Rifle Scopes ATACR vs S&B PMII 5-25

J

JayCarver

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jan 14, 2011
399
3
38
Alberta, Canada
#1
OK so I know alot of people hate these "vs" questions but I'm having a hard time deciding.

I'm having a 338LM built and it will be done in a few weeks. Its will be used for shooting steel and paper at know distances. The place I shoot at the most goes out to 1200yds but I have access to much longer ranges and will get out to them from time to time.

I actually prefer SFP as I like the reticle to always be the same size and ranging targets is not important to me. However I have never had a high end FFP scope so maybe I wouldn't mind it.

I have a 5.5-22 NSX and a 12-50 PMII, I can see a difference in the glass quality, I have heard that the ATACR has better glass than the NSX thou.

I know that there are not many ATACR out there yet but can anyone compare the glass quality between the two?

I like the 120MOA elevation adjustment of the ATACR.

Thanks for the help.
 
#4
I just got my atacr. Sitting beside my pmll it appears the atacr is a brighter, crisper scope. I have NOT had much time in different light conditions to really compare. My buddies who looked through both said the same, the atacr looks just a little better. Over the next month I will get in some shooting time and will have a better idea about glass quality and shooting the scope
 
#5
jeep sarge said:
I just got my atacr. Sitting beside my pmll it appears the atacr is a brighter, crisper scope. I have NOT had much time in different light conditions to really compare. My buddies who looked through both said the same, the atacr looks just a little better. Over the next month I will get in some shooting time and will have a better idea about glass quality and shooting the scope
Click to expand...

Thanks, if NF can do S&B quality glass with NF ruggedness at very competitive price they will sell lots of these, well I guess there's still the FFP thing that would be a deal breaker for some. I'm leaning toward the ATACR because FFP isn't important to me and the extra elevation travel will be nice also.

Thanks for the comment and be sure to let us know if you feel the same way after you have had a chance to shoot it more.
 
#6
I have the same first impression when looking through my ATACR and my PM II. The ATACR looks to be at least even with S&B as far as the glass goes but i have not had a chance to compare both under low light or tough contrast conditions I should get to over the next couple of weeks. If a second focal plane reticle will work I would not hesitate to get the ATACR.
 
#7
Wow, this all sounds great! I have been waiting for NF to pick up the pace in the optical quality department for some time. Now if it were just FFP, maybe I need to look at a BEAST...
 
#9
tnichols said:
I would give my left testicle if they would make the ATACR in FFP.
Click to expand...
They do...they call it the beast:) I had a ATACR for a very short time. If it was a ffp at the current price it would be the best thing ever unfortunately its a extra $1000 for the beast.
 
#12
25x FOV at 100 yards:

S&B 5-25x: 4.5 feet
ATACR: 4.92 feet
BEAST: 4.92 feet

5x FOV at 100 yards:

S&B: 15.9 feet
ATACR: 17.96 feet
BEAST: 18.7 feet

NF wins at both 5X and 25X.
 
Last edited:
#13
How are you guys finding the reticle thickness on the ATACR?

On the NF website is says that the reticle is 0.14 MOA thick for both the MOAR and the MIL-R reticle. This is more than twice as thick as the NP-R1 reticle thats in my NSX (0.06 MOA)

I'm not sure on the thickness of the P4F but it seems similar thickness as the NP-R1.

How is it for the guys that have them?
 
#17
Ok, well I think I will try one of these ATACR, now I just need to decide MOA or Mil, all my other scopes are MOA so I will probably go that way but It might be time to start the switch to Mil.

Thanks for all your guys feed back and help with the decision.
 
#18
The ATACR and BEAST certainly seem to be game changers for Nightforce from the reviews. I've never had a Nightforce, but know from others that they are rugged dependable scopes. Sounds like S&B dropped the ball this year and only 2 year warranty. I think I see a BEAST in my future! Just hope it will not be too large on my new DTA SRS.
 
#19
I'd like to hear more about the comparison between the ATACR and the S&B 5-25x, with which I'm familiar. Let's get some first-hand information from people who actually tried both. Also, are the interruptions in the MIL-R reticle an issue? The MOAR reticle doesn't have them and seems less cluttered.
 
Last edited:
#23
I find the reticle thickness to be fine. I have no issue seeing my 1/2" dots that I use from 100yds to 400yds. I am shooting this weekend for the first time with any quantity of rounds so I will get a really good look. My 300wm has the atacr and my 6.5cm the S&B so I will do a lot of comparison at ranges out to 1200yds
 
#25
Tackleberry said:
I find the reticle thickness to be fine. I have no issue seeing my 1/2" dots that I use from 100yds to 400yds. I am shooting this weekend for the first time with any quantity of rounds so I will get a really good look. My 300wm has the atacr and my 6.5cm the S&B so I will do a lot of comparison at ranges out to 1200yds
Click to expand...
Nightforce says the MOAR subtension at 25x is 0.140 MOA (or 0.040 mils - the P4F is 0.035 mils).
 
Last edited:
#27
Yesterday I compared my Nightforce ATACR to my S&B 5-25x56 PMII, including the FOV, "clarity", brightness, resolution, and "color". "Clarity" means the overall quality of an image, resolution means the ability to see fine details, and color refers to how accurate colors appear to be. This is not a camera lens review and don't pin me down to hard definitions. I'll also comment about the turret controls and reticles.

* Field of View: Switching between the ATACR and S&B, the NF image seems larger because of its slightly greater FOV. At first I thought it had more magnification, but I measured the subtensions of objects and the slightly greater FOV of the Nightforce leaves you with the impression of greater magnification, which is a plus.

* "Clarity": Qualitatively the S&B image seems crisper when you look at the entire image. Clarity is a combination of resolution, contrast, color and other technical factors. I can't quantify the difference, it's just an impression that you'll have when switching back and forth between the NF and the S&B, especially in the first few seconds of viewing.

* Brightness: The S&B has the noticeably brighter image, suggesting better light transmission. I said the difference is noticeable, but it's not huge.

* "Color": Intense colors seemed to "pop" more through the S&B, although it might have been due to the better light transmission. There is better contrast as well that is evident in shaded areas.

* Resolution: The S&B has slightly better resolution. Looking at the details of a house 420 yards away I couldn't really see any difference because there was a slight mirage. However, when I looked at the small blossoms of a tree (and other small detailed objects) about 80 yards away, I could see the details of the tiny blossoms more easily through the S&B. To take advantage of the better resolution you will need good seeing conditions.

* Turrets: I much preferred the NF ATACR turret to the S&B MTC in this case. The NF has 80 clicks/turn and the MTC has 120 clicks/turn, so the ATACR turrent has wider click separation and the feel of the clicks is positive yet not overly hard. The S&B double-turn (DT) turret avoids the problemmatic milestone clicks, but there are now 140 clicks/turn.

* Reticles: The ATACR MOAR reticle is really excellent, easy to read and non-obtrusive; I've very happy with this choice that also allows me to have a 1/4-MOA turret with only 80 clicks/turn. The P4F is a very popular reticle for this S&B model.

* Tunneling: Both the NF and S&B have very noticeable and surprisingly similar reductions in their FOVs at about 7X.

* Eyebox: At low magnifications, both scopes have an adquate eyebox due to the large exit pupil. At 25X I found the NF was slightly less forgiving of my head position.

Overall: Even though the S&B comes out slightly ahead in some specific categories, the NF ATACR is not very far behind optically overall. I categorized and described aspects of the image quality because people want to know about them. An often asked question is whether a particular scope can see XX-cal bullet holes at YYY yards. In this case I'd say the S&B has the better chance of seeing bullet holes at long range, but there is unlikely to be any difference if there is moderate mirage. Because of its brighter image and better contrast, the S&B would also be the better choice in low light conditions, for however long those conditions last.

I hope to have the ATACR at the range next week.
 
Last edited:
#29
The ATACR came today, did a quick comparison with a NSX 5.5-22x56 and a S&B PMII 12-50x56 from my kitchen table looking at a wooden fence 200yd away. I had all the scopes on 20x to make it fair.

With the NSX 5.5-22x56 I could see some of the wood grain and see where the cracks in the wood were. This scope has the smallest FOV of all three scopes.

First thing I noticed with the ATACR is the FOV is massive. I'm not sure what the numbers are but it was very noticeable. The resolution was very good, noticeably better then the 5.5-22. I could see alot more detail in the wood grain and also could see smaller cracks and gaps in the cracks of the wood that I couldn't see with the 5.5-22. Also I found this to be the brightest of the three although it may be a illusion with the larger FOV.

Next I grabbed the S&B PMII 12-50, while using the parallax knob I found it quicker and easier to focus than the NF's scopes. Once focused I went back and forth between the ATACR and the S&B and could not really say which one had better "glass" I will have to wait until I have a chance to look through them at longer range and different conditions, there was alot of mirage coming off the melting snow today so it was really hard to tell which is better.

So far I'm really impressed with the ATACR, unfortunately it will be a few weeks until I have the mount so I will have to wait to see how it really compares to the S&B but at this point I feel like it was money well spent.
 
#30
I mounted an ACTAR for a friend tonight just getting into LR shooting. I was very impressed with the reticle on my friends Mil Mil ACTAR. This improved range-glass...It makes buying the ACTAR a no brainer vs their regular NXS line. Im a bit jealous. Nice work NF on this one.

I have one of the Army Spec 3.5-15 on my Rem700 5R, that glass is supposed to be better, how does it compare to the ACTAR? Anyone know this question? It was dark for the mount up, but we are shooting this saturday. So my comparison will be soon.
 
#35
One-Eyed Jack said:
Yesterday I compared my Nightforce ATACR to my S&B 5-25x56 PMII, including the FOV, "clarity", brightness, resolution, and "color". "Clarity" means the overall quality of an image, resolution means the ability to see fine details, and color refers to how accurate colors appear to be. This is not a camera lens review and don't pin me down to hard definitions. I'll also comment about the turret controls and reticles.

* Field of View: Switching between the ATACR and S&B, the NF image seems larger because of its slightly greater FOV. At first I thought it had more magnification, but I measured the subtensions of objects and the slightly greater FOV of the Nightforce leaves you with the impression of greater magnification, which is a plus.

* "Clarity": Qualitatively the S&B image seems crisper when you look at the entire image. Clarity is a combination of resolution, contrast, color and other technical factors. I can't quantify the difference, it's just an impression that you'll have when switching back and forth between the NF and the S&B, especially in the first few seconds of viewing.

* Brightness: The S&B has the noticeably brighter image, suggesting better light transmission. I said the difference is noticeable, but it's not huge.

* "Color": Intense colors seemed to "pop" more through the S&B, although it might have been due to the better light transmission. There is better contrast as well that is evident in shaded areas.

* Resolution: The S&B has slightly better resolution. Looking at the details of a house 420 yards away I couldn't really see any difference because there was a slight mirage. However, when I looked at the small blossoms of a tree (and other small detailed objects) about 80 yards away, I could see the details of the tiny blossoms more easily through the S&B. To take advantage of the better resolution you will need good seeing conditions.

* Turrets: I much preferred the NF ATACR turret to the S&B MTC in this case. The NF has 80 clicks/turn and the MTC has 120 clicks/turn, so the ATACR turrent has wider click separation and the feel of the clicks is positive yet not overly hard. The S&B double-turn (DT) turret avoids the problemmatic milestone clicks, but there are now 140 clicks/turn.

* Reticles: The ATACR MOAR reticle is really excellent, easy to read and non-obtrusive; I've very happy with this choice that also allows me to have a 1/4-MOA turret with only 80 clicks/turn. The P4F is a very popular reticle for this S&B model.

* Tunneling: Both the NF and S&B have very noticeable and surprisingly similar reductions in their FOVs at about 7X.

* Eyebox: At low magnifications, both scopes have an adquate eyebox due to the large exit pupil. At 25X I found the NF was slightly less forgiving of my head position.

Overall: Even though the S&B comes out slightly ahead in some specific categories, the NF ATACR is not very far behind optically overall. I categorized and described aspects of the image quality because people want to know about them. An often asked question is whether a particular scope can see XX-cal bullet holes at YYY yards. In this case I'd say the S&B has the better chance of seeing bullet holes at long range, but there is unlikely to be any difference if there is moderate mirage. Because of its brighter image and better contrast, the S&B would also be the better choice in low light conditions, for however long those conditions last.

I hope to have the ATACR at the range next week.
Click to expand...

Thx for the information, I just bought a SB scope.....so i wouldn't regret it :D
 
#36
Dark Horse said:
Seriously? What shot can't you make with a 5-25 PMII that you could with a new Nightforce? I love when the latest and greatest toy comes out, everything else becomes obsolete.
Click to expand...

Couldn't make ANY shots with the PMII 5-25 I had when the erector $hit the bed and couldn't be dialed above 8x and so went back for service.

Any more questions?

Joe
 
#37
Ah, so you are the only guy that ever had a scope break. I should have realized when the 5-25 set the bar for long range tactical shooting that it would have turned out to be a turd and long in tooth several years later. What a waste of money. Thankfully Nightforce is around to save the day for us.

If you had a bad experience with Schmidt so be it, but to suggest the scope that all others are measured by is obsolete is absurd.
 
#39
ATACR is beautiful at least mine is it is mounted on my custom built 308 and the glass is great you have to look through one to really appreciate it. Now I looked through the s&b pmii and it is just a hair clearer but I wouldn't let my ATAC go for a s&b not after shooting with it.
 
#41
Dark Horse said:
Seriously? What shot can't you make with a 5-25 PMII that you could with a new Nightforce? I love when the latest and greatest toy comes out, everything else becomes obsolete.
Click to expand...

My ATACR has 2.5 moa down & 130 moa up, with 100 yard zero, that is double the total available elevation that the moa PMII has.

So I can dial past 3000 yards with my 375 DCM, the S&B doesn't even come close.....

I did a quick comparison a while ago now, here is a link to it.

High end scope comparison

I'm very happy with it & will be getting another
 
#42
Definitely NOT a hater (I own 3 NSX scopes), just a bit nervous after hearing about every Nightforce Beast at SHOT breaking during the course of the show. Any reports of early death by ATACR owners?

I love the idea of not having that extra MOA inside the scope, and not having to hold over in the desert when shooting beyond 2,000 with my 338 LM Ackley and 7 Dakota.

JeffVN
 
#44
Kiwi Greg said:
My ATACR has 2.5 moa down & 130 moa up, with 100 yard zero, that is double the total available elevation that the moa PMII has.

So I can dial past 3000 yards with my 375 DCM, the S&B doesn't even come close.....

I did a quick comparison a while ago now, here is a link to it.

High end scope comparison

I'm very happy with it & will be getting another
Click to expand...

Actually, it doesn't have double what the S&B does. That is somewhat misleading. The S&B has two turns for 26 mRad with 1 mRad down below the zero. 27*3.43=92 MOA. Now I may not have the best education, but 130 MOA is not double 92 MOA. If a person needs more, there are always holds or resetting the turret.
 
#45
Thanks for the excellent reviews and the time some of you spent on this. The ATACR sounds like a winner with great glass. Have to save up some coin and consider one. A FFP version for a small increase in price over the SFP would really sell.
 
#46
tylerw02 said:
Actually, it doesn't have double what the S&B does. That is somewhat misleading. The S&B has two turns for 26 mRad with 1 mRad down below the zero. 27*3.43=92 MOA. Now I may not have the best education, but 130 MOA is not double 92 MOA. If a person needs more, there are always holds or resetting the turret.
Click to expand...


You're correct for the MIL versions. However, the MOA version of the PMII only has 56 moa of adjustment for some reason, so in fact the ATACR does have twice the amount of travel.
 
#47
JLR, that is not correct. That is a misprint in the manual.

They have 65 MOA of "UP" (not including what is below the zero stop) in two turns and, like the mRad version, you can reset it at a different zero to have more "DOWN" by having your zero set higher. That is merely how much MOA is available without resetting the zero stop. I believe total travel is actually close to 100 MOA.

 
Last edited:
#49
tylerw02 said:
Actually, it doesn't have double what the S&B does. That is somewhat misleading. The S&B has two turns for 26 mRad with 1 mRad down below the zero. 27*3.43=92 MOA. Now I may not have the best education, but 130 MOA is not double 92 MOA. If a person needs more, there are always holds or resetting the turret.
Click to expand...

IF YOU BUY A MOA S&B IT HAS 65 MOA OF TRAVEL.........thats it, not 92......

I'm not using anything other than a 100 yard zero so that gets me to approx 2300 yards, the ATACR gets me another 1000 with which ever CE projectile I'm shooting.

I do not wish to have a scope with mil I have a lot of moa scopes & it would be very stupid to mix things up......
 
#50
wolffman said:
Kiwi so u ever use FFP scopes ? I have a HTI 50 and 375CT and trying to decide between sfp and FFP. I don't see myself shooting very close with this rifle.
Click to expand...

A Mate has a 375CT HTI very nice rifle.

I ordered two Premiers in MOA before I knew the ATACR was coming they took 7 months to get & showed up just as the ATACR was realeased.....Bugger.

The Premiers are fantasic, the glass is very nice, as mentioned in my comparison.

I decided the ATACR suited my requirements better than the Premiers so unfortunately I had to move them on....Bugger again.

I have several NPR1 NSXs & really like them, I was concerned about the ATARC reticle thickness but it isn't an issue.

I'm not a fan of FFP, I find for what I use my rifles for SFP is just fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Nightforce ATACR 4-16x50 -- Second Focal Plane -- Glass & eyebox as good as F1 ??
Replies
3
Views
570
Bungi
B
L
NF Atacr FFP 4-16x42 v SFP 4-16x50 Mil-R
Replies
7
Views
740
sjbryan65
sjbryan65
D
Long Range Gas Gun Optics
Replies
30
Views
1K
nick338
N
N
Rifle Scopes Nightforce 4-20 ATACR vs 5-25 ATACR
Replies
20
Views
1K
nick338
N
ModestMarksman
ATACR vs PM2 for SRSM2
Replies
10
Views
542
CSTactical
CSTactical
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts