Rifle Scopes Nightforce ATACR™ 4-16x42 F1?? Opinions wanted

[pharmvet]

i have been researching Scopes like crazy. I’m looking to purchase my first high end scope. I’m looking for a good fit for my M1A medium barrel DMR (type) rifle. I don’t mind spending a little money on this. I’ve considered Leupold MK6, US Optics, Trijicon and the Nightforce mentioned in the title.
what is your opinion of theATACR™ 4-16x42 F1 ? What reticle would you suggest?

 

[1911hombre]

I have one in MIL-R and it is stellar. Great glass. As far as what reticle that depends on what you want out of it. MIL-R is not very popular any more but I just wanted a simple reticle and it works for my purposes. I would definitely pass on the Mk6 3-18; I've had a few and the Mk5 HD is way nicer and tracks better. The ATACR stands above all the scopes you mentioned IMO.

 

[pharmvet]

What are your thoughts on the TREMOR3 reticle?

 

[wigwamitus]

haha, the T3 is truly an enigma. For those who swear by them, they are the bees knees ... for others they are "too busy" ... or other words that imply dislike. They are not for everyone. It depends on what you are trying to do.
If you would use a DMR rifle like a DMR rifle, the T3 is probably overkill. But that's just my opinion ... and I'm a T3 "bigot"

So, the T3 is good at speeding up unknown distance shots out to a certain distance, which depends on the cartridge, the rifle and the target size among other factors. Using the wind dots (the key differentiating feature of the T3) enables you to skip using a ballistics calculator for wind. You baseline your wind and then listen for the trees or other signals about rising wind and think in MPH and hold in MPH. No conversion to mils. Now at some point aero jump is going to become significant ... and you will want to switch back to your ballistics calculator to pick that up. And that means you won't be using the winddots any more. Some people say this is 600yds ... but again, it depends.

When I'm doing "wind practice" .. I focus on 1st rd hits ... and that means the first shot at the target from that position. I have several berms on my land ... and each berm determines a set of stages ... positions from which I can shoot. In some cases I can hit multiple berms from one position. But, in theory these are UKD shots and they mostly were for a while ... but by now ... I can tell you pretty closely what the distance is to within 20yds worst case. But I still practice like its UKD. But 1 shot per target, per position period, hit or miss. I shoot 8-12 target/positions for each wind practice session. Usually from 425yds out to 1050yds.

Here's thru lens pic of first first rd hit (on third day's attempt) at 1050yds ...

This was with .300WM(24) and A191 factory at 3001 MV ... that was some smooth shooting ammo ... able to get consistent sub .4 IPHY groups at 100yds with it, even with me shooting. On this day, I called the wind a 4 MPH and held for 4 MPH. Kestrel/AB said 8.4 mils up, so I held that and squeezed the trigger ... and a long time later heard a "ping" ...

Here's the .300WM(24) on a different day, same ammo, shooting 8 targets, 425, 504, 604 and 726 ... torso and face. I hit the target 8 times, but the 604 "face" shot was low and right and impacted the torso, which was a miss.

I use the wind dots out beyond the "theoretical" distance I should ... but I'm shooting at target that is 24 inches tall (torso ... which includes the face) usually ... though "face" is the 6x6 square on top.

If you click on the pic and zoom your browser, you should be able to see all the individual hits.

This was NF 7-35x T3 scope, so even though I was shooting on 15x, I would dial up to 30x-35x for "spotting". And the face shoots are pretty close together, except for the miss.

==
So I love the T3, for what I use it for, which is long distance wind practice with bolt guns, from 425yds to 1050yds ... For DMR, I use scopes like the NF 2.5-10x MIL-R ... lighter and shorter and lower bottom end ... more FOV.

==
As to the ATACR 4-16x T3 ...

I like everything about it EXCEPT ... to remove parallax at 100yds ... I need to set it to about 200yds on the dial ... and that makes it out of focus. I can get sub 0.4 IPHY groups with good ammo, but the image is fuzzy and I wish it wasn't. One person said, I should have it checked, their's isn't like that ... so maybe I will. But in the field there's no issue as I'm not trying to parallax at 100yds in the field.

==
I saw you mentioned the mk6 ... I also use it ...

It also an enigma I think it that many people don't like it ... I love it ... and I think I barely like it better than the 4-16x ...

Its shorter and lighter ... and I use NV/Thermal clipons so shorter and lighter is good. Shorter makes it easier to mount the clipon ... lighter makes it easier to carry thru the woods and over the fences and up and down the creek banks around where I am.

