Rifle Scopes Nx8 for hunting rifle ?

[4O6shootist]

I will agree, zeiss should have done a better job on their reticle, cuz the glass is pretty dang good, turrets are nice. The thing I found funky, the zero stop. If not in a perfect position, it'll cause a soft stop that feels like you're bottomed out on travel, or it'll make the turret feel different in areas as you dial, more tension, less then smooth. Idk it's not ideal. I used some feeler gauges to get the zero stop ring slightly above the turret body to keep a gap, then tightend it down very evenly each side and it's not very tight, but solid hard stop and no binding as the turret goes up in revs now. I am a big fan of the NF zero stop, you can set it for any amount of dial under your turret zero. I like the glass more in the 7-35 and 4-20 atacrs compared to the rest, it just seems to be a step up from the rest of the models, really hard to tell the difference in my zco 420 and my friends 4-20 atacr.

 

[tex68w]

really hard to tell the difference in my zco 420 and my friends 4-20 atacr.

WOW, that's a bold statement. I am not saying that you're wrong, I've never looked through a NF ATACR 4-20x but putting it on par with ZCO alpha glass is saying something. I guess I need to get a 7-35x and 4-20x ATACR in my hands before I buy another ZCO.

 

[Junco Grande]

NX8 4-32 F1 with a Mil C is a damn fine hunting scope.
Light weight, clutter free FOV with the Mil C, plenty of mag for field judging. I also feel the negative hype is over blown. I know you'll probably miss every shot if you're not using a TT or ZCO, but the NF will get you in the ballpark.

 

[4O6shootist]

WOW, that's a bold statement. I am not saying that you're wrong, I've never looked through a NF ATACR 4-20x but putting it on par with ZCO alpha glass is saying something. I guess I need to get a 7-35x and 4-20x ATACR in my hands before I buy another ZCO.

Not saying it's the same, but it's near as good! It's a great viewing experience fora NF, def noticeably better than my 5-25 atacr.

 

[2Twenty3]

So I have one of the old 4-16x50 ATACRs on my 20" 6.5 Creedmoor and it weighs 31oz. I was able to pick it up from a dealer for $1800 as it was a prior demo model. I paired it with Hawkins Precision Ultralight rings and it is tough to beat for a hunting setup. The reason I went with the 4-16 ATACR over either NX8 scope was solely based off of low light performance. The 34mm tube will always beat a 30mm tube, regardless of the objective lens diameter (between 42 and 56mm). Also, the lower mag range means less refraction internally to distort the image, which ultimately gives you a clearer view of what you're looking at. Less glass to look through, plus a larger tube body, equals better performance at crunch time.. which for me at least is in darker conditions (early in the morning and late in the evening when the majority of game is on the move). I will admit that the NX8 4-32 is really in a class of it's own and you cannot go wrong with it. There is not a scope available anywhere else that does what it can do. As someone stated earlier here, just because you have 32x doesn't mean you have to use it all, and in most cases I would never need it. But man is it nice to have that much power in a 28oz optic. That is the only thing I would change about my 4-16 is the mag range (only slightly). Which is why mine is currently for sale so I can go to a new 4-20 ATACR. Which in my opinion is possibly the best "do anything" scope available for just under $3k. But if you are needing just short of Alpha-Tier glass, and you don't want to enter the Tangent Theta/Zero Compromise/Schmidt & Bender price range.. an ATACR is hard to beat.

