Was told that NF is over price

[Pdvdh]

An enchanted NF scope Thread:

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f40/wts-wtt-nightforce-atacr-nxs-141038/

 

[Greg Duerr]

He never said WHY?? That would HELP

I don't know how many guys on here are true marksman at long distance shooting and how many are want to be's..............................You can ask a question and get 20 different answers and walk away more confused than when you started. It is fun though to see everyone with a different opinion.
I think its more about just wanting to try something different or to just get a NEW toy in the mail, kind of like at Christmas. Always looking for the next newer and better rather than learning to get good with what you have .....................
I hunted years ago with a very successful hunter who had been hunting for years with a Remington 270 and a 4x Weaver post and cross hair scope. If you could see all the huge Mule Deer bucks he had taken................I saw him kill a huge 4x4 at over 400 yds, he only shot 130gr Remington Bronze points,............Right behing the Shoulder. The other thing was that he had been hunting this area for years and new it really well. Asked him if he planned on getting a better rifle and scope and was told " I have a really good rifle and scope."............

 

[Daguru]

...


I'm in the process of trying to choose a scope for a long range rig. I've been reading lots and lots here. I have always been a die hard Leupold fan and still think their scopes are top notch. I was sold on the Vortex for a minute, but started looking into the NF and realized it wasn't that much more money for a scope I feel is better based on opinions and reviews from lots of sources. But really, I haven't held one in my hands yet, shot one on a rifle yet or even seen one. But I also recognize other brands excel at other things. And I am open to new information as to why or why not any of my hunting gear is better or worse than something else.

I agree with you here. I've not chosen my next scope yet mostly due to the fact that when making big purchases, I try to learn as much as I can about a product then compare with its closest competitor. Some of the comments I've read so far are akin to a Dodge, Ford, Chevy conversation. Each have their own merits and can generally satisfy their respective target audience. Here in Houston Tx, there is a shop (Scopesmith) where you can walk in and compare a vary nice selection of some very fine scopes. It's not an exhaustive array, which is why I've still not made my final purchase decision. This opportunity did allow me to compare top end model NF and S&B side by side. (There were other brands, but their names escape me) For me, the S&B had a noticeably brighter sight picture for a comparable price. I've heard excellent customer service stories about NF and some nightmares about S&B. IMO: listen to the customer sat stories and then get your hands on the models that interest you and pick the one that works for you. In terms of optics, picking from a catalogue is just too much of a gamble.

 

[IdahoCTD]

So my next scope is going to be the NF SHV 4-14x56 IHR

Does that scope have the 0 stop?

I would save a few more bucks and buy a used NXS in 3.5x15 or 5.5x22 if it was me. The zero stop isn't the end all. I made two aluminum rings to act as zero stops, on the two Nightforces I have without them, in about 10 minutes on my lathe.

 

[J E Custom]

In some things ,there are no real experts, Just opinions so you will have to do the best you can when choosing a scope based on your needs, requirements, intended use and finances.

There are many things that have to be evaluated to choose the best scope for the use and money.

Each persons eyes prefer different lens coating (One coating may look brighter than another)

There is also a weight issue some scopes weigh around 1 pound others will weigh up to 4 pounds.

Price is always an issue and in many cases more money may not get you that much more scope
based on your needs.

There is however a big difference when you go from a $400.00 dollar scope to a $1000.00 dollar
scope. but I don't find a $2000.00 scope is twice as good as a $1000.00 scope (It is better, but not twice as good).

Everyone will have/say that there scope is the best(For many reasons) But in truth, there is no perfect/best scope for everyone.

The best advice I can give is to buy a scope and evaluate it for your needs and likes then you will know if it was worth the money or not.

I myself cannot see the difference with my eyes in a $2000.00 scope and a $3500.00 scope. so there is no need for me to spend over $1500.00 to $2000.00 for a scope.

I prefer the scopes in the $1200.00 to $1500.00 range because they give me everything I need
Without feeling that I should have spent more just to feel like I got more. at some point only the price will increase not the quality.

Just my opinion

J E CUSTOM

 

[Greg Duerr]

I used a Weaver V16 on my .222 for years. For Marmonts and Ground Squirrels, Jackrabbits, and Coyotes...........Never once did I ever feel that the scope was not performing ............I never shot anything over 250yds.........but the scope met all of my needs. In my opinion if you not shooting over 300yds there is no need to spend over $600 A good Friend of mine does not feel the same way, he spent $2,000 on a Scope for a Rifle that shoots about a 2"group and would never shoot past 300 yds..................

To each his own...........................

 

[Mikecr]

My scope money goes to field function beyond all else.
I pick not the best in single attributes(like glass, or value), but overall as I consider field use.
It's so difficult to do this that cost no longer matters to me.
So if it's right, I'll take it!

I like NXS, but have been happier with MK4s. Now that March has put a boot up everybody's market, they are all adjusting and providing better scopes(especially NF). It's unfortunate that the prices have inflated so badly though. So I'll recycle current inventory as long as I can before buying more scopes. Don't want to be too close to early adoptions(never a good deal).

 

[FearNoWind]

Price is based on a lot of things. So look at the Schmidt/Bender and you'll feel lots better about the NF.

 

[Unofficial Gun Addict (UGA)]

I think JE Custom got this one right. Each person is unique in that how a scope is perceived when looking through it differs from one individual to the next. My buddy loves nikon or Bausch & Lomb monarch glass for his hunting rifle. Nothing wrong with it and it's served up some fine meals in the past and will likely do so in the future. I've always been partial to bushnell elite 4200 glass and it's also been very good to me. Now we aren't even talking about top tier optics, but very good glass for their particular price range.

So... The point I'm trying to make is that no matter how many times I looked through his scopes, or that he looked through mine, did either of us think that the glass in the others scope looked better. This wasn't a pride thing on either of our parts because that's just not how we are, but I always walked away wondering how he could possibly think that the monarch was nicer glass than the 4200. What I've come to realize is that he's color blind and the elite 4200 is indeed better!! . Hehe

 

[esshup]

I'm in the process of trying to choose a scope for a long range rig. I've been reading lots and lots here. I have always been a die hard Leupold fan and still think their scopes are top notch. I was sold on the Vortex for a minute, but started looking into the NF and realized it wasn't that much more money for a scope I feel is better based on opinions and reviews from lots of sources. But really, I haven't held one in my hands yet, shot one on a rifle yet or even seen one. But I also recognize other brands excel at other things. And I am open to new information as to why or why not any of my hunting gear is better or worse than something else.

Marble, when I was trying to decide on a caliber for my LR rig, Kirby had me shoot a few different ones. The different calibers had different scopes on them, and that is where I got my first look thru a NF scope. One gun had a Leupold Mark 4, the others had NF. When adjusted to the same power as the MK4, the NF (to these eyes) was a lot clearer and I could hold the crosshairs more precisely on the target.

I think it all depends on the distance that you will be shooting. Do you need a NF when big game hunting at <500 yds? I don't think you "need" one. (want might be a different thing tho!) Heck, shooting a gun that was unfamiliar to me, at 600+ yds, with a 10x MK4 scope, the first 2 shots (cold bore and next shot) were 2.5" apart. Good enough to kill a deer at that distance. Would I have that 10x scope on my LR gun for 1,000 yd shots? Nope.

I have Leupolds on 95% of the rest of my hunting rifles. I also have a few Simmons and a stray Burris on a few that are used for under 300 yds (down to about 10 yds - pellet guns). Am I happy with each scope that I have? For each scopes intended use, yes.

I went with a NSX 5.5-22x50 NP-R1 w/Zero Stop on my LR rifle, and it's zero'd at 300 yds. I've run it out to a bit past 1300 yds, and I'm very pleased with the optics. Even at that distance, I can spot my own shots with it on 22x.

