NightForce Rifle scopes

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by Bill Maylor, Jul 27, 2008.

  1. Bill Maylor

    Bill Maylor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    234
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    How good is a NightForce Rifle scope? I am looking to rescope my Rem Sendaro 300 UltraMag.I am thinking this scope might be the one. Dose anyone have this combo? And do thay like the setup. I want to target shoot to 1000 to 1500 yrds. The loupold 3.5x10x50VXIII served its purpose,out to 300. This rifle has put down some nice deer here in NW FL but its time to move up the food chain:) I am also looking to send this rifle to Harts for a tune up. Any feed back would be thankfull. Bill Maylor.
     
  2. Bill Maylor

    Bill Maylor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    234
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Help?
     

  3. jwp475

    jwp475 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,595
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Nightforce scope are excellent IMHO, I may prejudice since I own 5 of them. Very repeatable turrets and they adjust in true MOA..
     
  4. dbhostler

    dbhostler Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    837
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2002
    Nightforce scopes are very good quality, repeatable in adjustments and have a large selection of powers and reticles. They are also large and heavy. I have three and prefer them over any of my Leupold or Burris scopes. Also have one on a 300 RUM, works for me.
    db
     
  5. jmermis

    jmermis Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    52
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    i was looking to rescope my 300wm sendero awhile back and did a lot of searching on this forum and on my own. i ended up with a 5-22x50 with a NR-R1 reticle and haven't looked back. you actually ask your self the question why did you wait that long. Its a great scope with a lot of great features over and above many of the others. you'll enjoy it.
     
  6. Bill Maylor

    Bill Maylor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    234
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Night Force Rifle Scopes

    Thanks fo the info.I think the 5.5x22x56 will be the one for me, and your right I dont know why I waited so long. This rifle was one of the first year makes. I put the Leoupold on it thinking I would never shoot fauther then 300 yards:confused:. I have been shooting my Roy 257 with a Burris BlackDimmond 4x16x50, and let me tell ya thats one fine shooting Deer rifle. The 257 will not do what the 300RUM will:D I am a new member and have not found my way around this sight yeat, so please bear with my replies. Thank you Bill Maylor.
     
  7. wadevb1

    wadevb1 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    218
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    I have had my NF 5.5x22x50 for the past year. I did not have the opportunity to spend much time behind the glass til recently. Last week I had my 300WM with NF and 204 with Leupy 6.5x20x40 VXIII on the same bench. After switching back and forth working loads between rifles I believe NF is superior optically.
     
  8. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    A good, tough scope that makes sense on a hard kicking caliber. You will like it.
     
  9. hopt

    hopt Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2007
    thanks for the input guys, i hope to receive quite a bit more....can anyone give me a ballpark figure on what kind of $$ i'm looking at for a very good used nightforce or a new one? i would want a "middle of the road model", don't need the 56mm bell, and i don't want the low power variable, but like a 5-15x50 or something close. also does anyone have a source for these scopes at a "deal" on the price? thanks again for the info so far. The nightforce could go on a Rem LTR .308, or a Kimber .300WSM, or the Browning...haven't made up my mind yet.......
    hopt gun) :eek:
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2008
  10. CS T

    CS T Official LRH Sponsor

    Messages:
    1,248
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    In my opinion they are one of the best scope on the market. They are very strong, the turrets are very repeatable, the turrets are very positive, they have a very nice finish, and the glass is very good.

    We sale Nightforce along with a lot of other optics so if we can be of help feel free to call, PM, or email me.

    Thanks for your time,

    Mike @ CSGW

    www.csgunworks.com
    mike@csgunworks.com

    Here’s some testimonials about CS GunWorks
    FEEDBACK about CSGUNWORKS on AR15.com
    FEEDBACK about CSGUNWORKS on Snipersparadise
    FEEDBACK about CSGUNWORKS on the HIDE
     
  11. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    I highly recommend you give CS Gunworks a shot for all your Nightforce needs. He is a great vendor and he will treat you right.
     
  12. Bill Maylor

    Bill Maylor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    234
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Thanks for all replys. After a few weeks of resech,I orderd a5.5x22x56 Zero stop from Optics Planet. Thay did not have it in stock, said it would be about 2 weeks. The next day thay call and said NightForce will have to make it. I wanted the NPR1 ret.with the Zero stop, so it could take 4-6 weeks:(. I can wait for that price. And they had the best price $1568 no shipping or tax. I drove 4hrs to AL, last week just to see one. It was worth the drive. their price was$1625 without the Zero stop, and 10% sales tax:p. This Optics Planet Co. was very pro, and helpful in this sale. I will rec, this Co. with NightForce. If your looking for a NightForce ck their prices:cool:. Bill Maylor
     
  13. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    A Nation of Riflemen....needs Men...

    deleted
     
  14. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    A Nation of Riflemen....Needs Men

    A Nation of Riflemen First Needs Men
    Essays March 4th, 2008
    Early in World War II, Japan considered invading the mainland of the United States. Admiral Yamamoto, commander in chief of the Japanese naval forces and architect of the Pearl Harbor bombing, advised against invading. Twenty years prior, Admiral Yamamoto had spent a few years in the United States studying at Harvard University. Based on his experience with American culture, Admiral Yamamoto reportedly told his government, "I would never invade the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

    Admiral Yamamoto's observation speaks to the heart of America's uniqueness. The Admiral observed, in essence, that America was not a nation of subjects, who could be expected to cower and hope for their government to save them. It was a nation of citizens ready, willing, and able to defend their piece of ground against all comers, as a matter of civic duty, personal responsibility, and pride. It was the presence of citizens such as these–not the United States military–that filled his heart with fear.

