Rifle Scopes Anyone run a 16x for their main optic? regrets?

W

Winny94

Major Hide Member
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter
    • Nov 19, 2013
    2,206
    1,027
    #1
    I have a chance to buy a atacr at a good price, but it's only 16x. Does anyone run a 16x as a main optic? How often are you wishing you had 20-25x?

    Edit: uses will primarily be steel work from 600-800. Paper work at 100/200. A few times a year I'll get access to 1200. A few local comps, but those are mainly for fun.
     
    Last edited:
    #3
    Prior to the S&B Ultra Short’s introduction I used S&B 4-16x42 on most all of my LR VARMINT and target rifles. Loved them. Now all switched to ultra shorts.

    I seldom shoot beyond 800 m. Most of my shots are 200-600 m due to terrain where I hunt.

    Might help if you post on current or intendent use.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: deersniper
    #4
    In a field or tactical environment you won’t give up much if any at 16x. If you get past 12—15 wobble can really dick with your head and make you do stupid stuff like jerk the trigger.

    20x and above is for shooting groups from a bench or pdogs.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: deersniper and ZG47A
    #5
    I shoot between 12-18x 99% of the time in a match. I only go above that if I'm shooting a know your limits type stage, or doing load work up at 100. Even prairie dogs, I shoot on about 15x so I can have field of view. I'm already scanning in my scope for the next victim before the red mist has settled!
     
    #7
    16x will get you out to 1000 easy shooting

    mirage on warm days and off your barrel/can will affect you fairly quickly approaching 20x

    that said, the flexibility of having more mag at your disposal is nice, especially if you spot for others

    if your eyes are not struggling or failing, 16x will serve you well if you focus on the area the rounds are hitting/landing instead of the entire picture from edge to edge

    how good is the deal? maybe the peace of mind of a higher mag range is worth the extra $$

    if 90% of your shooting is under 1000, you should be fine
     
    #9
    If you trying to hit that 12x12 plate first rd try..even up to 1200 yards even with 6x will do the job..if you trying shoot for group or doing load dev. That high magnification/sensitive reticle IMO is must..even to max power
     
    Last edited:
    #12
    I concur with the comments above. An overemphasis on magnification is a genuine rookie mistake (I've been there) - enhanced field of view, a flexible eyebox and staying on target under recoil are the rather large upsides of mid magnification ranges. Scopes that top out at 15x - 20x also tend to be smaller, and I enjoy not having to tote a baseball bat atop my rig if it can be avoided. As mentioned it's useful to have more magnification when group shooting but my scopes are rarely dialed above 18x
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Vargmat and tnichols
    #13
    We still do not know the intended use. Above is good advice with the limited information given. If shooting RF at 100 yards folks use 45+ power in the right conditions.
     
    #14
    I ran an SWFA fixed power 16x for a long time. I only shot it out to 800 yards, but I never felt like I needed more mag. I have an SWFA HD 5-20 now, and I typically run it around 16x-18x just because I like the reticle thickness a bit more at those levels. The difference between 16 and 20 isn't hugely significant. 25x is definitely a step up though.

    Unless you're shooting steel over 1,000 yards or group-shooting at 500+, then I think 16x is probably plenty, especially with good glass like an ATACR.
     
    #15
    I also use that same Hens 4-16x56 NH-1 which I haven’t found a better scope. 1k plus hasn’t been a issue as the glass quality is top notch in my eyes. $2500 for that scope is a deal!! I think I paid $3300 for mine when they came out.
     
    #16
    I have several 5-25 S&Bs and just recently went down in power to a 3-12x50 S&B on my AW. No regrets. I also shoot a lot with a 8 and 9 power scope out of my MK12s. Magnification isn't everything.
     
    #17
    8x at 1k on a B-27 Target no problem. Half the time on my 4-16 I turn them down to 10x when the mirage starts. I will take glass quality over high magnification any day.
     
    #18
    I used a SWFA 3-15 for a couple years and never really felt like I needed more. Ran a NF 5-25 and Kahles 6-24 last year on my .300wm, and ended up with a S&B 5-20 which is perfectly fine for me.
     
    #20
    I used to use 3-15X mag scopes for comps and when I first started PRS. I ran into too many stages where I needed more magnification. Often those were paper scored stages or even CB on the second day in low light conditions. Every point helps! I'd rather have a 20X minimum and be able to dial down for better FOV than be limited to only a 15X top end. I also usually tend to be around 12-15X for the majority of a PRS match, but still find a big advantage to more magnification being available when it's needed.
     
    #21
    For a field gun a 4-16 or 3-15 is perfect IMO. I've been hindered by "too much scope" in field situations more times than I can count because of limited FOV on lower mag. Sometimes 5x isn't low enough and a lot of FFP scopes tunnel or the reticle becomes useless at lower powers therefor I find optics with 6x and 7x+ erectors almost useless and ultimately consider them a marketing gimmick.

    For a comp gun 10x is the absolute minimum I ever find myself using and most FFP scopes have the reticle plenty visible from there up,and it's rare I ever go above 18x. Sometimes I do though and it's usually beyond 900 yards when shooting 6mm's and the berm is wet or muddy. It can be hard to impossible to spot misses in those conditions on lower magnification so this is where some phenomenal glass and the ability to crank up to 25x really shines.

    IMO the 4-16x42 ATACR F1 is probably the best all around optic out there, but it wouldn't be ideal for a PRS comp gun.
     
    #22
    Do the 50mm objective lenses provide a substantially better field of view compared to the 42mm in the ATACR 4-16 line? Has anyone compared them side by side?
     
    #25
    BallisticPrimate said:
    Really excellent review, @koshkin, thanks for taking the time - However, I did a double take when I read this: "Nightforce ATACR F1 is designed to compete against the Mark 6 and it is almost as short, but significantly longer." Assuming the edit is "significantly heavier". Cheers, BP
    Click to expand...

    Correct. I'll fix it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: skinnj1 and BallisticPrimate
    #29
    I have a Vortex Razor 2 3-18x50 on my 6.5 Creedmoor, and a Steiner Military 4-16x50 on my 308. The Steiner has been loaned out to most of my friends at one time or another for various reasons, and not one of them have thought they were at a disadvantage with 16x. It's one of my favorite optics.

    The Vortex stays around 15x most of the time.
     
    #34
    I think it’s a tough call. On one hand, the 4-16 ATACR is a fantastic scope, and would be one of my number one, top choices on a gasser, or a .308, where distances would be limited to about 1000 or 1200. I shoot my 5-25 and my 3-20 at about 16-18 very often. Mirage becomes an issue.

    However....it IS nice to have more available. Just because I don’t always USE the 20x or 25x, doesn’t mean I don’t like having it available. Nice to have it if you need it, than be topped out all the time at 16x.
    Based on your use of steel at 600-800, and paper at 100-200, I’d say go for it. It is a FANTASTIC optic. If I didn’t have my S&B 3-20, the NF ATACR 4-16 would be on my GA Precision gun for sure!
     
    #35
    I actually had to turn my NXS down to 5.5 to get enough holdover to hit the mile plate a couple weeks ago. It really wasn't as big of a problem I thought it might have been. In steel shooting I very seldom am over 16-18 and more often than not I'm in the 5-8 range to start and crank up if needed, which isn't really too often. Like most others above, I do like having the extra mag to punch groups on paper but after that I don't use it hardly ever.
     
    #36
    Under a k for big targets , 16 max is fine . ELR on good visibility days is a different matter ,
    I want all the mag I can use , and have shot on 40 x with great success . For paper , again
    high mag is great for group shooting or F class . If you are happy with half Moa , 16 will do .
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 2680
    #37
    Though it is nice to have more mag available, it is also nice to buy a scope appropriate for your use, including the weight and length (to a lesser extent, usually). I never let "nice to have features" interfere with getting the need to have features. The 4-16 ATACR is as good a scope as exists, for any kind of practical pursuit.

    At way less money, I have to say that I have been impressed with the Bushnell LRHSi 4.5-18 from GAP. The glass does not compare to the ATACR, so lowlight performance is very different, but as a reliable scope with great user interface and features, it seems to be a home run. Cheap, too.
     
    #39
    I've had most of the alpha glass but if forced to pick one scope for everything it would be difficult to skip 4-16 ATACR. Shot matches and hunted with that little scope and never felt it was lacking. That said I'm enjoying being able to dial up to 30x on my bushnell xrs 2 for load development. As always it helps to be accurate about what the intended use of an optic really is. When you know exactly what you need it's much easier to skip the fluff
     
    #40
    For me the Hensoldt 4-16X56 LT in H59 is the best all around scope out there. Superior glass, top notch illumination system, unreal eyebox, perfect tracking with very positive clicks, light weight, amazing low light performance and exceptional fit/finish. I’ve owned & used many high end optics and I’ve found that this scope/power range is everything I need.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BallisticPrimate
    #41
    I just picked up a couple of these. I have never seen such a good deal on a Hensoldt as this. When I ordered mine last week, they still had 18 left.
    IMG_20180504_191124491.jpg

    IMG_20180502_122653759_HDR.jpg
     
    #46
    As others have already said, it’s nice having the extra magnification on the top end, but definitely not necessary, especially when you’re rocking really good glass like the Atacr 4-16, Hennies, etc... With that said, I just got rid of my Atacr F1 4-16. I loved the scope and will own another one one day, but it was moa, and I’m switching all my scopes to mils. Anyways, 16x was plenty for me to consistently reach out to 1030 yds (farthest my range goes), but sometimes I just like that 25+ magnification for shooting tiny little groups.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    P
    Rifle Scopes Looking for an ELR/LR/range optic
    Replies
    4
    Views
    1K
    paigecm
    P
    nickw
    SOLD Sell / Trade: 2x Springfield Prodigy’s, 5” (custom w/ SRO) and 4.5” (unfired) *New Pricing*
    Replies
    2
    Views
    586
    nickw
    nickw
    LuckyDuck
    Has anyone here quit or "quit" tobacco?
    Replies
    108
    Views
    2K
    Rocketvapor
    Rocketvapor
    Y
    Rifle Scopes What $500-ish mil/mil 4-16x with decent glass?
    Replies
    53
    Views
    5K
    Aqua Mark
    A
    Glassaholic
    Rifle Scopes Alpha Class High Magnification 6-36/7-35 FFP Scope Review
    Replies
    117
    Views
    6K
    ReturnFire
    ReturnFire
    Top Bottom
    Back
    Home
    Forums
    Merch
    Alerts