Rifle Scopes Need help picking a scope, please. ATACR 7-35 VS ZCO 5-27

[jetsurgeon]

Hi All,

I need some guidance fellas, hopefully from folks who have owned the two scopes I'm looking at. I've been reading alot of good things about both of these rigs, just need a little help.

I'm to the point I want to upgrade my scope on my 6.5 CM, from a Burris XTR II 5-25X50 with the SCR-MIL to either a NightForce ATACR 7-35X56 F1 with the MIL-XT, or considering a Zero Compromise ZC527 5-27X56 with the MPCT 2 reticle.

I know buy once cry once... LOL But seriously is there much difference between these two models? Both are expensive but they are not that much different in price, so to speak. I just don't want to make the wrong choice, that's why I'm asking for some help and guidance. Is one really better or worse than the other?

Will be used for banging steel out to 1000, hopefully next year I'll start this PRS type game.

Thanks for your time, really appreciate it!

All the best,
Jeff

 

[blbennett1288]

CSTactical and EuroOptic have demo models for the NF ATACR 7-35 MIL-XT, that’ll save you a couple hundred dollars.

Tons of people have the ATACR and love it. Having said that I think the ZCO 5-27 MPCT2 is a better scope. You can’t go wrong with either though, pick whichever has the features and reticle you like more and go for it.

 

[jetsurgeon]

Thanks for your input. One thing I do like about the ATACR is the ZERO STOP actually stops on Zero. From what I read the ZCO ZERO STOP is .5 mils below Zero. That alone would probably drive me crazy but I'm not sure because I'm not used to heaving a zero stop set below zero..... Can the ZCO zero stop be set to actually stop on zero?

Thanks!

 

[blbennett1288]

Thanks for your input. One thing I do like about the ATACR is the ZERO STOP actually stops on Zero. From what I read the ZCO ZERO STOP is .5 mils below Zero. That alone would probably drive me crazy but I'm not sure because I'm not used to heaving a zero stop set below zero..... Can the ZCO zero stop be set to actually stop on zero?

Thanks!

You can set the NF zero stop where ever you want. I have mine 1mil below zero. You can have it stop on zero if you wish.

ZCO is preset to 0.5mil below zero.

 

[gebhardt02]

We set up our Return 2 Zero with about 0.5 mil below so the user had that little bit of extra adjustment, and also didn't have to remove the elevation turret to mess with anything. This prevents any dirt or contamination from entering the system and potentially causing any sort of issues.

 

[Covertnoob5]

Both are absolutely top notch and have a lot of similar features. I would honestly pick whatever reticle you like the best and start there.

 

[lancetkenyon]

I don'town either of these...yet. The ZCO is definitely on my radar, and I have a ZCO 4-20×50 scheduled to be here tomorrow afternoon.

7-35 seems a little high for my tastes on a 1k gun. But then again, I don't shoot for tiny groups on paper at 1K either. I would rather have a 5x min for a wider FOV and "settle" for 27x on the top and sacrifice the added 7x of the NF. If you are thinking PRS, I highly doubt you will use 35x. That is my opinion.

All.my rifles are hunting rifles. High end hunting rifles with top tier glass, but still for hunting. I have used 3-15×50s for shooting steel out to 1500+ often. Only time I use 20x+ is punching paper of shooting for groups @ 800+. Not for steel though.

 

[jetsurgeon]

Thanks all for the feedback, gives me things to consider. Please keep them coming!

 

[gconnoyer]

I would go with the ZCO personally.

Their reticle is much easier and quicker for me to read, its graduated .2 marks instead of NF staggered and flipped .2 hashes, along with the ZCO having a nice quick .5 hold on the opposite side of the stadia. I really like what they did with it

their glass quality in my opinion is better than the NF and more pleasing to my eye.

Build quality between both is top notch. Both companies are top notch.

 

[bgavin]

I just looked through both the last few days. I have the 7-35 and my friend has ZCO.

The ZCO is a hair better scope all the way around. Like was said above if it’s for prs you won’t use the 35x. I shot a mile last weekend and don’t think I went over 16x.

