Nightforce problems.???

Brent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2001
Messages
2,537
Location
Palmer, Alaska
Hey thanks for all the time and info, I'll work on it and see how it works out and maybe even try the 185 Bergers too. I'll be changing to the 210 as well, we'll see what happens to the psi, MV and SD.

I thought of trying the VV 500 series of powders too.
 

Darryl Cassel

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 7, 2001
Messages
1,757
Location
Pennsylvania
S1 and Brent and others

Your doing your homework very well and that setup will work out for you.

I too have used the R2 Reticule in the Nightforce and had the spacing of the 2 MOA horizontal marks and a 500 yrd zero to where I could go to 1450 yrds with holdover. I was using the 240 gr Sierra MK with a BC of .711 to do it plus a velocity of 3250 FPS.

On the other hand, you have LR hunters such as myself that still like to click to the target (animal) rather then use holdover, and count on his spotter such as a sniper team does to see the hit/s.
When doing that, you must have a good military rangefinder to be exact as to distance.

If the shots are only 1000 yds (I don't mean that statement as a smart remark either), that system you mentioned and the bullet will work fine. If you reach out to say double that yardage, it will not because the 180 gr bullet will drop off drastically after 1000 yds and you don't have the line spacing to do it unless you have a 1000 yd zero to start with. Then that bullet won't carry the killing power because of the low foot ponds of energy left. We have killed elk out to 2100 yds using our click system and a 338- 300 gr MK at a starting Velocity of 3310FPS.

I don't like what I call "Junk" (horizontal lines, circles, several dots and so on) in my scopes view when trying to locate bedded elk or deer in thick areas of Laural and Oak brush after I have found them in my "Bigeyes".

You can order the NXS with a cross hair and small dot. With the lighted reticule and this makes for a very nice system.

To anyone reading the post:
I believe it depends on the way you like to hunt and also the range you are attempting or have killed animals at as to your selection of scopes. If price is not a problem, you must make that decision.
The question is, is the NXS worth over $600.00 more then the Leupold LR? To some it may very well be. To others it won't.

With the R2 Horizontal line setup, It seemed I always had the animal "between these lines" and I like to hold a cross wire or dot dead on the area of the animal I intend to place the bullet when using the hold over system.

Many years ago I had a series of verticle dots (5 or 6) put in Leupolds. The dots were placed in the scope for the velocity and bullet I was using and at yardages out to 1000 yards. So many times, the target was between these dots and I did not like that setup either. The R2 works in almost the same way if you don't plan on clicking to the target.

I think it depends on the way you like or are use to hunting and the "Clarity" of the optics you are using when picking out a scope to invest your money in, regardless of the cost.
As stated earlier, the Leupold Longrange 8 1/2X to 25X 50 MM is the clearest optics to "MY" eyes I have found to date.

Yes, the Nightforce is a fine scope and very well made and after having 5 of them, I can make that statement with accuracy.
The Leupold LR is also a quality scope and probably just as good opticlly or better then the Nightforce to those who care to compare them side by side.

A good test, is to set BOTH scopes up side by side, set or adjust them to your eyes and also set both to 22X or 25X and be looking at a fired target 100 yrds away. See which scope you can see the "Ragged" Bullet hole edges (not just the bullet hole) on the target.
Myself and four fellow shooters have done this test and all 4 said the same thing. The leupolds were sharper to them as it was to me. They could all see the ragged edges with the Leupold and not the NF.
After the 100 yd test, go to 1000 yds and look at a target and see for yourself which one is clearer to you. You must have the two scopes side by side for the test and at the same time.

I have both scopes so it makes no difference to me who buys what. I'm only giving my opinion and evaluation of what I have found plus some fellow shooters and what they have found also.
It depends on the way and distance you plan on hunting or shooting as to what scope or system to use.

It's a toss up as far as I'm concerned. One has more features while the other has a tad bit sharper optics "to me".
I like them both, but with a cross hair and Target dot in either one.

