just recently moved it from my CZ457 to my new T3x CTR hunting set up. So long as it eats monos without issue, I'll probably leave it be for the foreseeable future. Now I've got to do some soul searching for what the CZ is going to get. Life is hard as a poor, but there are some decent variable, low parallax, high adjustment range options coming down the pipeline.

I bet they do. I've had mine for little over two years now and there's always an air of satisfaction getting behind them. Hard to beat that "big screen tv" effect with how large and crisp the image appears. I've honestly never missed having that extra magnification that comes with my NX8 or Razor Gen II, and that's including glassing some deer around 350m in the sticks. I let some really green shooters behind my rifle once after they were having trouble spotting hits on paper at 300m with their Diamondback Tactical 6-24x. The first guy's "What the fuck!?" more or less sums up the experience haha.

 

[MtnGhost]

Just wanted to do a quick follow up and say HOT DAMN this 4-20 is nice!!! I haven't had much free time since I got it, but it's undoubtedly exceeding my expectations on clarity, FOV, and resolution at long range.

The operation of each mechanical mechanism feels above and beyond most of the optics that I've ran / handled. I absolutely love the layout and tactility of the illumination wheel, the resistance of the parallax adjuster, the pop-up turret knobs, and even the fine threaded diopter locking ring feels "luxurious".

Going into this, I was les to believe that the illumination sucked, but that could not be anything further from the truth! It's about as bright as I could ever need (and I'm anxious to test out the NV mode with nods this weekend).

The only thing that's been a little tricky this far is getting the diopter fine tuned. There's a wide range of rotation where the reticle is CRYSTAL clear, but I can't perceive any signs of parallax errors. I'm not usually OCD about having a micro-percentage of error, but my primary focus is getting it dialed in to work with my Sideshot GoPro camera system (to record HEVC/slow motion shot footage). My GoPro has the "Backbone" mod and I've been running the 12mm F2.8 lens with excellent success with all of my 30-34mm optics. I have been able use it with each optic without having to adjust the camera lens, and that camera system has also been a pretty reliable indicator to me for detecting parallax error.

The Backbone lens system is just a PITA to fine tune given the design of the lens' locking ring, so I'm hoping that I can get the ZCO's diopter dialed in close enough to be able to get hi-def footage without having to mess with the camera lens (or God forbid having to use a lens with a different aperture)!

Other than that, there's literally nothing else that I can complain about at this point!!!!!!!

 

[CSTactical]

Just wanted to do a quick follow up and say HOT DAMN this 4-20 is nice!!! I haven't had much free time since I got it, but it's undoubtedly exceeding my expectations on clarity, FOV, and resolution at long range.

The operation of each mechanical mechanism feels above and beyond most of the optics that I've ran / handled. I absolutely love the layout and tactility of the illumination wheel, the resistance of the parallax adjuster, the pop-up turret knobs, and even the fine threaded diopter locking ring feels "luxurious".

Going into this, I was les to believe that the illumination sucked, but that could not be anything further from the truth! It's about as bright as I could ever need (and I'm anxious to test out the NV mode with nods this weekend).

The only thing that's been a little tricky this far is getting the diopter fine tuned. There's a wide range of rotation where the reticle is CRYSTAL clear, but I can't perceive any signs of parallax errors. I'm not usually OCD about having a micro-percentage of error, but my primary focus is getting it dialed in to work with my Sideshot GoPro camera system (to record HEVC/slow motion shot footage). My GoPro has the "Backbone" mod and I've been running the 12mm F2.8 lens with excellent success with all of my 30-34mm optics. I have been able use it with each optic without having to adjust the camera lens, and that camera system has also been a pretty reliable indicator to me for detecting parallax error.

View attachment 8071824

The Backbone lens system is just a PITA to fine tune given the design of the lens' locking ring, so I'm hoping that I can get the ZCO's diopter dialed in close enough to be able to get hi-def footage without having to mess with the camera lens (or God forbid having to use a lens with a different aperture)!

Other than that, there's literally nothing else that I can complain about at this point!!!!!!!