We shoot for groups out to a 1000 and I like the extra magnification for spotting. It’s like cheating at a 100.

If you have the cash ZCO. But you really can’t go wrong with either one. I found a really good deal on the 7-35 and couldn’t pass it up and happy with it.

 

[GySgt Smith JE]

I just went through the same dilemma. I went with the NF 7X35 MIL-XT. I had an amazing deal pop up for me and couldn’t pass up on it. As some have told me at this “tier” there’s no correct choice or one size fits all. It comes down to what reticle you like and which feature you prefer.

 

[hk dave]

What a great problem to have.. having to choose between these two scopes. ;D

 

[jetsurgeon]

Thank you for the responses, still researching.......

 

[longgunJR]

I run the 5-25 ATACR with Mil-XT reticle. I saved for 2 years to buy one and when the Mil-XT came out I new it was for me.
I would not get another one though and the ZCO gets my vote, I'm not entirely happy with how parallax sensitive the NF is also the tunneling under 7x on the 5-25.

 

[CStroud]

Don't forget to consider resale values.

 

[jetsurgeon]

What do you mean about resale values?

Thanks

 

[jda2631]

I know this wasn't a choice, but have you looked at Minox? I only throw it in because of the deal going right now. Buy a Mauser rifle get 50% off a Minox scope. Check out this thread for more info. The ZP5 5-25x56 is a top tier scope and the MR4 reticle is very similar to the Mil-XT and MPCT-2. I just did it and the scope should arrive tomorrow (if it comes tomorrow, that will be 12 days after I placed the order for the rifle on EuroOptic till I had the scope in my hands). It's about $1200 off the list price when all is said and done, and then if you like you can sell the rifle after the fact to recoup some of the money. It is a pretty screaming deal.

 

[blbennett1288]

I know this wasn't a choice, but have you looked at Minox? I only throw it in because of the deal going right now. Buy a Mauser rifle get 50% off a Minox scope. Check out this thread for more info. The ZP5 5-25x56 is a top tier scope and the MR4 reticle is very similar to the Mil-XT and MPCT-2. I just did it and the scope should arrive tomorrow (if it comes tomorrow, that will be 12 days after I placed the order for the rifle on EuroOptic till I had the scope in my hands). It's about $1200 off the list price when all is said and done, and then if you like you can sell the rifle after the fact to recoup some of the money. It is a pretty screaming deal.

The glass in the ZP5 is better than the ATACR, but other than that it doesn’t even compete with the ATACR 7-35 or ZCO 5-27.

 

[ElectricFuneral]

"The glass in the ZP5 is better than the ATACR, but other than that it doesn’t even compete with the ATACR 7-35 or ZCO 5-27. "

LOL, some of you guys change your mind pretty fast... I guess it's the syndrome of raving about the latest and greatest toy that gets you....

 

[blbennett1288]

LOL, some of you guys change your mind pretty fast... I guess it's the syndrome of raving about the latest and greatest toy that gets you....

Meh, as you progress through Alpha scopes your opinion changes.

In the last year I have owned AMG, K525, ZP5, TT525P, S&B PMII and ATACR 7-35. I have spent a good bit of time behind the ZCO 5-27. I have a pretty solid opinion of what I like and don’t like.

I love the glass and parallax of the ZP5. I used to love the MR4, but I no longer think it is perfect. Everything else about the ZP5 is mediocre. Add in sample variance and the spotty CS and I think you can understand why Minox is allowing their flagship scope to be devalued on purpose.

At the current price it is a steal. But let’s not kid ourselves that great glass makes it an Alpha scope.

 

[ElectricFuneral]

I agree with sample variation being bad at that price point and I hope that Minox can sort that out, but saying that the scope is mediocre is too much. I haven't handled a ZCO so I won't comment on that, but I have experience with NF scopes and I just prefer the design of the Minox: better diopter adjustment system, less finicky parallax, 2 rotations turrets vs 3 rotations (I prefer 2) and reticles. I think the Minox is an alpha scope just as much as the NF.