Later
DC


[ 12-04-2002: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]
 

Darryl Cassel

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 7, 2001
Messages
1,757
Location
Pennsylvania
S1

My biggest problem with the other reticles is, to much "junk" or obstruction in the field of view. My targets are live also in the hunting fields.

Yes, I have powered down for the additional range as you mentioned.

I guess it's what you have been use to for many years now and what a person prefers.

That's why we have these discussions and the ability to buy what we want.

Our shots start at 1000 yds and go out from there. With your set up the way it is, I doubt if you would be doing bullet damage assessment before I would with my style and distance of shooting.

The 180 won't do it for you at the extended ranges. To 1000 yards your OK.

Take care and good shooting

DC
DC
 

FatBoy...

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2002
Messages
302
Location
Nashville, TN
It's odd that this thread went from speculation as to what an author was having trouble with regarding HIS Nightforce scopes,,,

to the merit of a particular reticle....

FatBoy...
 

Darryl Cassel

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 7, 2001
Messages
1,757
Location
Pennsylvania
Fatboy

I'm only giving a preferance as to scopes and Reticle and the difference between the two scope models from those I have had.

S1 is doing the same thing with his preference.

The original poster is trying to get information concerning both scopes so he can make a decision as to a purchase.

He mentioned a problem concerning the NF that someone else had.

Later
DC
 

Jake in NC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2002
Messages
328
..And great points were made all around.. I don't know about anybody else but no matter what I end up getting I enjoyed reading about something interesting I didn't know about.. When a major purchase is imminent (and when is it not.?) I like trying to talk myself in and out of it to see the pros and cons that can surface before actual ownership of an item..
..As for this particular debate I think S1 is most likely correct.. The scope has more features than I'm prepared to utilize..The additional cost, vs. value ratio would seem to negate my purchase of the item on "practical use" alone.. So if I did get the NF it would still have to be solely to own a copy of S1's way cool reticle..
.. So the Leupold seems like the most sensible candidate for my intended uses at this time..
..Thanks all for this productive discussion.. JiNC
 

FatBoy...

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2002
Messages
302
Location
Nashville, TN
Darryl,

I agree. It's nice to see a scope thread NOT get ugly, as they so often do.

I have Leupold and Nightforce scopes,, I like them both for their intended purpose. They are the two dominant brand scopes on the NRA prone 1K lines in my area,,, that's gotta say something... When I get off my lazy arse and send the NXS in to be checked out I'm sure it'll come back 100%.

I will say that the Nightforce scopes have the best illuminated reticle I've ever seen. The only thing I don't like about it is you need a small screw driver to change the reticle intensity,, but it's a small price to pay for the way they package the illumination switch and the quality and uniformity of the entire reticle being lit. Leupolds lit reticle, as well as S&B's really turns me off. I hate the 4th turret and only having the center crosshairs lit. Also, the new new S&B's lit reticle turret obstructs the view of the parallax while the shooter is in position. They should both pay NF to use the integrated design that they have for the NXS's.

The R2 reticle deserves it's own thread. This is info that I've not ever seen bofore,, and it would be nice to access it by itself. If more shooters knew about the reticles intended purpose and the ballistic details required to make it work correctly,, the R2 may have more appeal to the common guy.

S1,

The insight you've shared regarding this reticle is nothing short of outstanding, for obvious reasons. Thank you for sharing.

I do have a question regarding one of your posts though. You wrote "2) NVD integration: A gen 4 Itt unit clamps on the occular lens allowing you to adjust your reticle brightness and passively range, avoiding detection risk of using a rangefinder at night. This also eliminates poi shift when switching to NV conditions."

Can't this be done using the monoloc system and the PVS 14 with any scope that allows you to focus the reticle by rotating the ocular? Or using the Badger or DD Ross upper ring and mounting a Simrad? Oh,, and doesn't the lit reticle get picked up by those using NOD's for detection?