 

[tex68w]

So I have a 4-16x50 ATACR on my 20" 6.5 Creedmoor and it weighs 31.5oz. I paired it with Hawkins Precision Ultralight rings and it is tough to beat for a hunting setup. The reason I went with the 4-16 ATACR over either NX8 scope was solely based off of low light performance. The 34mm tube will always beat a 30mm tube, regardless of the objective lens diameter (between 42 and 56mm). Also, the lower mag range means less refraction internally to distort the image, which ultimately gives you a clearer view of what you're looking at. Less glass to look through, plus a larger tube body, equals better performance at crunch time.. which for me at least is in darker conditions (early in the morning and late in the evening when the majority of game is on the move). I will admit that the NX8 4-32 is really in a class of it's own and you cannot go wrong with it. There is not a scope available anywhere else that does what it can do. As someone stated earlier here, just because you have 32x doesn't mean you have to use it all, and in most cases I would never need it. But man is it nice to have that much power in a 28oz optic. That is the only thing I would change about my 4-16 is the mag range (only slightly). Which is why mine is currently for sale so I can maybe go to a new 4-20 ATACR. Which in my opinion is possibly the best "do anything" scope available for just under $3k. But if you are needing Alpha-Tier glass and you don't want to enter the Tangent Theta/Zero Compromise/Schmidt & Bender prices.. the ATACR is hard to beat.

I just picked up a F1 ATACR 4-16x50 which have now been replaced by the 4-20x for use on my main hunting rifle. Aside from the weight I’m pleased upon initial impressions, I’ll see if I still feel the same way after some range time with it and after its first kill/harvest. If I am still happy with it come December I’ll likely pick up a 4-20x to run on the rifle I plan to setup for NRL Hunter and this 4-16x can stay on my hunting stick.

While Night Force is a step above Vortex and Leupold in most respects, I wouldn’t put them up there with the alpha tier glass companies, it’s just not optically equal to ZCO/TT/S&B etc. That said, I haven’t been behind the 4-20x or 7-35x that most hold in the highest regard.

 

[2Twenty3]

I just picked up a F1 ATACR 4-16x50 which have now been replaced by the 4-20x for use on my main hunting rifle. Aside from the weight I’m pleased upon initial impressions, I’ll see if I still feel the same way after some range time with it and after its first kill/harvest. If I am still happy with it come December I’ll likely pick up a 4-20x to run on the rifle I plan to setup for NRL Hunter and this 4-16x can stay on my hunting stick.

While Night Force is a step above Vortex and Leupold in most respects, I wouldn’t put them up there with the alpha tier glass companies, it’s just not optically equal to ZCO/TT/S&B etc. That said, I haven’t been behind the 4-20x or 7-35x that most hold in the highest regard.

I can see your argument that it isn't necessarily Tier 1.. but I wouldn't compare the ATACR to a Razor. I have spent time behind a lot of glass and I just don't see a huge leap in quality from an ATACR to something like a ZCO. I know they are very well built and have great glass, but so does the ATACR. I will admit that NF glass is not TT or ZCO glass, but for me it's splitting hairs in quality compared to cost. But I personally have not had great experiences with anything from Vortex. I feel like they are too focused on moving quantity instead of quality. It's not that they don't make good optics, but they are a lot like Leupold nowadays with their business model. If they didn't have their warranty, I honestly think they would totally be out of the $1k and up market and have to rely solely on their more budget oriented offerings.

 

[tex68w]

I can see your argument that it isn't necessarily Tier 1.. but I wouldn't compare the ATACR to a Razor. I have spent time behind a lot of glass and I just don't see a leap in quality from an ATACR to something like a ZCO. I know they are very well built and have great glass, but so does the ATACR. I have not had great experiences with anything from Vortex. I feel like they are too focused on moving quantity instead of quality. If they didn't have their warranty, I honestly think they would be out of the $1k and up market and have to rely solely on their more budget oriented lines.

I agree, Vortex isn't in the same class as Night Force overall, of course there are outliers from both manufacturers. The only Vortex product left in my stable is the Razor HD Gen II-E 1-6x that resides on a 14.5" AR, IMHO it's still the very best SFP LPVO and the only one with a true 1x red dot, the Kahles K16i and K18i have better glass and maybe even a better reticle (3GR) but the 1x isn't as good. I had the Razor LHT on my hunting rifle last season and I couldn't ditch it fast enough yet there are folks here who love them. Aside from the LHT's low weight there wasn't much love there from myself, but to each their own. Everyone has a price point, some limited exposure and experience with certain manufacturers and models and then of course personal preferences and bias. It really just boils down to which features and functions are most important to you for your particular needs and then finding something within your budget that provides them.

I've only owned SHV, NXS and NX8 class Night Force optics in the past, this is my first optic from their premium ATACR line so there's that. I like some things about this ATACR right out of the box (build quality, glass, throw lever, reticle) but there are others that I don't care for (I'd prefer locking turrets and more tactile clicks) but putting it alongside of my ZCO I can't say that the ATACR is on par optically, but it isn't far off. There's a much bigger gap in optical clarity between the Razor and the ATACR than there is between the ATACR and the ZCO.

I have high hopes for this particular optic and should I find it to be most everything I want and need it to be then I might be buying another ATACR later this year instead of more ZCO optics. I know my wallet and my wife would much prefer that lol.

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

really hard to tell the difference in my zco 420 and my friends 4-20 atacr.

Either best ATACR ever or worst ZCO… have run both quite a bit. Maybe if looking at ideal target under ideal conditions both at 4X, sure. Eye box, color fidelity, low light, turret spinning - not sure what to say.

Have spent lots of time on scope with both, ZCO is easier for me to get behind and stay behind.

Mileage varies. I guess.

 

[4O6shootist]

Either best ATACR ever or worst ZCO… have run both quite a bit. Maybe if looking at ideal target under ideal conditions both at 4X, sure. Eye box, color fidelity, low light, turret spinning - not sure what to say.

Have spent lots of time on scope with both, ZCO is easier for me to get behind and stay behind.

Mileage varies. I guess.

I personally don't like the 15mil zco turret, but do their new 10mil. I have always like the NF turrets. The zco does have a better eyebox, it's shorter, weight is about the same. When I had the chance to compare them, it's was pretty prime viewing conditions, slightly overcast, in the 60s, minimal to no mirage. That was my one opportunity to get behind both side by side. Maybe he has a top end of sample size and maybe my 420 isnt. Idk, but they appeared very comparable viewing wise. Not that the difference between the two would case a miss, or inability to find a target or animal in most conditions I've been hunting in. I will say my 420 is going atop my new 7lrm that's being built, I do really like the scope. It needs to go in to factory for a check up, it took a pretty nasty spill 6 weeks ago, I just dismounted and haven't gotten around to it yet.

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

All eyes are different, my comment was not a dick-measuring thing; I was just surprised to hear that comparison.

Where ZCO - and most high end stuff - really distinguishes is in bad conditions and when you stay on scope for long periods of time.

All is well, just more points of view.

Carry on.

 

[Matt Fourie]

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?

NX8 2.5-20 is pretty cool - i have one and love it

 

[Juan_ID]

I currently have an nx8 with mil-xt and like it enough I’ll likely use it for hunting this year. But really wish they had a ffp nx5 3-15 or 4-20 x42 that was a little lighter than the nx8.

 

[YotaEer]

Really enjoying the 4-32x Mil xt for groundhog hunting the last couple weeks. Killed a pile of them. Having up to 32x is nice if only the head is sticking out, or they're in high beans. Glass is really good and eyebox hasn't been a problem. Also enjoying the lighter weight compared to 34mm optics ive had for the same use.

Just grabbed and zero'd a 2.5-20x version for my 6 ARC AR.

 

[Burdy]

Really enjoying the 4-32x Mil xt for groundhog hunting the last couple weeks. Killed a pile of them. Having up to 32x is nice if only the head is sticking out, or they're in high beans. Glass is really good and eyebox hasn't been a problem. Also enjoying the lighter weight compared to 34mm optics ive had for the same use.

Just grabbed and zero'd a 2.5-20x version for my 6 ARC AR.

Can expand on your thoughts between the 4-32 and 2.5-20?

 

[YotaEer]

Can expand on your thoughts between the 4-32 and 2.5-20?

