Kahles K16i vs. Nightforce NX8?

AR Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Kahles K16i vs. Nightforce NX8? (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 12/5/2018 6:09:31 PM EDT

Alright guys, I'm back in the market for a LPVO and it seems there's a lot of new options on the table.

Will be used on a "general purpose" 12.5" upper. Some range shooting out to a couple hundred yards, short range drills and practice, maybe some hunting.

Priorities are:

- Usability on 1x; eyebox, clarity (more like lack of distortion, good reticle for 1x usage with and without illumination), etc.
- Durability
- Reticle illumination

Both are decently lightweight which I like (the last LPVO I owned was a Razor 1-6). Reticles in both (looking at the ~~SM1~~ or 3GR in the K16i) seem very useable for my purposes.

I will say, I don't think I absolutely need the extra 2x that the NF offers, but having a little more magnification never hurt anyone so long as there aren't a lot of tradeoffs.

I have nowhere to go test these out local, so I'm hoping some people here have enough experience with both of them to open my eyes a little bit.

Posted: 12/5/2018 6:31:29 PM EDT

[#1]

The Nightforce has a somewhat unforgiving eyebox. The Khales is the pick of the litter. I have been looking for a good deal on one.

Posted: 12/5/2018 8:03:39 PM EDT

[#2]

I’ve owned both and sold both. The only reason why I sold the Kahles was because I wanted the extra 2x of the NF and all the reviews raved about it. Big mistake! The NF has a super tight/unforgiving eye box, fisheye effect on 1x, sub par glass clarity, and huge center dot on 8x. I sold it immediately, just not for me. I just picked up another P4Xi but if I didn’t just have my first child and building a house in the spring I would have bought the new K16i with 3GR reticle. My only complaint about the Kahles I had was I felt the SM1 reticle was too cluttered. YMMV

Posted: 12/5/2018 8:24:56 PM EDT

[#3]

Razor then Accupower 1-4 then P4Xi then Kahles SM-1 then back to Razor then NX8 and now running Kahles G4-BDC.

The size and weight of the NX8 are real juicy. Its a great optic. The rough eyebox jab is a bit overblown IMO. Its tight but still usable.

The razor is a great optic with a weight penalty.

The Kahles is king.

Posted: 12/5/2018 10:06:27 PM EDT

[#4]

I have/had both. My choice is the Kahles. I had the NX8 and could not get used to the picky eyebox, the tunneling at 1x and the distortion. The NX8 illumination is unreal though, as well as the size and well, its sexier. Buuut, the Kahles has an insanely good view at 1x, has one of, if not the, largest field of view of any 1-6, zero distortion and is just as light, although it is a bit longer. I much prefer the capped turrets of the kahles and while the illumination is not as bright, it is still daylight bright and the clarity/brightness of the scope is unrivaled. The extra 2x of the NX8 is not significant in my eyes. Below is my rifle with both optics, and a picture through the glass at 1x and 6x of both optics. You can see how the scope just fades away on 1x with Kahles. Its like its not even there and that is a good representation of how it appears in real life. The last picture is the NX8 on 8x. That well house is 50 yards away. So while the 8x gets you closer than 6x...its not that big of a deal IMO. I would only trade my Kahles for another one if they made a 1-8x. Otherwise, its on this rifle forever. My reticle is the 3GR. Hard to pick up on the cell phone pics, but I love it.

NX8 in Geissele Mount

Kahles in Scalarworks Mount

NX8 1x

Khales 1x

NX8 6x

Khales 6x

NX8 8x

Posted: 12/5/2018 10:26:37 PM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:
I have/had both. My choice is the Kahles. I had the NX8 and could not get used to the picky eyebox, the tunneling at 1x and the distortion. The NX8 illumination is unreal though, as well as the size and well, its sexier. Buuut, the Kahles has an insanely good view at 1x, has one of, if not the, largest field of view of any 1-6, zero distortion and is just as light, although it is a bit longer. I much prefer the capped turrets of the kahles and while the illumination is not as bright, it is still daylight bright and the clarity/brightness of the scope is unrivaled. The extra 2x of the NX8 is not significant in my eyes. Below is my rifle with both optics, and a picture through the glass at 1x and 6x of both optics. You can see how the scope just fades away on 1x with Kahles. Its like its not even there and that is a good representation of how it appears in real life. The last picture is the NX8 on 8x. That well house is 50 yards away. So while the 8x gets you closer than 6x...its not that big of a deal IMO. I would only trade my Kahles for another one if they made a 1-8x. Otherwise, its on this rifle forever. My reticle is the 3GR. Hard to pick up on the cell phone pics, but I love it.

