Nightforce 1-8 discussion

[CS Tactical]

$2,744.00 for the 34mm ATACR version
$1,715.00 for the 30mm NX8

Both FFP and the specs are below:
22343
22344
22345
22346

Sorry for the late announcement, we were told not to release information until the 15th and others already did. I was at home with two sick kids all day and didn’t get to post anything until now.

[Sigfan26]

I liked First Focal Plane 1-8 optics before it was cool, I guess🤨


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS Tactical]

I liked First Focal Plane 1-8 optics before it was cool, I guess��

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If Nightforce gets FFP right than (Which it looks like they did) than they win the internet. But one popular 1-8 FFP that many people fawn over is not that great IMO for reasons I've stated for awhile. :)

[TiroFijo]

CS Tactical, what does the ATACR brings to the table over the NX8?

The exit pupil of the NX8 seems veeery small at 1X, only 7.9 mm, have you tried it? The NXS 1-4x24 has a whopping 16 mm exit pupil at 1X.

The ATACR exit pupil is 11.3 mm at 1X, not great but certainly better. BTW, if the objective lens is 24 mm then it is impossible to have a 3.19 mm exit pupil at 8X, perhaps the real magnification is about 7.5? Nightforce always kinda "rounds???" the numbers.

[CS Tactical]

CS Tactical, what does the ATACR brings to the table over the NX8?

The exit pupil of the NX8 seems veeery small at 1X, only 7.9 mm, have you tried it? The NXS 1-4x24 has a whopping 16 mm exit pupil at 1X.

The ATACR exit pupil is 11.3 mm at 1X, not great but certainly better. BTW, if the objective lens is 24 mm then it is impossible to have a 3.19 mm exit pupil at 8X, perhaps the real magnification is about 7.5? Nightforce always kinda "rounds???" the numbers.

I'm hoping we find out soon if the ATACR is 'worth it' over the NX8. The NX8 should be shipping in the next week or so.
It will be nice to have them side by side to compare them to see how the numbers match up to them in person.

Size difference:
https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/25348781_1801081119933760_5022953859620778444_n.jp g?oh=73dcb4cf644c7f4aa7ab8a9a7421e616&oe=5AD6DBB5

[voodoo_man]

Shuttup and take my money!

[Eric_L]

FWIW, Kyle Defoor is using the 1-8 ATACR.

http://kyledefoor.tumblr.com/post/168579832868/my-new-nightforceoptics-1-8-atacr-ive-been

[bravo7]

....and he was all over the USO and said you needed both FFP and SFP in the same scope.

[CS Tactical]

....and he was all over the USO and said you needed both FFP and SFP in the same scope.


Not sure if you've used a USO 1-8 before, yikes...

[LOBO]

Not sure if you've used a USO 1-8 before, yikes...

???

[CS Tactical]

???

To keep it short, I'm not a fan of it at all. Hopefully their change in ownership will bring positive changes to their line.

[Crews]

CS Tactical, what does the ATACR brings to the table over the NX8?.

ATACR’s have a super cool locking low profile elevation turret! Oh wait....

To each his own, but as far as I am concerned boo for capping the coolest part about the ATACR


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS Tactical]

ATACR’s have a super cool locking low profile elevation turret! Oh wait....

To each his own, but as far as I am concerned boo for capping the coolest part about the ATACR


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hopefully when that part is released it can be retrofitted :cool:

[CS Tactical]

22441

[TiroFijo]

I see, the ATACR has less FOV than the NX8... only 32.0 m / 100 m (<-- this info is wrong in their tech pamphlet, apparently they get confused with basic math)

WAY less than a top 1-6X scope like the Swarovski, 42.5 m / 100 m , 33% more!

[voodoo_man]

22441

https://media.giphy.com/media/ToMjGpz81S7usvTIM8w/giphy-downsized-large.gif

[CS Tactical]

I see, the ATACR has less FOV than the NX8... only 32.0 m / 100 m (<-- this info is wrong in their tech pamphlet, apparently they get confused with basic math)

WAY less than a top 1-6X scope like the Swarovski, 42.5 m / 100 m , 33% more!

Supposedly the specs under-represent the ATACR compared to the actual performance but that is TBD as I have not tried it yet.

From Fenix Mike on the hide https://forum.snipershide.com/forum/sniper%C2%92s-hide%C2%AE-armory-supply/sniper-s-hide-rifle-scopes/6798633-just-released-nightforce-nx8-ffp-1-8x24mm-30mm-tube-atacr-f1-1-8x24mm-34mm-tube-models/page3

"The differences between these two (again my opinions, others may vary, and I will get to test them more once my personal pair come in for my rifles) -
the ATACR has the better ED glass, better low light performance (34mm tube) HUGE eye box, and better eye relief (much more forgiving)
The NX8 has the NXS quality glass, a lightly larger FOV than the ATACR, a much tighter eye box, and is similar to the NF 1-4, obviously other than having 8x and being FFP as well as daylight visible illumination where as previous models came up short. While the ATACR has less FOV, the HUGE eye box gives the feel of a larger FOV than what the specs state. "

"The NX8 is about 75% of what the Razor is for eyebox... I personally feel that was Vortex's greatest achievement, other than weighing as much as it does and lack of zero stop. I bounced between that and the MK6/8 multiple times because each one had little things I disliked. I will give a longer term review of the NX8 when mine shows up (hopefully in a couple weeks), and then when the ATACR ships, I will have some close and long range (800m+) reviews with it, turret testing etc. "

"the ATACR eye box is marginally better than the Razor... 10% give or take. That's saying a LOT because I was a Razor fanatic. I will probably have to test out one of the lightweight models eventually just to see how they do. My Scar 17 is a 13 inch SBR and one of my absolute favorite go to rifles because its light, easy to take anywhere, zero recoil suppressed with the correct gas jets, and with M80 Ball, still has no issues at 800m. If the MK6 had a better reticle and unlimited turret elevation, it would be a heavy contender in my favorites, and if the Razor was lighter and had some more updated features that all the other Vortex Razor scopes have, the same goes for it. Nightforce really took all the greatest parts of the other scopes and built them into the ATACR, and reading some of the other preliminary reviews, the others agree. The NX8 was going to go on my Scar 16 SBR (10 inch) as its perfect size and really will take full advantage of that rifle, but I may just put it on the Scar 17 until the ATACR comes in to see how it does. "

[TiroFijo]

Good for Fenix Mike, but the 34 mm tube has nothing to do with low light performance... basic physics.

FOV has to be measured in carefully controlled conditions, period. Not that difficult, and I don't think any maker would under represent their product.

I just mentioned Nightforce makes a simple math error when they translate the FOV from ft/100 yds to m/100 m in their pamphlet.

[LOBO]

To keep it short, I'm not a fan of it at all. Hopefully their change in ownership will bring positive changes to their line.

Gotcha.

[CS Tactical]

Good for Fenix Mike, but the 34 mm tube has nothing to do with low light performance... basic physics.

FOV has to be measured in carefully controlled conditions, period. Not that difficult, and I don't think any maker would under represent their product.

I just mentioned Nightforce makes a simple math error when they translate the FOV from ft/100 yds to m/100 m in their pamphlet.


Unfortunately I see errors like that on manufacturers sites and literature.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

The people who do the literature and web content rarely have anything to do with the products being manufactured, at least in any company I've ever dealt with either in this industry or any other.

[ragnar_d]

I doubt this will end up on a 5.56 gun for me . . . but I've got a 16" 308 gas gun project in the pipeline that this will be perfect for. I'm curious to lay hands on the both of them. I'm impressed that Nightforce got a 1-8 down to 17 ounces. That's impressive . . . moreso if it doesn't sacrifice quality/longevity.


The people who do the literature and web content rarely have anything to do with the products being manufactured, at least in any company I've ever dealt with either in this industry or any other.
Yup. A lot of it is farmed out to third parties (i.e. - HK backwards bullets) and people who really aren't gun folk.

[MSparks909]

I think a 1-8 NXS is in my future. I’ve got a 2.5-10x42 NXS on my DD5V1. Will probably move that scope to one of my bolt guns.

[TiroFijo]

The people who do the literature and web content rarely have anything to do with the products being manufactured, at least in any company I've ever dealt with either in this industry or any other.

This is true, and Nightforce scopes are top notch.

But a 5 min reading of their web page from a knowledgeable person could spot plenty of mistakes... should be easy to solve.

[orionz06]

The people who do the literature and web content rarely have anything to do with the products being manufactured, at least in any company I've ever dealt with either in this industry or any other.
Very much this.


But a 5 min reading of their web page from a knowledgeable person could spot plenty of mistakes... should be easy to solve.
It is very easy to solve but the person typing shit down gets paid anyway, right or wrong, and they just don't give a fuck. The people who know are doing things more important like making scopes, not arranging pamphlets.

[voodoo_man]

The people who do the literature and web content rarely have anything to do with the products being manufactured, at least in any company I've ever dealt with either in this industry or any other.

The larger the company, the more this appears to be true, unfortunately.

I understand that not every single person in a company can have some type of applicable and/or first hand knowledge to their product(s) but sometimes its really off putting.

Regardless of that, I'll buy an NX8 as I know NF quality is pretty good, and if it doesn't work out I'll default to the vortex Razor HD II...

[MistWolf]

Good for Fenix Mike, but the 34 mm tube has nothing to do with low light performance... basic physics.

A larger tube diameter allows the use of larger diameter lenses in the erector set. If larger diameter lenses are used in the erector set, more light will be passed through the scope. If more light is pass through the scope, the scope will have better low light performance.

[TiroFijo]

A larger tube diameter allows the use of larger diameter lenses in the erector set. If larger diameter lenses are used in the erector set, more light will be passed through the scope. If more light is pass through the scope, the scope will have better low light performance.

NO...

[TiroFijo]

The optical train elements in a scope with a bigger tube are not always bigger, the extra space is often used for other things: more room for elevation/windage adjustment, more forgiving for the complicated optical path, more rugged internal parts, double erector in a 1-8x zoom scope, etc.

Even if the lenses themselves are larger (most probaly they are not, at least all of them), the light transmition increase would be inconsecuential and not detected by the human eye. The key feature would be the glass + coatings quality and not the internal lenses diameter.

[voodoo_man]

The optical train elements in a scope with a bigger tube are not always bigger, the extra space is often used for other things: more room for elevation/windage adjustment, more forgiving for the complicated optical path, more rugged internal parts, double erector in a 1-8x zoom scope, etc.

Even if the lenses themselves are larger (most probaly they are not, at least all of them), the light transmition increase would be inconsecuential and not detected by the human eye. The key feature would be the glass + coatings quality and not the internal lenses diameter.

Do you have any formal research or documentation to cite? Not calling you out for the info, as I agree with most of it, just would like to be able to reference a document or research of some kind.

[TiroFijo]

Just a couple decades+ of asking about this kind of stuff to industry people and experts at sniper's hide (when I was more into long range shooting), and personal email communications.
I'm a civil engineer and some of it is basic physics or math, or available everywhere for research but the devil is in the details and it is better to ask people that do it for a living.

Since internet became available I've had great luck contacting very knowledgeable industry people, leaders in their field. I've discussed tech stuff (a hobby for me) with great 1911 gunsmiths or rifle makers, scope or ammo manufacturers, ballistic software designers, etc. It is amazing how well technical people respond to educated and interesting questions.

I just wrote yesterday to Nightforce telling them about the problems with the tech detailed data portrayed in their web site. Sometimes you get a reply with some thanks and make a new friend, sometimes not...

[voodoo_man]

Just a couple decades+ of asking about this kind of stuff to industry people and experts at sniper's hide (when I was more into long range shooting), and personal email communications.
I'm a civil engineer and some of it is basic physics or math, or available everywhere for research but the devil is in the details and it is better to ask people that do it for a living.

Since internet became available I've had great luck contacting very knowledgeable industry people, leaders in their field. I've discussed tech stuff (a hobby for me) with great 1911 gunsmiths or rifle makers, scope or ammo manufacturers, ballistic software designers, etc. It is amazing how well technical people respond to educated and interesting questions.

I just wrote yesterday to Nightforce telling them about the problems with the tech detailed data portrayed in their web site. Sometimes you get a reply with some thanks and make a new friend, sometimes not...

Got it.

Well then, if you are so inclined for the betterment and education of the forum, please start a new thread and post personal observations and experiences with optics as you see them, corroborating your statements with facts/science.

Again, not calling you out, I am sure I am not in the minority when I say that more education on this topic is best and by someone who clearly has put time and effort into it.

If you do not want to do the work on here, that is fine, maybe start a blog and post this information, either way there are plenty of interested parties.

[Alembic]

An optics sub thread? Anyone?
Lots of potential material to work with.

[MistWolf]

The optical train elements in a scope with a bigger tube are not always bigger, the extra space is often used for other things: more room for elevation/windage adjustment, more forgiving for the complicated optical path, more rugged internal parts, double erector in a 1-8x zoom scope, etc.

Even if the lenses themselves are larger (most probaly they are not, at least all of them), the light transmition increase would be inconsecuential and not detected by the human eye. The key feature would be the glass + coatings quality and not the internal lenses diameter.

All else being equal, an erector set with larger diameter lenses will pass more light.

[00bullitt]

All else being equal, an erector set with larger diameter lenses will pass more light.

This is very true. The optical prescription dictates the diameter of the lenses needed in an erector system to magnify the image. When the erector is made large enough to handle this larger diameter lens system, the outer tube is also made larger as a result to accommodate the necessary elevation travel for movement of the erector within.

I seriously doubt NF just MADE the ATACR 34mm for other reasons that were not dictated by a design criteria of the optical system. Just like I don't think Leupold MADE the Mark 8 35mm, or Hensoldt 36mm or IOR 40mm. They made them that large to accommodate a lens requirement and in turn had to enlarge the tube to provide the desired elevation travel.

I do know a fair amount about optical design in riflescopes specifically.

[TCFD273]

Do you have any formal research or documentation to cite? Not calling you out for the info, as I agree with most of it, just would like to be able to reference a document or research of some kind.

A scopes light transmission, “brightness”, is determined by lenses, coatings, objective diameter and the magnification

I own several NF ATACR’s, 1 SHV and 1 NXF1.

I imagine the ATACR will have better glass/coatings (which does translate to a brighter scope), and be built like a tank.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ASH556]

I can’t imagine why they felt the need to make this a FFP scope. As 00bullitt said in another thread, it’s not designed to be a true precision optic. In my mind after having used all of the “good” LPV optics, the Trijicon Accupower 1-4 is still one of the best due to it’s meeting the following criteria:

-True 1X
-SFP
-Bold reticle, useable without illumination (things break, batteries die, especially riding around in a patrol car or something)
-Capped turrets

It wins out over the NF 1-4 because of holdovers and a smaller center dot. The center dot on both the FC2 and FC3G are too big for precise aiming.

Kahles 1-6 is best in the world for the same reason.

If Nightforce would make the NX8 in SFP with capped turrets, I think that would be a real winner.

The whole “Aimpoint bright dot on 1X” thing works great until your battery dies. Then you have nothing but a small black spec to aim with.

[00bullitt]

I don't equate FFP to a precision optic. I see plenty of benefit for FFP in a LPV with greater than 6x magnification. My threshold for SFP is 1-6. More than 1-6, with a well designed reticle, FFP has benefits.

If I run a 200 yard zero, I can deal with just about any target inside 30 yards using the center of the reticle. I will most likely be on 1-6x doing so. If I go beyond 300 yards, I will most likely be on 6x; then the reticle subtensions would be accurate to deal with targets requiring any holds. If it were an 8x, dealing with targets beyond 300 yards, I will most likely be on 4x-8x depending on FOV required to engage efficiently. I may not want to be on 8x to address targets. Less magnification increases situational awareness and does not create tunnel vision. If the 8x scope did not have a well designed graduated reticle, then SFP would be just fine.

The SFP benefits of a 6x start to get trumped by the extra magnification of an 8x in my opinion.

The Nightforce reticles worked well in a power out situation. I think they were well designed to address that. I also do not run JUST a scope on a work gun; I couple it with an offset red dot as an auxiliary sight. If not that, I would, at minimum have offset BUIS as I am not one to ever depend on batteries. I DO, however change them regularly and always have spares on hand.

I'm sure if NF made a SFP version of the 1-8, they would sell a few of them, but the FFP will be the majority seller.

[voodoo_man]

While I understand the reasons behind the sfp vs ffp arguments, in the real world when you pump that optic up to Max magnification you aren't going to be moving around, it'll be in a stationary position for PID and precision shooting purposes. Having an optic you can go from CQB to 200m distances precision shooting is awesome and many that try have fallen short, very short.

[Clusterfrack]

I’m with 00bullitt on this one. Even in a 1-6x I prefer FFP. I’ve shot stages with multiple moving targets and 6x didn’t provide enough FOV. I want my leads and holds to work across the entire mag range. In a 1-8, this is even more important.

[TCFD273]

Ill choose a FFP over a SFP optic everyday of the week.

I shoot out to 1200yds on a weekly basis....sure if you have all the time in the world SFP will work. If your combining speed and precision...it’s FFP all the way.

I only own 1 SFP and it sits on my first rifle I received when I was 12. I would never change anything about that gun for sentimental reasons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS Tactical]

Ill choose a FFP over a SFP optic everyday of the week.

I shoot out to 1200yds on a weekly basis....sure if you have all the time in the world SFP will work. If your combining speed and precision...it’s FFP all the way.

I only own 1 SFP and it sits on my first rifle I received when I was 12. I would never change anything about that gun for sentimental reasons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Different scopes for different purposes

The stack of 7-35 FFP Nightforce's I sold yesterday and today are going on PRS rifles and ELR that shoot from 200ish yards to try and stretch out to eventually 4,000 yards.
If it was my choice the NX8 would have been a 1-6 SFP and slightly cheaper, but I will reserve judgement until I have them in my hand. Since I personally don't have unlimited funds I will eventually decide between the updated Razor Gen II 1-6 and the NX8 for my next LPV.

[TCFD273]

Different scopes for different purposes

The stack of 7-35 FFP Nightforce's I sold yesterday and today are going on PRS rifles and ELR that shoot from 200ish yards to try and stretch out to eventually 4,000 yards.
If it was my choice the NX8 would have been a 1-6 SFP and slightly cheaper, but I will reserve judgement until I have them in my hand. Since I personally don't have unlimited funds I will eventually decide between the updated Razor Gen II 1-6 and the NX8 for my next LPV.

I’ve bought a few scopes from you in the past [emoji106]

I almost pulled the tigger on the 7-35 but I don’t ever see myself shooting past 1500 and the 5x25 works well for me.

The NX8 is lighter, which is a selling point for me.

For me, the ability to be at any magnification and the drops be correct is very useful. If shooting multiple targets or targets that move after being shot, field of view is very important.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS Tactical]

I’ve bought a few scopes from you in the past [emoji106]

I almost pulled the tigger on the 7-35 but I don’t ever see myself shooting past 1500 and the 5x25 works well for me.

The NX8 is lighter, which is a selling point for me.

For me, the ability to be at any magnification and the drops be correct is very useful. If shooting multiple targets or targets that move after being shot, field of view is very important.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thank you for your Business! This is off topic but the 7-35's are truly something special where many people prefer paying the premium over the 5-25, if you're ever interested than shoot me a message and I'll go over it.

[TCFD273]

Thank you for your Business! This is off topic but the 7-35's are truly something special where many people prefer paying the premium over the 5-25, if you're ever interested than shoot me a message and I'll go over it.

Well damn! Lol

I bought another 5x25 last month, I debated the 7x35 for several weeks and decided against it.

I have an AI in 6.5 Creed coming in a month, I just might have to get a new scope, so I’ll definitely keep you in mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS Tactical]

Well damn! Lol

I bought another 5x25 last month, I debated the 7x35 for several weeks and decided against it.

I have an AI in 6.5 Creed coming in a month, I just might have to get a new scope, so I’ll definitely keep you in mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The only scope more desired than the 1-8 right now, I wish we had 20 of them on this order...

https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/26047347_1846651245377380_1462679787769541394_n.jp g?oh=bf265615d83a2978e61768d7d64108cd&oe=5AB38D4B

[DocGKR]

For LE shooting (almost always under 300), SFP is the way to go. For shooting longer ranges then FFP obviously is superior.

[littlejerry]

So, while I'm excited for the new 1-8, I've found myself wondering if NF will be releasing other NX8 compact models i.e. a 1.5-12, or 2-16.

[MSparks909]

For LE shooting (almost always under 300), SFP is the way to go. For shooting longer ranges then FFP obviously is superior.

Pardon the ignorance but why is SFP preferable in a LE shooting scenario?

[DocGKR]

Cross hair on target, pull trigger. At almost all LE engagement ranges, there is no appreciable drop to be worried about, so FFP and complex reticles are not such an advantage as at longer ranges (ex. military sniping). At low power, the cross hairs get very small and hard to see on some optics which can be very problematic for LE shooting distances.

[MSparks909]

Cross hair on target, pull trigger. At almost all LE engagement ranges, there is no appreciable drop to be worried about, so FFP and complex reticles are not such an advantage as at longer ranges (ex. military sniping). At low power, the cross hairs get very small and hard to see on some optics which can be very problematic for LE shooting distances.

Thanks for clarifying. Makes perfect sense.

[JSGlock34]

It's been a while since I've considered a variable optic for my AR, but this offering has me interested. What are the preferred QD mount options for the Nightforce 1-8?

[El Cid]

It's been a while since I've considered a variable optic for my AR, but this offering has me interested. What are the preferred QD mount options for the Nightforce 1-8?

I've been very pleased with my ADM QD mounts for my Z6i's. No issues or complaints and the rifles (one is .308) have been used in matches and high round count classes. I don't baby my gear.

If I was looking today I'd likely go with the Geissele - the only thing is it would require offset irons since it's not QD.

[Sigfan26]

It's been a while since I've considered a variable optic for my AR, but this offering has me interested. What are the preferred QD mount options for the Nightforce 1-8?

I’ve got LaRue and ADM. I like them both. Reason I got a LaRue was because the ADM was out of stock and I wanted to try Dillo Dust.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JSGlock34]

Which LaRue and ADM mounts? Standard LT104/Recon? Or Extended variants? There are a quite a few choices.

[Sigfan26]

Which LaRue and ADM mounts? Standard LT104/Recon? Or Extended variants? There are a quite a few choices.

I ADM Recon and the LaRue LT104.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[El Cid]

Which LaRue and ADM mounts? Standard LT104/Recon? Or Extended variants? There are a quite a few choices.

I went with the 30mm Recon X (extended) because I shoot nose to charging handle.

https://www.amazon.com/American-Defense-AD-RECON-X-30-STD/dp/B00MBBIEOK

They used to (maybe still do) offer a version with solid side pieces because Noveske wanted them like that.

ETA:
https://i.imgur.com/VzjDscZ_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium

[Default.mp3]

Spuhr and GDI both make what are suppose to be baller QD mounts, though I personally don't see a reason for QD these days, given the ease of finding offset sights.

[NickDrak]

I’d consider forgoing QD and instead going with the Geissele Super Precision 1.93” height.

[bravo7]

The MI qd with 1.93” height is a better mount than the ADM and Larue in my opinion if you must have a QD.

[Crews]

I ADM Recon and the LaRue LT104.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FYI, there’s a very compelling argument against using vertically-split rings for precision work because of the uneven forces they out on scope bodies. May or not apply depending on use.

I’ve used both, and had good luck with both. Nice mounts. Never the less, it’s Nightforce unimounts for me these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS Tactical]

FYI, there’s a very compelling argument against using vertically-split rings for precision work because of the uneven forces they out on scope bodies. May or not apply depending on use.

I’ve used both, and had good luck with both. Nice mounts. Never the less, it’s Nightforce unimounts for me these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


True, but I wouldn't consider LPV's on an AR precision work :cool:

[Crews]

True, but I wouldn't consider LPV's on an AR precision work :cool:

I guess I just assumed if they’re putting enough torque on scope bodies to affect the accuracy of the dials, it’s not good for your scope wether you use them or not. I could be misguided though!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS Tactical]

I guess I just assumed if they’re putting enough torque on scope bodies to affect the accuracy of the dials, it’s not good for your scope wether you use them or not. I could be misguided though!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Incorrect mounting and torque specifications can and do cause issues often.

[Jay585]

A bit of a thread tangent - I have a Leupold Mk8 1-8 CQBSS that I purchased for my SCAR 17S. I'm wondering if I'd be better off with the Nightforce ATACR 1-8. Optic and rifle is used mostly for recreational rock shooting here in Boise, ID. Might hunt coyotes and backpack with it (not likely, but possible).

Thoughts?

[CS Tactical]

A bit of a thread tangent - I have a Leupold Mk8 1-8 CQBSS that I purchased for my SCAR 17S. I'm wondering if I'd be better off with the Nightforce ATACR 1-8. Optic and rifle is used mostly for recreational rock shooting here in Boise, ID. Might hunt coyotes and backpack with it (not likely, but possible).

Thoughts?

Hard to say that it will be better though I believe it will be, Mike had the MK8 1-8 before it was officially released and prefers many 1-8's that came after it. The MK8 wasn't as close to a true 1X as many other scopes out, it didn't have daytime illumination and he did not like the turrets, on that alone I'd expect the Nightforce to blow it out of the water.

[NickDrak]

SHOT show peeps who have seen the NX8, what’s up? Give up some details!!!

[joshs]

SHOT show peeps who have seen the NX8, what’s up? Give up some details!!!

Size, glass, and illumination brightness all were great, but the eye box was very small and it suffers (to a lesser extent) the same illumination flicker with head position as the MK6. I didn't notice the illumination problem on 1x, but it was definitely noticeable on higher magnification. It also had a little bit of illumination bleed when the brightness was cranked up.

The ATACR was better in pretty much every way. The eye box was much more generous.

[navyman8903]

Size, glass, and illumination brightness all were great, but the eye box was very small and it suffers (to a lesser extent) the same illumination flicker with head position as the MK6. I didn't notice the illumination problem on 1x, but it was definitely noticeable on higher magnification. It also had a little bit of illumination bleed when the brightness was cranked up.

The ATACR was better in pretty much every way. The eye box was much more generous.

Do you have any experience with a Trij 1-8 to compare? And how did it feel as far as robustness? Do you think the NX8 is built well from your experience with it? I'm hoping 17oz didn't come at the cost of some knock around reliability.

I've got a pair of dedicated suppressed LWRC builds I'm doing for my wife and I when I get back from deployment. The NX8 might do well for us there, I've decided to put the trij on the MR556 for now since it's in stock at my local gun shop and the wait for the NX8 will be long.

[joshs]

Do you have any experience with a Trij 1-8 to compare? And how did it feel as far as robustness? Do you think the NX8 is built well from your experience with it? I'm hoping 17oz didn't come at the cost of some knock around reliability.

I've got a pair of dedicated suppressed LWRC builds I'm doing for my wife and I when I get back from deployment. The NX8 might do well for us there, I've decided to put the trij on the MR556 for now since it's in stock at my local gun shop and the wait for the NX8 will be long.

I'm not a fan of the Trijicon reticle, so I haven't spent much time looking at it.

I can't really comment on the NX8's durability since I just handled it on the show floor, but it seemed well built like the rest of the NXS line. I doubt NF would put out a scope with durability issues.

[navyman8903]

I'm not a fan of the Trijicon reticle, so I haven't spent much time looking at it.

I can't really comment on the NX8's durability since I just handled it on the show floor, but it seemed well built like the rest of the NXS line. I doubt NF would put out a scope with durability issues.


Fair enough, thanks for the reply. My local shop will get one before I order one from CS. I just want to put hands on it and see if it's worth the additional $$$ for me. I keep going back and forth.

[CS Tactical]

Holy moly the NX8 is Aimpoint bright! Bravo Nightforce... I don't have the best eyesight but I think there's a negligible amount of magnification, decent turrets, the eyepiece is small but so is the whole scope which makes it a winner IMO. Difficult to get a decent pic of the illumination, but trust me it's plenty bright. Order here http://bit.ly/2ohdFoo or call 916.670.1103

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/28056344_1917461234963047_2628317320668903957_n.jp g?oh=b81325b1b3f82fe7e24ad160cb4f95b4&oe=5B0B8E20

[JM Campbell]

Holy moly the NX8 is Aimpoint bright! Bravo Nightforce... I don't have the best eyesight but I think there's a negligible amount of magnification, decent turrets, the eyepiece is small but so is the whole scope which makes it a winner IMO. Difficult to get a decent pic of the illumination, but trust me it's plenty bright.

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/28056344_1917461234963047_2628317320668903957_n.jp g?oh=b81325b1b3f82fe7e24ad160cb4f95b4&oe=5B0B8E20

NANANANANANAAAAAH I don’t hear you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[navyman8903]

Holy moly the NX8 is Aimpoint bright! Bravo Nightforce... I don't have the best eyesight but I think there's a negligible amount of magnification, decent turrets, the eyepiece is small but so is the whole scope which makes it a winner IMO. Difficult to get a decent pic of the illumination, but trust me it's plenty bright. Order here http://bit.ly/2ohdFoo or call 916.670.1103

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/28056344_1917461234963047_2628317320668903957_n.jp g?oh=b81325b1b3f82fe7e24ad160cb4f95b4&oe=5B0B8E20

How tight is the eyebox and what is it the most comparable to? I'll be ordering this scope blind so, I'd like to get a rough idea. I hear the eyebox is pretty tight.

[CS Tactical]

How tight is the eyebox and what is it the most comparable to? I'll be ordering this scope blind so, I'd like to get a rough idea. I hear the eyebox is pretty tight.

The eyebox is a tad tight, but I'd run it like an Aimpoint at 1X and I did not get a chance to mount it to a rifle to try it at 8x as they sold out quick. IMO it's great for a 14.5" barreled gun and under, above that I'd rather go with the Vortex Razor HD-E 1-6, Kahles, Swaro or Minox. The ATACR will probably be added to the top of that list but until I have it in hand it's to be continued...

[navyman8903]

The eyebox is a tad tight, but I'd run it like an Aimpoint at 1X and I did not get a chance to mount it to a rifle to try it at 8x as they sold out quick. IMO it's great for a 14.5" barreled gun and under, above that I'd rather go with the Vortex Razor HD-E 1-6, Kahles, Swaro or Minox. The ATACR will probably be added to the top of that list but until I have it in hand it's to be continued...

Thanks for the info. I'm looking to run these on a pair of suppressed LWRC builds for my wife and I. Trying to keep the rifle as light as possible. I'm going the Trij route with the MR556 since the extra weight won't matter too much for the application. I'll be ordering some soon after this deployment is over. Should be some more user feedback by then also.

[CS Tactical]

An excellent post that covers LPV's in general including the Nightforce Duo and competitors... https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/just-released-nightforce-nx8-ffp-1-8x24mm-30mm-tube-atacr-f1-1-8x24mm-34mm-tube-models.6798633/page-4#post-6927319


Guys....I haven't been on here posting in a loooong time due to some issues that arose a few years ago. I work for Nightforce on the MIL-GOV-LE side of the house. I most likely won't post much beyond this, so I apologize if you ask questions and I don't follow up in a timely manner or at all.


I just thought it would be worthwhile to mention the largest differentiating factor for true 1x scopes; that is the focal plane that the reticle is located in. FFP and SFP are going to differ vastly in performance in the FOV arena. Its based on pure physics and size limitations. Until glass technology matures, right now a SFP 1x will always have more FOV.


SFP is typically always going to have more FOV due to the distance the reticle is located from the objective. It is further away. When you have a short scope, typically you have to account for more FOV by increasing the diameter of the fixed lens in the erector system. Often, the body tube is considered a limiting factor as that affects overall size and weight of a carbine type optic for a personal/primary weapon which is not meant to be huge (glass types being the same). The ATACR has a 34mm tube for a reason; design dictated a specific size of lens to accomplish a certain amount of FOV in the system at the given length for the type/spec of ED Glass used.


Fenix Mike nailed it above as the NX8 was developed with a purpose in mind and that was compact size for covert application on compact weapon systems with limited rail space. It was developed to meet certain requirements that dictated size and weight; size and weight being a higher priority than eyebox. The ATACR was also designed and developed around certain design parameters to meet a requirement; size and weight were one consideration. Eyebox (not eye relief) being up higher on the priority list. They both could be improved by making them larger/longer. Optical design is all about trade-offs and striking a balance to accomplish your end goal. Take a look at some of the European SFP 1x scopes. There is a reason they have 126'+ FOV at 1x. Look at their length.


I met Fenix Mike about 2 years ago while we were demoing to some Fed agencies in of all places....Phoenix. The gun guys who get it typically stand out at those demos as they can shoot at a higher level and understand application a bit more than others, and typically participate on forums like these. They stay much more tuned in. The 1-8's have been in development for some time. He certainly got a peek at them early on in their infancy.


The NX8 is FFP with a 30mm tube and only 8.6" long at 17 ounces. It performs very well.....FOR ITS SIZE. But it WILL NOT measure up to the ATACR in any way in performance, nor the Vortex......it was not designed to. The FFP ATACR with a 34mm tube is 10" and 21 ounces. The 34mm tube and slightly longer length allow for a larger diameter fixed erector lens. The eyepiece on the ATACR is much larger, but FOV is less than the NX8; yet the perceived performance is that the ATACR has a larger FOV as the edge to edge clarity and eyebox combine to form a fantastic image with a ton of forgiveness which makes it very fast to acquire the target. Designed to be more in line with the performance of the Vortex Razor minus the FOV.


The Vortex Razor is going to excel in the FOV arena as it has 115' on 1x; substantially more than the two NF 1-8's. The Razor eyebox is massive like the ATACR and it is fast to acquire the target. A huge recipe for 1x success is a large forgiving eyebox with as much FOV as you can squeeze out of it. Becuase lets face it....its al about speed and violence of action when you are on 1x, right?

The ATACR and Razor glass can be considered comparable.....I typically won't argue glass quality as that is a very subjective topic. What and how I see is not what/how everyone else sees. Both have excellent ED glass.


In my opinion, when close proximity CQB type of engagements trump the distance capability of an optic such as that of an assaulter/entry guy or 3 Gun Competitor, the SFP 1-6 very well may excel in certain scenarios (depending on its performance). If the emphasis is more on a DMR/SDM capability with CQB being the lower priority the FFP 1-8 makes good sense assuming it performs as needed. There is a reason that the Vortex Razor 1-6 receives such praise from the T1 units whom are using it. It does not compromise their ability to engage close targets with no sacrifice in speed over their prior EOTechs and it gives them enhanced PID capability on 6x for those distant engagements. Enhanced capability, right? 3 Gunners have been doing that for years.


Being a prior 3 Gun Competitor, I can tell you that I have always been very fond of the Vortex Razor 1-6 and the Swaro Z6i. 6x is the max that I prefer to contend with for a SFP 1x scope. If I were to go over 6x, I prefer FFP. The limiting factor has always been the reticle and daylight visibility of the dot that is formed for close work in FFP 1x scopes.


I have had the privilege over the past 30 months to put 10's of thousands of rounds through our new scopes and can form a very solid opinion of how they perform for a given application, but my opinion is just that. Fenix Mike addressed the application part pretty well. He has a criteria just like I do. They may not be the same, but we all have our considerations of what we want to accomplish with our tools. None of them are wrong.....just different


Both of the NF 1-8's share the same exact same FFP reticle technology and are extremely daylight visible in the brightest of daylight conditions. The ATACR has the inclusion of the drop down dot grid which is not inclusive of the NX8.


That brings up another point.....dot size or illuminated feature size. Remember that dot size is either fixed in relation to the target or in proportion. When in proportion (FFP), dot size is consistent through he mag range, When fixed, it only subtends properly on one setting. For example a 6x scope may have a dot size of 1moa on 6x. On 1x, it now subtends 6moa when the target is much smaller. On a FFP scope, like the NX8 and ATACR, the dot size is 2mils or 6.88moa. Yes....larger, but also consistent through the mag range and the segmented circle feature, now forms the dot on 1x.


I know there will probably be questions of me as to why we did "X" or "Y". I'd prefer not answer those questions on here as there were internal decisions that dictated why we did what we did. All had good reasons to support the decisions. These are brand new products for us. There may be changes to these models in the future; but please don't construe that as soon. It would be at least a year before you saw any additional skus.


I'd like to be as helpful as possible on here, but there are some things better left undiscussed on a public forum.


Hope you guys find the above info to be insightful and most of all thank you for your support of our products.

[StraitR]

^^^^ That was an extremely helpful post. I've spent the weekend trying to convince myself to pony up the NX8 money, but it sounds like my application falls more in line with a 1-6, not 1-8. The Gen II-E is looking better and better. Really appreciate you posting that over here.

[jellydonut]

It's an interesting post, but I'm still missing the argument or reasoning for FFP vs SFP in a low-power variable optic. When SFP gives you an inherent FOV advantage I can't see the good argument for FFP.

You're not going to be ranging with your mil dots at anything but full power with these low-power optics in any case, so what's the purpose?

[StraitR]

It's an interesting post, but I'm still missing the argument or reasoning for FFP vs SFP in a low-power variable optic. When SFP gives you an inherent FOV advantage I can't see the good argument for FFP.

You're not going to be ranging with your mil dots at anything but full power with these low-power optics in any case, so what's the purpose?

Reticule and dope is accurate through the entire range of magnification. Aside from potentially just not wanting 8x, I'd imagine 8x is a much longer throw from 1x (compared to 4x/6x), so not worrying about whether you got it all the way to stop in order for your dope to be on would be a benefit as well. Likely more important to 3-gunners. That's all I can come up with.

I do see you point. It seems the need to dial back mag to get a better FOV is a self-inflicted problem inherent of using a FFP optic with less FOV, thus needing the reticle/dope to be accurate because you want/need to shoot at less than full magnification. Subsequently, having 8x top end would just exacerbate the issue(s). *shrug*

This is more thinking out loud to better learn/understand, for myself, than countering your point.

[CS Tactical]

Part 2: https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/just-released-nightforce-nx8-ffp-1-8x24mm-30mm-tube-atacr-f1-1-8x24mm-34mm-tube-models.6798633/page-4#post-6928790


"00bullitt"Thanks for the welcome back. I believe heavily in factory representatives participating on forums to support their product, but sometimes given certain personalities that participate on here, the decision to continue doing so from a corporate perspective is difficult. I'm a shooter and enthusiast like others on here; have been for a loooong time. I enjoy the interaction and know our products as well as competing products very well as its my job to do so. I will offer as much value on here as I can as time permits, but please understand, I cannot and will not engage in argument or be placed in a defensive situation which could place the brand at risk. As mentioned, sometimes there are things that are better left undiscussed on a public forum. If you send me a PM, I will do my best to respond, but I can not make any promises as it is not a form of communication that I embrace as much as I do my email.


The eyebox on the NX8 is not near as forgiving as others. It works well for its size. Its size is a tradeoff to performance. Your performance expectations are very subjective and I expect them to differ. If you evaluate one not mounted to a rifle, you can easily get outside of the eyebox window and it will appear to be much tighter than it is. It is very comparable to the tradeoffs associated with the 2.5-10x24 on higher mag levels. I find the performance of the NX8 on 8x to be acceptable, but certainly prefer the ATACR. The two are a night and day comparison.


I have used the NX8 extensively on various 5.56 carbines and other calibers in the same platform and even have one on a DD5 at the moment. On 8x, you do come out of the eyebox briefly with 7.62 recoil, but its not hard to reacquire quickly. I have never experienced that issue on 5.56 carbines or with the ATACR.

The ATACR is a whole different animal. It was designed to perform. Optical quality and eyebox are superb. If you like the eyebox on the Vortex Razor, you will like the ATACR assuming you can sacrifice the FOV at 100 yards. If you like the illumination brightness of the Vortex, you will not be disappointed with either of our 1-8's; they are beyond bright enough and often require 1-2 settings below max.


As for the flashing reticle, again....when its not mounted to the rifle, it is apparent on higher mag levels. I do not get any intermittent illum issues from 1-4x. As the surface area of the illuminated portion of the reticle increases with magnification, you can induce extreme head position to get the fade of illumination, but not near to the level of competing products. The reflectivity of the reticle feature has its own FOV (or eyebox per se) to the eyeball based on the method used to illuminate the reticle to the required intensities for daylight visibility. It is the nature of the design to some extent. We go to great lengths to minimize it.


The ATACR does not tunnel at high or low magnification.

[CS Tactical]

It's an interesting post, but I'm still missing the argument or reasoning for FFP vs SFP in a low-power variable optic. When SFP gives you an inherent FOV advantage I can't see the good argument for FFP.

You're not going to be ranging with your mil dots at anything but full power with these low-power optics in any case, so what's the purpose?


Different scopes for different purposes, these were mainly developed for a .mil application and supposedly wanted both a SFP and FFP option. With the Nightforce NX8 (unmounted on a rifle) I preferred using it about 6x over 8x and with FFP you'd be able to range it easily at any magnification opposed to just at maximum.

[JSGlock34]

I decided to take the plunge on the NX8...and I'm moving it on. This was my first dip into the LPV waters, and I found the eye box too tight for my liking. I think that my natural head positioning (the Army inflicted nose to charging handle on me a long time ago) is a contributing factor, but I'm not so enamored with the optic to start messing around with different height mounts and trying to contort myself to the optic. The NX8 is certainly a quality scope, but I need something more forgiving at 1X.

[CS Tactical]

The ATACR 1-8 F1 is a whole 'nother level... Huge eyebox at 1x and better than the NX8 and 8x, as close as true 1x as you'll find, very usable reticle for distance.

[MSparks909]

I decided to take the plunge on the NX8...and I'm moving it on. This was my first dip into the LPV waters, and I found the eye box too tight for my liking. I think that my natural head positioning (the Army inflicted nose to charging handle on me a long time ago) is a contributing factor, but I'm not so enamored with the optic to start messing around with different height mounts and trying to contort myself to the optic. The NX8 is certainly a quality scope, but I need something more forgiving at 1X.

Give the new Gen 2 1-6 Vortex Razor HD a look. It’s my next 1-6 scope.

[CS Tactical]

Give the new Gen 2 1-6 Vortex Razor HD a look. It’s my next 1-6 scope.

Mine too, the ATACR is too rich for my blood :cool:

[JSGlock34]

Give the new Gen 2 1-6 Vortex Razor HD a look. It’s my next 1-6 scope.

I'm kinda wishing I tried the Vortex. In any case, I'll need to sell this NX8 before I try another LPV!

[dontshakepandas]

The eyebox is a tad tight, but I'd run it like an Aimpoint at 1X and I did not get a chance to mount it to a rifle to try it at 8x as they sold out quick. IMO it's great for a 14.5" barreled gun and under, above that I'd rather go with the Vortex Razor HD-E 1-6, Kahles, Swaro or Minox. The ATACR will probably be added to the top of that list but until I have it in hand it's to be continued...

Do you mind sharing a little more detail why you'd choose the Razor HD-E 1-6 over the NX8? I have a new build I'm about to finish with a 16" Centurion Recce barrel and had the optic narrowed down to these two options. I don't have many places nearby to shoot long distance so up close is still most important to me, but I'd like to have the ability to stretch this one out a bit more than I can with my Steiner 1-4.