 

[flyright]

The ATACR's and NF in general have been around the block a time or two. The ZCO's are kinda the new kid on the block but from what I've seen are staying. I've only compared the ZCO 5-27 to the NF 5-25 side by side and I could see the cost split between them but not by a whole bunch. I've never directly compared my 7-35 to the Z but, at this point, I'm not ready to sell it. FWTW. All are very fine optics.

 

[5RWill]

In the same boat with Bennett here in the last two years i've owned the AMG (still do), ATACR, MK5, K525i, K318i, K624i, and now ZP5s. Recently viewed a ZCO. If i'm spending $3000+ i'm going ZCO no questions asked. Honestly if the price ever drops or there is a promotion of some kind when Nick and Jeff can do so, you'll see my ZP5s listed immediately.

In the last year I have owned AMG, K525, ZP5, TT525P, S&B PMII and ATACR 7-35. I have spent a good bit of time behind the ZCO 5-27. I have a pretty solid opinion of what I like and don’t like.

I love the glass and parallax of the ZP5. I used to love the MR4, but I no longer think it is perfect. Everything else about the ZP5 is mediocre. Add in sample variance and the spotty CS and I think you can understand why Minox is allowing their flagship scope to be devalued on purpose.

At the current price it is a steal. But let’s not kid ourselves that great glass makes it an Alpha scope.

I agree though with one caveat if the ZP5 i just received is indicative of what they're putting out it's much better than the one i've been using for the past month or so. Mainly i'm referencing turret feel, it's substantially better. Whether i got lucky or they've changed things is beyond me though. I do agree though glass is not the only criteria.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Better glass, locking turrets, better set and forget parallax, better eye relief, better eyebox, locking quick adjust diopter.

Zcomp

 

[swage2712]

I have three 7-35's. Just picked up my third in Mil XT. With the used scope market the way it is I'll keep them. I like having the high end if I need it. The only issue I have/had is the the diopter has a lot of adjustment. It makes getting the initial set up frustrating. Had the ZCO been easier to acquire I probably would've picked one up. I'm impulsive and hate waiting so that wasn't an option at the time.

 

[Jonnyb0381]

Hi All,

I need some guidance fellas, hopefully from folks who have owned the two scopes I'm looking at. I've been reading alot of good things about both of these rigs, just need a little help.

I'm to the point I want to upgrade my scope on my 6.5 CM, from a Burris XTR II 5-25X50 with the SCR-MIL to either a NightForce ATACR 7-35X56 F1 with the MIL-XT, or considering a Zero Compromise ZC527 5-27X56 with the MPCT 2 reticle.

I know buy once cry once... LOL But seriously is there much difference between these two models? Both are expensive but they are not that much different in price, so to speak. I just don't want to make the wrong choice, that's why I'm asking for some help and guidance. Is one really better or worse than the other?

Will be used for banging steel out to 1000, hopefully next year I'll start this PRS type game.

Thanks for your time, really appreciate it!

All the best,
Jeff

Based on what Ive heard and read, ZCO has my vote. Although I've never put my hands on one.

 

[Jonnyb0381]

I know this wasn't a choice, but have you looked at Minox? I only throw it in because of the deal going right now. Buy a Mauser rifle get 50% off a Minox scope. Check out this thread for more info. The ZP5 5-25x56 is a top tier scope and the MR4 reticle is very similar to the Mil-XT and MPCT-2. I just did it and the scope should arrive tomorrow (if it comes tomorrow, that will be 12 days after I placed the order for the rifle on EuroOptic till I had the scope in my hands). It's about $1200 off the list price when all is said and done, and then if you like you can sell the rifle after the fact to recoup some of the money. It is a pretty screaming deal.

Im getting one myself and I know I wont be sorry. Most on this forum are pretty brand biased and if its not the brand they own they are quick to point out things, rather than speaking from experience or having handled one much or pointing out true facts.
There are some really good reads about high end scopes, in fact some being on the hide. Guess my point is, dont go on opinions w/o digging into the facts.

 

[jetsurgeon]

Thanks everyone for the words of wisdom and guidance, much appreciated. Seriously now I think I’m about 97% there in picking the optic.