NX8 in Geissele Mount
https://i.ibb.co/KqNRHZZ/00100d-PORTRAIT-00100-BURST20180811175133283-COVER.jpg
Kahles in Scalarworks Mount
https://i.ibb.co/kHcvh4L/00100l-PORTRAIT-00100-BURST20181027141550956-COVER-2.jpg
NX8 1x
https://i.ibb.co/HnH1YNn/IMG-20180929-172501.jpg
Khales 1x
https://i.ibb.co/yVHPMd7/IMG-20180929-172921.jpg
NX8 6x
https://i.ibb.co/q0sSvrg/IMG-20180929-172526.jpg
Khales 6x
https://i.ibb.co/YQNnnSv/IMG-20180929-173150.jpg
NX8 8x
https://i.ibb.co/YpnzFfS/IMG-20180929-172545.jpg

View Quote

I know photographed scope shots are often meh examples of IRL, but those photos do a pretty darn good job of showing what you’re describing. That NX8 looks downright claustrophobic compared to the Kahles, and the fish-eye is pretty darn noticeable.

Posted: 12/5/2018 10:32:05 PM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:

I know photographed scope shots are often meh examples of IRL, but those photos do a pretty darn good job of showing what you’re describing. That NX8 looks downright claustrophobic compared to the Kahles, and the fish-eye is pretty darn noticeable.

View Quote

No camera trickery there. I did everything I could to capture the essence of both in real life. I know a lot of the tunnel affect of the NX8 comes from it being FFP instead of SFP like the Kahles but for my use case the trade off is worth it. If I'm going to use the "bdc" of the 3GR, it will always be at 6x anyway.

Posted: 12/5/2018 10:47:31 PM EDT

[#7]

Kahles, with its glass quality and reticle options, is king

Posted: 12/5/2018 11:44:45 PM EDT

[#8]

Great post, Burdy! That K16i in the SW mount would be my go to combo right now. What's your opinion on the second illuminated dot on the 3GR reticle?

Posted: 12/6/2018 12:39:22 AM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:
I have/had both. My choice is the Kahles. I had the NX8 and could not get used to the picky eyebox, the tunneling at 1x and the distortion. The NX8 illumination is unreal though, as well as the size and well, its sexier. Buuut, the Kahles has an insanely good view at 1x, has one of, if not the, largest field of view of any 1-6, zero distortion and is just as light, although it is a bit longer. I much prefer the capped turrets of the kahles and while the illumination is not as bright, it is still daylight bright and the clarity/brightness of the scope is unrivaled. The extra 2x of the NX8 is not significant in my eyes. Below is my rifle with both optics, and a picture through the glass at 1x and 6x of both optics. You can see how the scope just fades away on 1x with Kahles. Its like its not even there and that is a good representation of how it appears in real life. The last picture is the NX8 on 8x. That well house is 50 yards away. So while the 8x gets you closer than 6x...its not that big of a deal IMO. I would only trade my Kahles for another one if they made a 1-8x. Otherwise, its on this rifle forever. My reticle is the 3GR. Hard to pick up on the cell phone pics, but I love it.

NX8 in Geissele Mount
https://i.ibb.co/KqNRHZZ/00100d-PORTRAIT-00100-BURST20180811175133283-COVER.jpg
Kahles in Scalarworks Mount
https://i.ibb.co/kHcvh4L/00100l-PORTRAIT-00100-BURST20181027141550956-COVER-2.jpg
NX8 1x
https://i.ibb.co/HnH1YNn/IMG-20180929-172501.jpg
Khales 1x
https://i.ibb.co/yVHPMd7/IMG-20180929-172921.jpg
NX8 6x
https://i.ibb.co/q0sSvrg/IMG-20180929-172526.jpg
Khales 6x
https://i.ibb.co/YQNnnSv/IMG-20180929-173150.jpg
NX8 8x
https://i.ibb.co/YpnzFfS/IMG-20180929-172545.jpg

View Quote

Thanks for the pics brother. Seems there’s a pretty unanimous consensus that the Kahles is the better scope.

