Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 5/16/2018 8:31:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2018 3:49:51 AM EDT by Marine6680]
***Edit***
Apparently there is an adjustment for ocular, and that may fix the issues I experienced. I will update later if this fixes the issue. It may simply be a case of RTFM... Not had that happen in a while. Eh, we all make mistakes from time to time.

***Edit 2***
Yeah, the eyepiece turns for ocular, I had to really wrench on it to get it to move. More than I was willing to try to turn it for blind earlier, when I first examined the scope. But, the scope was already in focus for me. So changing that does nothing for the fisheye distortion. But I found that being locked in behind the scope properly keeps the distortion to a minimum. Still noticable if you are looking for it. The eye box just isn't forgiving, so you notice distortion when not centered up perfectly.

I removed the mention of the ocular adjustment.

I am rethinking if I want to keep the scope or not. If I do, I want the mil version, and I was sent the MOA version, so I need an exchange if I keep it.

*** Back to the regularly scheduled program ***

Here are my initial thoughts on the Nightforce NX8 after unboxing.

I am not blown away... For the price, I expected much better. It is going back tomorrow.

Here is a quick rundown

Pros:
Lightweight for the magnification range
Feels solidly built
Illumination is truly daylight bright.
All controls are smooth to use
Glass is clear

Cons:
Glass clarity is not much, if any, better than my 1-4 Accupoint
Very noticable fisheye distortion effect on 1x magnification
The center dot of the reticle is huge on 8x
The eye box is very unforgiving
I would rather a BDC on a LPV (personal preference really)

A bit more detail...

For the Pros...
Most 1-8x LPV scopes are 25oz give or take. Even most 1-6x scopes average 20oz or more. This scope weighs less than an ounce more than my 1-4x Accupower. Despite the relative lightweight, it feels like it is built solid, and can take some real abuse.

The illumination is fantastic. Setting 7 and 8 out of 10, is very usable in direct sunlight, even against a light background.

The magnification ring turns very smoothly, the illumination knob has nice solid clicks, and the turrets turn smoothly with nice clicks. The elevation is not so stiff that you don't have to worry about it though. It could get bumped when removed from a case or other actions. Oddly, the windage knob feels a bit more stiff than the elevation... I would have prefered the feel to be swapped, as the windage is protected, and the elevation is exposed... But that is a personal preference.

The glass is very clear, no distortion across the field of view in 8x. There is slight aberration along the very outer edge, but most scopes I have handled, had at least some there, probably from where the mounting surface touches the lens.

For the Cons...
While the glass is clear, I can't really see much difference between it and my Accupower 1-4x... Maybe if the Accupower went to 8x I would see a difference though. Under 10x, heck probably under 15x... Its likely hard to see a difference in glass quality once you hit a certain level of quality. You really notice the quality of great glass at higher magnification. The Accupower is likely sitting in that glass quality range, even if the lower end of it.

The biggest issue I seen though... Distortion on objects inside 25yds on 1x, with reducing noticeability beyond that. It is still present at 50yds, but not too noticeable at 100yds or more. But you want 1x for close range work, where the distortion is the greatest. At across the room distances, moving the optic would generate a lot of distortion, with straight lines bending visually what seemed several inches. If you square up behind the optic, and can maintain, it minimizes the distortion its still noticable. But it is hard to stay perfectly unmoving behind the optic when moving a rifle around. Basically you have to stay centered in the eyebox or you get distortion... Myccupower does not have this distortion issue.

That reticle... it needs tweaked... The specs say 1.25moa/.35mil for the center dot... To my eyes on 8x, it looks huge. An LPV isn't a precision optic, but I would like a bit more precision than that when on 8x. The outer illuminated ring on 1x, is plenty big enough and bright enough to be used as a red dot, without the huge center dot. On 1x the illuminated portion looks like a single large 8moa dot, or rather very near a single dot. So the center could stand to be a little smaller and still work well as a dot on 1x, with the illuminated portion taken as a whole.

