Rifle Scopes Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
- Thread starter muggs13
- Start date
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
My perception is better glass in the Premier LT, while the NF might withstand more abuse.
My perception is better glass in the Premier LT, while the NF might withstand more abuse.
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
I generally agree with Drifter,
I have owned two Premier reticles scopes (third on the way) but have had the opportunity to shoot the NF too.
Both are outstanding but the edge does go to the PR for optics in my opinion although the difference is so insignificant, it shouldn't be the single determining factor.
I chose the PR mostly because they are located only about 15 miles from where I live and I have found their customer service to be outstanding. But to be honest, I have heard the same about NF.
I do like the no tools zero reset feature of the PR and I have become very fond of the Gen II reticle. Down side however is that the 34mm rings required for the PR are expensive.
Probably just made the decision process worse, sorry about that.
MacDaddy
I generally agree with Drifter,
I have owned two Premier reticles scopes (third on the way) but have had the opportunity to shoot the NF too.
Both are outstanding but the edge does go to the PR for optics in my opinion although the difference is so insignificant, it shouldn't be the single determining factor.
I chose the PR mostly because they are located only about 15 miles from where I live and I have found their customer service to be outstanding. But to be honest, I have heard the same about NF.
I do like the no tools zero reset feature of the PR and I have become very fond of the Gen II reticle. Down side however is that the 34mm rings required for the PR are expensive.
Probably just made the decision process worse, sorry about that.
MacDaddy
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
I have been considering a PH and aside from some comments without specificity regarding durability, and issues with the tension setting of the tool less turret caps which result in slippage (mimicking failed tracking) - which the LT addresses b/c it has traditional caps - what exactly are we talking about when we say not as durable? Keep in mind I have had to send Loopy, USO, and S&B back for failures. I understand if man made it, and man uses it - a lot, it will eventually fail. However, if a PH has a greater propencity to fail - I'd like to know in advance.
I am not interested in buying an expensive POS.
Thank you
Good luck
I have been considering a PH and aside from some comments without specificity regarding durability, and issues with the tension setting of the tool less turret caps which result in slippage (mimicking failed tracking) - which the LT addresses b/c it has traditional caps - what exactly are we talking about when we say not as durable? Keep in mind I have had to send Loopy, USO, and S&B back for failures. I understand if man made it, and man uses it - a lot, it will eventually fail. However, if a PH has a greater propencity to fail - I'd like to know in advance.
I am not interested in buying an expensive POS.
Thank you
Good luck
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
In my previous post, I didn't mean to imply that the Premier wouldn't withstand abuse. Just as I'm not saying that the NF has poor glass. I don't think either would make a bad choice, as I recently compared the same two models. Besides perceived differences in glass quality and robustness, however slight, there are also differences in elevation travel, weight, turret placement (and how this potentially affects choices of mounts on a particular weapon), finish / appearance, illumination, reticles, etc.
In the end, the primary deciding factor for me was the glass. I own a NF, but not the F1, so I also read the "High End Tactical" reviews very closely. I wanted the glass quality of my IOR 3-18x50mm in a smaller, lighter package, and chose the Premier. In addition, the illumination of the Premier has dimmer settings that work better for my application (low-light hunting). The NF's lowest settings seem too bright for my use.
For a different application, the NF might make a better choice, and I will still consider the F1 for future purchases.
For now, my Premier LT rides on an 18" 6.5 Grendel AR-15:
In my previous post, I didn't mean to imply that the Premier wouldn't withstand abuse. Just as I'm not saying that the NF has poor glass. I don't think either would make a bad choice, as I recently compared the same two models. Besides perceived differences in glass quality and robustness, however slight, there are also differences in elevation travel, weight, turret placement (and how this potentially affects choices of mounts on a particular weapon), finish / appearance, illumination, reticles, etc.