The 3x on the bottom gives more FOV, this is good for critter control.

It parallaxes better than the 4-16x.

Adjusting the diopter is its weak spot ... but I sent it in and L&S did "something" to it and now its easier. Its still hard (to turn) but at least I now can do it. I couldn't move it before.

Its hard to get a lens shade for it ... but I was able to get one.

I do like the NF T3 illum better than the L&S T3 illum because the NF has green also. I rarely use the illum but when I do, I use the green because it is dimmer ...

Right now, those are my two T3 scopes on my 7.62x51 bolt guns ... I like them both ... from a resale perspective, the ATACR probably has the edge, but from a "how does it work in the field" ... I'd give the mk6 a tiny edge, due to parallax and FOV ...

 

[pharmvet]

haha, the T3 is truly an enigma. For those who swear by them, they are the bees knees ... for others they are "too busy" ... or other words that imply dislike. They are not for everyone. It depends on what you are trying to do.
If you would use a DMR rifle like a DMR rifle, the T3 is probably overkill. But that's just my opinion ... and I'm a T3 "bigot"

So, the T3 is good at speeding up unknown distance shots out to a certain distance, which depends on the cartridge, the rifle and the target size among other factors. Using the wind dots (the key differentiating feature of the T3) enables you to skip using a ballistics calculator for wind. You baseline your wind and then listen for the trees or other signals about rising wind and think in MPH and hold in MPH. No conversion to mils. Now at some point aero jump is going to become significant ... and you will want to switch back to your ballistics calculator to pick that up. And that means you won't be using the winddots any more. Some people say this is 600yds ... but again, it depends.

When I'm doing "wind practice" .. I focus on 1st rd hits ... and that means the first shot at the target from that position. I have several berms on my land ... and each berm determines a set of stages ... positions from which I can shoot. In some cases I can hit multiple berms from one position. But, in theory these are UKD shots and they mostly were for a while ... but by now ... I can tell you pretty closely what the distance is to within 20yds worst case. But I still practice like its UKD. But 1 shot per target, per position period, hit or miss. I shoot 8-12 target/positions for each wind practice session. Usually from 425yds out to 1050yds.

Here's thru lens pic of first first rd hit (on third day's attempt) at 1050yds ...

This was with .300WM(24) and A191 factory at 3001 MV ... that was some smooth shooting ammo ... able to get consistent sub .4 IPHY groups at 100yds with it, even with me shooting. On this day, I called the wind a 4 MPH and held for 4 MPH. Kestrel/AB said 8.4 mils up, so I held that and squeezed the trigger ... and a long time later heard a "ping" ...

Here's the .300WM(24) on a different day, same ammo, shooting 8 targets, 425, 504, 604 and 726 ... torso and face. I hit the target 8 times, but the 604 "face" shot was low and right and impacted the torso, which was a miss.

I use the wind dots out beyond the "theoretical" distance I should ... but I'm shooting at target that is 24 inches tall (torso ... which includes the face) usually ... though "face" is the 6x6 square on top.

If you click on the pic and zoom your browser, you should be able to see all the individual hits.

This was NF 7-35x T3 scope, so even though I was shooting on 15x, I would dial up to 30x-35x for "spotting". And the face shoots are pretty close together, except for the miss.

==
So I love the T3, for what I use it for, which is long distance wind practice with bolt guns, from 425yds to 1050yds ... For DMR, I use scopes like the NF 2.5-10x MIL-R ... lighter and shorter and lower bottom end ... more FOV.

==
As to the ATACR 4-16x T3 ...

I like everything about it EXCEPT ... to remove parallax at 100yds ... I need to set it to about 200yds on the dial ... and that makes it out of focus. I can get sub 0.4 IPHY groups with good ammo, but the image is fuzzy and I wish it wasn't. One person said, I should have it checked, their's isn't like that ... so maybe I will. But in the field there's no issue as I'm not trying to parallax at 100yds in the field.

==
I saw you mentioned the mk6 ... I also use it ...

It also an enigma I think it that many people don't like it ... I love it ... and I think I barely like it better than the 4-16x ...

Its shorter and lighter ... and I use NV/Thermal clipons so shorter and lighter is good. Shorter makes it easier to mount the clipon ... lighter makes it easier to carry thru the woods and over the fences and up and down the creek banks around where I am.

The 3x on the bottom gives more FOV, this is good for critter control.

It parallaxes better than the 4-16x.