How have they been durability wise? You don’t really read about a whole lot of people using them, so with that, there’s a general lack of end user reviews.

Posted: 12/6/2018 1:00:49 AM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:

No camera trickery there. I did everything I could to capture the essence of both in real life. I know a lot of the tunnel affect of the NX8 comes from it being FFP instead of SFP like the Kahles but for my use case the trade off is worth it. If I'm going to use the "bdc" of the 3GR, it will always be at 6x anyway.

View Quote

Was the camera the same distance from both scopes? I see the mount in the pics of the NX8, which might indicate the camera is further away from it.

Posted: 12/6/2018 8:10:44 AM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:

Was the camera the same distance from both scopes? I see the mount in the pics of the NX8, which might indicate the camera is further away from it.

View Quote

The Kahles was not in a mount. It's sitting in the foam from the box. I adjusted the camera distance for the best possible image through both scopes as eye relief is different. There is nothing subjective here about the 1x view. You could ask 1,000 people to look through both and you wouldn't get a single person that would prefer the NX8 view. That's not to say the NX8 doesn't have it's advantages. FFP is one, compact size is great with NV, crazy bright and Nightforce has a history of durability.

Posted: 12/6/2018 8:19:13 AM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

Thanks for the pics brother. Seems there’s a pretty unanimous consensus that the Kahles is the better scope.

How have they been durability wise? You don’t really read about a whole lot of people using them, so with that, there’s a general lack of end user reviews.

View Quote

As for the durability of the Kahles, it's relatively unknown at this point compared to the Nightforce but I continue to see more and more images of SF guys now running the Kahles in theater, where all I used to see were Razors. That's a good sign.

Posted: 12/6/2018 8:25:13 AM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:
Great post, Burdy! That K16i in the SW mount would be my go to combo right now. What's your opinion on the second illuminated dot on the 3GR reticle?

View Quote

All of my shooting so far has been with the center dot, but that will change next weekend and I'll let you know. I know when I've used the illumination in low light I thought it was nice to know I had a second set reference point of a particular distance. I think they did great with the reticle. It's enough info for various yardages without being too confusing which should make it fast at various ranges. My rifle is a bit different as it's a 10.25" .300 Blackout. The reticle was designed for 5.56 so it will obviously be much more flat than .300. But here are my subtensions running the 110 grain Barnes Tac-TX, My second illuminated dot would be @ 275y. This is with a 50y zero. As you can see it's dead on again @ 121y:

Posted: 12/6/2018 12:44:08 PM EDT

[#14]

Been covered but:

As a point of reference: My very favorite LPVO is the Swarovski z8i 1-8 with BRT-I reticle. It's got a great view, aimpoint+ bright dot, a mil based reticle, and it is not heavy. I don't know of another scope which ticks all four of those boxes. I also really like the option for an exposed elevation turret on the z8is.

NX8: It's very compact -- I bought it specifically for the size and it fits the need I had. That said, there seem to be a lot of optical compromises made in order to get there. I'm fine with that for my purpose (my specific requirement was to minimize the amount of scope forward of the end of the receiver) but in the NF line I would skip it and look at the ATACR for competition/regular use.

K16i: I really like this scope, it's the closest thing I've seen to my z8i (which makes sense), but the illumination is definitely not as radiant (I wasn't expecting that) and because it's a 6x SFP scope the mil-based reticle seems more compressed than the 8x Swaro reticle. Ultimately I decided the only reason I'd select the K16i over the z8i is cost or weight, so I no longer own a K16i and have 2 z8is instead.

For situations where weight is the highest priority I'm looking at the Leupold VX-6HD firedot at ~13oz vs. 18oz for the Swaro and 16oz for the Kahles but I haven't formed an impression of it yet.

Posted: 12/6/2018 8:19:59 PM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
Been covered but:

As a point of reference: My very favorite LPVO is the Swarovski z8i 1-8 with BRT-I reticle. It's got a great view, aimpoint+ bright dot, a mil based reticle, and it is not heavy. I don't know of another scope which ticks all four of those boxes. I also really like the option for an exposed elevation turret on the z8is.

NX8: It's very compact -- I bought it specifically for the size and it fits the need I had. That said, there seem to be a lot of optical compromises made in order to get there. I'm fine with that for my purpose (my specific requirement was to minimize the amount of scope forward of the end of the receiver) but in the NF line I would skip it and look at the ATACR for competition/regular use.

K16i: I really like this scope, it's the closest thing I've seen to my z8i (which makes sense), but the illumination is definitely not as radiant (I wasn't expecting that) and because it's a 6x SFP scope the mil-based reticle seems more compressed than the 8x Swaro reticle. Ultimately I decided the only reason I'd select the K16i over the z8i is cost or weight, so I no longer own a K16i and have 2 z8is instead.

For situations where weight is the highest priority I'm looking at the Leupold VX-6HD firedot at ~13oz vs. 18oz for the Swaro and 16oz for the Kahles but I haven't formed an impression of it yet.

View Quote

Unfortunately I can't consider the SWARO because it's 1" longer and my NV is in the last slot on my rail already. We will see what SHOT show brings. :-)

Posted: 12/7/2018 6:09:47 PM EDT

[#16]

Kahles.

The NX8 does look great on paper and on instagram.

Look at the number of like new NX8s that are changing hands on the EE. That should be a clue.

NX8 is good for what it is, but has been badly overhyped.

Posted: 12/7/2018 7:51:27 PM EDT

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted:
I have/had both. My choice is the Kahles. I had the NX8 and could not get used to the picky eyebox, the tunneling at 1x and the distortion. The NX8 illumination is unreal though, as well as the size and well, its sexier. Buuut, the Kahles has an insanely good view at 1x, has one of, if not the, largest field of view of any 1-6, zero distortion and is just as light, although it is a bit longer. I much prefer the capped turrets of the kahles and while the illumination is not as bright, it is still daylight bright and the clarity/brightness of the scope is unrivaled. The extra 2x of the NX8 is not significant in my eyes. Below is my rifle with both optics, and a picture through the glass at 1x and 6x of both optics. You can see how the scope just fades away on 1x with Kahles. Its like its not even there and that is a good representation of how it appears in real life. The last picture is the NX8 on 8x. That well house is 50 yards away. So while the 8x gets you closer than 6x...its not that big of a deal IMO. I would only trade my Kahles for another one if they made a 1-8x. Otherwise, its on this rifle forever. My reticle is the 3GR. Hard to pick up on the cell phone pics, but I love it.

NX8 in Geissele Mount
https://i.ibb.co/KqNRHZZ/00100d-PORTRAIT-00100-BURST20180811175133283-COVER.jpg
Kahles in Scalarworks Mount
https://i.ibb.co/kHcvh4L/00100l-PORTRAIT-00100-BURST20181027141550956-COVER-2.jpg
NX8 1x
https://i.ibb.co/HnH1YNn/IMG-20180929-172501.jpg
Khales 1x
https://i.ibb.co/yVHPMd7/IMG-20180929-172921.jpg
NX8 6x
https://i.ibb.co/q0sSvrg/IMG-20180929-172526.jpg
Khales 6x
https://i.ibb.co/YQNnnSv/IMG-20180929-173150.jpg
NX8 8x
https://i.ibb.co/YpnzFfS/IMG-20180929-172545.jpg

View Quote

Chromatic Abberation in the Kahles looks annoying.
Why did you change the suppressor and the forward stop and then compare the weights of the optics in their mounts without mentioning that?

Posted: 12/7/2018 8:36:18 PM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:

Chromatic Abberation in the Kahles looks annoying.
Why did you change the suppressor and the forward stop and then compare the weights of the optics in their mounts without mentioning that?

View Quote

1. There is no chromatic Abberation, thats taken through a cell phone and it does not exhibit that to your eye. I took the images to compare tunneling and FOV, nothing else, but I can assure you the NF does not even come close to the optical quality of the Kahles, at least as it pertains to these two particular models.

2. The weight on the scale is not relevant to this conversation, those are two pics that are old that I took at separate times for separate reasons. I didn't go and take new pictures for this thread. These just happened to both be on a scale as I had been on a quest to get a suppressed, lpvo rifle with bipod at under 8 lbs.

3.) Thats not a forward stop. Thats a heathen systems bipod and barricade stop. One is a keymod version, the other is pic rail. The pic rail version on the "lighter" scale version is actually the heavier way of doing it as it requires the separate keymod pic rail piece.

The NX8 is said to weigh 17 ounces, the Kahles is said to weigh 16.9 if that is what you are concerned with.

