I currently have a order in with Wilson combat for a 18” SPR 5.56. I was initially going to just use my Nightforce NX8 1-8 scope, but figured this build would benefit from a better scope with more power. I was thinking of going with the Nightforce ATACR 4-16 Scope. My question is i mostly see this scope being used on AR10 or bolt guns. Is this to much of a scope for a 5.56? Plan to use it from 100-600 yards. Another question i had i typically go with Geissele mounts for my optic setups. Would i need the extended version from Geissele? With my 1-8 i used the regular one from geissele which still pushes it a bit forward. I figured with the longer scope i would need the extended or hyper extended version.
- Thread starter Joeyg023
- Start date
I prefer my variable power 1-6 on my 18" ar build due to the weight, but I think you've nailed it in your choice for your planned use. I have a Geissele Automatics 05-417B Super Precision Mount (Standard Length), 34mm, Black
for my 3-15 with no issues but you should confirm the ATACR's dimensions to insure that's the correct mount.
for my 3-15 with no issues but you should confirm the ATACR's dimensions to insure that's the correct mount.
I had a 4-16 F1 NF Atacr that I ran on an AR15 platform (6.5 Grendel). I don’t think it’s too much scope for an AR especially if you’re trying to reach out to further distances. For me, I always like having the extra top end magnification. On my SPR build that I got from a fellow Hide member, he was running a 4-16 NF in a cantilevered Spuhr mount. Some people may think it looks a little off/funny running a 34mm tube scope on an AR, but so what... it’s purely cosmetic. Now, on that same SPR rifle (223 wylde AR), I run a 1-6 LPVO Gen2 Razor. I like it for matches and closer in/fast shooting, but am eventually going to snag a 3-15 T5XI for it. Yes, it’ll hit 600+ yds now with the 1-6, but it would be a bit easier for me to really tighten those groups up if I had some extra magnification. Anyways, here’s some pics for reference...
Attachments
Awesome thanks for the replies that makes me feel a lot better after seeing more pictures. I was looking at the 2.5-10 as well, but i prefer 1st focal plane. Not sure if that scope is the same way, but I’ve had a few cheaper 2nd focal plane scopes and i could barely read the different lines on the reticle because they looked so far away.
So my dealer i use for scopes has a Nightforce 2.5-10x24 and he thinks that would work good for what i want to do. Only draw back is it’s 2nd focal plane. He said it’s been discontinued, but he has 1 left still sealed in the box.
I run a Schmidt 5-25 on one of my my precision ARs in 5.56. Another has a Steiner 3-15. If you don't mind the weight, the extra magnification is nice to have from time to time.
I'm a big fan of Spuhr for mounts. The one with an inch or two of extension is perfect.
I'm a big fan of Spuhr for mounts. The one with an inch or two of extension is perfect.
It all depends on what you want to do - and the answer will vary from person to person. I'm in the process of building a Mk12'ish clone and plan to go with the ATACR 4-16x42. I have a DMR rig that I use for PRS and it has a NF 3.5-15 F1 (I agree with you on the preference for first focal). For PRS I almost never have my magnification higher than 15x because it's easier for me for target acquisition - so that optic works on that rig... for me. But, if I'm shooting steel or paper prone or from a bench, I usually like a higher magnification. My eyesight has also gotten worse over the years - so I sometimes like to turn it up. If you need something compact and don't mind the 2nd focal, the 2.5-10x24 could be a good choice. But if you can spare the weight and size, the 2.5-10x32 is a better option - or go with the ATACR 4-16 and get an F1 (don't let your dealer reel you in by enticing you to buy a discontinued scope that he most likely just wants to get rid of).
As far as an extended mount, it all depends on what you're using it for and the eye relief needed. In general I have to use an extended mount on all of my ARs that aren't running holo sights.
As far as an extended mount, it all depends on what you're using it for and the eye relief needed. In general I have to use an extended mount on all of my ARs that aren't running holo sights.
