Nightforce NX8 4x32x50

Am getting ready to upgrade the scope on my rifle to something more LR oriented. LR out to 1000 yards - primarily TARGET work.

Savage Low Profile Varminter - .243 Win. Exceptionally accurate (or maybe not exceptional? Hear lots of good things). Confirmed accurate out to 1000 yards with the SFP scope.

Have spent many decades using a SFP scope for all the advantages they provide. Stepping into serious dialing work - making 2 changes.

1. FFP
2. MIL instead of MOA.

Those 2 changes are final.

After a LOT of research to solidify the 2 changes above, have, for now anyway, narrowed my scope choices down to the NX8. Upper level Leupold and Vortex??

If anyone here has any hands-on experience with Nightforce or this scope in particular, I'd very much like to hear your thoughts - good, bad or ugly.

Thanks.

I’ve had a couple NF Benchrest scopes and I have a couple buddies that have 5-6 NXS scopes. Have never had issues with any of them and they all track perfectly. I expect no difference for the NX8..

In fact, I bought a 2.5-20x50 NX8 a couple months ago but have only had it on a couple range trips so far. It is also my first step into a FFP scope. So far it is very nice. And should be for the cost. Nightforce has the best zero stop system you will find on a scope. Glass is super clear.

Actually this afternoon I was considering whether or not to buy another NF, but just bought Vortex rangefinding binoculars instead. Will help my eyes immensely in a couple months shooting prarie dogs!

I would lean heavily towards the NF scope, especially over the Leupold. If by Vortex you're referring to the Razor, they're a proven scope but I would go NF first.

Those are all out of my budget range, but so far (knock on wood) my Athlon Ares ETR has been serving me well. Mine's the previous gen but does what I need it to do. Other rifle has a Gen 1 Vortex PST on it which is probably pushing 15 years old at this point and no issues. Many other's have had issues with the PST's and lower lines from Vortex failing, but at least they're covered under warranty. Only NF I have is a SHV which has been great, but it's not on the same level as their NXS and Benchrest scopes.

Tons of great options out there these days, just a matter of what specific features you want and how much you're looking to spend.

I've not used the Razor either and have a Gen II PST. It has performed well for me. At lower power my Diamondback 4-16x has also done well. But I would go with something different for a new scope. Could not afford a NF so I found a Burris XTR Fclass scope on sale and snagged it. It is better than the PST as long as you don't need all the reticles marks.

Step ONE- FORGET WHAT OTHERS TELL YOU or advise you to buy! There are just to many human variables when it comes to eyes and usage. If possible do some side by side see through comparisons outdoors!

Step 2 Can't get a comparison. Copy what the long range champs use. Especially the bench rest guys! I say bench rest as they are a mature breed of Americans and their eyes and physical make up vary widely which tells you allot about why they bought what they did. They have also been where you are and learned over time what works.

Step 3 Decide what you going to shoot at 1000 yards. If its Pdogs that's a far cry from trying to shoot a 5 in 1. Also will you shoot at other ranges, in other wards do you want a more versatile scope?

Step 4 You never talked reticle adjustment. It matters if your scope base is 0-MOA or 50-MOA.

Step 5 How good does that new scope track. Which is a must for 1,000 yard shots. Go online and see as somebody has done scope tracking for you model I am sure. Or make sure the one you purchased and has a good warranty and do the tracking yourself. If tracking sucks send it back for a refund.


You asked MIL or MOA...if you are used to inches then stay with MOA. If you you can forget all about inches and how inches work for accuracy, then choose MIL and never look back. People think MIL is bad because they try to convert to MOA from MIL or vice versa. No more 4 clicks to make an inch in MOA...its 10 click equals I mil, so instead of coming up in inches you just come up in mils. That why MILS are more accurate because the divisions on a turret is smaller. Its especially true for judging wind. Think of mils as micro adjustments and MOA as coarse adjustments when compared on the range.

Lastly call the manufacturer of the scope that interest you. You may get a discount especially if Military. For example Sightron Factory direct last year offered me 35% off as I was a vet.

Gentlemen all........thank you for your input. Helpful would be an understatement.

LDSILLS said: "Think of mils as micro adjustments and MOA as coarse adjustments..." Well said and thank you for your service. Took me awhile to figure out the basics on MIL vs MOA. And why I chose MIL.

For anyone - like me - who is trying to better understand MOA vs MIL - IMHO - I thought this was worth watching, Part I & II:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRMr0pCV5dI


I will be ordering the NX8 4x32x50 FFP / MIL later today.

Thanks again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taidog1

Gentlemen all........thank you for your input. Helpful would be an understatement.

LDSILLS said: "Think of mils as micro adjustments and MOA as coarse adjustments..." Well said and thank you for your service. Took me awhile to figure out the basics on MIL vs MOA. And why I chose MIL.

For anyone - like me - who is trying to better understand MOA vs MIL - IMHO - I thought this was worth watching, Part I & II:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRMr0pCV5dI


I will be ordering the NX8 4x32x50 FFP / MIL later today.

Thanks again.

---

Remember the frustration when I bough my first MIL reticle scope, like learning to walk all over again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilC

Remember the frustration when I bough my first MIL reticle scope, like learning to walk all over again.

---

Phil...being brutally honest here...I don't know if I can learn MIL. Yes, I know, a gazillion shooters all favor MIL and for all the right reasons. I get that. So, go MIL...right? I AM willing to do the work and the dealer is trying to find my NX8 in MIL........ but...

Math is my nemesis. << Seriously. My entire life is structured around the KISS principle.

Example: So, all set up LR @ 860 yards, my spotter calls my miss in FEET: 1 ft high & 1 ft left.

I know how to dial that elevation and hold for wind in MOA. MIL? ? ? ? ? Are all these skilled spotters (MIL) calling my miss in MIL's (meters)......or feet?

If the spotter calls it in meters - with my MIL FFP scope - and I don't have a DOPE card to rely on - how do I dial that elevation turret to correct that miss in MILs?? It seems to me - somewhere in this working formula - somebody has to do some quick math using MIL. If I can't figure all this out fairly soon - I'll get an MOA reticle and live with all the MOA disadvantages. < That's probably too strong a word. Let's just say I'd lose many of the MIL advantages.

While I don't have any desire to compete with my LR gear - I work very hard to get all my gear set up properly. This vacillating between MOA & MIL is driving me nuts.

The shooter vote is in. It's unanimous, go with MIL. Reality tells me...be very careful with the MANY $$$ I'm spending. I simply can NOT afford to make a mistake here.

FWIW - just now learned that Zeiss has a relatively new intermediate price LR scope. Other's knew, I didn't. Didn't show up when I Googled Zeiss FFP scopes??? Just the $3K and up scopes showd up. I'm a Zeiss Conquest V4 fan. Will investigate this S3 before I push the purchase button. Owner / user reviews all seem positive.
ZEISS S3 4-25x50

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDSILLS

Step ONE- FORGET WHAT OTHERS TELL YOU or advise you to buy! There are just to many human variables when it comes to eyes and usage. If possible do some side by side see through comparisons outdoors!


You asked MIL or MOA...if you are used to inches then stay with MOA. If you you can forget all about inches and how inches work for accuracy, then choose MIL and never look back. People think MIL is bad because they try to convert to MOA from MIL or vice versa. No more 4 clicks to make an inch in MOA...its 10 click equals I mil, so instead of coming up in inches you just come up in mils. That why MILS are more accurate because the divisions on a turret is smaller. Its especially true for judging wind. Think of mils as micro adjustments and MOA as coarse adjustments when compared on the range.
.

---

Respectfully- this is very wrong...

.25 moa is a smaller adjustment than .1 mil (.1 mil is closer to a 1/3 moa)... Also- you do not come up in inches with moa- you come up with an angular adjustment- just exactly the same as you do with a mil adjustment. They work the exact same- they are both angular adjustments. And how that would make any difference with wind?

I prefer moa because off the top of my head I know my drops for an average bullet out to 1000- and if I didn't have my cards or a calculator could still get on target quick with very little thinking- but that doesn't mean it's a better system- just one that I'm more familiar with. And could easily learn the same for mil....

I 'grew up' with the mil system in the Army. Bino reticles and scopes were all marked in mils so any spotter would give correction in the same language. My use was on tanks so ranges were a bit different :) If you use a spotter on a regular basis then use whatever reticle they use for targeting information. And do get adjust knobs the same as your reticle.

On rifles I like MOA mainly because most of my targets are marked in inches and sometimes MOA. NRA targets as an example. A side benefit is the MOA marked scopes are sometimes less expensive.

Other than convenience there really is not an accuracy advantage.

Thank you.

Good replies all - sometimes agreeing to disagree which is the way it is supposed to be. Glad to be a new member here, really am.

Because I'm familiar with the Zeiss Conquest V4 in MOA - and I want to learn MIL - I ordered the S3 4x25x50 in MIL. Am willing to do the work needed to make the transition over to MIL. Time will tell and I'm confident in the scope. The rest will be up to me and I'm committed to learning.

Thanks again.

NX8 4-32 is one of my favorite scopes along with NF ATACR, BEAST and a NF Competition. Been messing with all sorts of scopes for over 60 years and they just keep getting better. Whatta Hobby!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NF1E

NX8 4-32 is one of my favorite scopes along with NF ATACR, BEAST and a NF Competition. Been messing with all sorts of scopes for over 60 years and they just keep getting better. Whatta Hobby!

---

Nicely done Sir.

The reason I went with Zeiss over Nightforce was because I am more familiar with Zeiis adjustment dials. Was NOT an easy choice between the two.

The NightForce Competition 15-55x52mm is another great scope for those shooting for tiny targets. Not cheap, but one heck of a nice scope. Whatta Hobby!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NF1E

The NightForce Competition 15-55x52mm is another great scope for those shooting for tiny targets. Not cheap, but one heck of a nice scope. Whatta Hobby!

---

Sir,

Couldn't agree with you more!!! That scope, however, its Target advantages don't very well transfer over to hunting. The scope I chose will be asked to do both.

Cheers.

Very good. Never even considered hunting use as I haven't done any of that for at least 30 years. Whatta Hobby!