The eye box is small, on 1x it is 9mm I believe, and 3mm on 8x. This is likely a combination of the small objective, the shortness of the optic, and the max magnification. This compounds the distortion issue, due to haveing a restricted eye box.

Personally I would prefer a BDC than a hash reticle... They are simply easier to use for quick shooting. "Memorize your drops"... Yeah thats fine on a static range and competition, and with a lot of practice. Not so good for anyone who is looking at the scope for serious work. With moving targets, unknown ranges, the fear of death... Tends to hurt critical thinking and thinking that requires detail. A lot of practice can help, but I still feel a BDC is best for that work.

So for me... the scope is leaving very soon. It cost way too much to be worth it, not with the obvious drawbacks. The positives just don't outweigh the negatives to justify the roughly 3x price increase over my current LPV. I want a bit more magnification, but I want a jump in quality too, if I spend double or more for a scope. The Accupower ran me $650 on sale... Most quality 1-6x scopes are running a bit over $1000 at a minimum.

I am just not a fan of the NX8... I'm sorry Nightforce fans... Having a fancy name on the side is not enough for me... I wanted to like it, but can't bring myself to like it enough to keep it.

Ok, to be fair, this optic has a place, as a lightweight 1-8x LPV.

Its 17oz and has a max of 8x, thats impressive. Most LPVs that top out at 8x are 25oz give or take, half a pound more. Plus it feels solidly built for that weight. It is very well made on the whole.

But unfortunately, it has drawbacks. Still not sure if I think it is worth the cost.
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 8:58:53 PM EDT
No ocular adjustment? You may want to take 2 seconds to look at that owner's manual as it has the same type of ocular adjustment as any other Nightforce - or any other scope with a locking diopter, for that matter.

Everything else is a matter of preference so can't really argue.
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 9:29:49 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Lawman734:
No ocular adjustment? You may want to take 2 seconds to look at that owner's manual as it has the same type of ocular adjustment as any other Nightforce - or any other scope with a locking diopter, for that matter.

Everything else is a matter of preference so can't really argue.
View Quote
You could be right.

I am used to the style on the back of the eyepiece for the adjustment. So if it has one that is different, then I didn't see that.

The rest stands.

And distortion really isn't subjective... It exists or doesn't.
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 9:30:00 PM EDT
Are you sure there isn't an ocular adjustment?

Well, LPVs are compromises. They can do a lot of things, but don't expect it to be the best at any one thing in particular.

Regarding mils, just align your load zero so 1mil-300 2mil-400 3mil-500
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 9:35:37 PM EDT
You really need to read the manual and adjust the diopter. You hold on to the rear part of the eye piece and twist the serrated ring counter clockwise to unlock it, then you can turn the eye piece to adjust diopter.

I felt the same exact way about the glass and clarity because I couldn't seem to get it adjusted correctly for my eyes. I, too was on the verge of returning/selling until I had a friend take a look and get it adjusted for him. He did and I looked through it and I was blown away by the change. Distortion free and more than enough clarity.

The center dot is 1.25moa, not exactly benchrest precision capable, but keep in mind it's also an 8x on max, so it's not really the purpose of the optic.

It's a fantastic optic, give it a chance, read the damn manual.
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 9:37:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/16/2018 9:42:26 PM EDT by Lawman734]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:

You could be right.

I am used to the style on the back of the eyepiece for the adjustment. So if it has one that is different, then I didn't see that.

The rest stands.

And distortion really isn't subjective... It exists or doesn't.
View Quote
Could be right? It's obvious you're not an optics guy, so may I suggest you start with reading the owner's manual.

And wrong - A properly adjusted diopter should mitigate or eliminate what you're seeing at 1x.
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 11:02:59 PM EDT
My biggest concern is the size of the dot at 8X. 1-8s are approaching precision optic range and .35mil is a lot.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 12:31:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2018 12:33:54 AM EDT by Marine6680]
I'm more of a red dot guy...

If the diopter adjusts, then I will need to change it. I looked at that ring mentioned, but didn't want to twist on it too hard.

