|
|
Post by chiefkillumdeer on Feb 26, 2016 11:38:05 GMT -5
I have had several Nightforce scopes, NSX and ATACR. They are a solid contender for top scope in the $2000 range, however they do not have the greatest glass. Several companies have caught up to them in glass quality at a lower price point. They are rugged. You could play softball with one and put it back on your rifle. You will never regret buying one. I would caution about getting one that starts at to high a power. Due to their OK glass you will lose legal shooting light if you can't dail down the power. Interestingly enough I have tested my best optics, Scopes and Bino's ( Lieca and Ziess Victory FL) with people with good eye sight and people with poor eyesight. I found the people that had good eyesight actually benefited from better glass, the ones with poor eyesight, especially poor night vision didn't gain but maybe the tiniest edge over cheap glass, like Bushnell,Burris, Nikon.Since seeing is what the whole scope thing is about, I would let my need for glass quality start my quest and factor in the rugged, I might drop my rifle, bump my scope, thing after that. Just my thoughts after spending probably 15 grand on scopes.
|
|
|
|
Post by keith on Feb 27, 2016 8:16:01 GMT -5
I disagree. Sights are for shooting with not spotting, viewing, or judging with. Mechanical quality trumps optical quality every time in a sight because any decent optic has decent glass. Guys shooting good irons (Warner, PNW, etc) buy based on adjustments (although you can add lenses) and a scope is just a magnified sight.
The most expensive sight I've used is the S&B 5-20x50mm Ultra Short. Beautiful resolution, warm colors, good adjustments. Broke two of them.
Next most expensive was the F1 BEAST. Better glass than the NXS but not like the Scmidt. Those of us that did the T&E for NF said fix the adjustments mechanism and out came the ATACR. The NXS still sells like hotcakes because it has good glass and bomb proof adjustments and lacks features that most people don't need or want to pay for.
In the middle I have lots of experience with Leupold. Good resolution and rich color but suffers from CA, junk adjustments. Nothing you can't overcome with a tall target test but unacceptable given how much Leupold charges these days.
Bushnell is the cheapest I use except the Vortex Viper PST (used half a dozen 3 years ago and they aren't in the same class as Bushnell Tactical Elite ). Good glass but suffers from chromatic aberration and some minor edge distortion. Nearly perfect in regards to adjustments. Lots of guys winning with these.
Beautiful glass will not appreciably boost your shooting. I don't shoot $3k better with the Schmidt than when I shoot the HDMR. If you need that sort of glass buy it in binos and spotters.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Feb 27, 2016 23:15:55 GMT -5
Oh Keith, I respect your opinion and am sorry to hear your testimonial about Leupold products. I just bought and installed a new VX-6 7-42x56 to my Hankins SPML-45. I was considering very strongly a NightForce NXS 8-32, just a little bit more money, but stuck with Leupold because I have so many of them on my other rifles. I'll have to conduct a "tall target test". Can you give me the basic protocol to follow? Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by keith on Feb 28, 2016 9:58:52 GMT -5
Mike, Not every Leupold is going to have problems and it largely depends on how you use one. If they have hold over reticles that reticles will always subtend what it did the first time you measured it. They are etched so cannot come loose like old wire reticles or take a spring set, gall, wear, etc. like mechanical adjustments. Once you calibrate the B&C reticle, Varmint reticle, CMR-2, etc. you can count on them being worth that value for life. I'm not sure what reticle you have. I'm not bad mouthing your scope. Leupolds will absolutely work fine and used their sporting optics for years. I have owned a lot of VariX-III and M8 (now called FX) scopes too but always just zeroed them for MPBR because back then 400yds looked like a long ways and there weren't good LR optics readily avialable. I never attempted to really test those optics because I wasn't aware of the need. For what they are the VariX line (and probably VX but haven't owned them) is good. I still own a couple. When I worked for a gun shop Leupold vent up about 7% in price every year without upgrading much of any features and that went on for a long time. My adjustments experience mostly revolves around the Mark and Mark 6 sights and that's where I say they fail. I have watched turrets snap off and huge errors occur when you dial up very far (more than 10% error inside of 20MoA). To me that is unacceptable in sights that are priced like they are Alpha optics. If you own this type of optic, regardless of who makes it you need to do tall target tests (windage too if you don't hold wind and then should test it just the same) of you can fight a lot of frustration and resultant bad data. Here is a tall target test for an LRHS and one for an HDRM but long and short is that you shoot it at 100yds/m with a total of 10MRAD or 30MoA worth of dialing. Mark your target at the bottom and make sure you have enough target to get up to your max dial on. Dial and shoot 1MRAD or 5MoA (that would be my technique if I used MoA), rinse and repeat to your max, then I dial back to zero and check for return. Measure your adjustments and see what your high, low, mean, and deviations are. |
|
