I would like to hear from owners of an IOR. I am interested in them due to their high end glass and being FFP. I have a NXS and like everything about it except the glass. The $1000 Swarovski I sold to get it had much better glass in it and was a much better hunting scope in low light. I want something in the 5-25 magnification range. Both have Zero Stop but the IOR is FFP compared to the NF being SFP. I have never had a FFP scope so maybe I don't know what I am missing but glass quality is one of the main factors if not the main factor. I want something for shooting steel out to 1000 yards as well as for hunting.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes IOR or ATACR?
- Thread starter EasternNChunter
- Start date
A few things I'd mention about glass:
Usually when someone says "great glass" or "not great glass", they almost universally mean that something about the clarity, brightness, resolution, or contrast either looks good or bad to they're eye. There is forever a trade off manufactures are forced to make a certain price points. There will always be the trade off between resolution and contrast. Some brands are biased more towards one or the other and it can be subjective as to which one seems more like "good glass" or other. The glass itself is easily the least important fact about a scope. As long as it is made to the standards of the price point it falls in, it makes no difference where it came from. Coatings, grinds, lens structure and layout are far more important and are what is actually making a scope have "good glass" or "bad glass". In tactical scopes, mechanical tracking is universally the most important aspect of the scope, and as the price point goes up, you begin to see all the positive attributes of a scope trade-offs come together.
Usually when someone says "great glass" or "not great glass", they almost universally mean that something about the clarity, brightness, resolution, or contrast either looks good or bad to they're eye. There is forever a trade off manufactures are forced to make a certain price points. There will always be the trade off between resolution and contrast. Some brands are biased more towards one or the other and it can be subjective as to which one seems more like "good glass" or other. The glass itself is easily the least important fact about a scope. As long as it is made to the standards of the price point it falls in, it makes no difference where it came from. Coatings, grinds, lens structure and layout are far more important and are what is actually making a scope have "good glass" or "bad glass". In tactical scopes, mechanical tracking is universally the most important aspect of the scope, and as the price point goes up, you begin to see all the positive attributes of a scope trade-offs come together.
Agreed. Reliable, repeatable tracking is always number one, but it should be a given for any reputable scope manufacturer. With that said, glass clarity is of utmost importance to me, above and beyond all else. I am currently running a Leopold mk4 and had an nxs prior to that. Both good glass, but i made the mistake of looking through a schmidt...
Nightforce's introduction of the ATACR with ED glass has swayed me, so i just ordered one.
FWIW, if you decide to go nightforce, order soon. I just placed my order and had to backorder it. They expect to receive more next week and one more order the following week, but after that nightforce will be slowing production on them and they may be harder to come by.
Also FWIW, i strongly suggest trying www.bearbasin.com for your purchase, be it IOR or nightforce. They have been very good to me, do free 2 day FedEx for orders over $999, and if you open an account with them they will do 0% financing for up to a year.
Nightforce's introduction of the ATACR with ED glass has swayed me, so i just ordered one.
FWIW, if you decide to go nightforce, order soon. I just placed my order and had to backorder it. They expect to receive more next week and one more order the following week, but after that nightforce will be slowing production on them and they may be harder to come by.
Also FWIW, i strongly suggest trying www.bearbasin.com for your purchase, be it IOR or nightforce. They have been very good to me, do free 2 day FedEx for orders over $999, and if you open an account with them they will do 0% financing for up to a year.
I think it would come down to whether or not you want and FFP or SFP scope? Both are good scopes, but for me FFP is a must! I use IOR and just recently the new Bushnell XRS 4.5-30x50. I haven't looked through the ATACR, but own 2 IOR's and the glass is really good, Nightforce is good also and I have heard the glass has improved tremendously on the ATACR, but their lack of FFP is a letdown.
How do you find the bushnell compared with the IOR. I must say the MP-8 dot reticle is one of my all time favourites.