 

[RCrem700]

Buying a Vortex Razor to shoot 2.5" groups at 100 yards is like paying a hooker to do your laundry.

Hahaha. This should be in the comedy section! Thats the hardest i've ever laughed on this site. Really though, 2.5"? I've seen that from my Mosin Nagant with open sights. I do shoot a Vortex HS-T on my long range rifle right now,and I love it, but sometime when I'm not a poor college student anymore that scope will move on down the line to my AR, and I will step up to a NF or Mark 4 for long range.

 

[NWmissouriman]

Hahaha. This should be in the comedy section! Thats the hardest i've ever laughed on this site. Really though, 2.5"? I've seen that from my Mosin Nagant with open sights. I do shoot a Vortex HS-T on my long range rifle right now,and I love it, but sometime when I'm not a poor college student anymore that scope will move on down the line to my AR, and I will step up to a NF or Mark 4 for long range.

....made sense to me anyhow. Sounds like you are doing almost exactly what I did. Started my LR rifle with a PST, eventually got one for my AR, moved the LR up to an ATACR and then the AR to a NXS. Pretty sure I'm not going to be changing anything scope wise on either now. Took a while to get there, but it's worth it.

 

[Marble]

Marble, when I was trying to decide on a caliber for my LR rig, Kirby had me shoot a few different ones. The different calibers had different scopes on them, and that is where I got my first look thru a NF scope. One gun had a Leupold Mark 4, the others had NF. When adjusted to the same power as the MK4, the NF (to these eyes) was a lot clearer and I could hold the crosshairs more precisely on the target.

I think it all depends on the distance that you will be shooting. Do you need a NF when big game hunting at <500 yds? I don't think you "need" one. (want might be a different thing tho!) Heck, shooting a gun that was unfamiliar to me, at 600+ yds, with a 10x MK4 scope, the first 2 shots (cold bore and next shot) were 2.5" apart. Good enough to kill a deer at that distance. Would I have that 10x scope on my LR gun for 1,000 yd shots? Nope.

I have Leupolds on 95% of the rest of my hunting rifles. I also have a few Simmons and a stray Burris on a few that are used for under 300 yds (down to about 10 yds - pellet guns). Am I happy with each scope that I have? For each scopes intended use, yes.

I went with a NSX 5.5-22x50 NP-R1 w/Zero Stop on my LR rifle, and it's zero'd at 300 yds. I've run it out to a bit past 1300 yds, and I'm very pleased with the optics. Even at that distance, I can spot my own shots with it on 22x.

They way you describe it is exactly how I feel about it. I have excellent vision. It is 15-20 to 20-20 at the office when I go in. So I think with my excellent vision, it may hinder me when looking through scopes because everything in the higher end is so good it's difficult to differentiate.

I want the best of the best with what I can afford on a hunting rifle that I can run out to 1000 yards. I'm a big strong guy and don't tire easily so a heavier rifle isn't so bad. It currently has a stock Winchester 7stw barrel on it, but I am planning on putting something a little better on it, built to shoot the 180 berger type bullets.

So I have not decided. My time frame to get it done it by next summer for using it next elk season. If not, I've still got a tone a guns I already shoot really well.

 

[esshup]

Marble, my LR gun with scope and 9"-13" Harris Bipod, and loaded magazine tips the scales at 12.5#. But, a light gun is harder to shoot long distance. With the Eberlestock backpack, I really don't notice the weight. I'm 5'-7" and should weigh around 180#, but I'm carrying more around my middle than the gun weighs...... I think where the gun sits weight wise is a good trade-off between shootability and carrying weight. One of these days I should throw the stock on a scale to see what it weighs. I probably could shave some weight off of the rifle by going with a lighter stock, but I'm not 110% sure of that. It's got a Manners MCS-GAT stock with a Defensive Edge adjustable cheekpiece.

I shot a cow elk last year at slightly over 700 yds, and with the scope dialed back to (I think) around 16x, I saw the bullet impact the elk. I really like how well Kirby's painkiller muzzlebrake works.