Adjusting the diopter is its weak spot ... but I sent it in and L&S did "something" to it and now its easier. Its still hard (to turn) but at least I now can do it. I couldn't move it before.

Its hard to get a lens shade for it ... but I was able to get one.

I do like the NF T3 illum better than the L&S T3 illum because the NF has green also. I rarely use the illum but when I do, I use the green because it is dimmer ...

Right now, those are my two T3 scopes on my 7.62x51 bolt guns ... I like them both ... from a resale perspective, the ATACR probably has the edge, but from a "how does it work in the field" ... I'd give the mk6 a tiny edge, due to parallax and FOV ...

In your opinion, what will the TREMOR3 reticle do for you that the Mil-XT won’t?

 

[CrabsandFootball]

Would rather find a S&B 4-16x42 or 50 with XR2 Reticle.

 

[dms416]

Would rather find a S&B 4-16x42 or 50 with XR2 Reticle.

Good luck finding those... especially the x42

 

[CrabsandFootball]

Good luck finding those... especially the x42

Right on. Such a great little scope I wish S&B still made them. Perfect for a gas gun.

 

[M8541Reaper]

I have a 4-16x42 with a mil-r and an M1A. While the scope isn’t currently mounted on that rifle, it would definitely be the one I slap on if I was going to bring the M1A out for the day.

As for reticle choice, I prefer the Mil-C to the Mil-R, but on a system like the M1A or an AR, the Mil-R is a solid choice. I used to be a Horus fan, and had an H58 and H59 but I doubt I’ll ever go back to them (let alone ever buy the T3) because they released the Mil-XT. That reticle is everything you could want in a traditional grid system setup. That being said, for an M1A or AR platform, I’d choose the Mil-R or Mil-C over a grid reticle.

 

[M8541Reaper]

Also, the others listed in your post don’t even come close to competing with the 4-16 ATACR.

 

[wigwamitus]

... In your opinion, what will the TREMOR3 reticle do for you that the Mil-XT won’t? ...

The Wind Dots ... (T3 has a couple of other features, but the wind dots are the primary differentiator)

The only other reticle I know of with Wind Dots is the DTR. I hope one day I get up the nerve to try it. My fear is, if I do try it. I'll have to replace all my scopes again

The DTR is to the T3, as the T3 is to the Mil-XT ...

The T3 removes the need for ballistic calculator reference for wind holds when engaging multi-UKD targets. You make your wind call in MPH and hold that MPH with the wind dots, which you calibrated to your ammunition/Rifle prior to shooting with them. It seemed a bit complex for the first 2-3 days ... until I figured it out. Then it seemed easier than drinking a sip of water. That was 2.5 years ago.

==
I still have a couple of mil-hash reticles, aka dialing reticles, I don't want to loose the old skills either and one of them (the NF 2.5-10x MIL-R) is even an SFP. Don't want to forget the even older skills with those ! But on my bolt guns, that I expect to be able to reach out, I would not go back. I will either stick with the T3s or go forward to the DTRs.

The DTR removes the need for a ballistic calculator period. The reticle IS the ballistic calculator. Note how the aero-jump is built in to the DTR. To use the DTR you do have to determine the density altitude. But my Kestrel will do that!

Right now, the DTR are only available on the L&S Mk5 scopes. Though it has been available on the L&S Mk6 and if you had a mk6 you could get the DTR swapped out on it. L&S will do it and charge you extra for David Tubb's royalty for the reticle.

Dynamic Targeting Reticle (DTR®) Scopes

Dynamic Targeting Reticle (DTR) Scopes and Scope Mounted bubble levels for precision and accuracy in shooting.

www.davidtubb.com

==
The NF 2.5-10x MIL-R is on one of my mk12s ... those I expect to be able to reach out to 770yds (12 inch steel, night or day, rain or shine, hot or cold, up to 25 mph first rd hit) ... but typically they are shooting much closer in ... doing critter control inside 500yds ... at night. So the DMR sort of scopes work just fine on them.

==
Now what can the T3 or Mik-XT both do that the mil-hash reticles can't do ? The mil-hash are designed to "dial for elevation and hold for wind" ... I use range finders mounted on my rifles.

Those range finders are calibrated (co-witnessed) to the day scope reticle as it sits at 100yds. If I dial, then I can't range. So, in order to range and shoot efficiently with the Range finders on there, we need "No Dial" reticles ... these are also called "holding reticles" (and other names as well ) ... but the point is, except when you are zeroing ... (or shooting beyond 1000yds) then you do not dial. This ensures your range finder can be used at any instant.