Posted: 12/7/2018 8:46:49 PM EDT

[#19]

My son picked up a cert for Kahles products at a match last month. I ordered a K525i SKMR3. I can`t wait to shoot with it.

Posted: 12/7/2018 11:35:47 PM EDT

[#20]

The Kahles is the finest LPVO I’ve tried.

Posted: 12/8/2018 3:26:29 AM EDT

[#21]

Bought an SM1 first. Love it. Bought an NX8, enjoyed it, but enjoyed my Kahles better so NX8 was sold and now I have a 3GR to go with the SM1.

Posted: 12/8/2018 3:28:10 AM EDT

[#22]

Quote History

Quoted:

1. There is no chromatic Abberation, thats taken through a cell phone and it does not exhibit that to your eye. I took the images to compare tunneling and FOV, nothing else, but I can assure you the NF does not even come close to the optical quality of the Kahles, at least as it pertains to these two particular models.

2. The weight on the scale is not relevant to this conversation, those are two pics that are old that I took at separate times for separate reasons. I didn't go and take new pictures for this thread. These just happened to both be on a scale as I had been on a quest to get a suppressed, lpvo rifle with bipod at under 8 lbs.

3.) Thats not a forward stop. Thats a heathen systems bipod and barricade stop. One is a keymod version, the other is pic rail. The pic rail version on the "lighter" scale version is actually the heavier way of doing it as it requires the separate keymod pic rail piece.

The NX8 is said to weigh 17 ounces, the Kahles is said to weigh 16.9 if that is what you are concerned with.

https://i.ibb.co/cNvjqwJ/IMG-20181004-191039.jpg

View Quote

Every Kahles ive owned (3 k16i's) had CA exactly as your pictures show.

This thread and others are pushing me to buy a Razor "E" over NX8, (i dont like kahles reticles, i want a simple 1 dot illumination and mil reticle). Literally noone praises the nx8s optical qualities. Honestly, my leupole MK6 had the best glass Ive used, 3 k16i, 1 vcog, 2 nightforce nxs 1-4. Ive not tried a razor yet.

Posted: 12/8/2018 7:53:49 AM EDT

[#23]

Quote History

Quoted:

Every Kahles ive owned (3 k16i's) had CA exactly as your pictures show.

This thread and others are pushing me to buy a Razor "E" over NX8, (i dont like kahles reticles, i want a simple 1 dot illumination and mil reticle). Literally noone praises the nx8s optical qualities. Honestly, my leupole MK6 had the best glass Ive used, 3 k16i, 1 vcog, 2 nightforce nxs 1-4. Ive not tried a razor yet.

View Quote

I am aware that the higher magnification Kahles are known to have CA as reported by many over on Snipers Hide but you don't hear about it with their 1-6. Haven't spent much time with the Leupolds.

Posted: 12/8/2018 9:32:49 AM EDT

[#24]

When I'm actually shooting (practice or competition) I'm not really sitting around looking for the pretty colors. I can see CA in pictures but never noticed it while using the scope for its intended purpose. If I were spending hours on glass in a stand or other static position I'd probably have a different perspective.

I agree with the comment on the NX8 above -- it is hailed as the end all of 1-8x scopes but I think it's a niche optic for those who want high power and a bright dot in the most compact package. It delivers on that in spades.

I have a few razors (not the E though) and my only complaint about any of the razor family is the weight. In my mind they don't do anything better than other options except present an opportunity to reduce cost in exchange for weight. Cost isn't one of my major criteria so I tend toward other options.

Posted: 12/8/2018 10:17:29 AM EDT

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:
When I'm actually shooting (practice or competition) I'm not really sitting around looking for the pretty colors. I can see CA in pictures but never noticed it while using the scope for its intended purpose. If I were spending hours on glass in a stand or other static position I'd probably have a different perspective.

I agree with the comment on the NX8 above -- it is hailed as the end all of 1-8x scopes but I think it's a niche optic for those who want high power and a bright dot in the most compact package. It delivers on that in spades.

I have a few razors (not the E though) and my only complaint about any of the razor family is the weight. In my mind they don't do anything better than other options except present an opportunity to reduce cost in exchange for weight. Cost isn't one of my major criteria so I tend toward other options.