FatBoy...
 

FatBoy...

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2002
Messages
302
Location
Nashville, TN
S1,

Yeah,, I wasn't thinking when I listed the SIMRAD,, Can't add all those lenes in different planes and not have a POI shift, my CRS kicking in there.

I was also mulling over the lit reticle with the PVS 14's... When in focus, the reticle couldn't be turned up bright or it would white out the Tube,,, it must be just barely visible,, almost not visible to the human eye I'd think. Something the NXS allows by not having click adjustments for the intensity of the light,,, That is clever isn't it...
The light from the NOD would be covered by the veil I guess, and there's a much smaller objective to hide. Ohh, the joy of being well funded.....

I'd think with the reticle intensity set that low,, Jack lighting or LCMS would be a much bigger threat to the operator. Not something most LRH's need to worry about,, YET
but them Elk get smarter every year...

Thanks for the insight.

FatBoy...

[ 12-04-2002: Message edited by: FatBoy... ]
 

FatBoy...

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2002
Messages
302
Location
Nashville, TN
S1,

I am also surprised (being the web challenged sort that I am) that I don't see major discussions on the wind and how it interacts with the laws on gyro-precession.

Man,, I could write a book on how the wind kicks my ***,
, no need to hash that out here,, LOL....

All kidding aside,, if I could hammer down my wind call shooting 1K would be easy. The newer calibers, coupled with the quality of the glass these days give the shooter every advantage.

It's nice being able to see the scoreing rings clearly at 1K,, and makes wind holds much easier for me,, something I can easily do with the 15X of my NXS but have trouble with using a 10X Leupold,, Apples to Oranges,, but the scores prove the NXS's power range is better suited in my case. I'd have liked to have slung up in Speedbumps rifle to see how the Benchrest NF looked cranked up,, but the noise it makes scares me off the firing line


1K is still as far as I have to shoot,, and I'm happy to have it. You guys that have opportunity get 2500+ yard shots,,, I hope you know how lucky you are.

FatBoy...
 

milanuk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
843
Location
Wenatchee, WA
Here's a question for you that have the luxury of having Leupold LR and NightForce NXS (or Hybrid or Benchrest) scopes available to look at side-by-side, or have looked at enough to be able to say anyway:

What about eye-relief?

I had two Leupold LR scopes, a 6.5-20 w/ a target dot and a 8.5-25 w/ duplex, and sold the both of them to put towards a NXS. Life being what it is, I ended up having to make due for the time being w/ a Sightron 6-24x


The reasons I was unhappy w/ the Leupolds at the time was a) the dot reticle was driving me absolutely batty. Half the time I couldn't see the thing for more than 5 seconds before it faded out. I've used other dot reticles before and since, but that one did not do my eyes any favors. Could have just had the reticle changed, but for b), which was that the scopes were on field guns, i.e. LR varmint guns that still fall in the 'walking' category, more due to who I hunt w/ rather than me wanting the exercise. W/ the scopes mounted on these guns, that I had to be able to use from prone, sitting, whatever, the wide range of eye relief btwn min and max magnification cause some serious problems w/ the fit of the rifle to me. At one end, I was crawling up the stock, and even had the scope mounted all the way forward in extended rings. At the other end, I was having to hold the stock about 3/4" from my shoulder, and trying to shoot accurately at that point was a lost cause.

The brief time I'd spent behind various NF scopes (12-42x BR, 2 5.5-22x NXS's), mostly on friends .50 BMG rifles, seemed to show that the field of view was crisper and 'flatter', and the eye relief hardly changed at all from min to max power.

As has been mentioned above, a lot of this is highly subject to individual perceptions/preferences, individual scope samples, etc. I'm curious if anyone else has anything to say about their views/opinions on the subject of the eye relief of the Leupold LRs vs the NightForce BR/NXSs.

Thanks,

Monte
 

Trending threads

Top