They sent the wrong version, I wanted the Mil, got the MOA. it goes back for that swap.

I will check the manual, If changing the Ocular fixes the distortion, I will re-evaluate the optic, and alter my post.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 12:48:12 AM EDT
My biggest concern is the size of the dot at 8X. 1-8s are approaching precision optic range and .35mil is a lot.
View Quote
at 8x, I am shooting supported.
at 8x, I use the stadia

Mr SCAR 17 shoots ~.5 MOA at 200, and I can't do that unsupported
just as good as other NXSs

(double whammy - not only do the 1-8s work, but the SCAR 17 is sneaky accurate)
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 7:34:30 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:
I'm more of a red dot guy...

Fair enough.

They sent the wrong version, I wanted the Mil, got the MOA. it goes back for that swap.

Who is "they"?

I will check the manual, If changing the Ocular fixes the distortion, I will re-evaluate the optic, and alter my post.

One would think that you'd do that before posting a review for all to read - especially when making an assumption that a simple diopter adjustment wasn't incorporated.
View Quote
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 8:01:14 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By scorps:

at 8x, I am shooting supported.
at 8x, I use the stadia

Mr SCAR 17 shoots ~.5 MOA at 200, and I can't do that unsupported
just as good as other NXSs

(double whammy - not only do the 1-8s work, but the SCAR 17 is sneaky accurate)
View Quote
I'm shooting a gas gun series and some of the targets are 2 MOA or smaller. On stages with fixed target distances, I prefer to dial. With that size dot, those targets may be challenging. I say May because I haven't actually tried it yet and it may be a none issue. I for sure will not only be using the reticle though. Part of the draw to this optic for me is the exposed zerostop turret.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 9:39:27 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Lawman734:
View Quote
Does who I bought it from matter? It was a major online retailer that specializes in optics. Simple mix up on the scope, no big deal.

And yeah yeah, I made a mistake on one aspect of the write-up... And I corrected it. I had looked for the adjustment, even tried turning the lock ring and eye piece. Seeing as how hard I had to turn it to get it to move the first time, I assumed incorrectly that it didn't have the adjustment. Scopes of this level are not super complicated beasts, but yes, I made a mistake.

That mistake does not invalidate the other points made.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 10:42:31 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:
That mistake does not invalidate the other points made.
View Quote
Well, you opined about your personal thoughts, but I'm having a hard time with accepting it as anything authoritative.

"While the glass is clear, I can't really see much difference between it and my Accupower 1-4x... Maybe if the Accupower went to 8x I would see a difference though. Under 10x, heck probably under 15x... Its likely hard to see a difference in glass quality once you hit a certain level of quality. You really notice the quality of great glass at higher magnification. The Accupower is likely sitting in that glass quality range, even if the lower end of it."

Yes, the higher you go in magnification, the easier it is for the human eye to pick up the nuances in optical quality. Being that both the Accupower and the NX8 are LOW products, it wouldn't surprise me if the lens material is the same for both.

"The biggest issue I seen though... Distortion on objects inside 25yds on 1x, with reducing noticeability beyond that. It is still present at 50yds, but not too noticeable at 100yds or more. But you want 1x for close range work, where the distortion is the greatest. At across the room distances, moving the optic would generate a lot of distortion, with straight lines bending visually what seemed several inches. If you square up behind the optic, and can maintain, it minimizes the distortion its still noticable. But it is hard to stay perfectly unmoving behind the optic when moving a rifle around. Basically you have to stay centered in the eyebox or you get distortion... Myccupower does not have this distortion issue."

You said the glass is clear, but you keep saying "distortion" - which is it? Owning several different LPVO's and several NF riflescopes as well, I'd be pretty shocked if Nightforce put out a product that had an optical flaw that could be described as "distortion" and haven't seen anyone else reference this either. Color me shocked that a riflescope with a 4x zoom range and a max magnification of 4x isn't showing the same thing that you're seeing.