I like the Bushnell, overall they are pretty close, both have great reticles, built like tanks, big knobs, 10 mils/rev, zero stop.... I don't think I could get rid of either of them. The IOR has slightly better glass IMO, and I do think I prefer the floating dot on the MP-8, and the IOR is illuminated. But I haven't had the Bushnell out too much yet I've had IORs for several years. Couldn't go wrong with either IMO
IOR scopes are built like tanks. They are heavy but they don't break either.
I have several and myshooting buddies run them also.
You can't go wrong with IOR.
I have several and myshooting buddies run them also.
You can't go wrong with IOR.
I have an older IOR 2-12 with the MP-8 reticle that has amazed me. While it is only in 1/4 moa correction, it has maintained zero and always tracked true. This was the first high end scope I had ever had and the glass amazes me. I know run a lot of USO's but still find the glass to be better in the IOR. One of the major drawbacks of the IOR is the placement of the turrets and the limited mounting ability due to the short tube size on the rear of the scope.
They no longer make the scope I have but have advanced much of their lines adding in the 1/10 mil adjustment and zero stops that I know have in other scopes. While their customer service has a horrendous record, my scope has never had any problems. This has been through the original importer in Colorado but if you purchase these through Scott at Liberty Optics he will back it 100%. If you do purchase an IOR I would strongly recommend getting one through him to ensure the warranty work if it is ever needed.
They no longer make the scope I have but have advanced much of their lines adding in the 1/10 mil adjustment and zero stops that I know have in other scopes. While their customer service has a horrendous record, my scope has never had any problems. This has been through the original importer in Colorado but if you purchase these through Scott at Liberty Optics he will back it 100%. If you do purchase an IOR I would strongly recommend getting one through him to ensure the warranty work if it is ever needed.
Just picked up the new NF ATACR and was very impressed! So, I purchased it. I have several NF NSX's, all great scopes! have not tried the other brands. There is a extensive write up on the NF ATACR on the LRH site. It's what had me take a good look at it.
Nice, is that with the MILR reticle? I've been wondering how good the inverted T for ranging works?
I currently run 5 IOR scopes, 3 of the 2,5-10X where one of these are more that a decade old with green illum and MOA adjustment, one 2-18X42 and one 1,5-8. The only regret I have about this brand are that I`ve been buying them to quickly at first release and I would have gotten a more desirable scope if I had waited a bit of time.
Mostly in regards to the 1,5-8, mine has a SFP BDC reticle set up for .223 and MOA adjustments and now is available in a FFP Mil/mil version, if I remember correctly (discussion of these was at IWA in 12). Somewhat same story with the earliest 2,5-10X and the 3-18X, there are "refined" versions of them with, for me, desirable options that I would rather have. I fixed it with the 2,5-10Xs and may do an upgrade on the 3-18 somewhere down the line.
Mostly in regards to the 1,5-8, mine has a SFP BDC reticle set up for .223 and MOA adjustments and now is available in a FFP Mil/mil version, if I remember correctly (discussion of these was at IWA in 12). Somewhat same story with the earliest 2,5-10X and the 3-18X, there are "refined" versions of them with, for me, desirable options that I would rather have. I fixed it with the 2,5-10Xs and may do an upgrade on the 3-18 somewhere down the line.
I have run IOR 3-18's and a 6-24. The 3-18 is a solid scope if you don't need more magnification. Unfortunately I do. Haven't looked thru an ATACR yet but I recently purchased a Bushenll 4.5-30 XRS. Just got it today. First impressions are good. Glass is comparable with the IOR but I think the IOR beats it a little. IOR's have a lot of color whereas the XRS, and other scopes, are sort of flat. Clarity is equal with both. I have had some CS issues with IOR's before and currently I know the 6-24 isn't quite up to par as some of the same I have looked through. I really like the MP-8 floating dot. I mean really like it but the G2 reitcle is nice too. Sorry I can't comment more on the NF.
I will say this though. IOR has released some MP-8 reticles with the christmas trees at the bottom (although not in any scopes I want). That and the floating dot would be an almost ideal reticle. Once you shoot the dot you're hooked. Another thing about the MP-8 is you can with practice mil down to .05 mil. It was designed that way even though its only breaks down into .25 mil lines. Using the insides and outside of the lines its easy to do since they are .1 mil wide. Even thgouh I like the IOR's due to the problems I've had (bad luck I guess) I would go NF if the ATACR is everything its supposed to be.
I will say this though. IOR has released some MP-8 reticles with the christmas trees at the bottom (although not in any scopes I want). That and the floating dot would be an almost ideal reticle. Once you shoot the dot you're hooked. Another thing about the MP-8 is you can with practice mil down to .05 mil. It was designed that way even though its only breaks down into .25 mil lines. Using the insides and outside of the lines its easy to do since they are .1 mil wide. Even thgouh I like the IOR's due to the problems I've had (bad luck I guess) I would go NF if the ATACR is everything its supposed to be.
Does it come with the sunshade you have pictured? I just ordered one from bear basin. I had to backorder it but it should be here next week.
does anyone know if the sun shade for a nxs 56mm will fit on the ATACR? I just want to know if my current ARD for my NXS 5.5-22x56 will fit the ATACR.
My 2 cents,
Had an IOR 3-18 on a Tikka T3 Tactical .308, around 3 years ago, bought the scope new, looked solid, good glass quality.
After 20 shots, black particles started showing around the crosshairs, accuracy went down, 5 shots later, the scope was done (never got dropped or rough treatment) . I sent it back to IOR/Valdada, no question asked, easy people to deal with and they sent me a new one. As I was waiting for the new scope to arrive, went shooting with few friends; one of them just got a new IOR, his scope went down after 30 rounds of .308. Later on, he switched to Vortex, then to USO.
When my new IOR arrived, I sold the Tikka/IOR and got a Sako TRG/S&B PMII, no more issue.
Many people are happy with their IOR but they are not as "bulletproof" as one could think. Anything mechanical is subject to failure but some products are more prone to do so than others. If you shoot at the range, it ruins your day; in other situations...it really sucks.
I shoot with S&B, NF, Leupold and original Russian PU, thousands of rounds in all, so far so good.
Just my own experience, nothing against IOR/Valdada but I won't get another one. It could be that their new products are now more reliable. Other shooters probably had issues with other brands, no doubts about it; as I say, anything mechanical is subject to failure.
Good shooting.
Ombre noire
Had an IOR 3-18 on a Tikka T3 Tactical .308, around 3 years ago, bought the scope new, looked solid, good glass quality.
After 20 shots, black particles started showing around the crosshairs, accuracy went down, 5 shots later, the scope was done (never got dropped or rough treatment) . I sent it back to IOR/Valdada, no question asked, easy people to deal with and they sent me a new one. As I was waiting for the new scope to arrive, went shooting with few friends; one of them just got a new IOR, his scope went down after 30 rounds of .308. Later on, he switched to Vortex, then to USO.
When my new IOR arrived, I sold the Tikka/IOR and got a Sako TRG/S&B PMII, no more issue.
Many people are happy with their IOR but they are not as "bulletproof" as one could think. Anything mechanical is subject to failure but some products are more prone to do so than others. If you shoot at the range, it ruins your day; in other situations...it really sucks.
I shoot with S&B, NF, Leupold and original Russian PU, thousands of rounds in all, so far so good.
Just my own experience, nothing against IOR/Valdada but I won't get another one. It could be that their new products are now more reliable. Other shooters probably had issues with other brands, no doubts about it; as I say, anything mechanical is subject to failure.
Good shooting.
Ombre noire
I shoot an IOR 4-14 with a MP 8 reticle. I love the glass and have looked through a friends Nighforce. I have to say that the glass seemed alot better on my IOR. Now I have to admit, that is the only time that I have had the ability to compare. My 2 cents of course, but I love my IOR>
Was your friends nightforce an ATACR? If not then it didn't have the ED glass. The ED glass on the ATACR has already been determined to be a decisive improvement over nxs glass.
I am safely sure that it was not, since it was a year or so ago. Haven't been able to see the ATACR yet.
Similar threads
Rifle Scopes
Help picking light weight scope for shorty build