Otherwise, you have to dial down to 100yds and range, dial up to shoot, dial down to range for target #2, dial up to shoot target #2, dial down to range for target #3, dial up to shoot for target #3. With a no dial reticle you sit on 100yds and range and hold and shoot and range and hold and shoot and range and hold and shoot. I engage targets out over 1000yds without dialing. But at some point you're gonna need to dial if you keep going longer. Then you have to switch to the dial down range, dial up shoot, dial down range, dial up shoot method. But until you run out of reticle, you don't have to do that.

==
So both the T3 and the Mil-XT can do the "no dial" thing. But the T3 adds the wind dots, so you can adjust your wind hold by making mental wind call in MPH and holding for that MPH with no ballistic calculator reference. That's what the T3 can do (and the DTR) that the Mil-XT cannot do.

 

[Terry Cross]

i have been researching Scopes like crazy. I’m looking to purchase my first high end scope. I’m looking for a good fit for my M1A medium barrel DMR (type) rifle. I don’t mind spending a little money on this. I’ve considered Leupold MK6, US Optics, Trijicon and the Nightforce mentioned in the title.
what is your opinion of theATACR™ 4-16x42 F1 ? What reticle would you suggest?

That scope is excellent.
I have 2 that are used hard on demo guns and brought as spares to classes in case a scope goes down on a student rifle.
Not uncommon to have both of mine on other people's rifles by Day 2 or 3.

This particular model also has the turrets I wish NF had put on ALL their scopes years ago. Low profile without all the BS.
We are using the MiL-R reticles and they work perfectly for what we need them for.

Even though I am not a fan of the Tremors/Horus family, I would encourage you to look at one of those reticles or the Mil-XT if you are going true DMR type use.

For what we do, we promote dialing dope when possible. However DMR and overwatch type roles should be ready to roll with pure reticle holds which the Tremors and XT would be slightly better at depending on your distance and conditions.

Regardless of your reticle choice, the 4-16x42 is true commercial grade with excellent glass.

There was a previous thread that had more specific info on this scope vs the 50mm version a few months ago. You may want to search and review that as well.

./

 

[Pappasniper]

Great scope, I have mine on a MWS in 6.5. Its one of my favorite scopes in that mag range. I did the plain Jane Mil R reticle I believe it is called.

PB

 

[tanders11]

So the answer here is yes to this scope and get either mil-c or mil-xt?

 

[kai24]

Old guy here...........

Eyes are needing the surgery shortly, but I have been using the 4-16 with the MOAR. Reticle is a bit thicker and its very usable for me. Can still do elevation, although I mostly dial. Windage works fine unless it's a gale force wind. I don't shoot PRS so I can take my time. I have it mounted on a LRB scout with a NF 20MOA mount. Great glass, excellent turrets and built like a tank. It takes the semi auto pounding in stride. I shoot mostly 5-600 yards max and have had no problems with the weapon or scope. Highly recommended. If your eyes are still good, I probably look at one of the uncluttered Mil reticles.

Enjoy!

 

[Crews]

I’ve had 2 of these scope in the past, and currently have a 3rd on my main hunting rifle. I just keep on coming back to them.

Opinions will always vary, but as far as I’m concerned there isn’t a better all-around practical application field use scope out there for $2k-ish. It’s compact, the glass is excellent, and the low profile turret is money. Mil-C is a great reticle. The whole eyepiece rotating is the only source of irritation. However, I’d have to spend a lot more money to alleviate that gripe and have comparable features and performance, so I have learned to live with it.

 

[lennyo3034]

Just bought one. Went with Mil-XT. The 4-16 has a thicker reticle than the 5-25 or 7-35. I like thicker reticles because they are more useable at lower magnification. The 4-16 with the mil-XT has .043 mil line thickness which I believe is the thickest reticle with .02 mil wins holds.

 

[mildot326]

That scope is excellent.
I have 2 that are used hard on demo guns and brought as spares to classes in case a scope goes down on a student rifle.
Not uncommon to have both of mine on other people's rifles by Day 2 or 3.

This particular model also has the turrets I wish NF had put on ALL their scopes years ago. Low profile without all the BS.
We are using the MiL-R reticles and they work perfectly for what we need them for.

Even though I am not a fan of the Tremors/Horus family, I would encourage you to look at one of those reticles or the Mil-XT if you are going true DMR type use.

For what we do, we promote dialing dope when possible. However DMR and overwatch type roles should be ready to roll with pure reticle holds which the Tremors and XT would be slightly better at depending on your distance and conditions.

Regardless of your reticle choice, the 4-16x42 is true commercial grade with excellent glass.

There was a previous thread that had more specific info on this scope vs the 50mm version a few months ago. You may want to search and review that as well.

./

Thanks Terry, are you using the C552 model? It looks like Nightforce has "discontinued" the 4X16X50 model and replaced it with the 4X20X50 model.

 

[Terry Cross]

Thanks Terry, are you using the C552 model? It looks like Nightforce has "discontinued" the 4X16X50 model and replaced it with the 4X20X50 model.

Yes sir. Both are the Mil-R reticled C552.

./

 

[mildot326]

Yes sir. Both are the Mil-R reticled C552.

./

BTW, I'm just curious about your choice of rings? & height? I'm using one your stocks , & I usually opt for Badger M40A rings , however this being somewhat of a "compact" scope, I'm thinking maybe going with Nightforce 1"-mediun? or the 1.125" height?

 

[Terry Cross]

BTW, I'm just curious about your choice of rings? & height? I'm using one your stocks , & I usually opt for Badger M40A rings , however this being somewhat of a "compact" scope, I'm thinking maybe going with Nightforce 1"-mediun? or the 1.125" height?

I am a super die hard NF Ultra HD ring whore. Regardless of what optic a client chooses, I try to push them to the NF.

The way we are using these scopes, we are no where close to your preferred height.
We use the 1.375" height 34mm rings.
This is to get the scope axis closer to coincident with PVS 27 and 30 when mounted.

I have found the NF Ultra HD rings to be perfect. Even in .338LM and heavy 30s we have never had a scope torque or move. The std. 4 screw ring config is just fine. The only time I use any of the 6 screw versions is when using a RAP that is going to use 6 screws worth of scope tube space anyway. As in the pic above I stay with the 4 screw on the rear ring and go 6 screw on the front.

Adjustable cheek stocks and chassis allow for perfect head position even with higher rings compared to the old days. As I've gotten older, I found that i actually prefer the higher rings anyway because they allow a more favorable head angle with less neck stress compared to the lower rings of yesterday.

Not saying that's what you should do. Just explaining why I do what I do.


./

 

[mildot326]

I am a super die hard NF Ultra HD ring whore. Regardless of what optic a client chooses, I try to push them to the NF.

The way we are using these scopes, we are no where close to your preferred height.
We use the 1.375" height 34mm rings.
This is to get the scope axis closer to coincident with PVS 27 and 30 when mounted.
View attachment 7715538

I have found the NF Ultra HD rings to be perfect. Even in .338LM and heavy 30s we have never had a scope torque or move. The std. 4 screw ring config is just fine. The only time I use any of the 6 screw versions is when using a RAP that is going to use 6 screws worth of scope tube space anyway. As in the pic above I stay with the 4 screw on the rear ring and go 6 screw on the front.

Adjustable cheek stocks and chassis allow for perfect head position even with higher rings compared to the old days. As I've gotten older, I found that i actually prefer the higher rings anyway because they allow a more favorable head angle with less neck stress compared to the lower rings of yesterday.

Not saying that's what you should do. Just explaining why I do what I do.


./

OK, good info, so without the PVS, 1.125" should be fine, my boss is using those & the height seems fine. Thanks for the info, I like to try new things or products. I like Nightforce & I'm happy to spend my $ with them. Cheers

 

[deersniper]

Mil xt

 

[powdahound76]

I am a super die hard whore.

forgive my 17 yr old humor in an old grey beard…..

 

[Terry Cross]

forgive my 17 yr old humor in an old grey beard…..

Well . . . . calling a spade a spade....
No harm, no foul and I have plenty of the grey.

./

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

Well . . . . calling a spade a spade....
No harm, no foul and I have plenty of the grey.

./

The whoredom might finally explain the shorts....

 

[Terry Cross]

The whoredom might finally explain the shorts....

Me as uncle Scar...

 

[nick338]

My favorite compact, high end scope I have owned to date and love the Mil-C reticle. I know this thread is old but for the original question I can't think of a better option on an M1A type of rifle. Great glass and the 42mm objective allows the scope to be mounted lower for a better cheek weld. Unless someone is a magnification junkie, the power range is right in the sweet spot as well.

My only complaint if I had one is the reticle is difficult but not impossible to use at 4X with the Mil-C center dot.