"That reticle... it needs tweaked... The specs say 1.25moa/.35mil for the center dot... To my eyes on 8x, it looks huge. An LPV isn't a precision optic, but I would like a bit more precision than that when on 8x. The outer illuminated ring on 1x, is plenty big enough and bright enough to be used as a red dot, without the huge center dot. On 1x the illuminated portion looks like a single large 8moa dot, or rather very near a single dot. So the center could stand to be a little smaller and still work well as a dot on 1x, with the illuminated portion taken as a whole."

The dot size could probably be shrunk a hair, so I can't say that I disagree, but I haven't found it to be intrusive on the one I used.

"The eye box is small, on 1x it is 9mm I believe, and 3mm on 8x. This is likely a combination of the small objective, the shortness of the optic, and the max magnification. This compounds the distortion issue, due to haveing a restricted eye box."

It hasn't been a secret on here that the eyebox was going to be the limiting factor with this scope - the 30mm tube pretty much guaranteed that. I've found that the eyebox isn't especially problematic to acquire and maintain with heavy rapid fire on a 5.56 gun. It could be an issue maintaining it though on something with more recoil, which is where I'd probably spring for an ATACR.

Personally I would prefer a BDC than a hash reticle... They are simply easier to use for quick shooting. "Memorize your drops"... Yeah thats fine on a static range and competition, and with a lot of practice. Not so good for anyone who is looking at the scope for serious work. With moving targets, unknown ranges, the fear of death... Tends to hurt critical thinking and thinking that requires detail. A lot of practice can help, but I still feel a BDC is best for that work.

Purely preference - I hate BDC reticles. I can also see how from a sales perspective that it wouldn't be the first choice simply so that it can appeal to a broader market.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 12:37:25 PM EDT
There is some image bending around the edges on 1x but so what. After my first outing with this scope i i like it so much ill probably get another.

What can be done about the dot is set your zero stop so that it stops 2 mil under, you can guage it perfect by holding the turret next to the stop shelves to get that distance then set the turret at zero and then hold up at 2 mil on the reticle. If you need to. i thought it was pretty easy to use the bigger segment ed circle as a referance on a small target. Initially I didnt like the dot size either but after using the scope i dont think it hinders anything
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 2:36:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2018 2:37:53 PM EDT by Marine6680]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Lawman734:

Well, you opined about your personal thoughts, but I'm having a hard time with accepting it as anything authoritative.

Yes, the higher you go in magnification, the easier it is for the human eye to pick up the nuances in optical quality. Being that both the Accupower and the NX8 are LOW products, it wouldn't surprise me if the lens material is the same for both.

You said the glass is clear, but you keep saying "distortion" - which is it? Owning several different LPVO's and several NF riflescopes as well, I'd be pretty shocked if Nightforce put out a product that had an optical flaw that could be described as "distortion" and haven't seen anyone else reference this either. Color me shocked that a riflescope with a 4x zoom range and a max magnification of 4x isn't showing the same thing that you're seeing.

It hasn't been a secret on here that the eyebox was going to be the limiting factor with this scope - the 30mm tube pretty much guaranteed that. I've found that the eyebox isn't especially problematic to acquire and maintain with heavy rapid fire on a 5.56 gun. It could be an issue maintaining it though on something with more recoil, which is where I'd probably spring for an ATACR.

Purely preference - I hate BDC reticles. I can also see how from a sales perspective that it wouldn't be the first choice simply so that it can appeal to a broader market.
View Quote
I will just go over these one by one.

I have never claimed to be an authority, but I am no stranger to sitting behind glass and a rifle... Someone of a more discerning eye, and with younger ones to boot, would likely notice this GS I wouldn't or couldn't.

I still am a user who can relate their experience with a scope.

That next statement... It's basically just agreeing with my point in a round about manner.

Distortion and clarity... I may be using terms a bit different than you would here. By clarity, I am talking overall image quality and transmission to the eye.