Even though I seriously would like to see give the ZCO a shot, I think I’m going to go with then ATACR and here is my reasons.

1. I can save about 500 by going with the ATACR vs the ZCO.
2. With the ZCO need to purchase new 36mm rings / mount..... WTF do these Spur ring / mounts cost 400?
3. I already have 34 mm rings now so the ATACR just drops in, no additional cost.
4. I think having the ZCO zero stop set for .5 Mils below zero would drive me batty, really wish it could be set for zero. ( but what do I know, I’m not used to this, I might like it).
5. Also I think having to pop up and unlock the ZCO turret would also drive me batty, (but again what the hell do I know, I’m not used to that).

So going NF is approx 900 less for me (optic and mount), over the ZCO. Plus I can get a Giraud trimmer with some additional goodies, and the ATACR, and still come out less than going the ZCO route.

I hope I’m not making the wrong decision. Like folks mentioned, with this level of glass, are they really all that different?

Thanks again for everyone’s thoughts, much appreciated!

All the best,
Jeff

 

[Jonnyb0381]

Thanks everyone for the words of wisdom and guidance, much appreciated. Seriously now I think I’m about 97% there in picking the optic.

Even though I seriously would like to see give the ZCO a shot, I think I’m going to go with then ATACR and here is my reasons.

1. I can save about 500 by going with the ATACR vs the ZCO.
2. With the ZCO need to purchase new 36mm rings / mount..... WTF do these Spur ring / mounts cost 400?
3. I already have 34 mm rings now so the ATACR just drops in, no additional cost.
4. I think having the ZCO zero stop set for .5 Mils below zero would drive me batty, really wish it could be set for zero. ( but what do I know, I’m not used to this, I might like it).
5. Also I think having to pop up and unlock the ZCO turret would also drive me batty, (but again what the hell do I know, I’m not used to that).

So going NF is approx 900 less for me (optic and mount), over the ZCO. Plus I can get a Giraud trimmer with some additional goodies, and the ATACR, and still come out less than going the ZCO route.

I hope I’m not making the wrong decision. Like folks mentioned, with this level of glass, are they really all that different?

Thanks again for everyone’s thoughts, much appreciated!

All the best,
Jeff

Im sure you will be very happy.
Only an extreme scope geek would be able to nitpick the differences into different categories. The ZCO is a better scope on paper but the differences arent night and day and at the price point the difference may be worth it to some but not others. Also, some features one may like more about the NF than the ZCO.
Lastly, if you change your mind about the ZCO you can always sell the NF which hold thier value well, at least that's what I always seem to do lol.

 

[Covertnoob5]

Thanks everyone for the words of wisdom and guidance, much appreciated. Seriously now I think I’m about 97% there in picking the optic.

Even though I seriously would like to see give the ZCO a shot, I think I’m going to go with then ATACR and here is my reasons.

1. I can save about 500 by going with the ATACR vs the ZCO.
2. With the ZCO need to purchase new 36mm rings / mount..... WTF do these Spur ring / mounts cost 400?
3. I already have 34 mm rings now so the ATACR just drops in, no additional cost.
4. I think having the ZCO zero stop set for .5 Mils below zero would drive me batty, really wish it could be set for zero. ( but what do I know, I’m not used to this, I might like it).
5. Also I think having to pop up and unlock the ZCO turret would also drive me batty, (but again what the hell do I know, I’m not used to that).

So going NF is approx 900 less for me (optic and mount), over the ZCO. Plus I can get a Giraud trimmer with some additional goodies, and the ATACR, and still come out less than going the ZCO route.

I hope I’m not making the wrong decision. Like folks mentioned, with this level of glass, are they really all that different?

Thanks again for everyone’s thoughts, much appreciated!

All the best,
Jeff

Very well thought out use of funds and no you didn't make the wrong decision. You made the right decision for YOU. And that's the most important aspect of this. We can compare scopes till we're blue in the face, but if the NF fits your needs and part of that includes the savings to use on the best trimmer in the world, then burn it down and shoot on!