I've had a few of each and think the 4-32x is the better optic in every way. Better eye box, DOF, optical quality, reticle scaling etc

Only advantage the 2.5-20x is saving 1 inch and 1 oz IMO.

 

[BurtG]

Only advantage the 2.5-20x is saving 1 inch and 1 oz IMO.

2.5 versus 4x bottom end is a big advantage for close in hunting and using clip ons

 

[J-Fonz]

I've got 2 of each model. Love them on hunting rifles.

 

[YotaEer]

2.5 versus 4x bottom end is a big advantage for close in hunting and using clip ons

All my hunting rifles have 4.5-7x bottom end and I’ve never had an issue.

I can see your point on clip on usage. I’m too poor to know any better on that one and thus use dedicated thermal sights.

 

[BurtG]

There’s a great deal on a 432 in the for sale section

 

[BurtG]

All my hunting rifles have 4.5-7x bottom end and I’ve never had an issue.

I had a fawn jump up about 20 yards or closer in front of me.

Was glad to have a 1-10 on 1x on that occasion.

 

[Burdy]

2.5 versus 4x bottom end is a big advantage for close in hunting and using clip ons

Yes but I've got other guns for my clip on.

 

[NORTHMAN86]

I have an NX8 2.5-20 FFP. I like it a lot on top of my Sig Cross... That said, I would say reticle is unusable under 4x and eye box is very tight from 18 to 20x. Up here in the very dense boreal forest, I prefer SFP 1-6 lpvo since I never had to shoot more than 300 meters.

 

[jbuck88]

2.5 versus 4x bottom end is a big advantage for close in hunting and using clip ons

Not much of a clip-on guy. However I do hunt and the bottom zoom is important in the woods. I shot my last elk around 10yds when it was in a herd of ~20 all together. I ended up way too close on accident. Anyways had to wait for a head shot with a tree as a backstop.

That shot would have been a lot harder on higher magnification scope. Or if the illumination failed. I was using a NX8 2.5-20 on 2.5 power.

As much of a struggle 2.5x was. I'm not sure I would have made it with 4x or higher on the bottom end.

After all of that I understand all hunting is different and here in the PNW we can either have longer shots in the timber clearcuts (500yds+) or up close (usually under 50yds). Other areas offer different opportunities so there is no "best" scope for everything.

 

[BurtG]

Not much of a clip-on guy. However I do hunt and the bottom zoom is important in the woods. I shot my last elk around 10yds when it was in a herd of ~20 all together. I ended up way too close on accident. Anyways had to wait for a head shot with a tree as a backstop.

That shot would have been a lot harder on higher magnification scope. Or if the illumination failed. I was using a NX8 2.5-20 on 2.5 power.

As much of a struggle 2.5x was. I'm not sure I would have made it with 4x or higher on the bottom end.

After all of that I understand all hunting is different and here in the PNW we can either have longer shots in the timber clearcuts (500yds+) or up close (usually under 50yds). Other areas offer different opportunities so there is no "best" scope for everything.

I think a red dot either on top or 45* would be quite beneficial for the close / quick stuff

 

[jbuck88]

A red dot would just get hung up on all the straps on my pack. I use the Kuiu quick draw on my pack and it's already a pain sometimes. Need to try something else.

 

[Burdy]

You don't get to always determine the engagement but I have a short range 10-200 gun and then a 200+ gun depending upon where I plan to hunt.

 

[BurtG]

Vortex 1-10 covers most things

 

[Obi-WanKannoli]

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.

This. 100%. Share the same sentiment...except swap out S&b 3-20 for Kahles

 

[96C]

NX8 4-32 F1 Tremor3
I find the 32x more useful than the 2.5-20 that leaves you wanting a bit more magnification in the hills at times to suss out a shadow.

Perfect hunting scope

 

[DubfromGA]

Why did they stop making the 4-16x50 in a FFP/F1?

I don’t know, but I am glad I grabbed one when I did.