I have a question for you guys that have used both. I am looking at one of these for a 14.5" AR. It will be my go to rifle. I have very bad eyes so I am wondering how much that extra top end will do for me. I have looked through several Kahles 1-6 and am impressed but have not had the chance to look at the NF atacr. I have looked through the nx8 but did not like it . Thanks for the input.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Nightforce atacr 1-8 vs kahles 1-6
- Thread starter dozer460
- Start date
For 1x performance, the Kahles is king. Its also only 17 ounces which I value greatly...and the mount will be lighter as well.
Do you plan on dialing your dope, ever? If so, the ATACR will be the better choice or if you just have to have the extra 2 power or FFP.
Do you plan on dialing your dope, ever? If so, the ATACR will be the better choice or if you just have to have the extra 2 power or FFP.
Last edited:
The ATACR 1-8x is the most amazing scope I have ever held. If you were to buy one scope, that would be the one. Kahles makes great scopes. You are comparing two world class scopes. The ATACR is a little heavier. Both will give you great 1x with a very large eyebox. You looked at the NX8. Those are great scopes, but different. The NX8 is scope that happens to be 1-8x. You still need a cheek weld.
The ATACR and the Kahles, and for that matter, the Razor 1-6x are made for two eyes open shooting. For me, there is no comparison who wins between these three. It is the ATACR. Solid red-dot two eye open shooting. Heavy duty, through it in the trench military tough. Pick it up and zoom to 8x when you need it. If it is weight, I think the Kahles is a little lighter. Price, then the Vortex wins, but it is heavy. Vortex has improved on the weight, but it still doubles for a hammer when you need it.
You said 14.5" barrel, which tells me that you want tactical performance. Again, vote for ATACR. If you had 16" barrel, a Kahles might fit.
I have been just so impressed with the ATACR 1-8x that it is hard for me to consider another scope in that market. I do like the S&B 1-8x Dual, but it takes a little getting used to (both first and second focal), and you have added another $1k. While I really like the S&B, I don't see it worth that much more.
That said, you are in good company, and which ever has the reticle and weight and durability for your gun, you will not regret any of the scopes mentioned.
The ATACR and the Kahles, and for that matter, the Razor 1-6x are made for two eyes open shooting. For me, there is no comparison who wins between these three. It is the ATACR. Solid red-dot two eye open shooting. Heavy duty, through it in the trench military tough. Pick it up and zoom to 8x when you need it. If it is weight, I think the Kahles is a little lighter. Price, then the Vortex wins, but it is heavy. Vortex has improved on the weight, but it still doubles for a hammer when you need it.
You said 14.5" barrel, which tells me that you want tactical performance. Again, vote for ATACR. If you had 16" barrel, a Kahles might fit.
I have been just so impressed with the ATACR 1-8x that it is hard for me to consider another scope in that market. I do like the S&B 1-8x Dual, but it takes a little getting used to (both first and second focal), and you have added another $1k. While I really like the S&B, I don't see it worth that much more.
That said, you are in good company, and which ever has the reticle and weight and durability for your gun, you will not regret any of the scopes mentioned.
Can't go wrong with either.
I have the ATACR on a 308, and the Kahles on a 16" 5.56
- Kahles eyebox 'feels' a bit bigger to me, but they're both great, and have excellent glass.
(I wasn't happy with the image clarity on the NF out of the box at distances beyond 125yds+, as the images weren't crisp/resolved fully, and sent it into CS - not sure if they changed a lens or adjusted the fixed parallax, but it's perfect now and every bit as good as the Kahles image.)
- Kahles is slightly easier to stay in/on when dialed up to 6x, as compared to the ATACR at 8x, but I haven't had issues with either.
- FOV is a bit cleaner in appearance as well, if you don't like a busy tree style reticle, although the NF FC-DM reticle is by no means overly busy or cluttered.
