80mm rifle scope

Looks like junk-- the specifications don't even tell how many MOA of adjustment are available. Nor do they tell anything about how the scopes are made, only that they have a Lifetime Warranty
So does Tasco and Bushnell--but they don't cost $600...and you would probably come closer to getting a T or B fixed when they break.....Come to think of it--how many ATN scopes have you seen at competitions? Get a Leupold--you won't be sorry.
I have to agree with you Chris

When I read 1/8 Min clicks, Bullet drop compensators and no overall MOA in the ad, it threw up a warning sign. It didn't have large target knobs either.

I'll stick to my Leupold Longranges, Mark 4s and the B&L Balvar 6x to 24X (old style)with Kuharsky rear mounts.

just my 2 cents worth.
They are stout scopes with etched in glass reticle as the Nightforce is.

The thing I remember was that the 4x12 power model my friend bought for his AR-15 would get stuck on 4 power and the **** thing wouldn't rotate. I believe that he tourqued the rings too tight and it kept it from adjusting. It said something to the effect that your only to tighten to a certain tourque and not beyond. That was a red flag for me. Sure enough when we loosened the rear ring the problem was corrected, only trouble was, it had to be kept so loose it was ridiculous. It was returned, I think.

The optics were not as nice as the B OR T and had a tint of some sort to them, I think yellow or was it greenish? The lighted crosshair was truly nice and was the only highlight other than it being a backup tent stake hammer if needed.

The scope in my opinion was good for a light recoiling weapon where a lighted croshair would be a nice plus and a bullet drop compensator for a few hundred yards tops (if it works) might be needed too, only if I had to pay $150. or less for it. The scope ring thing pinching the adjuster just realy left a bad taste in my mouth.

Hope this helps some. I had wondered if anyone else has used them for a while now too, just forgot the name of them until now.
Warning! This thread is more than 22 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.