Printable View
Hello all,
Just ordered my old man a new scope for his birthday. Was wondering if any of ya'll have had any experience with any of the FX line of scopes. Did a bunch of looking and watching over the last week or so, and the reviews seem to be pretty positive, especially in the price range.
Can anybody give me their thoughts/experience?
Thanks,
I’m very interested in this too in 2nd ffp.
Well ok then... Looks like I'm going to be the first to jump in on the Nikon. I will report back my findings with it.
Kohler, I ran out to take a look at both the FX1000 and X1000 this weekend (I wanted to at least look through the glass and see the reticle on each in MOA) This is only the second time in my life I've bought a scope for myself or someone else, without looking through one first. I was very impressed with the glass they decided to put in them (For the price point) and once we can get it on a rifle and out to the field, will I be able to see how it compares to to the glass in my Sightron SIII. I have always thought that Nikon had pretty good glass even in their lower end BDC hunting scopes. I will say that I really didn't like the turret zero reset system that the X1000 employs. They are lift up resets and I know from experience they can get messed up really easy. The X1000 also has no zero stop on the elevation turret. The FX1000 turrets are redesigned and has a much better zero reset design and Zero Stop
Thanks, SageRat, for the initial eval. I only have Nikon on a 220f which has modest range and magnification needs so I’ve never touched the turrets since sighting in the first time. Scope is nice for its purpose. Prior to my recent TN hunt I cranked on turrets on another scope and messed up the resets unknowingly after a windy day here around Lake Michigan. I got the two deer I pointed at but it cost $6 - $9 in custom ammo per deer. Learned lessons about preset knobs.
I've had a few Nikon's over the years and never had any complaints with them. Their glass has always been on par with or better than anyone elses at a given price point so I never worried much about that. Biggest thing for me has always been features and reticles offered, which is where Nikon has lagged behind a bit. These new FX and X series have started to address that.
Still don't like their ballistic reticles though with the big open circle dots. Guess they figured it would be like shooting with ghost ring sight - just without the front sight blade to center up in it.
First or second plane I still need an education on the reticle. In MOA version I didnt follow Nikon’s web instructions on determining image size. Jim, you’re right about enduring stupidity, but it can be cheaper if managed. Maybe a fixed power scope using whitetail max point blank range would be practical for this woods and blinds gun - 22” Bartlein 270 on one of Fred’s Monte Carlo stocks.
FFP= the reticle grows and shrinks accordingly as you zoom in or out as well as your target. the advantage IMO of that is that your subtensions remain the same regardless of what magnification you are on.
SFP= the reticle remains the same size whether you're zooming in or out, your target will grow and shrink accordingly, but your subtensions change depending on what magnification you are on.
The FX line have addressed their reticle and did not make the mistake of putting those big open circle dots in this line. They have pretty thin crosshairs (for a FFP anyway) and the MOA version has hashmarks in 1, 2, and 10 MOA (short hash, medium hash, and Long hash). I will say I wish they would have made the center a floating dot like my SIII, but it's still a nice reticle.
Specifically I could not figure this image size equalling 10 MOA.
https://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/nikon-products/black-reticle/index.page
Despite never conquering the speeding train questions I did get above average math grades - for lack of completion probably - so I’m missing something basic here. My fallback is a tutorial from a potential son-in-law who spent Christmas here and he’s getting his PhD in a math intensive curriculum.
I have a finished 26 Nosler (McGowen, Sharp Shooter stock) that may be an even better candidate for this Nikon.
https://shop.opticsplanet.com/nikon-...age=5c0c3afb68
Look at this one, it has measurements listed for each thing in the reticle. each hash is 1 MOA, but they also made the 2, 4,6,& 8 hash a little longer than the 1, 3,5,7, & 9.
The 10, 20, & 30 Hashmarks are the longest and are marked with the specific number.
The 26 Nosler should do well with the Nikon on top, provided the scope performs the way they say it does... Only time will tell.
Thanks SageRat. In March or April I’ll be ready to buy.
Update: Well, we got the scope mounted this Sunday, using Warne Medium rings and standard 2 piece weaver bases. Will be a few more weeks before any testing will be done, as Dad had Carpal tunnel surgery done on his shooting hand last week. Everything looks good with it (reticle, glass, finish etc...). Now we just have to see how it dials and performs on top of the 7MM.
I'm thinking about the FX1000 as well, but in the 6x24 illuminated.
My SIII is 6-24x50 and I really like the extra magnification for shooting @ 1000 yards. My POPs is way "old school"... In fact it's taken me over 2 years, a lot of talking and demonstrating the benefits of todays modern optics, before he was open to the idea of getting a new scope. He only has known one optic his entire life (Leupold). All he's ever used is a 3-9 or a 4-12 scope with standard crosshairs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sled
I knew he wasn't going to like having a giant scope on his rifle, so I opted for the 4-16 as it would work for both hunting and LR shooting. It is a fairly long scope and the turrets are huge compared to my SIII turrets, but all in all I think it's going to work perfect for his 7MM, which is what he shoots LR with. So after I bot him the FX1000, he confessed that he'd been wanting a scope like mine since he saw me first round hit everything out to 500 yards, but he just didn't know what he should be looking for... :noidea: WTF!!?? Why is it that the old timers won't ask questions of those that know the answers to their questions, just because they may be his "kid" or that he's just a "whippersnapper"??
Yeah, I'm back and forth on the magnification myself. The most I've ever used is 3x9. Most days I think I want the 6x24 for long range shooting, and some days the sensible me says the 4x16 is all I need since I live in Kentucky and there just aren't any 1000 yd shots around here. It's going on a 110 Tactical .308, which could double as a deer gun (though I usually use a 30-30), so part of me says too much magnification limits field of view too much for hunting in the woods, but then the other part of me says I don't really hunt that much anymore and will be shooting mostly off a bench rest, and my old eyes could use the extra, and if neccessary I could just dial it down. There's a question for you whippersnapper.... help an old man out with an opinion.... :)
:thumb::thumb: LOL!!!! Sled, my Pops is 74 and also has tired eyes. You and he seem to be similar in how you would actually use it. We have parts of OR that are wide open enough to take advantage of the extra magnification sometimes. Most of the time our shots are within a couple hundred yards at most. Since he's putting it on his 7MM which is used more often in the wide open spaces rather than his 338-06 for the thick timber, he won't need to dial it down very low.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sled
I will say, that when the magnification is turned down past about 8x, you can't really see much of the reticle in the FFP model. Now, you can adjust the parallax down to 50 yards, but the field of view is rather small at 8x. However, if you've got a shot inside of 100 yards, I don't think you'd really have to be able to see the reticle all that well, so turning it down to 4x you could just put the whole reticle on your target and pull the trigger.
The reason I chose to go with the FFP for Pops was more about having a solid Zero Reset feature and had to have a good Zero Stop feature as well. He's not familiar at all with the newer dialable scopes, and I know he'd forget to set his turrets back to zero (I know I forget still). He doesn't really plan on shooting much over 600-700 yards and the 16x is plenty of Magnification for that distance and then some. Additionally, he's always held for wind and elevation, and with 30 MOA of internal W & E in the reticle, he won't have to dial if he doesn't want to.
Just my .02 from a young whippersnapper... LOL!!!!!!
Got the Nikon mounted and went to zero it at 100 yards today. The tracking is C**P!! We couldn't even get it zeroed and the .25 clicks are more like 1 minute clicks, but still not even consistent at that. Will be sending it in for repair already!! Guess I should have gone with an Athlon!!!!
The glass is fantastic though, that is the only thing I can say a positive thing about.
Oh, that is rough. I am sure they will take care of you!
Update: Ok, so the scope was returned and remounted on the 7MM... Scope will at least zero now. Still not sure how well it's going to track on the turrets yet. Have to wait for the flooding and rain to stop so we can get out to 500 yards at least and see if it will dial even close. I think the tracking on my Redfield Battlezone is actually better than the Nikon, but I will have to confirm that and get back to ya'll.
I am curious...does it appear to be your old scope, or do you think they just sent you a new one? And good luck!!!
It would be too hard for me to tell. as the original scope went from box, to rifle, back to box... It didn't have any blemishes to refer to identify that it was the original. And thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by celltech
Glad they seem to have taken care of you. I went ahead and went with that Gen 2 PST after reading your message...
Sled,Quote:
Originally Posted by Sled
I should have done the same I think... Seems to me they are the same scope basically, but Vortex seems to have sorted their QC a bit better. It was a toss up for me n which one was going to be the winner... Hell, even the Athlon would have been a better option most likely... I should have just ponied up another couple hundred and got another Sightron SIII. Live and learn as they say.
Got into a trashing session with one of their reps yesterday after he read one of my posts on Youtube. The dude tried telling me that the FX1000 was a "Phenomenal" scope and wanted to assist me with the return of the scope for repair. Told him that I had already done that and had received it back. I told him that I trusted the tracking on my $300 Redfield battle zone more than I trusted the tracking on Nikon's $695.00 FX1000.
Dude glossed right over that statement and again tried saying that it was the perfect scope and setup for the price range. SMH!!! I'm glad that I could help someone else avoid making the same mistake I did.
Hope that PST is tracking D.B.O.A. for you.... :thumb:
If you want some really good pricing on Sightrons check out manventureoutpost. The 6-24 SIII can be had for about $717 in SFP. Now the FFP model is about $840. But to my knowledge that's still $100-$200 less than most other places sell them for.
I was considering the FX1000 also, but this is the second thread I've come across that had a bad review of that scope. Thanks for the update!
I was all set on that scope, but cam across MANY threads critical of the tracking and other issues. Sage Rat's experience was enough to switch me over to the Vortex. And it's a shame, I really liked that Nikon 6x24 and had high hopes for it....Quote:
Originally Posted by obssd1958
Well, the Nikon FX1000 is gone... (Thank God)! Replacement Optic is the Athlon Ares BTR 4.5-27x50.... Will report back on results from this one as it just came in today (Updated version even). It was a little more expensive, but I felt I had to move up a tier from the Nikon...
Tracking is #1, that is why I always recommend the Burris XTR2 for an under $1000 scope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sled