Rifle Scopes Athlon Midas TAC 4-16x44 first impressions, and final review at bottom of thread.

[steve123]

The time finally came, the brown van showed up Tuesday afternoon with a big box, in it was two Athlon Ares 4.5-27x50's and a Midas TAC 4-16x44. Hey, it's always a good day when cool stuff shows up on your doorstep, right??!! I'll start another thread at some point about my new Ares.

I've been excited about getting a Midas TAC since I played around with a prototype version at the Shot Show in January, and here it is, in fact it's mounted on my AR in 6mmFatRat with rounds down range already!!!

Just mentioning this, that a friend of mine named John, owns a big piece of property and it's basically his home and shooting range, which sure is convenient for me! 5 of us were there for our Wednesday afternoon shootfest and after saying Hi and shooting the bull for a while, I headed up to the bench to try out the new TAC.

Yeah, it was a short sight in, same old story, get on paper at 100Y with a two shot group, measure POI to POA with the nice mil reticle, in this case adjusting .4 mil down and .3 left, wallah, then two more shots touching finishes the job and done. I zeroed the turrets and set the zero stop, BTW a ZS which is dead simple to set.

Right after sight in I walked over to shoot the turkey silhouette steel, being 421Y away, but 90 degrees from the sight in range, I had a 8-9 mph wind from 9 oclock to compensate for, so I dialed 1.7 mil of elevation and held .5 mil wind, bang, a well centered hit, John did the same. That's literally all I shot it.

Now to the first impressions.

The glass is very very nice, bright and clear, one friend stated that he liked the glass better in the TAC at 16x vs the Ares 4.5-27x50 on 16x, the others really liked the glass as well and so did I, though I couldn't tell a difference between it and the Ares.

This part is gonna be short, sorry. """All""" the controls were wonderful, none too light or too heavy, and also had a smooth action to them, not exaggerating either!

The best part of the initial impressions is about the turret department, these are the best of the Chinese made Athlon turrets! The click sound of the elevation turret is the most audible of any turret I've tried so far of any rifle scope, and that includes some expensive ones, it's kinda neat really.
The line on the housing lined up perfectly with the .1 mil lines on the turret too and without any lash.
There was quite a bit of turret tension, definitely enough tension, at least equal too or surpassing the tension of the moderately priced tactical scopes in the display case at my local gunstore.
Also the zero stop is hit with a nice distinct wall, making a noticeable clunk sound.

Reticle - that's one tiny center dot!!! So small it disappeared into the black diamond in the center of the 1" orange sticker. .2's out to 6 mils on each side for windage and to 1 mil above and below, you'd need to go to Athlons website and look at it to see if you like it or not. It's just a basic "non" tree type reticle. You guys that read my posts know I'm not enthused about mil line numbers directly off the vertical stadia, which this scope has, but that's just my opinion.

I prefer close focusing scopes and this 4-16 does it at 10Y, so I'm a happy guy, YAY!

$589 Map, man...??!!

After I've had a couple hundred rounds through this upper I'll write a review with my thoughts about the scope.

 

[PBWalsh]

Really like that reticle, I wonder if they will introduce it to the rest of their line.

 

[Poorboyr]

This post is spot-on about the Midas Tac. It really is an unbelievable scope at the price. I'm really hoping they introduce this reticle to a Cronus.

 

[USMC 308]

The single larger vertical screw holding down the elevation knob, as opposed to the 3 or 4 small horizontal screws on the original Ares, should be standard by Athlon.

 

[flatland1]

My personal experience with Athlon scopes has been limited to the Ares 4.5-27x50 & Cronus 4.5-29x56, both models in the mil versions. I've pre-ordered a couple of the new 34mm Ares ETRs, and will be looking into getting a few of these new Midas TAC scopes, based on Steve's limited review. Might be an ideal scope for shooters on a tighter budget - or for guys like me who need several scopes for ARs, and don't have the $$$ to put a Cronus or Ares on every rifle in the safe...

 

[steve123]

Shooter, you're picky like I am, I almost feel the same way except this scope is too well done to pass up but the 10Y parallax tipped me over. Yep, we all have our reticle preferences, I too like tree reticles. I've grown fond of the Athlon "+" center as well but I've used a dot center since the H59 came out so I have more time with a dot. At this point I'm happy either way, although I like the finer line thickness in the Cronus BTR vs some of the other reticles.

