Quoted:
I was a little hesitant to write this since my time behind my new atacr is very limited but considering it's not THAT much different than my old nx8 I feel pretty confident that that I can accurately compare them. It's common knowledge that the atacr is the better device and the goal of this isn't to reaffirm that. Instead it's to try and paint the picture of how much of a performance difference there is so you can decide if the atacr is worth it over the nx8.

My nx8 was the old mil reticle with the capped turrets. I had over 5000 rounds through it and probably close to 2000 hours total between live fire and dry training. Furthest distance was 600 yards simply because I couldn't locate a place to push it further. It was mounted on a 12.5 in a 1.93 badger mount, without any passive aiming device. I like to take advantage of the FFP reticle and used 1x for dynamic shooting, 4x for acog type work, and 6-8x for DM type work. As a side note, 6x isn't super tight but 8x does live up to its reputation of being tight and this will be important later. I originally had it in a nightforce 1.54 mount and this is where the tight eyebox first showed up. I had no issues getting behind it in any magnification but tracking it under recoil during dynamic shooting was proving to have limitations. When I switched to the 1.93 the optic would naturally recoil into my line of sight, completely eliminating that issue. I have zero issues getting behind a 1.93 in the prone and the higher mount really allowed the nx8 to shine during dynamic shooting such as contact drills or v-tac barricades.

As I begin to get more in to NVG stuff I started to explore mounted RDS for passive use. I'm not a fan of offset for that (i've never been smooth with them) and tried a top mounted dot but found it to be slightly too high with the 1.93 combination. Originally, I considered the atacr to be too heavy but after researching it, it turns out the ATACR in a 1.7 is only 2oz heavier than the NX8 in a 1.93 outfitted with the same accessories. That was basically the push to try out the ATACR.

The atacr in the 1.7 tracks identically to the nx8 in the 1.93 which I attribute to the better eyebox. 5x on the NX8 feels identical to 8x on the atacr. 4x on the nx8 has a very ta31 feel to eyebox where as the atacr feels closer to a ta33 *THIS DOES NOT MEAN FOV!!!* The .1mil adjustments are a welcome change over the NX8.

Reticle-I know people are critical of the original nx8 reticle but I had zero issues and liked it a lot. Honestly, i'm not convinced that the center dot 'upgrade' on the FC-DMX is actually an upgrade over the original reticle but the wind holds are certainly nice. People like to complain that the original center dot/circle is too thick for dialing but I honestly have no idea why in the world anybody would be dialing with it-my 12.5 has over 800 yards worth of holds with mk262/clones.

Glass-I should start with this-the nx8 has well above average glass for the class that it's in. Not class leading but certainly very good. The ATACR's glass shines. Unless using some type of splatter target I was never able to call my individual shots at 100y. That changed with the ATACR-being able to pick up individual shots at 100y is super nice.

Top mounted things-1.7 feels good with a top mounted RMR. 1.93 is too high for me, but certainly not unusable. Understand this is personal preference.

So where does the atacr shine?
1) Needing a lower mounted optic to run with a top mounted RDS
2) Spending more time under magnification. The better optical characteristics really shine past 4x without sacrificing useability at 1x.

If I try to quantify them in numerical values for their class
nx8
1x 9/10
4x 7/10
8x 5/10
price (professionals program) 9/10

atacr
1x 9/10
4x 9/10
8x 9/10
price (professionals program) 7/10

Quoted:
I was a little hesitant to write this since my time behind my new atacr is very limited but considering it's not THAT much different than my old nx8 I feel pretty confident that that I can accurately compare them. It's common knowledge that the atacr is the better device and the goal of this isn't to reaffirm that. Instead it's to try and paint the picture of how much of a performance difference there is so you can decide if the atacr is worth it over the nx8.

My nx8 was the old mil reticle with the capped turrets. I had over 5000 rounds through it and probably close to 2000 hours total between live fire and dry training. Furthest distance was 600 yards simply because I couldn't locate a place to push it further. It was mounted on a 12.5 in a 1.93 badger mount, without any passive aiming device. I like to take advantage of the FFP reticle and used 1x for dynamic shooting, 4x for acog type work, and 6-8x for DM type work. As a side note, 6x isn't super tight but 8x does live up to its reputation of being tight and this will be important later. I originally had it in a nightforce 1.54 mount and this is where the tight eyebox first showed up. I had no issues getting behind it in any magnification but tracking it under recoil during dynamic shooting was proving to have limitations. When I switched to the 1.93 the optic would naturally recoil into my line of sight, completely eliminating that issue. I have zero issues getting behind a 1.93 in the prone and the higher mount really allowed the nx8 to shine during dynamic shooting such as contact drills or v-tac barricades.