I prefer the ATACR for use as a larger Aimpoint style red dot, as well as for max mag when dialed up for holdovers (I keep the elevation turret capped on both) but that's also taking into consideration that I can stretch the 308 out a bit farther than the 5.56
I think you'll have to boil it down to which options/features you prefer, as well as reticle choice and focal plane. The ATACR reticle, being FFP, changes with magnification, but the reticle stays the same size *in relation to the target* irrespective of magnification - whereas the Kahles reticle, being SFP, always stays the same size, irrespective of magnification, and reticle/holdover values change relative to the magnification setting. I think of the Kahles SM1 as a much more refined Eotech style reticle, with elevation holds and a very fine center dot, which is better for pinpoint aiming vs. the ATACR center dot.
The illumination on the Kahles increases/decreases with the rheostat control, and is always on, as with an Aimpoint or Eotech, whereas the ATACR has an off position in between each brightness setting, which is my preference.
The Kahles lends slightly better to a 5.56 in my opinion, considering the caliber ability and distances with which it will be used - as well as the overall weight and size of both - but you'll be golden with either, and an argument could be made for either of them in regard to a specific rifle platform/caliber. The extra 2x will help with target evaluation/PID etc., but the ATACR center will also be covering more of the target at max mag, as compared to the Kahles at max mag.
Reference this thread about the ATACR, and post #160 from 00bullitt in particular: https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...r-f1-1-8x24mm-34mm-tube-models.6798633/page-4
I have the ATACR on a 308, and the Kahles on a 16" 5.56
- Kahles eyebox 'feels' a bit bigger to me, but they're both great, and have excellent glass.
(I wasn't happy with the image clarity on the NF out of the box at distances beyond 125yds+, as the images weren't crisp/resolved fully, and sent it into CS - not sure if they changed a lens or adjusted the fixed parallax, but it's perfect now and every bit as good as the Kahles image.)
- Kahles is slightly easier to stay in/on when dialed up to 6x, as compared to the ATACR at 8x, but I haven't had issues with either.
- FOV is a bit cleaner in appearance as well, if you don't like a busy tree style reticle, although the NF FC-DM reticle is by no means overly busy or cluttered.
I prefer the ATACR for use as a larger Aimpoint style red dot, as well as for max mag when dialed up for holdovers (I keep the elevation turret capped on both) but that's also taking into consideration that I can stretch the 308 out a bit farther than the 5.56
I think you'll have to boil it down to which options/features you prefer, as well as reticle choice and focal plane. The ATACR reticle, being FFP, changes with magnification, but the reticle stays the same size *in relation to the target* irrespective of magnification - whereas the Kahles reticle, being SFP, always stays the same size, irrespective of magnification, and reticle/holdover values change relative to the magnification setting. I think of the Kahles SM1 as a much more refined Eotech style reticle, with elevation holds and a very fine center dot, which is better for pinpoint aiming vs. the ATACR center dot.
The illumination on the Kahles increases/decreases with the rheostat control, and is always on, as with an Aimpoint or Eotech, whereas the ATACR has an off position in between each brightness setting, which is my preference.
The Kahles lends slightly better to a 5.56 in my opinion, considering the caliber ability and distances with which it will be used - as well as the overall weight and size of both - but you'll be golden with either, and an argument could be made for either of them in regard to a specific rifle platform/caliber. The extra 2x will help with target evaluation/PID etc., but the ATACR center will also be covering more of the target at max mag, as compared to the Kahles at max mag.
Reference this thread about the ATACR, and post #160 from 00bullitt in particular: https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...r-f1-1-8x24mm-34mm-tube-models.6798633/page-4
Excellent breakdown.Can't go wrong with either.
I have the ATACR on a 308, and the Kahles on a 16" 5.56
- Kahles eyebox 'feels' a bit bigger to me, but they're both great, and have excellent glass.
(I wasn't happy with the image clarity on the NF out of the box at distances beyond 125yds+, as the images weren't crisp/resolved fully, and sent it into CS - not sure if they changed a lens or adjusted the fixed parallax, but it's perfect now and every bit as good as the Kahles image.)
- Kahles is slightly easier to stay in/on when dialed up to 6x, as compared to the ATACR at 8x, but I haven't had issues with either.
- FOV is a bit cleaner in appearance as well, if you don't like a busy tree style reticle, although the NF FC-DM reticle is by no means overly busy or cluttered.
I prefer the ATACR for use as a larger Aimpoint style red dot, as well as for max mag when dialed up for holdovers (I keep the elevation turret capped on both) but that's also taking into consideration that I can stretch the 308 out a bit farther than the 5.56
I think you'll have to boil it down to which options/features you prefer, as well as reticle choice and focal plane. The ATACR reticle, being FFP, changes with magnification, but the reticle stays the same size *in relation to the target* irrespective of magnification - whereas the Kahles reticle, being SFP, always stays the same size, irrespective of magnification, and reticle/holdover values change relative to the magnification setting. I think of the Kahles SM1 as a much more refined Eotech style reticle, with elevation holds and a very fine center dot, which is better for pinpoint aiming vs. the ATACR center dot.
The illumination on the Kahles increases/decreases with the rheostat control, and is always on, as with an Aimpoint or Eotech, whereas the ATACR has an off position in between each brightness setting, which is my preference.
The Kahles lends slightly better to a 5.56 in my opinion, considering the caliber ability and distances with which it will be used - as well as the overall weight and size of both - but you'll be golden with either, and an argument could be made for either of them in regard to a specific rifle platform/caliber. The extra 2x will help with target evaluation/PID etc., but the ATACR center will also be covering more of the target at max mag, as compared to the Kahles at max mag.
Reference this thread about the ATACR, and post #160 from 00bullitt in particular: https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...r-f1-1-8x24mm-34mm-tube-models.6798633/page-4
Having owned everything besides a S&B CC (Kahles, Vortex, ATACR, Minox) I'm here to say the Minox is the absolute pinnacle of 1-8 tech. Unparalleled. But for 95% of the capability a Vortex Razor gets you there. I disliked the Kahles reticle and its brightness suffers. The ATACR doesn't have a deep field of parallax. I've spent a collective $12+k figuring out the best LPVO. Ended up with the Vortex for me, primarily because it's unparalleled at 1x. I didn't want to admit that, I wanted to believe all the other higher tier brands had a better product, and after spending enough to buy a nice used sedan, I'm full circle.
Last edited:
Interesting thread, I have the K16i and like it on my 16" 5.56. I was considering rolling it up to a NF 1-8, but after reading I don't think I'd get much benefit for the extra cost. If Kahles offered a 1-8 FFP with the same glass, and maybe an upgraded reticle, then that would be different story. I will have to look a Minox, but I think I've read their ZP5 having reliability issues. The S&B is too expensive to be considered for me.
Both are phenomenal options and any comparison is splitting hairs. Reticle, level of abuse, weight and max distance would be how I'd pick.
The Kahles has the most forgiving 1x I have shot of any 1-6 / 1-8. I LOVE the SM1 reticle in the Kahles for 3 gun but they also have other great options. If you're shooting 5 yards to 500 yards go Kahles. I've dumped the optic in all sorts of conditions and it's never failed. It's also very, very light in this class of optics.
The NF is going to give you a bit more magnification out of the bigger tube. There's no question it's beefy but you could probably also used it as a hammer in a pinch. FC-DM reticle is great inside of 25 yd, maybe a touch slower than SM1, but past 500 you're going to gain a lot.
For a 14.5" 3 gun ultralight I picked the Kahles. Either one will be a solid choice.
The Kahles has the most forgiving 1x I have shot of any 1-6 / 1-8. I LOVE the SM1 reticle in the Kahles for 3 gun but they also have other great options. If you're shooting 5 yards to 500 yards go Kahles. I've dumped the optic in all sorts of conditions and it's never failed. It's also very, very light in this class of optics.
The NF is going to give you a bit more magnification out of the bigger tube. There's no question it's beefy but you could probably also used it as a hammer in a pinch. FC-DM reticle is great inside of 25 yd, maybe a touch slower than SM1, but past 500 you're going to gain a lot.
For a 14.5" 3 gun ultralight I picked the Kahles. Either one will be a solid choice.
Similar threads