View Quote

CA is typically not a limiting factor, but for glass that everyone raves about, I was disappointed. Every K16i I've owned has it just like in OP's pictures. Annoying on a sunny day shooting white steel/paper. MK6 was much better in that regard, although the K16i, minus reticles and dim illumination, was better in every regard (I had SM1 reticles).

Posted: 12/8/2018 10:46:28 AM EDT

[#26]

I never noticed any CA in my K16i or in the NX8 that I briefly owned. I do notice it in my long range Tract scope that has Jap glass, which I still consider excellent glass for its price range. It’s not a limiting factor for me either.

Posted: 12/8/2018 10:50:51 AM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:
I never noticed any CA in my K16i or in the NX8 that I briefly owned. I do notice it in my long range Tract scope that has Jap glass, which I still consider excellent glass for its price range. It’s not a limiting factor for me either.

View Quote

I wonder if there is a variance, because I definitely saw it in mine. Again, as stated, not a limiting factor, but yeah, kindof offputting in that bracket. My NXS 1-4 had BAD CA that actually was limiting, IMO

Posted: 12/8/2018 7:57:29 PM EDT

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:
When I'm actually shooting (practice or competition) I'm not really sitting around looking for the pretty colors. I can see CA in pictures but never noticed it while using the scope for its intended purpose. If I were spending hours on glass in a stand or other static position I'd probably have a different perspective.

I agree with the comment on the NX8 above -- it is hailed as the end all of 1-8x scopes but I think it's a niche optic for those who want high power and a bright dot in the most compact package. It delivers on that in spades.

I have a few razors (not the E though) and my only complaint about any of the razor family is the weight. In my mind they don't do anything better than other options except present an opportunity to reduce cost in exchange for weight. Cost isn't one of my major criteria so I tend toward other options.

View Quote

If cost isn't a major criteria, have you considered the Nightforce ATACR 1-8x?

Posted: 12/8/2018 10:06:22 PM EDT

[#29]

Quote History

Quoted:

If cost isn't a major criteria, have you considered the Nightforce ATACR 1-8x?

View Quote

I considered it (not who you addressed), but because it has such a huge ass, you have to push it way forward, and this means the mount and scope are centered much more forward on the gun vs a vortex or similar, which for a dmr isnt an issue but on a 14.5 or shorter kindof sucks.

Posted: 12/8/2018 11:53:08 PM EDT

[#30]

Didn't a Kahles 1-6x make it overseas and broke on the guy? Remember reading that somewhere. Durability has to be an extremely important aspect of choosing such a pricey LPVO.

Posted: 12/9/2018 10:13:35 AM EDT

[#31]

Quote History

Quoted:
Didn't a Kahles 1-6x make it overseas and broke on the guy? Remember reading that somewhere. Durability has to be an extremely important aspect of choosing such a pricey LPVO.

View Quote

My first two NX8's went back for repair right out of the box from Nightforce. So I probably wouldn't base durability off of a single instance. My first one had debris in the glass and second one had a frozen zero stop. Both repaired promptly so no customer service issue at all but still annoying. Especially the zero stop because I found that out after zeroing.

Posted: 12/9/2018 12:08:14 PM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:

My first two NX8's went back for repair right out of the box from Nightforce. So I probably wouldn't base durability off of a single instance. My first one had debris in the glass and second one had a frozen zero stop. Both repaired promptly so no customer service issue at all but still annoying. Especially the zero stop because I found that out after zeroing.

View Quote

IMO, the big appeal of Nightforce is their QA/QC (durability). That's pretty disheartening, as if those things can be missed, what finer alignment issues of the guts could later present? What tolerances were "meh"'ed over? I'm a huge NF fan, but that is very troublesome.

To date, I have heard of only 2 Vortex Razor HD 2's that have died or had issues. Several K16i's that have arrived defunct or had issues, and I'm seeing more than a few NX8's on the forums with issues like this. Leupold MK6's have an alarming prevalence of "trash in the glass" (black flecks). Honestly, the "bargain" Razor is looking more and more "Gen 3 Glock 19" every day.

Posted: 12/9/2018 12:09:38 PM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:
Didn't a Kahles 1-6x make it overseas and broke on the guy? Remember reading that somewhere. Durability has to be an extremely important aspect of choosing such a pricey LPVO.