The ATACR is out of my price range. The NX8 is actually a little over what I wanted to spend but I was thinking the extra mag might be worth it, but if people are liking the Razor better I may just stick with that.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[TCFD273]

I decided to take the plunge on the NX8...and I'm moving it on. This was my first dip into the LPV waters, and I found the eye box too tight for my liking. I think that my natural head positioning (the Army inflicted nose to charging handle on me a long time ago) is a contributing factor, but I'm not so enamored with the optic to start messing around with different height mounts and trying to contort myself to the optic. The NX8 is certainly a quality scope, but I need something more forgiving at 1X.

PM sent


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TCFD273]

Do you mind sharing a little more detail why you'd choose the Razor HD-E 1-6 over the NX8? I have a new build I'm about to finish with a 16" Centurion Recce barrel and had the optic narrowed down to these two options. I don't have many places nearby to shoot long distance so up close is still most important to me, but I'd like to have the ability to stretch this one out a bit more than I can with my Steiner 1-4.

The ATACR is out of my price range. The NX8 is actually a little over what I wanted to spend but I was thinking the extra mag might be worth it, but if people are liking the Razor better I may just stick with that.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

I have some time behind the NF 1-8. I’m a NF fanboy, have 3 ATACR’s (5x25 & 7x35)in the safe right now.

But-

Go with the Vortex HD 1-6


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dontshakepandas]

I have some time behind the NF 1-8. I’m a NF fanboy, have 3 ATACR’s (5x25 & 7x35)in the safe right now.

But-

Go with the Vortex HD 1-6


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkIs it mainly the tight eyebox that would push you towards the Razor?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[TCFD273]

Is it mainly the tight eyebox that would push you towards the Razor?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Yes, the Vortex has the NF beat on 1x all day long.

A LPVO on carbine will spend most of its life on 1x, with occasionally being spun up for precision shots. 1x matters a lot, in my opinion. If I’m spinning up magnification I generally will have time to get a great cheek weld and good eye relief...on 1x I just need that bitch to be there like now! Haha





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Poconnor]

What about the Schmidt and bender short dot? The nightforce is getting close in price. Is the vortex that much better than the nightforce at 1x? Swarovski or kahles 1-6x?

[dontshakepandas]

Yes, the Vortex has the NF beat on 1x all day long.

A LPVO on carbine will spend most of its life on 1x, with occasionally being spun up for precision shots. 1x matters a lot, in my opinion. If I’m spinning up magnification I generally will have time to get a great cheek weld and good eye relief...on 1x I just need that bitch to be there like now! Haha





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks. I don't disagree, I just keep telling myself I might like a little more magnification on this one since I have other rifles I can grab for up close.

I'm hoping I'll get a chance to play with both at the NRA show next week.

[dontshakepandas]

What about the Schmidt and bender short dot? The nightforce is getting close in price. Is the vortex that much better than the nightforce at 1x? Swarovski or kahles 1-6x?

The Kahles would be pretty high up on my list if it wasn't for the cost. It's substantially more expensive than the Vortex, and I'm just not sure the improvements over the Vortex justify the additional cost for me.

[CS Tactical]

Do you mind sharing a little more detail why you'd choose the Razor HD-E 1-6 over the NX8? I have a new build I'm about to finish with a 16" Centurion Recce barrel and had the optic narrowed down to these two options. I don't have many places nearby to shoot long distance so up close is still most important to me, but I'd like to have the ability to stretch this one out a bit more than I can with my Steiner 1-4.

The ATACR is out of my price range. The NX8 is actually a little over what I wanted to spend but I was thinking the extra mag might be worth it, but if people are liking the Razor better I may just stick with that.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


Essentially it's similar to how I describe the ATACR but with a maximum of 6x and Second Focal Plane. Huge eyebox where the ocular practically disappears, excellent clarity, great brightness but not nuclear like the Nightforce twins and a reasonable price. Here's an excellent review on the Vortex here:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?28785-Vortex-Razor-Gen-II-1-6-Review-with-some-SR-15-thrown-in

[dontshakepandas]

Essentially it's similar to how I describe the ATACR but with a maximum of 6x and Second Focal Plane. Huge eyebox where the ocular practically disappears, excellent clarity, great brightness but not nuclear like the Nightforce twins and a reasonable price. Here's an excellent review on the Vortex here:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?28785-Vortex-Razor-Gen-II-1-6-Review-with-some-SR-15-thrown-inThanks. I think I'm leaning towards the Razor HD-E right now.

I really like the SM1 reticle on the K16i too, but I just can't justify the $800 price difference.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Mike C]

I just got my NX8 today, finally. It’s mounted in a LaRue. No joke about that eye box. It’s tight as hell and it’s a little bit of a let down. Oh well I’ll just chalk it up as an excuse to grab up a Razor HD.

[GRV]

Essentially it's similar to how I describe the ATACR but with a maximum of 6x and Second Focal Plane. Huge eyebox where the ocular practically disappears, excellent clarity, great brightness but not nuclear like the Nightforce twins and a reasonable price. Here's an excellent review on the Vortex here:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?28785-Vortex-Razor-Gen-II-1-6-Review-with-some-SR-15-thrown-in

Besides the focal plane and mag, how do the Vortex and ATACR compare?

[CS Tactical]

Besides the focal plane and mag, how do the Vortex and ATACR compare?

Your quote was how I described the Vortex to the Nightforce in Summary :) I'd give the potential edge is durability to the Nightforce ATACR and the grid reticle is potentially better at distance. Both the Razor and ATACR have great glass, good illumination, are durable and two of the best LPV's out right now. 6x and under I'm fine with SFP while 6x and above I'd prefer FFP (if done right).

[GRV]

Your quote was how I described the Vortex to the Nightforce in Summary :) I'd give the potential edge is durability to the Nightforce ATACR and the grid reticle is potentially better at distance. Both the Razor and ATACR have great glass, good illumination, are durable and two of the best LPV's out right now. 6x and under I'm fine with SFP while 6x and above I'd prefer FFP (if done right).

:p I was afraid it might have seemed silly.

In particular I was curious to hear how close the two are in eyebox/relief, glass quality, 1x trueness and distortion, etc.

[CS Tactical]

:p I was afraid it might have seemed silly.

In particular I was curious to hear how close the two are in eyebox/relief, glass quality, 1x trueness and distortion, etc.

They are close enough overall that they're near the top of their class, I didn't try them side by side here in the shop as I thought it would be splitting hairs at that point.

[navyman8903]

So after giving it some time and deciding to go with a Trij accupower 1-8 on my rifle.....I feel like I made the better decision. I heard whispers of the tight eyebox before, but what I'm hearing now is a much worse assessment. I might have to stick with the Trij setup. It's the same weight as the Vortex with 8 power, and nicer turrets/illumination control IMO.

I know the Trij gets a bad shake from people, but owners seem to like it. I wonder where this puts the Trij 1-8 now. Looks like the only NF optics I'm going to be running in the future will be ATACR's, and of the 4-16x42 variety.

[littlejerry]

So after giving it some time and deciding to go with a Trij accupower 1-8 on my rifle.....I feel like I made the better decision. I heard whispers of the tight eyebox before, but what I'm hearing now is a much worse assessment. I might have to stick with the Trij setup. It's the same weight as the Vortex with 8 power, and nicer turrets/illumination control IMO.

I know the Trij gets a bad shake from people, but owners seem to like it. I wonder where this puts the Trij 1-8 now. Looks like the only NF optics I'm going to be running in the future will be ATACR's, and of the 4-16x42 variety.

I'd love to actually run an NX8 and see how bad it is.

I love my NXS 2.5-10x32, and the compact NXS scopes in general. I hope NF still sells a sub 20oz ~10x optic in the future. Maybe a 2-12x32?

[navyman8903]

I'd love to actually run an NX8 and see how bad it is.

I love my NXS 2.5-10x32, and the compact NXS scopes in general. I hope NF still sells a sub 20oz ~10x optic in the future. Maybe a 2-12x32?

My project gun it was supposed to go on was a suppressed 16" LWRC with a light and DBAL. So I needed something on the lighter end of the spectrum, but I also have to be able to fight with it. So having a tight eye box isn't really an option. I had a lot of hopes for the NX8 but even my wife who's a NF fanatic, for her it's aimpoint dots or Nightforce. Nothing else, even she didn't like it. Which is saying something because she was stressing me buying the Trijicon, but she actually likes the trijicon better than the NX8. A lot of people we know run the Trij and they like it a lot. It's heavy, but it literally weighs what the ATACR version 1-8 weighs for less than half the price. I might have to deal with the extra 8oz.

[dontshakepandas]

I had a chance to try the NX8, Razor HD-E, and Accupower 1-8 today at the NRA show and I think I'll be purchasing the NX8.

While the Vortex eyebox was a little more forgiving throughout the entire magnification range, I didn't have any issues with the NX8 at 1x and 8x seemed fine too.

The illumination of the Trijicon isn't even in the same league as the other two. The Nightforce also has a significant advantage in weight and size. I also really preferred the Nightforce reticle options.

I'm willing to give up the very tiny bit that I experienced on 1x for the other features since I already have other rifles (specifically the one with an Aimpoint Comp M5) that would be more of my go to options for anything up close.

Edit: My wife who has cross eye dominance issues and issues getting behind a scope in general also choose the NX8 out of the three options either. (I obviously made sure the Nightforce rep didn't tell her how much it cost).

[dontshakepandas]

Anybody have an NX8 with a Geissele mount? I just ordered my NX8 from CS Tactical and I'm not sure if I should go with the standard or extended mount for the NX8 on an AR15.

[dontshakepandas]

Anybody have an NX8 with a Geissele mount? I just ordered my NX8 from CS Tactical and I'm not sure if I should go with the standard or extended mount for the NX8 on an AR15.I'll answer my own question. It looks like the standard mount is the way to go.

I think I'm going to stick with Bobro just to stay consistent with my other mounts though.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[dontshakepandas]

At the risk of this thread just turning into me talking to myself, Aaron Cowan posted his review of the NX8 earlier today. Looks like it is going to do everything that I want it to do.


https://youtu.be/EEobnGeQ7BY

[Whiskey_Bravo]

Cowan likes to talk, but damn does he do well though out reviews.

[CS Tactical]

Anybody have an NX8 with a Geissele mount? I just ordered my NX8 from CS Tactical and I'm not sure if I should go with the standard or extended mount for the NX8 on an AR15.


Let us know what you think after you get a chance to play with it when it gets there next week :)

[CS Tactical]

Cowan likes to talk, but damn does he do well though out reviews.


Compared to 99% of the reviews out there, I prefer his on the topics he covers.

[dontshakepandas]

Compared to 99% of the reviews out there, I prefer his on the topics he covers.

I agree. He tends to be very thorough and looks at realistic situations.

One thing he mentioned in the review is that the size of the center dot could make it harder to be precise at longer distances. This would be true if you were dialing for the distance, but if you are using the reticle for holdovers it should allow you to be a little more precise at those distances.

I was actually pretty disappointed that they are only offering the NX8 with the capped elevation turret to LE/MIL since that would probably be my preference. Although, being able to adjust the elevation easily might be beneficial to change zeros between shooting with and without a can.

[CS Tactical]

More ATACR 1-8's are coming in if anyone is looking for them, give us a call at 916-670-1103 to Pre-Order. We also have one NX8 mil left in stock :)

[CS Tactical]

These very lightweight yet sturdy Scalarworks mounts would make a fantastic option for the NX8 :cool:
Just 22.48oz together :eek:

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38280422_2175972482445253_5324680126053482496_n.jp g?_nc_cat=0&_nc_eui2=AeHwdXBtW643okRABVR80JA293FOI2YzAxUd49fOk VMFhBuYUgedqqOeCGlKNQIqy_iYTGEtaPNTYvZB7aeNMOaNChS 5DyXmCvpHjyciURPcew&oh=2e29d3d60ac7c3dbdc961cf4e1584dcb&oe=5C0A07C1

[Unobtanium]

These very lightweight yet sturdy Scalarworks mounts would make a fantastic option for the NX8 :cool:
Just 22.48oz together :eek:

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38280422_2175972482445253_5324680126053482496_n.jp g?_nc_cat=0&_nc_eui2=AeHwdXBtW643okRABVR80JA293FOI2YzAxUd49fOk VMFhBuYUgedqqOeCGlKNQIqy_iYTGEtaPNTYvZB7aeNMOaNChS 5DyXmCvpHjyciURPcew&oh=2e29d3d60ac7c3dbdc961cf4e1584dcb&oe=5C0A07C1

Do you honestly feel that <5in-lb per clamp is enough to secure a 17oz optic to a hard use rifle?

[Mike C]

Do you honestly feel that <5in-lb per clamp is enough to secure a 17oz optic to a hard use rifle?

Not sure what the documentation states in regards to the amount of force on the clamp (or even where you'd find that) but either way mine is holding zero. Mine has been sliding around the trunk of my wife's impala for a few weeks in-between range trips every 3 days and hasn't skipped a beat. So far I have about 4,000 rounds through the mount and its been mounted since 12JUL18. There has also been a lot of dry practice and manipulation drills in that 4K as well.

I've rechecked zero every 1k and have not seen any shift. The mount is slim without the QD levers and I love it. It is crazy that it is only a few ounces lighter than the LT104 on paper but the weight difference is noticeable mounted. I can't speak for certain about the mount over long term without more rounds through it and carrying it around more but so far it is holding up and I am liking it. Sample of one and all but I think they are worth a shot. The craftsmanship and quality in general are outstanding, pictures don't do them justice it is something you truly have to put your hands on to appreciate.


28727

ETA: Don't laugh at my yellow broccoli band you know you want one.

[Unobtanium]

Not sure what the documentation states in regards to the amount of force on the clamp (or even where you'd find that) but either way mine is holding zero. Mine has been sliding around the trunk of my wife's impala for a few weeks in-between range trips every 3 days and hasn't skipped a beat. So far I have about 4,000 rounds through the mount and its been mounted since 12JUL18. There has also been a lot of dry practice and manipulation drills in that 4K as well.

I've rechecked zero every 1k and have not seen any shift. The mount is slim without the QD levers and I love it. It is crazy that it is only a few ounces lighter than the LT104 on paper but the weight difference is noticeable mounted. I can't speak for certain about the mount over long term without more rounds through it and carrying it around more but so far it is holding up and I am liking it. Sample of one and all but I think they are worth a shot. The craftsmanship and quality in general are outstanding, pictures don't do them justice it is something you truly have to put your hands on to appreciate.


28727

ETA: Don't laugh at my yellow broccoli band you know you want one.

Could you at some point closely inspect the recoil lugs and 1913 slots of the rail they interfere with, so as to ascertain movement under recoil, or not? I want to like the SW mount, but have had experiences in the past that make me shy away. SW has told me those issues are fixed, but I want 3rd party info.

[Mike C]

Unobtanium would you be willing to share your experiences and issues as well as what you were told was, "fixed?" If you don't want to share publicly feel free to PM me. As for the lugs I'll snap some photos of them tomorrow morning. I do want to ask for clarification though before I forget. You were talking about the clamping pressure on the main tube being less than ideal but you are asking me about the lugs on the mount. Have you had issues with the scope moving in the mount under recoil, the mount itself, or both? Thanks.

[Unobtanium]

Unobtanium would you be willing to share your experiences and issues as well as what you were told was, "fixed?" If you don't want to share publicly feel free to PM me. As for the lugs I'll snap some photos of them tomorrow morning. I do want to ask for clarification though before I forget. You were talking about the clamping pressure on the main tube being less than ideal but you are asking me about the lugs on the mount. Have you had issues with the scope moving in the mount under recoil, the mount itself, or both? Thanks.
PM sent.

[Poconnor]

After reading all this I think I will have to make a road trip to lay hands on all the choices. The vortex, NX8, ATACR, Swarovski and kahles. I think if nightforce made the NX8 in SFP with capped turrets it would be an easy decision. I think that would increase the eye box and FOV at 1x. Is red dot illum adgustable like an aimpoint?

[littlejerry]

This weekend I was able to look through both the NX8 and ATACR 1-8 at the Carolina Run and Gun courtesy of the NF sales rep.

Wow. The ATACR is an awesome optic. Illumination, eyebox, reticle, clarity, all incredible. The range was only 300 yards but it felt like it gave up nothing compared to my NXS 2.5-10x32. Curious to see it at longer distance, but it seems like a perfect match for a 5.56 DMR for use out to 600-800.

NX8 was interesting. Much more sensitive to eye position. I'd like to try it mounted up before passing judgement. Crazy bright, good reticle. If it's easy enough to get behind it's a solid choice. Side by side with the ATACR the clarity and eyebox doesn't look nearly as good, but it's also $1000 cheaper. I'd really like to try it mounted on a rifle before passing judgement.

[Mike C]

Unobtanium here are those pictures. Only thing to take note of is the long lines you see on the ejection port side under the rail are from the LT104 I used prior. The two smaller bits of marring non ejection port side are also from the LT104 QD levers. I can discern no marring from the Scalarworks mount moving in any way. I hope this helps and thanks for the PM and info you had to share.


28754
28755
28756
28757
28758

littlejerry I like the NX8 more now than I initially did. At first I wasn't sure about it because the eye box does feel tight as heck but the more I work with it the less of an issue I have with it. The only real problem I've had with it that is on going is the transition to non dominant side. I find myself having to work harder to get into the eye box even on 1X. If you are looking for a small profile without sacrificing quality and want that 1-8 the NX8 fits the bill nicely. If the extra K is no biggie or you don't mind the slight extra bulk the the ATACR is the shit.

[Unobtanium]

Unobtanium here are those pictures. Only thing to take note of is the long lines you see on the ejection port side under the rail are from the LT104 I used prior. The two smaller bits of marring non ejection port side are also from the LT104 QD levers. I can discern no marring from the Scalarworks mount moving in any way. I hope this helps and thanks for the PM and info you had to share.


28754
28755
28756
28757
28758

littlejerry I like the NX8 more now than I initially did. At first I wasn't sure about it because the eye box does feel tight as heck but the more I work with it the less of an issue I have with it. The only real problem I've had with it that is on going is the transition to non dominant side. I find myself having to work harder to get into the eye box even on 1X. If you are looking for a small profile without sacrificing quality and want that 1-8 the NX8 fits the bill nicely. If the extra K is no biggie or you don't mind the slight extra bulk the the ATACR is the shit.

That's looking pretty good. Can you post a picture "looking down the top of the rail" at a 45* angle into the 1913 slots, as it were from the CH towards the muzzle, so one can see the "impact faces" of the 1913 slots?

[Mike C]

Unobtanium Here you go man, there is no discernible damage to the rails. The highlighted circle in red is just a dried piece of locktite, (T8). T4 is the other rail slot that interfaces with the locking screw. Sorry if the pictures suck I took them in between feedings for my newborn. The lack of sleep is definitely screwing with my coordination/concentration.

28788
28789

[Unobtanium]

Looks really good, it impact will be on the opposite side. The optic tries to stay in place while the gun moves rearward, thus potential impact would be on the face that the shooter would be looking at if that makes sense.

[Mike C]

Looks really good, it impact will be on the opposite side. The optic tries to stay in place while the gun moves rearward, thus potential impact would be on the face that the shooter would be looking at if that makes sense.

Yeah I've got you. Told you sleep deprived and completely nonsensical. The other side looks exactly the same. There is no marring of any kind. If you look at the third picture down from my initial post of photos you will see the other face of the rail and there is nothing to note.

[CS Tactical]

Do you honestly feel that <5in-lb per clamp is enough to secure a 17oz optic to a hard use rifle?


When that amount of pressure is applied over that long contact area I don't see why not. There's other manufacturers that have more clamping area over much less surface. I'm not an engineer, but Phil over at SW is much more intelligent than myself and has done quite a bit of testing on his products plus has quite a few SME's using them. IMO there's plenty of high quality mount and ring options (ADM, Geissele, Nightforce etc...) find what works for you and drive on.

[MistWolf]

These very lightweight yet sturdy Scalarworks mounts would make a fantastic option for the NX8 :cool:
Just 22.48oz together :eek:

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38280422_2175972482445253_5324680126053482496_n.jp g?_nc_cat=0&_nc_eui2=AeHwdXBtW643okRABVR80JA293FOI2YzAxUd49fOk VMFhBuYUgedqqOeCGlKNQIqy_iYTGEtaPNTYvZB7aeNMOaNChS 5DyXmCvpHjyciURPcew&oh=2e29d3d60ac7c3dbdc961cf4e1584dcb&oe=5C0A07C1

How much does the Scalar Works weigh by itself?

[CS Tactical]

How much does the Scalar Works weigh by itself?

5.48 oz, check out the detailed information on their site here: https://scalarworks.com/shop/optic-mounts/leap-scope-mount/

[Unobtanium]

When that amount of pressure is applied over that long contact area I don't see why not. There's other manufacturers that have more clamping area over much less surface. I'm not an engineer, but Phil over at SW is much more intelligent than myself and has done quite a bit of testing on his products plus has quite a few SME's using them. IMO there's plenty of high quality mount and ring options (ADM, Geissele, Nightforce etc...) find what works for you and drive on.

Roger that. I'll honestly have to see a ton of non-biased testing before I trust their products again. They are awesome people, but I'm not buying again until I see proof that these mounts are improved. Like you said, too many products that I know work to choose from, at this time. I love their mount for my Benelli M4/H2, and want to love this one, I just can't based on past experiences.

[MistWolf]

5.48 oz

That's $73 an ounce!

[CS Tactical]

That's $73 an ounce!


Seems like a bargain with some plants costing more than that per ounce :cool:

[Unobtanium]

That's $73 an ounce!

Well, the scope is $88/oz. +-

What did the car you drive around in cost per ounce? Your house? Relevancy?

[MistWolf]

Well, the scope is $88/oz. +-

What did the car you drive around in cost per ounce? Your house? Relevancy?

According to my estimates, my jeep cost 4¢ an ounce. If you want to discover the relevancy, stick your tongue in your cheek. You'll find it there!

[Unobtanium]

According to my estimates, my jeep cost 4¢ an ounce. If you want to discover the relevancy, stick your tongue in your cheek. You'll find it there!

I've owned a jeep product before I got my cx5. Adjusted for fixing it over 5 yearsownership, and you're at at least 6-8 cents per oz.

[MistWolf]

I've owned a jeep product before I got my cx5. Adjusted for fixing it over 5 yearsownership, and you're at at least 6-8 cents per oz.

Counting shocks, tires, exhaust, engine mount and other miscellaneous repairs, I'm up to 6¢ an ounce, but the peace of mind it brings when your 60 miles from the nearest paved road is priceless.

Gotta admit- 6¢ an ounce for a 3,000 lbs vehicle is pretty cheap!

[MistWolf]

You really don’t want to do that calculation for the SCD.

I would probably be shocked- if I knew what ask SCD was.

[Unobtanium]

Counting shocks, tires, exhaust, engine mount and other miscellaneous repairs, I'm up to 6¢ an ounce, but the peace of mind it brings when your 60 miles from the nearest paved road is priceless.

Gotta admit- 6¢ an ounce for a 3,000 lbs vehicle is pretty cheap!

I'll take peace of mind knowing I wont break down on the way to work, lol

[Unobtanium]

Alright. I was waffling on the NX8 and Vortex "E", and finally decided on vortex due to eyebox, but then I saw that the ATACR is 0.04" shorter, and 0.5oz lighter. This made things a total no brainer. Anyway, I'm looking for a mount that will compliment things. I am using it on a 5.56 receiver and prefer my ocular to end even with the charging handle/receiver juncture. I'm seeing that these atacr have a huge! Arse end. What mount is light, sturdy, and will push it out there without having to mount the base of the mount at the very bleeding edge of the receiver? The scope is what it is, but I prefer to keep the mass of the mount nearest the BUIS. Pics would be nice if you have a setup you like. Dont want QD. Prefer 1/2" hardware.

[CS Tactical]

Alright. I was waffling on the NX8 and Vortex "E", and finally decided on vortex due to eyebox, but then I saw that the ATACR is 0.04" shorter, and 0.5oz lighter. This made things a total no brainer. Anyway, I'm looking for a mount that will compliment things. I am using it on a 5.56 receiver and prefer my ocular to end even with the charging handle/receiver juncture. I'm seeing that these atacr have a huge! Arse end. What mount is light, sturdy, and will push it out there without having to mount the base of the mount at the very bleeding edge of the receiver? The scope is what it is, but I prefer to keep the mass of the mount nearest the BUIS. Pics would be nice if you have a setup you like. Dont want QD. Prefer 1/2" hardware.


We have the NX8's in stock BTW, I'd say the Nightforce Unimount (if you don't mind 20 MOA built in) or the Magmount but the only 30mm height is 1.375. Give me a ring on the scope and I'll see what I can do :)

[Unobtanium]

We have the NX8's in stock BTW, I'd say the Nightforce Unimount (if you don't mind 20 MOA built in) or the Magmount but the only 30mm height is 1.375. Give me a ring on the scope and I'll see what I can do :)

I'm planning on the ATACR. NX8's don't do well with built-in elevation mounts. It's part of their compromise in size. Some odd optical properties emerge in some of them when you dial in significant elevation. I already have a very generous offer on an ATACR from a friend, if indeed I go that path.

[Unobtanium]

22441

Early production/Prototype only. I'm sure if ever sold, it will fetch a mint. Otherwise, Leupold is your source for those turrets.

[HCM]

http://soldiersystems.net/2018/10/01/ussocom-selects-nightforce-for-squad-variable-powered-scopes-first-focal-plane-contract-worth-up-to-21-million/

USSOCOM Selects Nightforce For Squad-Variable Powered Scopes (First Focal Plane) Contract Worth Up To $21 Million



Today, they announced the First Focal Plane contract, awarding a little over $15 Million initially to Nightforce. Ultimately, the contract could be worth as much as $21 Million.

The Optic is the ATACR (Advanced Tactical Rifle) 1-8x. It is similar to the commercial variant except that it will be in FDE and utilize a custom BDC reticle specified by USSOCOM.

[CS Tactical]

It's definitely a worthy scope to win that contract, I'd buy one if I can afford it :cool: