I have a origin/ proof 24” 6.5 creed sitting in a manners stock and I want to get a scope with a little more mag range than the nxs 2.5-10, I’m currently looking at the 4-32 and atacr 4-16, I’ll be hunting out to 500 on deer, hogs, coyote, and fox… some varmint hunting out to 7-900 and steel a little past 1000, looking at moving to ffp as well since I think it would be nice for all of my Holds to be true through the mag range, out of all of these scopes which would you recommend?
Rifle Scopes Nx8 for hunting rifle ?
- Thread starter Joko111
- Start date
NX8 4-32 F1. For your purposes.
I have used most of NFs offerings and that is the clear winner unless you’re dead set on the ATACR and are okay with the weight penalty.
I have used most of NFs offerings and that is the clear winner unless you’re dead set on the ATACR and are okay with the weight penalty.
I loved my 4-16x42 ATACR for hunting. To be fair, I’ve never owned an NX8 but I was never bothered by the ATACR weight.
Maybe because I grew up a poor learning how to utilize what we had, in order to do what we needed... But to me, any scope can be a "hunting scope" if you take it in the woods and go hunting with it... Just like any rifle can be a "hunting rifle" if you take it hunting. 
I think people put too much emphasis on "hunting" or "target" this or that, these days. Same with the people who sit and count ounces on their hunting rig. Bro, unless you're talking several extra pounds, then a few extra ounces over your goal weight to build the ideal rig, is a small price to pay to have what you want, instead of compromising just to fit one factor of your criteria, and leaving your rig lacking in other areas. Use what you like best and what you think will best do the job for you, whether it was designed for that purpose, or not. And if someone else has a problem with it... Fuck 'em.
My main deer rifle has a Kahles K318i on it... That's not really a "hunting scope", but it does a really phenomenal job as a hunting scope, IMO. Amazing glass, and a really nice magnification range with a good field of view. It's compact, has plenty of adjustment, an excellent magnification range, and the controls and turrets are top-tier, and the parallax is on-pointe. Name one of those things that's not important in a hunting or tactical situation... Exactly. So it's doesn't matter what it was designed to do, it does both hunting and target shooting well.
I think people put too much emphasis on "hunting" or "target" this or that, these days. Same with the people who sit and count ounces on their hunting rig. Bro, unless you're talking several extra pounds, then a few extra ounces over your goal weight to build the ideal rig, is a small price to pay to have what you want, instead of compromising just to fit one factor of your criteria, and leaving your rig lacking in other areas. Use what you like best and what you think will best do the job for you, whether it was designed for that purpose, or not. And if someone else has a problem with it... Fuck 'em.
My main deer rifle has a Kahles K318i on it... That's not really a "hunting scope", but it does a really phenomenal job as a hunting scope, IMO. Amazing glass, and a really nice magnification range with a good field of view. It's compact, has plenty of adjustment, an excellent magnification range, and the controls and turrets are top-tier, and the parallax is on-pointe. Name one of those things that's not important in a hunting or tactical situation... Exactly. So it's doesn't matter what it was designed to do, it does both hunting and target shooting well.
Last edited:
THIS^^^plus I have TT, ZCO, S&B, but if I could have only one hunting scope it would be the NX8 for weight savings and durability. The eye box thing is not that big of a deal. Set it up right and get behind it enough and I think you'll like it.
I have a NX-8 4-32 on my big hunting rifle (300NMI). Use it primarily for elk. Like any FF scope the reticle is tough to use at low power. At mid range it is flat awesome. I set the rifle up for longer shots out west and it doesn't disappoint
Maybe I'm missing something, but according to their website, the weight difference between an NX8 4-32x50f1 and an ATACR 4-16x42 is 1.4 oz. To me, that's negligible. I wouldn't really call that a "weight penalty." That being said, I've played with both of these scopes and either one would work really well for that application. Since you are thinking about doing steel past 1000, you might find the extra magnification of the NX8 to be more enjoyable. It's not necessary, because you can ring steel at 1000+ with 16x, but it might be more pleasant to have a little more available.
