Trying to decide on a scope for my precision oriented 5.56 AR.  Typical usage will just be general target shooting, steel silhouettes, possibly some "tactical" comps at a rifle range/club I'm about to join.  Ranges will be out to 600m.

I thought I had it pretty much narrowed down to a NF 2.5-10x32 with the Mil-R reticle but I just saw USO's new Br line of Optics and the B-10 (1.8-10x) caught my eye.

The USO obviously has some features that aren't present with the NF, mainly adjustable parallax and FFP (I'm honestly not really convinced I need either for my uses), but it's new and looks interesting.

It doesn't appear anybody has hands on with any of the new models yet, but since I don't have any experience with USO I did some research.  Majority of the stuff I found was on SH and it was real hit or miss.  Some people loved their USO scopes while others reported having to send multiple different scopes back for the same issues that never got corrected.

So, does anyone here have an opinion on USO and how their QC/quality is doing recently?  Any opinions as to which of these two optics you'd pick?

One of my sons` sponsors is Nightforce. He wins.

If your son wins he would win with other quality glass too.

I don't own a USO, but they seem to have better QC lately.  I;d say it comes down to buying what has the features that are the most important to you.

I buy all of my gas from Kwik Trip stores, and I have never run out of gas.

I went with NF solely because of the lower weight over USO.

On an Ar it dosent matter much, but I had a US optic's 22x and the eye relief sucked. I traded it for a gen2 razor for my main rifle. I took a NF 8-32 NXF off because the razor glass blew it away.  I've used NF scopes for 20 years and was a fan until I looked through a razor and could see 6.5 mm bullet holes past 500 yards in paper.

I've owned a Razor (1-6) and used a friends 3-18 a few times.  They're absolutely phenomenal.

Wish they made a Razor in an intermediate power range, say 2-10x or 3-12x, it would probably sit atop my "must have" list for this rifle.

Have you considered the Bushnell LRTSi or the Bushnell LRHS?

They are light but have great glass and an excellent reticle.  The LRHS 3-12x44 can be found for under $1K right now.  I had one and sold it...I regret doing that

I thought the Nightforce 2.5-10 I used in a class was amazing.  My only gripe was no illuminated reticle but I heard that was going to change soon.

I ended up deciding on the NF NXS 2.5-10x32 with the Mil-R reticle.  It is illuminated, too.  Thanks for the advice guys, weight ended up being the deciding factor, just couldn't pass up such a good scope that weighs in at only 19oz.

Went with the same on my obr.  Hard to be for something compact and relatively lightweight.

I have owned a US Optics ST-17 since 2010 or so. It is bomb proof and I have had no problems with it. The guys on the Hide are into ultra high-end scopes and what you read there should be viewed in that light. USO used to be a darling there.

I've got a USO ER5-25, as well as a NF ATACR F1 5-25, plus I've owned a couple other NF scopes through the years.

My preference would be the NF. The USO has some nice features, but the glass isn't as nice, it's way heavier and the eye relief/ eye box and parallax adjustment isn't as forgiving.

http://www.nightforceoptics.com/nxs/2-5-10x42 MIL-R reticle has more features with adjustable parallax.

The NXS 2.5-10X32 is a helluva good scope.  I had one for a couple of years and never had any trouble with it.

I went from the x24 to the x32 to finally the x42. It's fantastic.

Im still running the Nightforce 2.5-10x32 and really like it.  Would make the change to the 42 if I had the coin for the change.  Nothing bad to say about the 32 at all but the improvements made to the 42 with the Digilum illumination, additional light gathering due to the increased objective lens size and the adjustable parallax from 25 yards out are huge.

I have a nf 3.5-15x50 and two uso st-10's and i would take the uso scopes the glass is tier one
As well uso scopes are built like tanks

I have yet to pick up a USO that I was all that impressed with. Nightforce is where I end up.

I know the OP already made his purchase but this would be my suggestion as well. Especially if his competitions involve movers where you need to dial below 10x and still need to use your mil hashes for lead. FFP absolutely necessary here.

I also tested the LRHS glass against a USO ST-10s and the LRHS soundly beat out the USO. It really wasn't very close.

The bigger objective and adjustable parallax is what makes the 42 IMO.  I still don't like how the digillum works and think the knob on the X32s was a much easier, more intuitive arrangement.  

On an AR, I would almost pick the X32 over the X42 just for the slightly more compact size.  On a bolt gun, the X42 will definitely look and perform better.

The NightForce optics in their NXS and SHV scopes have a bit of chromatic aberration.  That is a result of different wavelengths of light coming to focus at different points.  Theoretically it reduces the sharpness and resolving power, but practically it doesn't make a difference with the objective lens sizes and magnifications used as the image it produces is sharp and the slight CA is not the limiting factor.  Where that chromatic aberration is apparent however is in the purple fringe you sometimes see along a hard white edge.   Some people are really bothered by that, while others are not.   The lens coatings on their scopes also leaves the color looking slightly washed out compared to a Leopold VX-3 which can be had for somewhere between slightly less and about half the cost of a Nightforce depending on the models being compared.

That slight bit of CA in their SHV and NXS scopes is where NF's ATACR scopes come into play with the use of Extremely Low Dispersion (ED) glass.  ED glass produces a smaller difference in the focal lengths of different colors of light, which essentially eliminates the chromatic aberration.

However, the real strength of all of the Nightforce scopes is their rock solid adjustments.  The are accurate, reliable and repeatable and that's a prime factor in long range precision shooting.  NF  scopes are solid in that area and it's enough for me to be willing to overlook the mild CA issues in their NXS and SHV scopes.

---

Reticle wise many shooters seem to get all warm and runny over the availability of a first focal plane reticle. The irony here is that they spend a lot of cash on that FFP, but then other don't know how to use it, or have no real need for it in terms of stadiametric ranging, or elevator and windage estimating and hold off at other than maximum magnification.

Beyond the extra cash there is also a sharp downside to a FFP reticle, as the cost for having the hash marks in the reticle subtend the same dimensions at different magnifications is that the reticle has to be thick enough to see at low magnification, particularly in low light, which means it is usually thicker than optimum at higher magnifications where the reticle is now less precise and can cover the target.  There's no free lunch, and if your only need for a FFP reticle is to be tacti-cool, you're much better off without it.

Have you ever tried to get any information from them on their optics?  Lots of luck with that.

I'm speaking from an astronomical glass perspective, but while the US Optics lenses are very good,they are not "Tier 1".

When you say something like that, in the absence of any information on the glass and lens coatings used, you're just stating a subjective opinion.

Since you're limited to subjective impressions rather than an test data, it's a lot more useful if you give a comparison with other optics you've used, rather than calling something "Tier 1", based on anything other than price.

I had the chance to compare my USO sn3 with a comparable NF on a 1200 yd range.  There wasnt a comparison.  I had the edge in clarity and a much wider FOV.  The EREK knob was also the shit.

My 2 cents is NF has amazing Mechanical performance however there glass in NXS ,SHV is Japanese even there ATACR with its German glass really doesn't compare on a optical level with a V8 Zeiss or S&B. So for me since my vision isn't very good I went for the better glass of a Schmidt but I really can't say to much about the USO. I went to the Atlanta NRA meeting and after talking to the pro's I went with a Schmidt. I wanted to look at the ATACR vs Kahles and since there wasn't a huge difference I looked at the Schmidt.