    From the drafting of the Bill of Rights onward, America has placed its faith not in the hands of a cultural, political, or academic elite, or in a standing military, but rather in the hands of armed, self-reliant citizens with the desire and ability to care for themselves. The United States was designed not to be a nation of subejcts, like every other on earth, but a nation of men. A nation of riflemen.

    It is unsurprising that the Admiral, coming from the conformist culture of Japan, was impressed by the gritty self-reliance of American culture. Even in the soft confines of Harvard, the social norm of individualism was in sufficient evidence to catch Admiral Yamamoto's attention.

    The Admiral's concern came not just from the individualistic spirit he observed in American culture, but also from the rifles that would fill their capable hands if an invasion was attempted. America at that time, and throughout most of its history, prided itself on being a "nation of riflemen," where every able-bodied man was, if not a master marksman, at least competent in the use of a longarm.

    The concept of a "nation of riflemen" was not the product of some unhealthy cultural obsession with weapons, nor did it arise from any remarkable immediate threat to popular safety. The concept was the natural outgrowth of spirit evident in the very founding of the United States, the spirit that made Americans unique and America great. The rifle is, implicitly, the symbol of the self-reliant American.

    Why use a rifle as the symbol of self-reliance? Because no other thing, word, or sign is nearly as fitting. In The Prince, Nicolo Machievelli wrote, "etween an armed and an unarmed man, there is no comparison whatsoever . . . ." An unarmed man is, by definition, a dependent. He is incapable of securing his own safety. He must depend on someone else to defend him against attack, whether from a stray dog, a lone criminal, an organized gang, or a foreign army. He rightly fears any separation from society, because solitude separates him from those who can defend him and singles him out as a target for those who might wish to harm him. He is tied by his interest in self-preservation to whoever assumes the burden of defending him. His need to be defended puts him at the mercy of his defender, and over time, he by neccesity becomes their subject.

    An armed man, by contrast, has the means for independence. While he may choose to avail himself of help in securing his own safety, he does not need it. He can, if he chooses, separate himself from society without fear, confident that he can preserve himself without aid. He can even hunt meat, skins, and furs for his own food and clothes, freeing himself at least in part from the social economy. He is not fundamentally dependent on anyone, and therefore has no need to become subject to another's demands. Moreover, he has the means to resist anyone who would seek to force him into subjectivity. A rifle, more than any other tool, enables a man who desires self-reliance to attain it.

    Just as the spirit of self-reliance is stillborn if the person it inspires is unarmed, a rifle is worse than useless in the hands of someone without the mindset to use it for its intended purpose. It takes a man–a real man, who believes in personal responsibility, in a duty to defend himself, his family, and his friends, who values courage and seeks to possess it–to make a rifleman of the sort whose existence deterred the Japanese from invading the US.

    America, sadly, seems to be a nation with a rapidly dwindling population of such men. Biologically male humans continue to be born and to die at normal rates, but men are increasingly scarce. Public schools raise boys to be good little girls by punishing any sign of initiative, assertiveness, decisiveness, aggression, stubborness, or independence of thought–traits essential to a self-reliant man; traits our Founding Fathers had in spades. Attributes found in most boys and that would, if left alone, develop in manhood into a capacity for self-reliance, are shamed and punished out of many of them before they graduate junior high.

    On the other side of the age spectrum, the government seeks endlessly to expand entitlement programs such as universal health care, and will likely continue to push until everyone in America is, in one fashion or another, dependent on it for some essential service. Self-reliance is, literally, in danger of becoming outlawed. It is unsurprising that many state governments also seek to outlaw firearms, the symbol of self-reliance. The passion and persistence of the anti-gun movement is inexplicable until understood in the context of the symbolic importance of firearms. It is not firearms these politicians hate with such vehemence–after all, hating a piece of inanimate iron is too silly to be contemplated seriously by intelligent adults–but rather the self-reliance symbolized by firearms. They seek to ban not guns per se, but rather the kind man who neither wants, nor needs, nor can be compelled to accept their vision of a wholly dependent society, guided by the wisdom of an elite few.

    America still has plenty of rifles, at least for the moment. What she lacks is men–the kind of men in whose hands a rifle is not merely a weapon, but a symbol of freedom, a condemnation of tyranny, and a standing refusal to become a subject. The Constitutional drafters understood that the existence of liberty requires on such men, and drafted the Second Amendment to ensure that they would always remain armed. The drafters never anticipated that the self-reliant man would be outlawed before the rifles were.