1-4 and 1-6 optics discussion

[jellydonut]

I'm worried about what exactly they've sacrificed to lose all that weight. The Razor II HD is a tank, if it could stand to lose this weight, why didn't they build it like that in the first place?

I bought mine mainly because it's an optic that has been there and done that, it's not a gamer optic but a combat-proven optic. I wanted something durable. This latest version is still an unknown quantity.

[StraitR]

Alright, after reading THIS excellent post by @CS Tactical in the Nightforce NX8 thread, I went ahead and picked up a Razor HD Gen II-E. Looking forward to getting a LPV back on my carbine after a couple years of using a T-2, as well as the 2x extra mag over the TR24 I used for almost five years.

[CS Tactical]

An excellent post from a Nightforce Rep that covers LPV's in general including the Nightforce Duo and competitors... https://forum.snipershide.com/thread...4#post-6927319

Quote Originally Posted by 00bullitt:
"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."