By distortion, I am referring to a specific optical effect that causes the image to distort when the optic is moved. It isn't noticable in a static image. The distortion happens under movement, and os worst when you get outside of perfect alignment in the eye box. I am not talking about getting out of the eyebox and getting the body shadow. No, I am talking still in the eyebox, but slightly off center. Like what happens when you move the rifle and are required to shift you body too. Like when in a standing position, your cheek weld isn't always perfect when you transition. The image warps under these conditions. It's only an issue for close range objects, and likely not an issue if you are making fast movement transitions.

This effect only happens on 1x power... Top end magnification doesn't come into play here, unless it is a byproduct the additional magnification affecting geometries inside the optics compared to the 4x.

The eyebox issue may not be a secret, but that does not make it less of an issue or insignificant. Basically you are agreeing with me by way of saying, "oh yeah, we already knew that".

The BDC reticle thing, I stated as preference, and not a fact... So there is no grip here... We use what we like. I mentioned it as a negative from my perspective, and not necessarily a negative for everyone.

If this scope works for you, then awesome, keep at it.

That does not make it the right scope for me.

Some may not think of a $1800 scope as being "high end" but for many, anything over say... $800 is a high priced high end optic... Myself I look at anything between $1500-2000 the beginning of high end.

So for that money, I want quantifiable improvement over something that costs $700.

What I want out of my next LPV

Glass clarity that is better than what I have now.
Magnification that is at least 6x on the top end.
Light weight, around 16oz max, a bit of give is fine for an otherwise solid optic, but no more than 19oz.
True 1x
Good eyebox
Daylight bright illumination, and battery life better than a few days use.
Rugged/tough to handle reasonable abuse.

The NX8 seems to fit these for the most part, but as a whole isn't quite making it to being worth the cost over other options.

You can get combat effective optics for $600 and even less. Rugged enough and with glass good enough to not be a hindrance... Maybe $1800 gets you more rugged setups, or other tangible benefits, bit the question is... Is the price to performance gain worth it...
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 3:02:12 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:

I will just go over these one by one.

I have never claimed to be an authority, but I am no stranger to sitting behind glass and a rifle... Someone of a more discerning eye, and with younger ones to boot, would likely notice this GS I wouldn't or couldn't.

I still am a user who can relate their experience with a scope.

That next statement... It's basically just agreeing with my point in a round about manner.

Distortion and clarity... I may be using terms a bit different than you would here. By clarity, I am talking overall image quality and transmission to the eye.

By distortion, I am referring to a specific optical effect that causes the image to distort when the optic is moved. It isn't noticable in a static image. The distortion happens under movement, and os worst when you get outside of perfect alignment in the eye box. I am not talking about getting out of the eyebox and getting the body shadow. No, I am talking still in the eyebox, but slightly off center. Like what happens when you move the rifle and are required to shift you body too. Like when in a standing position, your cheek weld isn't always perfect when you transition. The image warps under these conditions. It's only an issue for close range objects, and likely not an issue if you are making fast movement transitions.

This effect only happens on 1x power... Top end magnification doesn't come into play here, unless it is a byproduct the additional magnification affecting geometries inside the optics compared to the 4x.

The eyebox issue may not be a secret, but that does not make it less of an issue or insignificant. Basically you are agreeing with me by way of saying, "oh yeah, we already knew that".

The BDC reticle thing, I stated as preference, and not a fact... So there is no grip here... We use what we like. I mentioned it as a negative from my perspective, and not necessarily a negative for everyone.

If this scope works for you, then awesome, keep at it.

That does not make it the right scope for me.

Some may not think of a $1800 scope as being "high end" but for many, anything over say... $800 is a high priced high end optic... Myself I look at anything between $1500-2000 the beginning of high end.

So for that money, I want quantifiable improvement over something that costs $700.

What I want out of my next LPV

Glass clarity that is better than what I have now.
Magnification that is at least 6x on the top end.
Light weight, around 16oz max, a bit of give is fine for an otherwise solid optic, but no more than 19oz.
True 1x
Good eyebox
Daylight bright illumination, and battery life better than a few days use.
Rugged/tough to handle reasonable abuse.

The NX8 seems to fit these for the most part, but as a whole isn't quite making it to being worth the cost over other options.

You can get combat effective optics for $600 and even less. Rugged enough and with glass good enough to not be a hindrance... Maybe $1800 gets you more rugged setups, or other tangible benefits, bit the question is... Is the price to performance gain worth it...
View Quote
You sound like you'd be better off with a fixed power 6-10 scope and an offset reddot IMO.

I've yet to see a x1 LPV that's completely distortion free. Some do it better, some do it worse, but it's always there.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 3:22:05 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:

You sound like you'd be better off with a fixed power 6-10 scope and an offset reddot IMO.

I've yet to see a x1 LPV that's completely distortion free. Some do it better, some do it worse, but it's always there.
View Quote
Actually I feel that setup is better for practical shooting. (I tend to think about optics and setups from a practical, meaning combat, standpoint, and not competition or range work)

I am not a fan of a do it all setup, for close in it's red dot all the way. A LPV is not a red dot, and has definite disadvantage to a red dot when in close range.

The idea of a fixed scope with an offset mini reflex like an RMR, makes sense to me. And would be my preference if I had no idea the terrain and needs of the day, and/or suspected a mix of terrains and scenarios.

The problem it the short eye relief of ACOGs... You tend to need them at the end of the rail, or shoot NTCH, which I do not do.

If there is a good fixed power scope in the 6x range with decent eye relief, and is light like an ACOG, I would be interested. So long as it is a well made and rugged optic.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 3:44:43 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:

Actually I feel that setup is better for practical shooting. (I tend to think about optics and setups from a practical, meaning combat, standpoint, and not competition or range work)

I am not a fan of a do it all setup, for close in it's red dot all the way. A LPV is not a red dot, and has definite disadvantage to a red dot when in close range.

The idea of a fixed scope with an offset mini reflex like an RMR, makes sense to me. And would be my preference if I had no idea the terrain and needs of the day, and/or suspected a mix of terrains and scenarios.

The problem it the short eye relief of ACOGs... You tend to need them at the end of the rail, or shoot NTCH, which I do not do.

If there is a good fixed power scope in the 6x range with decent eye relief, and is light like an ACOG, I would be interested. So long as it is a well made and rugged optic.
View Quote
The budget friendly SWFA fixed x10 has about 4 inches of eye relief. Also lightweight, combat proven, and very durable.
Not the most glorious piece of equipment to make your friends jealous but it works.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 4:36:41 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:
The budget friendly SWFA fixed x10 has about 4 inches of eye relief. Also lightweight, combat proven, and very durable.
Not the most glorious piece of equipment to make your friends jealous but it works.
View Quote
Combat proven? Do tell!
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 4:56:11 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Lennyo3034:

I'm shooting a gas gun series and some of the targets are 2 MOA or smaller. On stages with fixed target distances, I prefer to dial. With that size dot, those targets may be challenging. I say May because I haven't actually tried it yet and it may be a none issue. I for sure will not only be using the reticle though. [ Part of the draw to this optic for me is the exposed zerostop turret.
View Quote
That is the one thing keeping me from buying one, I want the C599 version. The currently available model has a reticle ment for holding over combined with an exposed non locking elevation turret.

If you prefer to dial you may have been happier with something like a Leupold Mk6 or Mk8 with the tmr reticle.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 5:07:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2018 5:10:27 PM EDT by BarrettBoy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 00bullitt:

Combat proven? Do tell!
View Quote
http://swfa-ss.com/index.php/history
Here's a history of the fixed x10 scope and its contract.
The specific contract is #N00164-93-C-205 through the Navy if that helps you to go dig it up on the .gov.

Tibo did a good review of it here
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 5:25:57 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:
Here's a history of the fixed x10 scope and its contract.
The specific contract is #N00164-93-C-205 through the Navy if that helps you to go dig it up on the .gov.
View Quote
Have you seen an actual copy of the contract - I can't find it anywhere? I've seen contracts for as little as 12 units for samples only, to 5 year IDIQ contracts with an extension option. Considering I've yet to see a picture of actual Navy SEALs (who this was allegedly for) using these, I'll bet it wasn't anything significant so am inclined to discount being awarded a contract if there's no substance.