In the end, the primary deciding factor for me was the glass. I own a NF, but not the F1, so I also read the "High End Tactical" reviews very closely. I wanted the glass quality of my IOR 3-18x50mm in a smaller, lighter package, and chose the Premier. In addition, the illumination of the Premier has dimmer settings that work better for my application (low-light hunting). The NF's lowest settings seem too bright for my use.
For a different application, the NF might make a better choice, and I will still consider the F1 for future purchases.
For now, my Premier LT rides on an 18" 6.5 Grendel AR-15:
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
Drifter...
Would you be so kind to give me the run down on the premier scope you have there.... is it a 3-15 x50? FF? How do you like the turrets? Are the mushy as in not very "clicky"? and how well does it track? The more info the better....
Thanks...
Drifter...
Would you be so kind to give me the run down on the premier scope you have there.... is it a 3-15 x50? FF? How do you like the turrets? Are the mushy as in not very "clicky"? and how well does it track? The more info the better....
Thanks...
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Drifter...
Would you be so kind to give me the run down on the premier scope you have there.... is it a 3-15 x50? FF? How do you like the turrets? Are the mushy as in not very "clicky"? and how well does it track? The more info the better....
Thanks... </div></div>
Yes, it's a 3-15x50 LT with FFP, and has the Gen2 XR reticle. Turrets have crisp clicks, and scope tracks as it should. The turrets are a little easier to turn versus my NF, which could be a plus or minus depending upon application.
To me, the standouts of the Premier LT are glass, illumination, and weight (or lack of). Wasn't sure how well I would like the Premier lens caps or the reticle, but both are very nice and were easy to adjust to. Haven't put it to the test yet regarding low light performance (light transmission), but I don't expect to be disappointed.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Drifter...
Would you be so kind to give me the run down on the premier scope you have there.... is it a 3-15 x50? FF? How do you like the turrets? Are the mushy as in not very "clicky"? and how well does it track? The more info the better....
Thanks... </div></div>
Yes, it's a 3-15x50 LT with FFP, and has the Gen2 XR reticle. Turrets have crisp clicks, and scope tracks as it should. The turrets are a little easier to turn versus my NF, which could be a plus or minus depending upon application.
To me, the standouts of the Premier LT are glass, illumination, and weight (or lack of). Wasn't sure how well I would like the Premier lens caps or the reticle, but both are very nice and were easy to adjust to. Haven't put it to the test yet regarding low light performance (light transmission), but I don't expect to be disappointed.
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
Drifter,
I too have both the PR light tac as well as the full blown 3.5 Heritage. Both with GEn II reticles (my eyes don't like the fine lines in the XR).
Have no complaints about either. If I was every to consider another scope for my hunting rifle, I would potentially consider the March 2.-24 42mm for significant weight and size reduction even over the PR light Tac.
For now however, PR works for me and am very happy.
Macdaddy
Drifter,
I too have both the PR light tac as well as the full blown 3.5 Heritage. Both with GEn II reticles (my eyes don't like the fine lines in the XR).
Have no complaints about either. If I was every to consider another scope for my hunting rifle, I would potentially consider the March 2.-24 42mm for significant weight and size reduction even over the PR light Tac.
For now however, PR works for me and am very happy.
Macdaddy
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Will the PR LT with a 20 min base get out to 1100
yards?</div></div>
Depends on the mount, weapon, cartridge, bullet, velocity, zero range, etc.
The max elevation after sighting in will be 12 mils, as the turret allows only 2 revolutions (6 mil per turn). I think there's ~18 mil of total vertical adjustment, so it depends somewhat on how much is used to get zeroed.
On my AR-15 6.5 Grendel, I have 9 mils of elevation left after acquiring a 200-yard zero and resetting the turret to its zero-stop. (The turret cannot complete the full 2nd revolution because I used up too much elevation in sighting in.) A 20-moa base might give me an additional ~6 mils (?), but I would only be capable of using 3 more mils because of the 12-mil limit on the 2-turn turret.
With the load I'm using, 9 mils will get me to ~850 yards. If I switch to a 20-moa base, the 12 mils available would get me to ~1000 yards (though velocity of my load would be subsonic by then). The scope also has 10 mils of holdover in the XR reticle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Will the PR LT with a 20 min base get out to 1100
yards?</div></div>
Depends on the mount, weapon, cartridge, bullet, velocity, zero range, etc.
The max elevation after sighting in will be 12 mils, as the turret allows only 2 revolutions (6 mil per turn). I think there's ~18 mil of total vertical adjustment, so it depends somewhat on how much is used to get zeroed.
On my AR-15 6.5 Grendel, I have 9 mils of elevation left after acquiring a 200-yard zero and resetting the turret to its zero-stop. (The turret cannot complete the full 2nd revolution because I used up too much elevation in sighting in.) A 20-moa base might give me an additional ~6 mils (?), but I would only be capable of using 3 more mils because of the 12-mil limit on the 2-turn turret.
With the load I'm using, 9 mils will get me to ~850 yards. If I switch to a 20-moa base, the 12 mils available would get me to ~1000 yards (though velocity of my load would be subsonic by then). The scope also has 10 mils of holdover in the XR reticle.
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
Just got a 3-15 LT, have the Heritage original, both are great scopes, both have great glass.
I like the turrets on the LT, but they are VERY DIFFERENT from the Heritage 3-15. The clicks are well spaced, very audible and tactile, no mush, no play, but they turn with a little more ease than most. I haven't used it enough yet to know if that will be a problem.
As for glass, I have never personally seen or owned a Nightforce with really great glass (though some insist their NF has Hensoldt-quality glass), and my LT is appreciably better than the NF glass I have experienced.
Both of my Premiers have great glass, eyebox isn't quite as great as Hensoldt, but not far off.
I recently had the same choice (F1 or LT), and bought the LT - would do it again.
Just got a 3-15 LT, have the Heritage original, both are great scopes, both have great glass.
I like the turrets on the LT, but they are VERY DIFFERENT from the Heritage 3-15. The clicks are well spaced, very audible and tactile, no mush, no play, but they turn with a little more ease than most. I haven't used it enough yet to know if that will be a problem.
As for glass, I have never personally seen or owned a Nightforce with really great glass (though some insist their NF has Hensoldt-quality glass), and my LT is appreciably better than the NF glass I have experienced.
Both of my Premiers have great glass, eyebox isn't quite as great as Hensoldt, but not far off.
I recently had the same choice (F1 or LT), and bought the LT - would do it again.
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Will the PR LT with a 20 min base get out to 1100
yards?</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry... 308 168 mk's 2700 ft per sec....</div></div>
Premier LT's max of 12 mils of elevation would get you out to ~1040 yards by dialing up from a 200-yard zero. You would need to use holdover in the reticle to get that load to 1100 yards using this scope.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Will the PR LT with a 20 min base get out to 1100
yards?</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: muggs13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry... 308 168 mk's 2700 ft per sec....</div></div>
Premier LT's max of 12 mils of elevation would get you out to ~1040 yards by dialing up from a 200-yard zero. You would need to use holdover in the reticle to get that load to 1100 yards using this scope.
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
muggs13, I'm curious why you would want to use 168gr out at 1100 yards - that's like tying a hand behind your back for a boxing match.
muggs13, I'm curious why you would want to use 168gr out at 1100 yards - that's like tying a hand behind your back for a boxing match.
Re: Premier 3x15 LT vs NF 3x15 F1
On occasion I do shoot that far. Not enough to change my ammo/bullet for that distance. And believe it or not I do hit the target more times then not.
168s are easly had from the "armory" I have access to. I hope you are picking up what I am laying down......
But yes I know the 175s are a bit better....
On occasion I do shoot that far. Not enough to change my ammo/bullet for that distance. And believe it or not I do hit the target more times then not.
168s are easly had from the "armory" I have access to. I hope you are picking up what I am laying down......
But yes I know the 175s are a bit better....
Similar threads