As I begin to get more in to NVG stuff I started to explore mounted RDS for passive use. I'm not a fan of offset for that (i've never been smooth with them) and tried a top mounted dot but found it to be slightly too high with the 1.93 combination. Originally, I considered the atacr to be too heavy but after researching it, it turns out the ATACR in a 1.7 is only 2oz heavier than the NX8 in a 1.93 outfitted with the same accessories. That was basically the push to try out the ATACR.

The atacr in the 1.7 tracks identically to the nx8 in the 1.93 which I attribute to the better eyebox. 5x on the NX8 feels identical to 8x on the atacr. 4x on the nx8 has a very ta31 feel to eyebox where as the atacr feels closer to a ta33 *THIS DOES NOT MEAN FOV!!!* The .1mil adjustments are a welcome change over the NX8.

Reticle-I know people are critical of the original nx8 reticle but I had zero issues and liked it a lot. Honestly, i'm not convinced that the center dot 'upgrade' on the FC-DMX is actually an upgrade over the original reticle but the wind holds are certainly nice. People like to complain that the original center dot/circle is too thick for dialing but I honestly have no idea why in the world anybody would be dialing with it-my 12.5 has over 800 yards worth of holds with mk262/clones.

Glass-I should start with this-the nx8 has well above average glass for the class that it's in. Not class leading but certainly very good. The ATACR's glass shines. Unless using some type of splatter target I was never able to call my individual shots at 100y. That changed with the ATACR-being able to pick up individual shots at 100y is super nice.

Top mounted things-1.7 feels good with a top mounted RMR. 1.93 is too high for me, but certainly not unusable. Understand this is personal preference.

So where does the atacr shine?
1) Needing a lower mounted optic to run with a top mounted RDS
2) Spending more time under magnification. The better optical characteristics really shine past 4x without sacrificing useability at 1x.

If I try to quantify them in numerical values for their class
nx8
1x 9/10
4x 7/10
8x 5/10
price (professionals program) 9/10

atacr
1x 9/10
4x 9/10
8x 9/10
price (professionals program) 7/10

Quoted:
Excellent write-up. Everyone talks about the small eye box of the NX8, but never in the detail you provided. Thank you.

Quoted:
Did you ever try the NX8 in a 1.7" mount? Wondering if that rise over the 1.5 mount would be enough to solve the recoil alignment issue.

Waiting for the new NX8 FC-DMx version, ATACR is not an option. Need the lengthwise footprint of the NX8. Trying to co-align with an RH-25 and dealing with rail space issues. Have a Badger 1.7 ready to go, with the 12 O'clock rmr for NODs. So I'm hoping that mount works for what I'm trying to accomplish.

Quoted:
Did you ever try the NX8 in a 1.7" mount? Wondering if that rise over the 1.5 mount would be enough to solve the recoil alignment issue.

Waiting for the new NX8 FC-DMx version, ATACR is not an option. Need the lengthwise footprint of the NX8. Trying to co-align with an RH-25 and dealing with rail space issues. Have a Badger 1.7 ready to go, with the 12 O'clock rmr for NODs. So I'm hoping that mount works for what I'm trying to accomplish.

Quoted:

Glad it was helpful!
Let me be clear-the eyebox 'issues' are very very exaggerated

Quoted:

Having owned NX8, VCOG, K16i, MK6, NXS 1-4, and some others, I do not find it oppressive at all. Especially for the footprint, but even not taking that into account. The only real drawback, I feel, is the shallow depth of focus the NX8 possesses. You must compromised. The K16i for example had a very large depth of focus. Your same diopter settings allowed a very flat 1x, along with a very crisp top magnification, at distance. The NX8 is very sensitive to this. Then again, so was the VCOG, but worse. Also, I found the NX8's optical clarity to be "functional". I will never say it's clear, or crisp, or whatever compared to the ED glass I've used, but it IS plenty functional, and I'll take functional glass with rock solid adjustments, and bombproof durability every time. I have never missed or not taken any shots due to "glass quality". It's just not as pleasant as the others. Of them all, I preferred the MK6 1-6. It was VERY crisp, with minimal chromatic aberration. Everyone raves about the K16i, but it had boatloads of CA. Very crisp and I liked the palate, though, but the MK6 was just CRISP!

Quoted:


This mirrors my complaints with the NX8. The depth of field is just not good at 8x which kinda defeats the purpose of the higher 8x top end. They eyebox wasn't good but the issues are definitely overstated. Overall, the $1750 msrp is a stretch imo when a razor is $1200 and the trijicon credo/delta stryker are like $800 which both have better glass and eyebox over the nx8 imo.