No doubt the SWFA version likely has some experience on a non-contractual basis as there's no telling what everyone was grabbing in early GWOT to outfit some sort of DMR rig, etc.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 5:40:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2018 5:45:27 PM EDT by BarrettBoy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Lawman734:

Have you seen an actual copy of the contract - I can't find it anywhere? I've seen contracts for as little as 12 units for samples only, to 5 year IDIQ contracts with an extension option. Considering I've yet to see a picture of actual Navy SEALs (who this was allegedly for) using these, I'll bet it wasn't anything significant so am inclined to discount being awarded a contract if there's no substance.

No doubt the SWFA version likely has some experience on a non-contractual basis as there's no telling what everyone was grabbing in early GWOT to outfit some sort of DMR rig, etc.
View Quote
Interesting. Maybe.
If that's the case, then the way they worded it on their website would be very misleading.
If you're inclined, I'm sure you could call up SWFA and get more specific info about it.
I'm not sponsored by SWFA and I don't own this scope. I've got no vested interest in spending the time to prove anything about it beyond a cursory search engine scan.

I mentioned the scope as a possible budget friendly choice for a quality fixed x10 optic.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 5:50:01 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:

Interesting. Maybe.
If that's the case, then the way they worded it on their website would be very misleading.
If you're inclined, I'm sure you could call up SWFA and get more specific info about it.
I'm not sponsored by SWFA and I don't own this scope. I've got no vested interest in spending the time to prove anything about it beyond a cursory search engine scan.

I mentioned the scope as a possible budget friendly choice for a quality fixed x10 optic.
View Quote
No doubt - just curious. I doubt SWFA would have anything on it - the contract was fulfilled and expired by the time they got involved.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 5:51:58 PM EDT
That SWFA scope is fantastic for the money.

The glass is pretty good, not high density glass, expensive high end scope good, but very good for standard glass. It's built like a tank... And the turret tracking is dead on from reports I have seen.

Lightweight it is not...

Small and handy for a 5.56 carbine... It is not.

It works as a SPR scope though.

When I think intermediate range, I am thinking 4x or 6x, in a small lightweight optic, like an ACOG. I would not go higher than 6x on a fixed optic for a handy carbine. Nor would I go with a standard sized scope.

When I think general purpose, with magnified backed up with a small offset red dot, I think patrols that move between more open ground, and into villages or small towns.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 8:46:18 PM EDT
The NXS 1-4 is horrible on 1X too.

I think the best option for an LPV is something in the 2.5-10 range with an offset Micro.
Link Posted: 5/22/2018 7:33:02 PM EDT
My NX8 works great. Glass is clear. No distortion on 1x or any x. Remembering the point of the optic really helps. It isn’t a precision rifle optic. It is a combat optic a red do that can do 8x and it certainly can do precision if needed. The whole dot being too big is garbage. Take it and go shoot with it. Try it out.
Link Posted: 5/22/2018 9:23:43 PM EDT
If you have a 1-whatever scope and think it has no distortion check out some tile flooring or a grid on paper. It's there.
Link Posted: 5/22/2018 11:58:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/23/2018 12:07:49 AM EDT by Sniper3142]
Great review of the Nightforce NX8 1-8x scope by Sage Dynamics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEobnGeQ7BY&t=35s
Link Posted: 5/25/2018 10:04:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/25/2018 10:05:20 AM EDT by Trunkmonkey4]
My NX8 and I have done two carbine classes and countless other range sessions. I am sold on it. While yes the center dot is large, this is a fighting optic. I use it on a 11.5 HRT barreled gun. I tend to use 1x & 3-5x, but having the options is what is nice. I have ID'd targets with the higher end of the scope then backed out some to shoot.

I don't want a BDC in mine, since at distance and zoomed in I would run out of sight picture to land hits. Would much rather dial for my distances since I don't exactly have the best ballistics.

Thanks NF!
Top Top