Like the title says. Thinking of buying one of these. Is the price difference justified? Thanks in advance for the replies.
Rifle Scopes Is the ATACR worth the extra coin over the NXS?
- Thread starter 7magsavage
- Start date
The ATACR is leaps and bounds better than the NXS. You will not be disappointed with purchasing an ATACR.
Do a search, this has already been asked by several on this site as well as the LRH site. I own several NSX's and Mark 4's and I am glad I purchased the new ATACR. Great scope!
I went from a $950 Swarovski 4-12x50 1" tube hunting scope to a NF NXS 5.5-22x56, which was MF first "Tactical" scope and was extremely disappointed in the glass when used early morning and late afternoon from a deer stand. I sold my NF and was going to get the ATACR but have decided to get the Steiner instead since a "demo" Steiner can be had for $2500 if you call around and ask for the snipershide discount.
Yes, from everything that has been said about the ATACR, it is a significant upgrade over the NXS. If you want second focal plane then that would be a great scope.
I just purchased one from euro optic , ordered it Saturday before the holiday (and almost closing time for the office), shipped Monday, got it Tuesday, I can see the glass appears better , next to my other nxs (which is still good). I got mine with the moa/moar I plan to get it mounted and take it to the range next week and ring it out
What are the big advantages? I shoot with a guy that has a ATACR and I have 5 or so NXS's so I'm familiar with them.
for me I like the 25x if I plan to do any "bench" shooting it give me the magnification (although I cant tell to much between 22x and 25x) , the glass appears a bit more clear (but I still love my 5.5-22x50) , and I like the reticle as im a moa prefer-er. i also like the 34mm tube. now ive had my nxs for a few years and never had any problems with it whatsoever , and if the atacr is more rugged/reliable as NF states (I would probably never tell the difference anyway). im liking it
I hear ya, thats good to know. I never care about clarity, resolution, and such on these optics. My NF's have always been plenty good in that aspect. I fiqured it might have a bit more adjustment as a bigger tube. To me and it might sound crazy the ONLY thing I like better about the new one is the paralax knob sticks out less. That is the only thing I don;t like about the NXS. When you put a sling on your back with flush cups the know is where the whole rifle is resting on. I have had great results from NF as most have had. When people start saying the reason they went with the ACATR is beacause of better glass their comment means nothing to me but I'm glad they're happy. I care about tracking and reticle accuracy, pure toughness, and how well they hold zero.
Todays scopes are looking really good but you still hear alot of trouble out there. When people say how good CS is is another thing I don;t want to hear. I don;t want a scope that has to have CS, I have thrown away some Bushnell 10X's that fogged up and people think I'm crazy as yo can always send it back. Nope, I'm getting what I can trust. That being said I have tried the DMR with great results but I fiqured these NF's are much much tougher. I might be wrong but I'm glad you see these new NF's. They are looking great and glad y'all like em.
That has to be some of the most asinine crap I have ever read, anywhere at any time.
If you care nothing about clarity, resolution, or contrast then perhaps a Barska would suit you fine. Or better yet, maybe a Counter Sniper.
Since when has a NightForce been anything but tough and reliable? They are known for tracking accurately, holding zero, and being tough as nails. As far as the reticle being accurate, umm...yeah. Customer service matters a whole hell of a lot and although it's something none of ever wanna use, excellent customer service is a must because shit happens.
Your comments just didn't make a lick of sense to me because anyone who knows anything about optics, wouldn't have made the comments you have.
The two BIG advantages are the glass and the 120 MOA elevation travel. Glass alone sold me on it, but the extra elevation will be nice for stretching the legs of my 338lm.
I agree, the glass and FOV on the ATACR is much better then the NSX. The scope also went on my 338 LM.
RobertB,
Not to give you a hard time, as I am truly interested, why do you not care about clarity, resolution? Are those thing the 2nd most important qualities of a precision rifle scope or any rifle scope for that matter just behind tracking and reliability. I was thinking about the same thing as KillShot when I read your post. I have heard these same thoughts from others around here, so I am interested. I am personally an optics whore/snob, I have owned several NXS and love them but only sold them as the optics were not what I want them to be. I have also owned and sold Razors, Zeiss Victory/Diavari, and the new Kahles K624 just to name a few but sold them all because they were not as good as my PMIIs. I am not the only person I know who feels like this. That is why I am interested in your statement.
I am not RobertB, but I am reading he already knows its going to be good and....
is going to rule out Barska and Counter Sniper's.
Similar threads