 

[Jonnyb0381]

Very well thought out use of funds and no you didn't make the wrong decision. You made the right decision for YOU. And that's the most important aspect of this. We can compare scopes till we're blue in the face, but if the NF fits your needs and part of that includes the savings to use on the best trimmer in the world, then burn it down and shoot on!

I agree with this 110%

 

[Dthomas3523]

36mm rings are not a problem. You can get ARC rings.

If a .5 under zero stop and slight pulling up of turrets drives you nuts, I dunno what to tell you. Neither really matters overall.

But can’t go too wrong with NF if you like them.

 

[Alphadelta33]

Meh, as you progress through Alpha scopes your opinion changes.

In the last year I have owned AMG, K525, ZP5, TT525P, S&B PMII and ATACR 7-35. I have spent a good bit of time behind the ZCO 5-27. I have a pretty solid opinion of what I like and don’t like.

I love the glass and parallax of the ZP5. I used to love the MR4, but I no longer think it is perfect. Everything else about the ZP5 is mediocre. Add in sample variance and the spotty CS and I think you can understand why Minox is allowing their flagship scope to be devalued on purpose.

At the current price it is a steal. But let’s not kid ourselves that great glass makes it an Alpha scope.

What did you like better out of the S&B and the NightForce

 

[blbennett1288]

What did you like better out of the S&B and the NightForce

Nightforce

 

[Alphadelta33]

S

Nightforce

Awesome I just ordered one since the majority like it, what reticle do you have?

 

[blbennett1288]

S
Awesome I just ordered one since the majority like it, what reticle do you have?

I went with MIL-C, but I wouldn’t hesitate to buy a MIL-XT if funds were available

 

[CSTactical]

This deal on a 7-35 Mil-XT is pretty tempting

https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...s-atacr-7-35x56-f1-mil-xt-demo-model.6958658/

 

[Alphadelta33]

I went with MIL-C, but I wouldn’t hesitate to buy a MIL-XT if funds were available

I went with the tremor, they seem similar not sure which one is better though

 

[5RWill]

There is an upcharge for the Horus reticles. Mil-XT is better than anything Horus has IMO

 

[patriot07]

I have not seen a ZCO in person, but a lot of it depends on how much your money is worth to you. What is the price difference?

Optically, the ZCO is likely to be a hair better, only noticeable if you're looking for it with very picky eyes. Everything else is likely to be preference between turrets, reticle, etc. That being said, I'd probably save the money and buy the ATACR if it was me (especially if I could find a 7-35 mil-c for around $2500 on PX), versus spending $1k more on the ZCO. Nothing is going to be worth $1k over the ZCO of my hard-earned dollars. But if someone gave me either for free, I'd likely pick the ZCO.

 

[5RWill]

Idk about the current lot of NFs the last one i had faired very well to the ZP5. ZP5 still edged it out though. But my buddy i turned on to ZCO and i talked about this and we always felt like there is sample variance among ATACRs IQ. Don’t get me wrong there is sample variance among any product. But of the three I’ve seen one was exceptional (the one i sold), one was really good, and the other honestly didn’t hold a candle to my 10 year old SN-3. That must be largely an outlier though because i rarely if ever hear bad things about NFs IQ these days.

NF offers two of the best reticles around, a phenomenal track record, and great glass. No one is likely to be disappointed with one.

Having said that for me personally again if I’m spending retail I’m going ZCO. No sense in spending 3k+ and not getting what you want. Used is a different story you can find ATACRs with the mil-c for 2100-2300 and the mil-xt for 2300-2500. Hard to argue with that.

 

[blbennett1288]

Idk about the current lot of NFs the last one i had faired very well to the ZP5. ZP5 still edged it out though. But my buddy i turned on to ZCO and i talked about this and we always felt like there is sample variance among ATACRs IQ. Don’t get me wrong there is sample variance among any product. But of the three I’ve seen one was exceptional (the one i sold), one was really good, and the other honestly didn’t hold a candle to my 10 year old SN-3. That must be largely an outlier though because i rarely if ever hear bad things about NFs IQ these days.

NF offers two of the best reticles around, a phenomenal track record, and great glass. No one is likely to be disappointed with one.

Having said that for me personally again if I’m spending retail I’m going ZCO. No sense in spending 3k+ and not getting what you want. Used is a different story you can find ATACRs with the mil-c for 2100-2300 and the mil-xt for 2300-2500. Hard to argue with that.

Those have got to be 5-25 pricing numbers. Used 7-35 is $2600 for MIL-C and $3000 for MIL-XT. I suspect the one that didnt do well was largely diopter setting. Mine took 3 full revolutions to really tighten up optically. The parallax doesn’t need the full revolution and is more or less parallax free from 500 yards on. Disclaimer I don’t have anything from 300-500 yards to test in between. Post 500 I left it on the same setting from 500-1000 and was center punching targets no issue. I continually am impressed with the optic with what I have invested in it.

Downsides:

1.) the ocular rotates and is a PITA. I typically stay between 12-15, so not a huge deal but still annoying having to move the rear cover
2.) depending which hand you use to dial elevation you may roll the parallax if using the left hand. Not a huge deal if past 500 yards, because for me there is zero change, but inside 500 it could make a difference.
3.) Above x25 there is dimisnishing returns in the glass. CA becomes really apparent around ~ x30. Resolution and Clarity appear to fall off slightly.

 

[Nik H]

Those have got to be 5-25 pricing numbers. Used 7-35 is $2600 for MIL-C and $3000 for MIL-XT. I suspect the one that didnt do well was largely diopter setting. Mine took 3 full revolutions to really tighten up optically. The parallax doesn’t need the full revolution and is more or less parallax free from 500 yards on. Disclaimer I don’t have anything from 300-500 yards to test in between. Post 500 I left it on the same setting from 500-1000 and was center punching targets no issue. I continually am impressed with the optic with what I have invested in it.

Downsides:

1.) the ocular rotates and is a PITA. I typically stay between 12-15, so not a huge deal but still annoying having to move the rear cover
2.) depending which hand you use to dial elevation you may roll the parallax if using the left hand. Not a huge deal if past 500 yards, because for me there is zero change, but inside 500 it could make a difference.
3.) Above x25 there is dimisnishing returns in the glass. CA becomes really apparent around ~ x30. Resolution and Clarity appear to fall off slightly.

Admittedly, I have not used the ZCO or ever seen one. However, this entire thread could have ZCO replaced with Tangent Theta and we would be re-living conversations that were had a couple of years ago when TT was the new kid on the block. I remember having a ton of back and forth angst regarding the TT due to the hype. Should I buy one or not...sight unseen??? Then I went to a class and there were two people that had the TT and I got to spend some time behind it. The end result...glad I didn't buy one. IMHO, and I am not a scope guru, not worth $1,000 more than my NF. No fucking way....

Now it is 2019 and we find ourselves having the same conversation only TT is now ZCO. We are still comparing it to NF though. That hasn't changed. Once again, I hope the hype is true this time. I love my 7-35 but it does have some quirks. Personally, being left handed, the rotating ocular is not a big deal. Parallax drove me nuts until I learned how to set it up. The Zero Stop is something I love due to the fact that I use it with an AI AT and run different calibers.

When I finally see a ZCO, I will act accordingly

 

[blbennett1288]

Admittedly, I have not used the ZCO or ever seen one. However, this entire thread could have ZCO replaced with Tangent Theta and we would be re-living conversations that were had a couple of years ago when TT was the new kid on the block. I remember having a ton of back and forth angst regarding the TT due to the hype. Should I buy one or not...sight unseen??? Then I went to a class and there were two people that had the TT and I got to spend some time behind it. The end result...glad I didn't buy one. IMHO and I am not a scope guru, not worth $1,000 more than my NF. No fucking way....

Now it is 2019 and we find ourselves having the same conversation only TT is now ZCO. We are still comparing it to NF though. That hasn't changed. Once again, I hope the hype is true this time. I love my 7-35 but it does have some quirks. Personally, being left handed, the rotating ocular is not a big deal. Parallax drove me nuts until I learned how to set it up. The Zero Stop is something I love due to the fact that I use it with an AI AT and run different calibers.