I honestly am leaning towards the atacr, I really like the idea of that locking turret
If it were me, I would get the ATACR. Better eye box, locking turret, slightly better glass... I don't like to make sacrifices in areas I need to get bonus features I don't need. So while 32x might be a nice bonus feature, if I can have better features and have the magnification and weight I'm looking for, I'll take the better features I need over the better features I don't need. But that's just one guy's opinion. YMMV. I think you'll be happy with either scope.
It also looks like used they are around the same price, I’ve seen many 4-16s go for 17-1900, same with the nx8, almost seems like a no brainer unless I want 32x
32x is a lot of magnification for a hunting scenario. something in the mid-range might be better. The ATACR 4-16 would be really nice. If you're wanting to save some money, the SHV stands for "Shooter, Hunter, Varminter." (I read that on the internet, but it might be true). Here's a good deal on a Nightforce SHV 4-14x50 F1.
You know what’s great about a 4-32x scope? You don’t have to use all 32x…
I've had good success hunting with NX8 4-32 and the 2.5-20. Don't have a 4-16 atacr to compare with. The nx8 line is proven, durable, tracks, good glass. The depth of field is poor due to the 8x zoom, and eyebox can be a issue for some, I have not experienced it. I picked up my last few nx8 new for sub 2k, you'll pay close to 3 for a new atacr. Is it 1k$ better? That's for you to justify.
The eyebox is really sweet when backing down the magnification of a high magnification scope compared to maxing out a 16x scope.You know what’s great about a 4-32x scope? You don’t have to use all 32x…
When it comes to the overall package of features, size, and durability the NX8 4-32 is my favorite hunting scope available. I did use the ATACR 4-16 prior to the NX8. It's a great scope as well with better glass. My main gripes for switching was not wanting a 34mm tube (looks out of place on a smaller barrel) and the rotating ocular. I'd be hook, line, and sinker if NF changed those two things on the ATACR.
That's true. But, there are trade-offs between an 8x magnification range, and a 4x magnification range.You know what’s great about a 4-32x scope? You don’t have to use all 32x…
That said, the NX8 4-32 is a good choice. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
NX8 and ATACR both great scopes. 8x erector has more compromises than 4x erector scopes. 2.5-20 is ideal if you ever intend to put a clipon in front. 4-16x42 wins on every category besides mag range, ATACR's optical and mechanical performance is pretty amazing. If you need the mag range then go for the NX8, if you don't then get the better optical and mechanical performance. I should also mention 16x is plenty for beyond 1000, you don't need high magnification to shoot far.
I use a NX8 on my Moon-built 6.5 Creedmoor. Honestly it’s as nice glass wise as any of my ATACR scopes, and I’ve used it on everything from 150 yard shots at white tails here in SC to Muledeer shots out at 500 yards in Wyoming. It’s a great all around scope IMHO and like I said, the glass differences everyone claims to see vs the ATACR I personally don’t see. Doesn’t mean I’m right or there aren’t differences, I just happen to be looking for animals vs worrying about targets or steel gongs and don’t see much difference.
I have 2 of the 4-32 and a 2.5-20, been solid for me, no problems. They have some short comings but that's to be expected in sub 13" form and a 8x zoom but they do their job well respectively. They're very durable, track, great glass in the 90% view, at edges they fall off as well as in the top 20% of magnification. But they fit a niche void that really not a lot of other optics fall into. I'd put one on another hunting rig no problem.
Every time I look at threads like this it makes my decision even more difficult.
I'm stuck between the LHT 4.5-22 or a nx8 4-32 for a hunting rig.
Every time I think I've settled on one, I read something on here that changes my mind!
Do you guys think the nx8 is worth the extra $500+?
I'm stuck between the LHT 4.5-22 or a nx8 4-32 for a hunting rig.
Every time I think I've settled on one, I read something on here that changes my mind!
Do you guys think the nx8 is worth the extra $500+?