View Quote

I know of 1 dealer who has sent 1 back for a very canted reticle, and killed another on a beltfed gun, and many people who have had the rear occular housing "sleeve" become "free turning" (cosmetic not functional, but really chintzy).

Posted: 12/9/2018 9:44:49 PM EDT

[#34]

Quote History

Quoted:
My first two NX8's went back for repair right out of the box from Nightforce. So I probably wouldn't base durability off of a single instance. My first one had debris in the glass and second one had a frozen zero stop. Both repaired promptly so no customer service issue at all but still annoying. Especially the zero stop because I found that out after zeroing.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Didn't a Kahles 1-6x make it overseas and broke on the guy? Remember reading that somewhere. Durability has to be an extremely important aspect of choosing such a pricey LPVO.

My first two NX8's went back for repair right out of the box from Nightforce. So I probably wouldn't base durability off of a single instance. My first one had debris in the glass and second one had a frozen zero stop. Both repaired promptly so no customer service issue at all but still annoying. Especially the zero stop because I found that out after zeroing.

Ok sure

Posted: 12/9/2018 9:48:23 PM EDT

[#35]

Quote History

Quoted:

Ok sure

View Quote

$100 paypal against my $100 payapl that I will post up the RMA's. Tool.

Posted: 12/9/2018 10:19:21 PM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
Didn't a Kahles 1-6x make it overseas and broke on the guy? Remember reading that somewhere. Durability has to be an extremely important aspect of choosing such a pricey LPVO.

View Quote

So?

It wasn't easy but I broke a Steiner Military. Hell, you can break an Abrams if you try hard enough.

Posted: 12/9/2018 11:14:10 PM EDT

[#37]

Quote History

Quoted:
$100 paypal against my $100 payapl that I will post up the RMA's. Tool.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Ok sure

$100 paypal against my $100 payapl that I will post up the RMA's. Tool.

If costomer service humored you thats great. Thanks for keeping on top of this thread. Glad you kept the rmas for such quick referance.

Posted: 12/10/2018 7:52:27 AM EDT

[#38]

Quote History

Quoted:

If costomer service humored you thats great. Thanks for keeping on top of this thread. Glad you kept the rmas for such quick referance.

View Quote

The debris in the glass was somewhere around 5 moa. You would have sent it back too. As for the zero stop they ended up replacing it completely as well as the turret cap as it was shown to be out of spec and sticking. I'm sorry I've hurt your feelings by talking about your beloved optic. I have no issue with Nightforce and would buy again, but not another NX8. Even if the scopes weren't defective out of the box the optical quality is just not there. Perhaps much is lost in trying to make a FFP scope so compact with so much zoom. Who knows, but there are compromises. If you have nothing to contribute to this thread, leave.

Posted: 12/10/2018 8:58:51 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

So?

It wasn't easy but I broke a Steiner Military. Hell, you can break an Abrams if you try hard enough.

View Quote

Why yes, you can....

Posted: 12/10/2018 10:43:06 AM EDT

[#40]

Quote History

Quoted:

My first two NX8's went back for repair right out of the box from Nightforce. So I probably wouldn't base durability off of a single instance. My first one had debris in the glass and second one had a frozen zero stop. Both repaired promptly so no customer service issue at all but still annoying. Especially the zero stop because I found that out after zeroing.

View Quote

My NX8 went back right out of the box due to not being able to see through it past about 4X. It transmitted light, but the image was totally blurred.

They sent me a replacement and I sold it. I used one while mine was out for repair and I thought it sucked. Poor image quality and reticle and turret arrangement that didn't work well together.

Posted: 12/10/2018 10:51:55 AM EDT

[#41]

Quote History

Quoted:

My NX8 went back right out of the box due to not being able to see through it past about 4X. It transmitted light, but the image was totally blurred.

They sent me a replacement and I sold it. I used one while mine was out for repair and I thought it sucked. Poor image quality and reticle and turret arrangement that didn't work well together.

View Quote

I know you've owned some NXS 1-4's. 1-4, how is the image quality in comparison? I never did find my NXS 1-4's to produce CRISP image at 100 yards. It was always just sorta "meh". My G33/T2 was much clearer.

Posted: 12/10/2018 1:46:23 PM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:
If cost isn't a major criteria, have you considered the Nightforce ATACR 1-8x?

View Quote

I'd definitely prefer an ATACR (at which point I'd get another Swaro anyway).