 

[koshkin]

Midas TAC 4-16x44 is on my list of scopes to look at later in the year, when I free up a little.

How is reticle visibility at lower magnifications?

ILya

 

[steve123]

Midas TAC 4-16x44 is on my list of scopes to look at later in the year, when I free up a little.

How is reticle visibility at lower magnifications?

ILya

I'd have to get back with you on that because it was on 16x most of the time I was shooting.

 

[gr8fuldoug]

FYI, We've received fairly large shipments of both the Midas TAC 4-16x44 - APRS2 FFP MIL & Midas TAC 6-24x50 - APRS2 FFP MIL so if you're looking please give us a call, 516-217-1000, and of course mention the 'Hide

 

[steve123]

Midas TAC 4-16x44 is on my list of scopes to look at later in the year, when I free up a little.

How is reticle visibility at lower magnifications?

ILya

I Just went and compared a little using the S&B H59, APRS in the Cronus BTR, APLR2 in the Talos BTR, and the APRS2 the one in the Midas TAC, all on 5x.

I looked at both darker tree trunks and dark rocks and lighter things like dead grass, the APLR2/Talos BTR was easiest to see by far, it's a little thicker than the rest, and seeing the hashes crossing over is like cheating on low power.

The others were pretty much the same, though the thick bars on the outside of the reticle in the TAC helped me find center easier because it made it somewhat like looking at a duplex reticle since there's no Christmas tree on the bottom, maybe cleaner looking would describe it??? I could also make out the .2 mil hashes from center a little better than the other slimmer lined scopes. Of course the center dot was gone on 5x, "in affect" like a TMR reticle with open center, just larger.

 

[jpspeeddemon]

Midas TAC 4-16x44 is on my list of scopes to look at later in the year, when I free up a little.

How is reticle visibility at lower magnifications?

ILya

I have a Midas Tac 4-16x44.

Glass is very good, especially for the money. Bright and crisp image.

The reticle is a bit thin at 4x. I like it at 6x if I were to hunt with it set on a low mag. Probably need to be around 10x to use the wind holds.

 

[Sampharr77]

Glad to find this review as I was looking at this scope this morning. Thanks

 

[steve123]

Well I guess I've had enough time behind my Midas TAC 4-16 to come out and tell my final impressions, lol. I'm late doing this because for almost 2 months the FS was closed due to drought, so I didn't shoot long range in that time period which was shortly after this post began. Well, and I had gotten a new barrel put on one of my other rifles in 223AI which took some time later in the summer, that had the Ares 4.5-27x50 on it.

That being said please reread my posts above as nothing has changed my mind in regards to fit, finish and feel, concerning this scope, which says something in and of it's self.

Tracking, even though I don't do official tracking tests, because it can't be done right without the proper equipment, I have shot long range enough to know when my dope doesn't line up. Seeing that I have had no problems hitting center of steel out to 1122Y I'm giving this scope a perfect score. It seems to be right on.

On that note I've gone out maybe 5 times shooting steel from 300Y to 1122Y. There were no surprises. The Midas TAC has found a home for the foreseeable future on my 6mmFatRat 22" upper. It's a great marriage for this upper in most aspects.

What the friends think. They like it, out of 8 or so of them nobody has had anything but high praise, but most of these guys use scopes that are less quality so to them it's superior to what they are used to.

Have you ever experienced a situation when using a product when every time you used it you came away with disappointments or at least aspects about the product that made you say to yourself, "I just can't get past this or that so I'm selling such and such product". I know I have many times, probably most often with riflescopes!

So my IMO's of those undesirable traits that make me want to sell scopes is listed below.

1 Weird eyebox, only two scopes of many scopes that I've owned were bad in this aspect.
2 Poor glass, which can include vignetting, CA, getting blurry on the edges, etc, the list goes on and on...]
3 Reticles that are outdated or less useful for holdovers or holdoffs, including mil line numbers just off the vertical stadia obscuring holdoffs.
4 Mushy turrets,
5 Turrets with indicator marks that don't line up with each other and excessively tall turrets.
6 No revolution indicator marks on the turret housing.
7 Lack of zero stop.
8 Complex ZS system. If you have to have the instructions in your gear you might have one, lol.
9 Too hard or too soft controls such as parallax knob, etc.
10 Parallax focus of more than 25Y.
11 Long, heavy, and cumbersome scopes.
12 Poor exterior finish that scratches easy or smudges too easily.
13 Generally annoying things that just bug you about a scope, like paying $1750 for a popular brand scope and finding out the glass was on par with a $40 scope, yes that happened to me, and yes I sent it back, it was fine to them unfortunately.
14 Poor value to dollar spent.
15 Not having a great warranty.

The balancing act. There is no perfect scope, right??!!, but does this scope meet most of an individuals requirements or expectations, me in this case. The answer is YES. Why?
Because my TAC 4-16 is incredible for the price. In fact to me it rates high in most aspects regardless of price. The truth is this scope just turned out well in design and execution!!

So in other words in my list above, there's only one detractor which is a personal pet peeve, that being the reticle. It has the annoying numbers in the reticle and the center dot is very small. Other people might very well prefer these things??? On the positive side to me is it does have some .2 mil marks on the horizontal which saved me from selling the scope, but keep in mind I'm """very very picky""" when it comes to reticles.

The car illustration coming, lol.
My wife just bought a brand new 4Runner. It's one of those vehicles that every time you drive it you exit the drivers side door with a "wow feeling", or a "that's one impressive 4x4 SUV in so many ways opinion", it's the "whole experience" of, it's the general refinement and balance throughout the vehicle..., even compared to our RAV4 that we traded in.

That 4Runner is like this scope when it comes to impressions, the Midas TAC, it's so well done and so balanced, that for the money it's by far my #1 choice over all competitors in it's price range! I might even say that I like it in some ways more than that Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 which is a more expensive scope!

I have to compare the scopes that I have on hand or at least have had.
Starting with S&B, at this point in my life I like them too much to consider selling them, which I've almost done a few times when things got tight. I got into a Cronus BTR to go midland between the S&B's and the less expensive scopes. I couldn't get past the reticle, it wasn't for me, and let's face it the S&B is superior if not by much, so I sold it.

I've sold some of my Talos BTR 4-14's and Argos BTR 6-24's. These are't bad scopes at all and I kept 2 of each. They do lack in some ways but after all what does one expect for a inexpensive scope, only so much quality can be put into them.

So I am transitioning to the Midas TAC and the Ares BTR. I'm pretty satisfied doing this, they are worth the extra money for sure. BTW I can think of plenty of scopes, for one reason or another, that cost much more than this scope, which to me fall short of my personal expectations.

I guess that wraps it up, I doubt you'll be disappointed with the Midas TAC series, is all I can say!

 

[gr8fuldoug]

Thanks for taking the time to review and post. After reading this I am glad to say we received a delivery last week of more of the Midas TAC's

 

[palmettoman]

Dittos on your review. I’ve got the 24x and really enjoy it. Head and shoulders above the Diamondback Tacticals at a somewhat similar price point.

 

[palmettoman]

To add to my previous post, Athlon's customer service is top notch. I had to send my Midas Tac in due to an accident I had with it and bent the objective housing. Totally my fault. I asked them if I could send it in and pay to have them fix it. They replaced the scope with a new one that arrived today. Completely unexpected. Athlon earned a loyal customer.

BTW...I shot the scope the day after the accident and it tracked perfectly even after falling 5' to the floor.

 

[bnanaphone]

I just wanted to chime in and say your comments, and Doug's discount at Camera Land, just made me purchase an Athlon Midas Tac 4-16x44 this morning. It will be replacing an SWFA 3-15x42 SFP.

Everything about it sounds good and I can't wait to use it in my next NRL22 match. I think it is a great scope for that environment.

 

[Lesco Brandon]

I just got my Midas tac 4-16 yesterday from Doug at camera land. First and foremost he’s got my business for life - awesome guy. Secondly, I am pleasantly surprised by the quality of this scope. The turrets are the best I’ve ever felt. The positive click is like someone smacks your hand. You KNOW when it moves. I lined it up beside my Leupold VX3i LRP which costs twice as much. I wanted the Leupold to win. I love my leupold. I’ve compared my leupold to other high end scopes at matches and walked away feeling sorry for the other guy. It was an overcast dreary day and I looked at a house 400 yards away. The brick mortar lines looked equal as did tree branches but when I looked at the dark shingles on the roof the Midas tac came out ahead, just a touch, but ahead. I haven’t shot it yet but am excited.

 

[chavezz556]

I just ordered one in 6-24 can't wait to get it mounted!

 

[fastdiablo]

Can you guys who own a Midas Tac 4-16x44 tell me which is the correct size of Butler Creek flip up scope covers? Thanks!

 

[BobinNC]

Nice review Steve. I think you might just have sold me on one......

 

[gr8fuldoug]

The #213070s Sunshade for the Midas TAC 4-16x44 - APRS2 FFP MIL have finally come in, if anyone is looking for the sunshade

 

[steve123]

The #213070s Sunshade for the Midas TAC 4-16x44 - APRS2 FFP MIL have finally come in, if anyone is looking for the sunshade

Mine unexpectedly showed up on Friday.

 

[flatland1]

I put a Midas TAC 6-24x50 on a V-22 w/18" Ranch contour bbl - this is my 'sporter' lightweight walkabout V-22, and I love it. The little pencil thin ACE Ranch bbl is - for all intents & purposes - as accurate as the 22" Bartlein Kukri on my newest heavy bbl V-22. No, it's not quite as easy for me to shoot as a heavier rifle, but I've been shooting it off the bench with a Doggone Good bag, which is pretty heavy, and makes it easier to break a shot without moving such a light rifle. The Midas TAC was the first scope I mounted on this rifle, and I really don't see myself ever trying another scope on it - I'm more than satisfied with the optical quality, the feel of the distinct clicks/detents of the turret knobs, and the reticle. I also am very pleased with the feel of the power ring & parallax knob - very smooth, with just the right amount of resistance. It is IMHO, the perfect scope for this rifle. The only complaint I have is that the floating dot aiming point of the reticle is a bit too small for my tastes. It wouldn't hurt a thing if it were twice as large as it is. I've had this rifle for several months now, and it's always a pleasure to pick it up and take that first look through the scope - I liked it enough that I bought four more of them to either sell or put on my own rifles, and will be ordering more of them when I've either got these sold or mounted on my stuff.

There's one mounted on a new Howa Mini in 22 Grendel that I'm just itching to shoot - just need to do the final bits of fine-tuning the inlet in a Boyds Prairie Hunter stock, get it bedded, and then.....wait for the ground to dry up enough to be able to make it to my range to zero the scope & get some chrono data with it. I put a Bartlein 1-6.8tw, 24" #3 sporter on this Mini, along with DIP DBM, EGW 20 MOA scope rail, and a modified HACT trigger that's got a very crisp 1.3lb break. The way our weather forecast is looking, I might as well get the bbl'd action & DBM degreased, blasted, and CeraKoted in sniper gray as soon as I get the bedding job done, because we're supposed to get another2"-3.5" of rain over the next couple of days, and there's already a lot of water standing in our fields - so it's gonna be awhile before I can get to my range without cutting up/rutting the sod in our pasture.

 

[PabloM]

I just got a Midas Tac 4-16 that I plan to put on my CZ455. Nice turrets, overall fit and feel. Optically clearer than my PST 4-16x50 and maybe slightly clearer than my SWFA SS 3-15x42. Reticle is a bit fine but should be good on the .22 for targets and PRS style shooting because it’s not very busy. I like the numbers off to the side so no issues there. Center dot is tiny but as others said it’s like an open center so bracketing the target works.

I did a tracking test by mounting the scope to a bench, measuring the distance to the wall, and doing the math to draw a grid that worked out to be perfect 1 mil lines. Tracked perfectly with 10 mills of up and 4 mills each right and left. About all I need for a 22.

Looking forward to shooting with this scope the reticle should work nicely and be a little easier to be precise than the SWFA SS 3-15x42 I had on it. but now the SWFA is moving to my SPR which should be perfect hitting steel where I have a little more tolerance than with the 22 on paper or PRS.

 

[Jack Master]

How is this reticle on low power in low light? (Dusk or Dawn)

I'm look at getting this scope to put it on a .243 coyote rifle that I could also have fun shooting long range with. (no competition) I am concerned the reticle would be too fine for these shooting conditions. If you have had experience with it, what are your thoughts?

@flatland1
@PabloM
@steve123

 

[steve123]

With my older eyes, and since the TAC does not have illumination, I don't use it on 4x. I did shoot a jackrabbit offhand in the head at 45y a few weeks ago with the TAC on 8x and I could see the reticle well in the late afternoon.

People will laugh but I use a cheap Athlon Argos 4-16 "non BTR" SFP for coyotes, the reason why is it has a thick mildot reticle. I prefer it in this application because most of my shooting is fast action or PB in the junipers. Or just goofing around to 400Y with a reduced load.

Currently my TAC 4-16 is on an American Air Arms EVOL 30 cal PCP air rifle. I was hitting pine cones and small rocks at 180Y, so was my friend, he having a 6-24 Midas TAC on his Daystate Redwolf PCP. It was fun calling wind and the location of hits or misses for each other.

 

[PabloM]

How is this reticle on low power in low light? (Dusk or Dawn)

I'm look at getting this scope to put it on a .243 coyote rifle that I could also have fun shooting long range with. (no competition) I am concerned the reticle would be too fine for these shooting conditions. If you have had experience with it, what are your thoughts?

No experience shooting it yet, but it’s 8pm here and looking at landscaping down the street with the scope in hand and scanning for a neighborhood cat... I can see the cross hairs at all power levels over trees and bushes, with enough clarity to easily make out larger critters. But I personally can’t make out the mil marks until I get up to 12 or so, and even then the background has to be pretty light and uniform in color to see them. The numbers off to the side actually help you count-off in 2 mil increments but I wouldn’t bank on being able to do that over backdrops of varying shadows and dark areas, or in the final moments before dark. It’s a pretty thin reticle...

I think it makes a better budget target scope or day time hunting scope than a low-light predator hunting scope. Unless you don’t hold and you dial everything, but I think that’s not practical for shooting smart and fast-moving targets, in my opinion. I’m not a coyote hunter, but for that task I would want an FFP scope with a heavier basic mildot reticle that’s easy to see, or an illuminated reticle that’s still simple in design.

 

[flatland1]

I'm out every night around 10:30 with my dog, doing bodyguard duty for her while she's doing her before-bed duty. I live out in the country, with plenty of coyotes around, along with coons, bobcats, and - so I've been told recently - a couger. I've got a 6-24x50 Midas TAC on a V-22 sporter, which I take out every morning for the same reason. But after dark, I usually grab a 10-22 with an old Japanese Bushnell sfp 3-12x44 with a duplex reticle. It's shorter & quicker to handle than the V-22, and I have no issue seeing the duplex clearly while hand holding a Fenix TK-22 or 4Sevens Maelstrom flashlight under the forearm of the B&C Anschutz-style stock. I favor the 10-22 more for the fact that it's a semi-auto, which allows me to take quick follow-up shots without taking my eye off what I'm seeing through the scope, and would probably still use it in the dark, even if I had another Midas TAC on it.

Nothing bad to say about the Midas TAC - I knew it didn't have an illuminated reticle when I bought several of them. I've got them on a couple of Howa Mini customs in 22 Grendel & 6.5 Grendel, and yet another on a CZ457 American with a custom Shilen bbl. I like this scope very much, on each & every one of these rifles.

 

[steve123]

Just an update;

The TAC in the review has been swapped around to different rifles I since wrote my review on it. No drama to share, it's been a solid scope.

I did get a Midas TAC 6-24 early this year and it's on my 6mmFatRat instead of the 4-16. I like it a lot, 24x has it's advantages!

As I mentioned above I put the TAC 4-16 on a PCP 30 caliber air rifle recently. This rifle has a 50 moa Picatinny mount machined into the receiver. I had no problem zeroing the rifle at 50Y and have a ton of elevation travel available.

It was amazing to me yesterday when that 30 cal 44 grain pellet was nailing the 200M steel chicken and more so the 289Y 7" diamond with regularity, just crazy - with a friggen pellet! Ha, I used 3-4 mils wind holdoff for the diamond and 24.9 mils dialed on the scope. The first try barely missed the diamond so dope was good.

Still have the Ares BTR 4.5-27 on the 223AI.