This 100%. The 4-16 ATACR and 4-32 NX8 are basically the same price used. The ATACR is 1oz heavier, better turrets, and is better optically. I’m not a high mag guy, so the choice has been easy for me.
Unless you're building/using a sub 6lb bare gun weight weenie rifle with a pencil thin barrel then I wouldn't worry about your optics weight all that much. I just grabbed a 4-16x ATACR for my 20" hunting rifle, with glass the rifle is going to weigh in right at 10 lbs which is just about perfect for a stable hunting rifle IMHO. I'm not sure if I'll love the 4-16x or if it'll stay beyond this upcoming season, but short of the Kahles K318i or a ZCO 420 I think it's one of the best "tactical" optics out there for a serious hunting rifle.
I'm a NF fanboy, and I think the NX8 issues are way overblown, but Ive pulled multiple atacrs off hunting rifles and replaced them with swfa 6x and 3-9s.
The NF reticles just don't won't at the zoom range I like for hunting.
NXS 2.5-10 is fine if you can SFP.
For something like nrl hunter or a varmint rig sure, but big game I'll keep running swifers until there's something better.
The NF reticles just don't won't at the zoom range I like for hunting.
NXS 2.5-10 is fine if you can SFP.
For something like nrl hunter or a varmint rig sure, but big game I'll keep running swifers until there's something better.
Last edited:
Interesting comment as I'm currently in a similar quandary as the OP with a new 300 Win Mag I'm picking up tomorrow. I'm shopping for other optics but I have a spare brand new SWFA 3-9 HD sitting in its box that I had considered using. Can you please share why you pulled off NFs in favor of the SWFA 3-9?
ETA: Anything other than the aforementioned reticle preference? Is your reticle issue with NFs mainly about the thickness?
Last edited:
My problem with the LHT were the controls, they are terrible. I went to the NX8.
Much Better reticle under 10x which is where it stays for deer, plenty good enough "glass" to kill anything, saves close to a pound on Tikkas since I can run dovetail rings vs rail/rings, cheap enough to run on a half dozen rifles granting consistency benefits.
IMO the Mil R is fine for hunting, and the 4-16 form factor is awesome, just an unnecessary compromise for me since I don't shoot animals at extended ranges. If I had the skills and practice time to ethically take > 500 yard shots on big game, I'd probably go back to that optic. Instead I optimize for the ~6x zoom range.
Thanks for taking the time to explain, I will probably go ahead and roll with the SWFA for now until (unlikely) I find the 9x top end somehow holding me back. Thanks again for your input.
I find it hard to believe someone would pull a NF scope off and replace it with any SWFA anything, unless the NF was truly defective... That would be retarded to downgrade so far as to go from an advanced scope like an ATACR, to a scope that doesn't even have a simple zero-stop. I have 3 SWFA scopes left, and there's not a single one of them I'd choose over my ATACR. Now, from a lightweight hunting standpoint, sure the SWFA might make sense than a 5-25 or something like that, but for an overall hunting/target rifle, NF all day over the SWFA.
Here's my old 26" Rem 700 5R Milspec (Gen1) .300 WInMag w/ new NF ATACR F1 5-25x56 MIL-XT reticle...
Vortex 1-10 for sure ^
I’m a big fan of mx8 2.5-20 have 5 or more of them
The best hunting and clip on scope. Though that 1-10 vortex works quite well also
Have some 4-16s also. Great scopes if you can handle the 4x bottom end
Their primary "feature” is weighing 20oz, working, and having a reticle you can actually see below 10x, but yeah lack of "advanced features" is always a hit for us retards 
Cause they started making a 4-20x50.
4-16x42 (my fave) is still in production.
OP, sorry I missed the 1000 yard steel / 900 yard varmint req earlier - even I wouldn't choose a 6x or 3-9 for that - but I would for 500 yard deer.
Yall are making me want to try a 4-32
There's lots of 20oz range scopes that have functional reticles below 10x, great glass, and modern features that excel beyond the SWFA...Their primary "feature” is weighing 20oz, working, and having a reticle you can actually see below 10x, but yeah lack of "advanced features" is always a hit for us retards
23oz...