Like I said, I had a very specific use case and size was the primary factor.

Posted: 12/10/2018 4:58:26 PM EDT

[#43]

Quote History

Quoted:
I know you've owned some NXS 1-4's. 1-4, how is the image quality in comparison? I never did find my NXS 1-4's to produce CRISP image at 100 yards. It was always just sorta "meh". My G33/T2 was much clearer.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

My NX8 went back right out of the box due to not being able to see through it past about 4X. It transmitted light, but the image was totally blurred.

They sent me a replacement and I sold it. I used one while mine was out for repair and I thought it sucked. Poor image quality and reticle and turret arrangement that didn't work well together.

I know you've owned some NXS 1-4's. 1-4, how is the image quality in comparison? I never did find my NXS 1-4's to produce CRISP image at 100 yards. It was always just sorta "meh". My G33/T2 was much clearer.

About the same as the 1-4 but with a much tighter eyebox and FOV.

The reticle is not useable on 1X without the magnification, which I really didn't like.

Posted: 12/10/2018 5:10:06 PM EDT

[#44]

Quote History

Quoted:

About the same as the 1-4 but with a much tighter eyebox and FOV.

The reticle is not useable on 1X without the magnification, which I really didn't like.

View Quote

When is it usable? I do a fair bit of shooting at 20-80 yards that I want precision for. That means for the sake of FOV and precision compromise on moving targets, I use 2.5-4x a lot. To this end, Ive used SFP optics thus far. I am not milling at 80y.

Posted: 12/10/2018 6:21:28 PM EDT

[#45]

Quote History

Quoted:

When is it usable? I do a fair bit of shooting at 20-80 yards that I want precision for. That means for the sake of FOV and precision compromise on moving targets, I use 2.5-4x a lot. To this end, Ive used SFP optics thus far. I am not milling at 80y.

View Quote

Why not a TA33 for this use case? I'm thinking low mount with RMR on top would be better than lpvo. Can't believe I'm saying that.

Posted: 12/10/2018 10:50:15 PM EDT

[#46]

Quote History

Quoted:

Why not a TA33 for this use case? I'm thinking low mount with RMR on top would be better than lpvo. Can't believe I'm saying that.

View Quote

Not a Trijicon fan, and sometimes the rifle gets used at night, and id prefer a normal index point vs whats forced with offset or piggyback.

Posted: 12/11/2018 9:30:27 PM EDT

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:
When is it usable? I do a fair bit of shooting at 20-80 yards that I want precision for. That means for the sake of FOV and precision compromise on moving targets, I use 2.5-4x a lot. To this end, Ive used SFP optics thus far. I am not milling at 80y.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

About the same as the 1-4 but with a much tighter eyebox and FOV.

The reticle is not useable on 1X without the magnification, which I really didn't like.

When is it usable? I do a fair bit of shooting at 20-80 yards that I want precision for. That means for the sake of FOV and precision compromise on moving targets, I use 2.5-4x a lot. To this end, Ive used SFP optics thus far. I am not milling at 80y.

About 4-5X on anything other than a nice contrasting target.

Posted: 12/11/2018 11:03:33 PM EDT

[#48]

Quote History

Quoted:

About 4-5X on anything other than a nice contrasting target.

View Quote

Kindof what I figured, which is why Ive always laughed at the "but you sfp guys are just using it like an Elcan" line.

Posted: 12/11/2018 11:24:24 PM EDT

[#49]

Quote History

Quoted:

So?

It wasn't easy but I broke a Steiner Military. Hell, you can break an Abrams if you try hard enough.

View Quote

I was considering their 1-8. My Accupower is okay, but I would like better. I had a Steiner 3-12 Military and that things glass has ruined all other expectations.

Posted: 12/11/2018 11:30:25 PM EDT

[#50]

Quote History

Quoted:

I know of 1 dealer who has sent 1 back for a very canted reticle, and killed another on a beltfed gun, and many people who have had the rear occular housing "sleeve" become "free turning" (cosmetic not functional, but really chintzy).

View Quote

Yeah, I'd pass on the Kahles then. I hope it never hits the fan, okay I lied, though not so I could shoot stuff, but everything must be worthy imo. Everything.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Kahles K16i vs. Nightforce NX8? (Page 1 of 2)

AR-15 » Optics, Mounts, and Sights

AR Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us