Rifle Scopes anything as good as NF for less money?

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

I have a NF NXS and a Super Sniper. If we are speaking purely on glass quality and tracking, the Super Sniper is 95% as good but at 1/5th the price.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

I have tested 3 scopes side by side
1) NightFoce NXS 3.5-15x50, ill, $1700
2) Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x40, ill, $1100
3) SWFA SuperSniper 10x42, $300


Clarity -
All are so very close I am going to declare no difference. Don't think this is just a looking at a human silhouette at 100 yards on a bright sunny day testing either. My test was a lot more extensive. I tested in low light conditions (dusk and under street lamps). also viewed objects with low contrast to see if I could tell a difference. If I had to split hairs then I will declare the NF the winner, but it is only slightly brighter than the Leupold and Leupold only slightly brighter than the SS. Again I am splitting hairs here. The SS under street lamps was hard to use because it does not have an illuminated reticle, but it's glass quality was really indistinguishable from the others.

Turrets -
My NF are nice, fast turrets and zero stop. The clicks are also very positive. The SS are not bad and also positive, but no zero stop option. The Leupold is slightly spongier than the SS, but still very doable. The SS not having a side focus made it a little tougher to focus, but not impossible and something you can easily get use to.

Reticles -
My NF has an MOA reticle with matching MOA knobs so it wins easily. Leupold has he TMR reticle, which I like a lot and actually prefer over the NF NPR reticle. However, the TMR is a Mil reticle and not MOA. My SS has a plain mildot reticle, not spectacular, but it works. What really sucks about both the SS and Leupold is that the math for them is a lot harder because of the MOA knobs with Mil reticle. Once you memorize a table though, it's not so bad and really no calculations needed. Tracking for all the scopes seems equal, that is 1 MOA adjustment is very close to 1 MOA.

Bottom Line -
I know it's not fair comparing expensive scopes with inexpensive scopes, variable mag to non-variable, 10x to 15x, illuminated reticle to non-illuminated. We all know who is going to win this comparison. However, I do think a comparison is needed to see how much you are getting for the buck. The NF though the nicest, will not make you a better shooter. The Leupold is a nice scope too, but it is way over price for something that does not have matching reticle with matching knobs. If you take away the features and the extras and just gauge on glass quality and tracking ability, I will say all are EQUAL.

Sorry to offend all the juice drinkers.

.308 Precision Family Group Photo

 

[brand692]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have tested 3 scopes side by side
1) NightFoce NXS 3.5-15x50, ill, $1700
2) Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x40, ill, $1100
3) SWFA SuperSniper 10x42, $300


Clarity -
All are so very close I am going to declare no difference. Don't think this is just a looking at a human silhouette at 100 yards on a bright sunny day testing either. My test was a lot more extensive. I tested in low light conditions (dusk and under street lamps). also viewed objects with low contrast to see if I could tell a difference. If I had to split hairs then I will declare the NF the winner, but it is only slightly brighter than the Leupold and Leupold only slightly brighter than the SS. Again I am splitting hairs here. The SS under street lamps was hard to use because it does not have an illuminated reticle, but it's glass quality was really indistinguishable from the others.

Turrets -
My NF are nice, fast turrets and zero stop. The clicks are also very positive. The SS are not bad and also positive, but no zero stop option. The Leupold is slightly spongier than the SS, but still very doable. The SS not having a side focus made it a little tougher to focus, but not impossible and something you can easily get use to.

Reticles -
My NF has an MOA reticle with matching MOA knobs so it wins easily. Leupold has he TMR reticle, which I like a lot and actually prefer over the NF NPR reticle. However, the TMR is a Mil reticle and not MOA. My SS has a plain mildot reticle, not spectacular, but it works. What really sucks about both the SS and Leupold is that the math for them is a lot harder because of the MOA knobs with Mil reticle. Once you memorize a table though, it's not so bad and really no calculations needed. Tracking for all the scopes seems equal, that is 1 MOA adjustment is very close to 1 MOA.

Bottom Line -
I know it's not fair comparing expensive scopes with inexpensive scopes, variable mag to non-variable, 10x to 15x, illuminated reticle to non-illuminated. We all know who is going to win this comparison. However, I do think a comparison is needed to see how much you are getting for the buck. The NF though the nicest, will not make you a better shooter. The Leupold is a nice scope too, but it is way over price for something that does not have matching reticle with matching knobs. If you take away the features and the extras and just gauge on glass quality and tracking ability, I will say all are EQUAL.

Sorry to offend all the juice drinkers.

.308 Precision Family Group Photo

</div></div>

Man, this has got to one of the goofiest reviews I've seen. I hope you didn't write this as a serious review and that it is some kind of joke.

First you evaluate the glass, which personally, I hate. It is very subjective and varies greatly person to person. But you rate them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Then you rate the turrets. You put them:

NF 1st
SS 2nd
Leupy 3rd

Next the reticles. Somehow tracking came into play here, not sure why as that has nothing to do with the reticles. But ok. You put them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Honestly, your "Bottom Line" evaluation is the one of the most asinine things I've read for a while, although the 2010ers have set new expectations for asininity. You openly admit that you did a faulted test, compared optics that had a predetermined outcome, yet rate them all the Equal? Then you say that this is a value for a buck. If you evaluate something on its value wouldn't you want to factor in all the options? You say to take away the features and extras and just gauge glass quality and tracking then they are all EQUAL?

In that line of thinking, an 75 Chevy C10 and a Ferrari are EQUAL. Take away the features and they are just both vehicles right? One won't make a person a better driver. Might as well own the C10 when it will get the job done just as well? Screw the fact that one is a truck, ones a sports car, one has 300hp, the other has 850hp, etc etc. They both have engines and both burn gas so they are EQUAL.

 

[selfbowhunter]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

brand669,

why dont you cut the guy some slack. he was trying to be helpful and i appreciate it. he evidently doesnt have your qualifications to test scopes but he made an attempt. what did you do?

chuck

 

[CK_32]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Man, this has got to one of the goofiest reviews I've seen. I hope you didn't write this as a serious review and that it is some kind of joke.

First you evaluate the glass, which personally, I hate. It is very subjective and varies greatly person to person. But you rate them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Then you rate the turrets. You put them:

NF 1st
SS 2nd
Leupy 3rd

Next the reticles. Somehow tracking came into play here, not sure why as that has nothing to do with the reticles. But ok. You put them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Honestly, your "Bottom Line" evaluation is the one of the most asinine things I've read for a while, although the 2010ers have set new expectations for asininity. You openly admit that you did a faulted test, compared optics that had a predetermined outcome, yet rate them all the Equal? Then you say that this is a value for a buck. If you evaluate something on its value wouldn't you want to factor in all the options? You say to take away the features and extras and just gauge glass quality and tracking then they are all EQUAL?

In that line of thinking, an 75 Chevy C10 and a Ferrari are EQUAL. Take away the features and they are just both vehicles right? One won't make a person a better driver. Might as well own the C10 when it will get the job done just as well? Screw the fact that one is a truck, ones a sports car, one has 300hp, the other has 850hp, etc etc. They both have engines and both burn gas so they are EQUAL. </div></div>

Yea bud get off your high horse. Thats like saying if I have a howa 1500.. remington 700 5r and a Stag arms 20" and I compair them... Its just what I have and the differences I saw from all levels cheap to expencive and noticed differences to show the value of high end compaired to lower end products to show how far behind your product might be if you go with a lower product than the NF. It might not have been up to par for you but then again he's not a professional product tester. Your might be but were not. He just tried helping the OP with his question with what he had avalable. No need to bury the guy.

Sometimes the ignorance of this forum amazes me.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Man, this has got to one of the goofiest reviews I've seen. I hope you didn't write this as a serious review and that it is some kind of joke.

First you evaluate the glass, which personally, I hate. It is very subjective and varies greatly person to person. But you rate them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Then you rate the turrets. You put them:

NF 1st
SS 2nd
Leupy 3rd

Next the reticles. Somehow tracking came into play here, not sure why as that has nothing to do with the reticles. But ok. You put them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Honestly, your "Bottom Line" evaluation is the one of the most asinine things I've read for a while, although the 2010ers have set new expectations for asininity. You openly admit that you did a faulted test, compared optics that had a predetermined outcome, yet rate them all the Equal? Then you say that this is a value for a buck. If you evaluate something on its value wouldn't you want to factor in all the options? You say to take away the features and extras and just gauge glass quality and tracking then they are all EQUAL?

In that line of thinking, an 75 Chevy C10 and a Ferrari are EQUAL. Take away the features and they are just both vehicles right? One won't make a person a better driver. Might as well own the C10 when it will get the job done just as well? Screw the fact that one is a truck, ones a sports car, one has 300hp, the other has 850hp, etc etc. They both have engines and both burn gas so they are EQUAL. </div></div>


Like I said, I apologized in advance for offending all the juice drinkers. Will it help if I say "I am sorry again"??

I was evaluating scopes on rifles and what you get for the price.

Now if I was evaluating Ferrari F50's vs Ford F150 , I will make sure to do:
1) an off-road test between the 2 and log which one is better for off-road and dirt trails.
2) A grocery store run test to see which is better for this task.
3) A picking up girls from the strip test to see which one is easier to pick up girls with.

I will keep that in mind if I ever do a Ferrari vs. F150 Test. HOWEVER, this tested involved rifle scopes on rifle shooting .308 bullets.

BTW, I know a little bit about cars and motorcycles and going on the track.

1st place Baby!!!!

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

How about a Ferrari F40 ($350,000) vs. a Souped up Miata (~$50,000)

Well let's just say The Ferrari had slight faster lap times despite having 3 times the Horsepower. That's if the Ferrari did not crap on itself and break down.

However, as far as gathering a crowd of Hot Chicks, the Ferrari easily wins! YAY FERRARI!

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

Tomorrow the comparison will involve Donuts.

Hostess vs. Entemanns' vs. Dunkin-Donuts

I am currently adding up the points as we speak. I'll post my results shortly.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

Is this guy brand692 for real?

He is a Professional Product Tester?

What is a professional product tester?

Do you get a tab for that like the Ranger tab?

 

[brand692]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

I don't intend getting in a pissing match. I'm not a koolaid drinker. I have no particular alliance to any MFG, ever. I've gone between them all the different optic mfgs one point or another.

To selfbowhunter, I am not a qualified optics tester, I assure you. I also don't expect to be cut any slack. It wasn't that long ago that guys were doing scope reviews through bay windows-and this was of high end optics. Are you insinuating that that individual should not be corrected or his review be critiqued? Or is because I came off to harsh? ETA: I sincerely hope you do not buy a SS thinking it is equal to NF. There are lots of good options out there where you don't have to spend 1500 for NF quality, and still get the repeatablility. But you know, and I know, that a SS is NOT equal to a NF.

CK_32, I'm not on a high horse. But I reread my post and totally stand by what I said. How was I being ignorant? He compared three completely different optics with completely different options, and rated them equal. Is a NF and a Leupold and a Super Sniper equal? Factually, no, they aren't, regardless of what anyone says.

To EC, yes, I'm for real. I said it before, I'm not a product tester. I very happy for you and your trophies, but it doesn't change your post. Feel free to make the doughnut comparison. Like the car and motorcycle pics, its just not relevant. Feel free to join me at Leguna Seca. And I'm honest about that. I'm not here to make enemies. I get tix to all the major events and you are more than welcome to come with. Since your profile is not complete, I have no idea where you are located, but the offer stands. Also, if you are close, we can make a weekend out of it. They have a set of ranges there too.

I'll drop it now after I say this. EC, you can back off you Tab comment. I don't appreciate that, and you if you want to see what it takes to earn a Tab, feel free to join and try yourself. RLTW.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't intend getting in a pissing match. I'm not a koolaid drinker. I have no particular alliance to any MFG, ever. I've gone between them all the different optic mfgs one point or another.

To selfbowhunter, I am not a qualified optics tester, I assure you. I also don't expect to be cut any slack. It wasn't that long ago that guys were doing scope reviews through bay windows-and this was of high end optics. Are you insinuating that that individual should not be corrected or his review be critiqued? Or is because I came off to harsh? ETA: I sincerely hope you do not buy a SS thinking it is equal to NF. There are lots of good options out there where you don't have to spend 1500 for NF quality, and still get the repeatablility. But you know, and I know, that a SS is NOT equal to a NF.

CK_32, I'm not on a high horse. But I reread my post and totally stand by what I said. How was I being ignorant? He compared three completely different optics with completely different options, and rated them equal. Is a NF and a Leupold and a Super Sniper equal? Factually, no, they aren't, regardless of what anyone says.

To EC, yes, I'm for real. I said it before, I'm not a product tester. I very happy for you and your trophies, but it doesn't change your post. Feel free to make the doughnut comparison. Like the car and motorcycle pics, its just not relevant. Feel free to join me at Leguna Seca. And I'm honest about that. I'm not here to make enemies. I get tix to all the major events and you are more than welcome to come with. Since your profile is not complete, I have no idea where you are located, but the offer stands. Also, if you are close, we can make a weekend out of it. They have a set of ranges there too.

I'll drop it now after I say this. EC, you can back off you Tab comment. I don't appreciate that, and you if you want to see what it takes to earn a Tab, feel free to join and try yourself. RLTW. </div></div>


Well I was not aware all my reviews had to go through you. I am not in Monterey, I live in the Las Vegas area and I do go to local shoots sometimes. You are welcome to come out here anytime to meet up. Maybe you can share with me that juice you have been drinking.

Also what did I say in my own testing that was so outlandish? I was just comparing expensive scopes to inexpensive scopes. I do believe you CAN compare APPLES to ORANGES despite what all the juice drinkers say.

Take no offense when I say your response has "Juice Drinker" all over it. There is nothing wrong with being a juice drinker, and I believe you have to proud of what you are, and have to believe whatever it takes so you can sleep better at night.

I do think the glass is so close to equal between all of them that it is indistinguishable.

The SS did track nicely, and I was able to get close on the first shot, and adjust making hits on the 2nd shot even with 20 mph crosswinds.

If the new SS had side focus, matching knobs, and an illuminated reticle, I would be all over it. It does not so my next scope will be a Burris 3-12x44 because it has all the goods I look for in a scope, side focus, illumination, good glass, knobs that matches reticle, and it even has FFP.

I still would rather have the NF, because I like pretty labels and "perceived" quality just like the next guy. I figure it's my money so I can blow it on expensive scopes with pretty labels like NF if I want to, and not because I NEED IT. Heck if my wife can buy expensive purses that looks pretty, than I should be able to buy scopes that have pretty labels on them.

Your opinion is your own like mine is my own, I will never personally attack anyone for thinking differently than me.

However, I do expect to get personally attack by people like you if I do think different. Not only do I expect it, I look forward to it

You started this fire so don't expect me to put it out. I am not a FIREMAN, I don't put out fires that others started, and I have no problems throwing gasoline on it to keep it going.

 

[brand692]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well I was not aware all my reviews had to go through you. I am not in Monterey, I live in the Las Vegas area and I do go to local shoots sometimes. You are welcome to come out here anytime to meet up. Maybe you can share with me that juice you have been drinking.</div></div>

Your reviews do not have to go through anyone. Feel free to post all you want! Expect criticism on them. I'll shoot you a PM on a Vegas meet up. My brother is up there at Nellis and we visit off and on. He is in AF right now, but when he gets back we can see if we can work something out.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also what did I say in my own testing that was so outlandish? I was just comparing expensive scopes to inexpensive scopes. I do believe you CAN compare APPLES to ORANGES despite what all the juice drinkers say.</div></div>

I didn't say it was outlandish, I said asinine. But here is why:
1. You tested three optics on three different rifles. You did not remove the variable of the rifles. You can't expect a suppressed AR-10, M1A, and a Bolt rifle to have the same effects on a optic or shoot the same groups.
2. You have no empirical evidence to prove your conclusions. You say things seem better, turrets feel better, all of which is subjective. How about some hard tests? Like box testing? Or print up some resolution charts and see how they compare instead? Even though you do them with your own eye, you are using the same eye on three.
3. You didn't quantify the test. In reality, you need should have done all three at 10x since the SS is fixed. But did you? You didn't say. Maybe, maybe not.
4. Comparing apples to oranges all you want. But don't expect everyone to agree with it. It a poor comparison.

Do me a favor. Look up user name ILya. Read his optics reviews. Base yours off of those.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take no offense when I say your response has "Juice Drinker" all over it. There is nothing wrong with being a juice drinker, and I believe you have to proud of what you are, and have to believe whatever it takes so you can sleep better at night.</div></div>

I thougth I made it clear, the only thing you did that offended me was the off color Tab comment. Earn one. Then make a comment like that.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I do think the glass is so close to equal between all of them that it is indistinguishable. </div></div>

Good for you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The SS did track nicely, and I was able to get close on the first shot, and adjust making hits on the 2nd shot even with 20 mph crosswinds. </div></div>

Here is another issue. Why would you do a test on optics when there is a 20mph wind? That is a variable you would want to remove, not use to justify a scopes tracking ability.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If the new SS had side focus, matching knobs, and an illuminated reticle, I would be all over it. It does not so my next scope will be a Burris 3-12x44 because it has all the goods I look for in a scope, side focus, illumination, good glass, knobs that matches reticle, and it even has FFP. </div></div>

Then why didn't you say this in the review? This is more logical than the comparison and all three are EQUAL comment.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I still would rather have the NF, because I like pretty labels and "perceived" quality just like the next guy. I figure it's my money so I can blow it on expensive scopes with pretty labels like NF if I want to, and not because I NEED IT. Heck if my wife can buy expensive purses that looks pretty, than I should be able to buy scopes that have pretty labels on them.</div></div>

Feel free to buy all the pretty stuff you want. However, the quality of a NF is not perceived. It is a reality.

Likewise the quality of the SS is a reality, not a perception-<span style="font-weight: bold">at its price point</span>. You are right its a good scope, <span style="font-style: italic">at the price point.</span> But its just not on par with NF.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your opinion is your own like mine is my own, I will never personally attack anyone for thinking differently than me.

However, I do expect to get personally attack by people like you if I do think different. Not only do I expect it, I look forward to it

You started this fire so don't expect me to put it out. I am not a FIREMAN, I don't put out fires that others started, and I have no problems throwing gasoline on it to keep it going. </div></div>

Flame away brother. You just further discredit yourself.

You are right. I started it. It's only right that I stop it. No more posts in this thread for me.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I didn't say it was outlandish, I said asinine. But here is why:
1. You tested three optics on three different rifles. You did not remove the variable of the rifles. You can't expect a suppressed AR-10, M1A, and a Bolt rifle to have the same effects on a optic or shoot the same groups.
2. You have no empirical evidence to prove your conclusions. You say things seem better, turrets feel better, all of which is subjective. How about some hard tests? Like box testing? Or print up some resolution charts and see how they compare instead? Even though you do them with your own eye, you are using the same eye on three.
3. You didn't quantify the test. In reality, you need should have done all three at 10x since the SS is fixed. But did you? You didn't say. Maybe, maybe not.
4. Comparing apples to oranges all you want. But don't expect everyone to agree with it. It a poor comparison.

Do me a favor. Look up user name ILya. Read his optics reviews. Base yours off of those.
</div></div>

1) Why would I remove the optics? What the heck am I trying to prove here? I was just shooting bullets and the scopes did their part in getting the bullets to arrive where they were suppose to.

2) Why do I need imperical data to use a scope? Am I trying to prove a mathematical proof or something? Are not all reviews subjective? All the scopes were doable and they all worked. My conclusion is the NF is not $1400 better than the SS. If $300 can buy me 100 gallons of gas, then I expect $1700 to buy me 567 gallons. But it does not work like that with scopes. $300 will get you 100 gallons while $1700 gets you about 120 gallons.

3) I put them all on the highest mag. If you were curious why did you not ask? Oh I get it, you don't like it when we use glass quality to gauge a scope. Maybe you should make a list for me? Now that I know that you are the authority on scope reviews, as well as car reviews too. Oh and I'll make sure I get imperical data whatever the hell that is. Can I buy Imperical data calculator at Walmart?

4) Thank you for your input, and I will continue to compare apples to oranges. and continue to make it poor comparisons. I fully expect you to say they are poor comparison. As a matter of fact, if you disagree with me that is how I know everything is normal. If I ever finding you agree with me I think that is God's way of telling me I need to shoot myself in the head.

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I thougth I made it clear, the only thing you did that offended me was the off color Tab comment. Earn one. Then make a comment like that.
</div></div>

Well what do you need to be an expert scope reviewer? I guess not a tab? Oh yeah that's right you need an Imperical Data Calculator, right?

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Here is another issue. Why would you do a test on optics when there is a 20mph wind? That is a variable you would want to remove, not use to justify a scopes tracking ability.
</div></div>

Oh I am sorry, I tested the scope outdoors on a random day. Was I suppose to test it indoors? Was I suppose to test it on the moon where there is no wind and gravity is a lot less? I had no ideas there were a list of rules when you test scopes. Now I know. Can I get a copy of the rule book from you?

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Then why didn't you say this in the review? This is more logical than the comparison and all three are EQUAL comment.
</div></div>

You need to go back and read my review. For your convenience and because I am a nice guy. I will repeat what I said...

<span style="font-weight: bold">"Bottom Line -
I know it's not fair comparing expensive scopes with inexpensive scopes, variable mag to non-variable, 10x to 15x, illuminated reticle to non-illuminated. We all know who is going to win this comparison. However, I do think a comparison is needed to see how much you are getting for the buck. The NF though the nicest, will not make you a better shooter. The Leupold is a nice scope too, but it is way over price for something that does not have matching reticle with matching knobs. If you take away the features and the extras and just gauge on glass quality and tracking ability, I will say all are EQUAL."</span>

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Feel free to buy all the pretty stuff you want. However, the quality of a NF is not perceived. It is a reality.
</div></div>

To me they both work. That is all I know. The NightForce has the prettier label. Also to me the NightForce has better perceived quality because of what people say. Not what I experienced. It would be a shame my NF breaks before my SuperSniper. I wonder what Juice Drinkers like you would say then?

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Flame away brother. You just further discredit yourself.

You are right. I started it. It's only right that I stop it. No more posts in this thread for me. </div></div>

I don't mind "discrediting myself". Now if it affects my paycheck, or makes my wife stop loving me less, then I might be worried if I "discredit myself"

Don't worry man, you can keep on going if you want, I would love to hear more of what you have to say. I am trying to enter into the world of Juice Drinkers and I need to better understand how you guys think!

 

[19dsniper]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

I dont know why this has turned into a nut slapping contest.. I am also looking for a good scope that i can use on my .308 out to 1000. Then i can take my NF and put it on my .300 Anyone else have OPINIONS on SCOPES? I am leaning more towards the 4500-6500 series.

 

[neeley205]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

If<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19dsniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I dont know why this has turned into a nut slapping contest.. I am also looking for a good scope that i can use on my .308 out to 1000. Then i can take my NF and put it on my .300 Anyone else have OPINIONS on SCOPES? I am leaning more towards the 4500-6500 series. </div></div>

^^^ agreed. Its ok for everyone to have their oppinions. But this forum is repeatedly having legitimate threads with honest questions ruined by people having dick measuring contests.
Its really a shame and its unfortunate.

 

[BasraBoy]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Savage110</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If anything was as good as a Nightforce for less money, why would people buy NF's? Think about that one...</div></div>

Words of wisdom, quietly spoken.

And if the new ones are out of reach....look for a second hand one.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: chansen49</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lexington</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fdkay</div><div class="ubbcode-body">IOR, even has better glass. </div></div>

The IOR I owned several years ago strained my eyes like a bad pair of glasses - and I wear glasses. </div></div>

I had a fixed 6x IOR that you could hardly even look through.. The most unforgiving eye relief I have ever tried. Sold it for a loss.

</div></div>

Glad I'm not the only one who found the IOR experience "disappointing".

As Frank implied...the internals are piss poor. The POS I had fell apart when I loosened of the screws to zero the turrets....not even IOR service could work out how to fix it.

I ended up getting a refund.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 19dsniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I dont know why this has turned into a nut slapping contest..</div></div>

Well at least it's one way for some guys to get close to boltripper's post count!!

P.S. Eric, although I've always liked the F40, I'd rather have seen pics of the babes it pulls! That would be a great test of the effectivness of the kit in acheiving the desired results. Just a pic of it effortlessly eating up some lame old cabrio (TR6?) doesn't do it for me, it's kind of expected

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

This is just guys being guys.

Most guys want to better than the next guy. One way they think they become better is if they discredit the other guy. Then if they can't argue the point, they personally attack the guy. This is how forums, as well as life in general works.

For me I have a very average size dick, so no need to compete in a dick measuring contest. However, I have no problems fueling a fire

 

[EricCartmann]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

I think most should ignore this post right here, I don't want to ruffle any feathers...

If I may play Psychiatrist

..

1) Egos is what drives men to be better, they all want to be better than the next guy. This is just guys being guys.

2) Most People take a disagreement as a personal insult, so in turn they feel a giving a personal attack back is warranted. For them, this is the best way to argue a disagreement.

3) Most people always see's themselves as the victim and not the attacker. Take any thread for instance, a person will have no problem handing out personal attacks, but when someone else attacks him back, he put his hand in the air and cry "foul".

4) Forums have herd leaders, and these guys see themselves as warriors. So when someone comes on here and insults his teachings, he feels a duel is in order. He has his honor he has to protect and a herd he must maintain.

5) People in general have a hard time seeing things as DIFFERENT. They only see right and wrong. They are right and you are wrong. They really hate it when your view of the world conflicts with their view of the world. To them DIFFERENT does not exist, just right and wrong.

 

[crnkin]

Re: anything as good as NF for less money?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brand692</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have tested 3 scopes side by side
1) NightFoce NXS 3.5-15x50, ill, $1700
2) Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x40, ill, $1100
3) SWFA SuperSniper 10x42, $300


Clarity -
All are so very close I am going to declare no difference. Don't think this is just a looking at a human silhouette at 100 yards on a bright sunny day testing either. My test was a lot more extensive. I tested in low light conditions (dusk and under street lamps). also viewed objects with low contrast to see if I could tell a difference. If I had to split hairs then I will declare the NF the winner, but it is only slightly brighter than the Leupold and Leupold only slightly brighter than the SS. Again I am splitting hairs here. The SS under street lamps was hard to use because it does not have an illuminated reticle, but it's glass quality was really indistinguishable from the others.

Turrets -
My NF are nice, fast turrets and zero stop. The clicks are also very positive. The SS are not bad and also positive, but no zero stop option. The Leupold is slightly spongier than the SS, but still very doable. The SS not having a side focus made it a little tougher to focus, but not impossible and something you can easily get use to.

Reticles -
My NF has an MOA reticle with matching MOA knobs so it wins easily. Leupold has he TMR reticle, which I like a lot and actually prefer over the NF NPR reticle. However, the TMR is a Mil reticle and not MOA. My SS has a plain mildot reticle, not spectacular, but it works. What really sucks about both the SS and Leupold is that the math for them is a lot harder because of the MOA knobs with Mil reticle. Once you memorize a table though, it's not so bad and really no calculations needed. Tracking for all the scopes seems equal, that is 1 MOA adjustment is very close to 1 MOA.

Bottom Line -
I know it's not fair comparing expensive scopes with inexpensive scopes, variable mag to non-variable, 10x to 15x, illuminated reticle to non-illuminated. We all know who is going to win this comparison. However, I do think a comparison is needed to see how much you are getting for the buck. The NF though the nicest, will not make you a better shooter. The Leupold is a nice scope too, but it is way over price for something that does not have matching reticle with matching knobs. If you take away the features and the extras and just gauge on glass quality and tracking ability, I will say all are EQUAL.

Sorry to offend all the juice drinkers.

.308 Precision Family Group Photo

</div></div>

Man, this has got to one of the goofiest reviews I've seen. I hope you didn't write this as a serious review and that it is some kind of joke.

First you evaluate the glass, which personally, I hate. It is very subjective and varies greatly person to person. But you rate them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Then you rate the turrets. You put them:

NF 1st
SS 2nd
Leupy 3rd

Next the reticles. Somehow tracking came into play here, not sure why as that has nothing to do with the reticles. But ok. You put them:

NF 1st
Leupy 2nd
SS 3rd

Honestly, your "Bottom Line" evaluation is the one of the most asinine things I've read for a while, although the 2010ers have set new expectations for asininity. You openly admit that you did a faulted test, compared optics that had a predetermined outcome, yet rate them all the Equal? Then you say that this is a value for a buck. If you evaluate something on its value wouldn't you want to factor in all the options? You say to take away the features and extras and just gauge glass quality and tracking then they are all EQUAL?

In that line of thinking, an 75 Chevy C10 and a Ferrari are EQUAL. Take away the features and they are just both vehicles right? One won't make a person a better driver. Might as well own the C10 when it will get the job done just as well? Screw the fact that one is a truck, ones a sports car, one has 300hp, the other has 850hp, etc etc. They both have engines and both burn gas so they are EQUAL. </div></div>

Your a dick.