Zeiss Conquest V4 Rifle Scope 3-12x 44mm Z-Plex Reticle Matte Black
The Conquest V4 riflescopes are for hunters and shooters whose lifestyle and adventures involve traditional and long-range hunting, as well as shooting...
www.midwayusa.com 24.4oz... (I have 3 of these...They're great hunting scopes)
Zeiss Conquest V4 Rifle Scope 30mm Tube 6-24x 50mm Target Turret
The Zeiss Conquest V4 is based on a 4x zoom ratio and incorporates a 30mm main tube. Each model delivers 90% to the-eye light transmission, offers 1/4...
www.midwayusa.com 23.3oz...
KAHLES: Riflescopes
This is good stuff and following as I'm in the same boat. Just a note, the reason I'm looking hard is I liked the PST II until I had a coyote at 600 yards right as the sun had just disappeared. I could see him in my binos but I could only make out a dark"ish" dot in the scope. Now searching for that higher end optic that won't let me down when the light is low. But definately going to stay MIL and FFP.
What's your budget on it? If your budget is in the $1,500 range, the Burris XTR-3i 5.5-30x56 SCR 2 will be nearly unbeaten. If you're in the $2,500 range, the Zeiss LRP S3 4-25x50 or 6-36x56 is the best option. If your budget is under $3.5K, then I'd look into the Kahles K525i. If your budget is under $5K, then I'd look into the new ZCO 527.
I gave up on Vortex cheaper line of scopes a long time ago, but officially stopped buying them a couple years ago when Arkens came out. Better scopes for better prices. Then I got a better paying job, and started upgrading glass on things. Now, the cheapest scope I'll put on a rifle is the Burris XTR-2i 5-25x50 SCR MIL. They're on sale for $599 at EuroOptic right now, but had an MSRP of $1,499 and a retail of around $1,000-$1,200. Under $1,000, I don't think it will be beaten.
Burris Xtreme Tactical XTR II 5-25x50 Illum SCR Mil Scope 201051
Burris Xtreme Tactical XTR II 5-25x50 SCR Mil Scope 201051 | Only at EuroOptic.com!
Thanks and I appreciate all those options. My budget is pretty flexible but my psyche is putting the brakes on in the $2K-ish range. Heard good things about the XTR and maybe should take a harder look that direction. However @FuhQ - I like the idea with AtacR 5-25 like yours above.
If you've got MIL/LE creds, you can call Clay Hawkins over at EuroOptic, and end up with the ATACR F1 5-25x56 (like mine) for around the same price as the Zeiss LRP S3 6-36x56 retail pricing.
If you're going to get a NF scope, the only reticle they offer worth owning (IMO) is the MIL-XT. That's what my ATACR is.
The MIL-XT is my favorite reticle overall for all of the scopey things we do with scopes.
Lol. I have partaken and rejected that gospel. I just can't dig the open blank spaces to aim in. I have a Leupold cch reticle on a 3-18 mk5 an hate it. If there were tiny dots in the middle of all those circles I could dig it. But If I were going that way I would go for the MPCT2. I still prefer the MIL-XT over that though.
I like MPCT2X the best of all the ZCO offerings but still have the MPCT3. If/when I pick up a 420 or the new 216 I might grab it in the MPCT1 flavor if I decide that it should reside on a hunting stick.
Ahh the gold old Uterus of Death or the Fallopian Funnel of Death, very useful for on the fly ranging estimates.
Reticle choice is very much personal preference and I have pretty strong bias' in this area, since this is a Nightforce thread, I can say that the Mil-XT is one of my favorites in that it keeps the tree to a minimum and doesn't clutter the view as much as some other reticles do, HORUS is the worst, but many people use them to great effect.
Now that's funny! I have not seen the Zeiss reticle in the field, but thick horizontal lines in the tree are not my thing
They missed a great opportunity to label that the "climax reticle", or "money shot".
I'd be snickering too much to ever concentrate on shooting.
Similar threads
Rifle Scopes Optic recommendations for hunting and back country