When I finally see one, I will act accordingly

Yeah I down graded from TT to NF. Yes, I do miss some aspects of the TT; namely the glass and turrets. Is it worth the difference? That is for your wallet to decide.

For me no, I was able to purchase a new barrel and brass with the difference.

The NF turrets are quickly growing on me, are they TT level? No, but I think they are next in class for non-locking.

Is it TT glass? Is it a noticeable step down? No, and yes it is a noticeable step down. Does it matter? For me at my current state of mediocrity, no.

My opinion may not be true for your current situation as a shooter but hoping that my experience may help others in my situation

 

[Nik H]

Yeah I down graded from TT to NF. Yes, I do miss some aspects of the TT; namely the glass and turrets. Is it worth the difference? That is for your wallet to decide.

For me no, I was able to purchase a new barrel and brass with the difference.

The NF turrets are quickly growing on me, are they TT level? No, but I think they are next in class for non-locking.

Is it TT glass? Is it a noticeable step down? No, and yes it is a noticeable step down. Does it matter? For me at my current state of mediocrity, no.

My opinion may not be true for your current situation as a shooter but hoping that my experience may help others in my situation

I don't know if I fully agree although I am likely older than you and don't have the eyesight any longer. I thought the glass on the TT was a little clearer and had a different color balance but was it super noticeable??? Not sure.

Turrets on the TT were best part...and I am not talking about the "tool-less zero". I couldn’t give two fucks and a bottle of cold piss about that. Turret tactile feel was just heaven and legibility was best in class on the TT. However, I agree that the NF is no slouch here. It is a DAMN step up over my S&Bs.

The GenIIXR reticle versus the MIL-C is a joke. I am a reticle snob and even though I do like the GenIIXR, it is no way a MIL-C. The XT was not around

As you put it, the extra $1,000-$1,200 is a value judgement for the individual to make. In my case, it was a no go. ZCO is MUCH closer in cost so now we have a potential value proposition that makes sense. Would love to see a ZCO and I am sure I will eventually

 

[Mxridr]

ZCO is an amazing optic. Wish I had the funds. Don’t look thru it.

 

[5RWill]

Those have got to be 5-25 pricing numbers. Used 7-35 is $2600 for MIL-C and $3000 for MIL-XT. I suspect the one that didnt do well was largely diopter setting. Mine took 3 full revolutions to really tighten up optically. The parallax doesn’t need the full revolution and is more or less parallax free from 500 yards on. Disclaimer I don’t have anything from 300-500 yards to test in between. Post 500 I left it on the same setting from 500-1000 and was center punching targets no issue. I continually am impressed with the optic with what I have invested in it.

Downsides:

1.) the ocular rotates and is a PITA. I typically stay between 12-15, so not a huge deal but still annoying having to move the rear cover
2.) depending which hand you use to dial elevation you may roll the parallax if using the left hand. Not a huge deal if past 500 yards, because for me there is zero change, but inside 500 it could make a difference.
3.) Above x25 there is dimisnishing returns in the glass. CA becomes really apparent around ~ x30. Resolution and Clarity appear to fall off slightly.

Oh yeah i was referencing the 5-25 not the 7-35.

 

[jetsurgeon]

Earlier today I pulled the trigger, ATACR 7-35 F1 Mil-XT. Also ordered the Giraud Power Trimmer and some goodies.

This thread has been very helpful in my decision, and again I want to say thank you to all that provided input and guidance, much appreciated!

All the best,
Jeff

 

[Diver160651]

Thanks for your input. One thing I do like about the ATACR is the ZERO STOP actually stops on Zero. From what I read the ZCO ZERO STOP is .5 mils below Zero. That alone would probably drive me crazy but I'm not sure because I'm not used to heaving a zero stop set below zero..... Can the ZCO zero stop be set to actually stop on zero?

Thanks!

WTF is in the Water ???? This is as weird as it gets

 

[jetsurgeon]

What’s up Diver?