That would be a good MK12 clone scope. I wouldn't use it myself.
I run a Steiner 3-15 on a MK-12, works great. Plenty if power for the longer shots and I usually never go below 6X for most of my shooting with that rifle.
True true @deersniper. I stand corrected on that one. I guess I always associate with the Leupold Mk4 with the 36mm bell.
I think 4-16 is more then needed but if that’s what you want go for it
I use a pst 2.5-10 on mine and have liked it. I think it’s a mix of size and magnification
I use a pst 2.5-10 on mine and have liked it. I think it’s a mix of size and magnification
NF 2.5-10x32 for a more up to date clone.
I run a x42 on my MSTN and love it!
I run a x42 on my MSTN and love it!
They have used x32's correct?
I will sell you my 4-14x50 F1 NF with the cantilever mount. I have it on my .224 Valkyrie. Size and weight is good on a SPR.
How much and what reticle?
I'm looking at the new Athlon Midas Tac for several of my ARs - it's available in 4-16x50 or 6-24x50, is ffp mil, non-illuminated. MAP for the 4-16 is $590; the 6-24 is $630. They've both got a covered windage knob, while elevation is an open knob. Reticle features a floating dot center & these scope feature HD glass. They also have a hard zero stop.
I've currently got 1" Weaver 3-15x42 & 4-20x50 Super Slams on a couple of rifles that I want to upgrade - glass quality of the Weaver Super Slams is excellent, but they're sfp w/plain duplex reticle, and worst of all, the 4-20 has 1/8 min clicks. Going to the Midas Tac would be an improvement if for no other reasons than the reticle & zero stop.
I've currently got 1" Weaver 3-15x42 & 4-20x50 Super Slams on a couple of rifles that I want to upgrade - glass quality of the Weaver Super Slams is excellent, but they're sfp w/plain duplex reticle, and worst of all, the 4-20 has 1/8 min clicks. Going to the Midas Tac would be an improvement if for no other reasons than the reticle & zero stop.
I have the ATACR on my “SPR” Noveske and I don’t find it to be too much at all. In fact it’s one of my favorite optics I have ever owned. It’s a very useful mag range, it’s obviously quality and it just looks so good:
I also have the 2.5-10x24 on a MK12 and while it’s a great little scope, looks good, is reliable and all that... man. If I wasn’t going for that MK12 look I would NEVER keep it. Do yourself a favor and get the larger objective if that’s the route you go. It can be a VERY unforgiving scope to get behind and the x32 is not like that.
I also have the 2.5-10x24 on a MK12 and while it’s a great little scope, looks good, is reliable and all that... man. If I wasn’t going for that MK12 look I would NEVER keep it. Do yourself a favor and get the larger objective if that’s the route you go. It can be a VERY unforgiving scope to get behind and the x32 is not like that.
The Midas TAC 4-16 that is on my 6mmFATRAT, it's as good as it gets for the money!
I had the Bushnell LRHS 3-12 on my AR223, it was okay but I like the TAC more.
Had the NF 2.5-10x24 on the AR223, It fell short for me so I sold it. No parallax adjustment, I wanted more than 10x, SFP, and no revolution marking lines on the housing.
If I had the disposable income I'd get a March 3-24x52 with FML-T1.
I had the Bushnell LRHS 3-12 on my AR223, it was okay but I like the TAC more.
Had the NF 2.5-10x24 on the AR223, It fell short for me so I sold it. No parallax adjustment, I wanted more than 10x, SFP, and no revolution marking lines on the housing.
If I had the disposable income I'd get a March 3-24x52 with FML-T1.
I'm planning to use a Bushnell LRTS or maybe LRHS on an SPR build I'm slowly piecing together. To me, they're an excellent option in either the 3-12x or 4.5-18x options.
The Midas TAC is a great choice!
I run a mark4 4.5-14x50 on my MK12 mod 1
$1000 with the mount. MOAR reticle.
