Rifle Scopes Nightforce ATACR for 1,000 yard F class?

[Tempest 455]

I know there may be a better choice for a dedicated 1,000 yard F class scope but has anyone used this scope in this application?

I'm going to upgrade the glass for my son but want to use the rifle for shooting situations other than just F class.

Just curious if the reticle would be OK for that application?

 

[rideHPD]

To really work for 1K F-class you're going to want the 8-32x or 12-42x NF, plain and simple. There's a reason why everyone who actually shoots F class uses them, and especially with F-Open compared to F-T/R. Also, FWIW, the NF Competition supposedly has kinks and isn't worth the money yet, so I'm told. I'm in the same boat now, trying to use my one bolt gun for F-T/R and recreational shooting with a NF 5.5-22, and I just need more magnification. You can shoot well without it, but it's just not worth shooting 60+rounds when I can only resolve the 9-ring at best through heavy mirage. Post this in the F-T/R sub-forum, but you'll find that you really have to go one way or the other with your use of the rifle.

 

[Chris@InterstateGuns]

To really work for 1K F-class you're going to want the 8-32x or 12-42x NF, plain and simple. There's a reason why everyone who actually shoots F class uses them, and especially with F-Open compared to F-T/R. Also, FWIW, the NF Competition supposedly has kinks and isn't worth the money yet, so I'm told. I'm in the same boat now, trying to use my one bolt gun for F-T/R and recreational shooting with a NF 5.5-22, and I just need more magnification. You can shoot well without it, but it's just not worth shooting 60+rounds when I can only resolve the 9-ring at best through heavy mirage. Post this in the F-T/R sub-forum, but you'll find that you really have to go one way or the other with your use of the rifle.

What kinks have you heard about. We've sold an abundance of the compition with some customers coming back for a second scope.

 

[Tempest 455]

Forgot to mention, we have been doing matches w/ 25X currently. He has 20/10 vision and seems to do just fine at 25X. Was more concerned with the reticle size compared to some of the competition series.

 

[James n TN]

Like others posted look for an 8-32 or 12-42 the new 15-55 I'd stay away from as the eye relief is too short and lack of decent reticle.

sent from my RAZR Maxx HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[Killshot44]

Well, the 55X is selling like sex on a boat....anyone looking for a great, used NF should check out the For Sale forum on Accurateshooter.com - lots of guys have upgraded and are selling their 42X BR scopes.

And OP, get the NP2DD reticle for 1K F-Class.

 

[haroldwilson]

Shoot it. See what you do or don't like about it, and use that experience to decide if you want something different. Only you can really decide.

That said, you see Sightron, NF, and March in higher magnifications than25x on most F class rigs. There is a reason. Also, my experience is I want 1/8 moa clicks for f class.

 

[rideHPD]

What kinks have you heard about. We've sold an abundance of the compition with some customers coming back for a second scope.

I'm probably going to get roasted for this, but that is just what I was told by several other competitors at the last F-class match I shot 2 weeks ago, and I don't have any firsthand experience to back it up. I was told that some went back to the 8-32/12-42 models after buying the Comp b/c of issues with them, what the reasons were I wasn't told.

To the OP, I shoot that 5.5-22x with a MOAR reticle, and it is fine, and I like having the hashes for holdovers. I don't notice much of an issue with the reticle blocking view of the target, or the subtensions being too large, my only issue is as I mentioned previously, that I sometimes have trouble differentiating the exact center of the target, and this opens the deviation of my POA to about 1(+) MOA, which costs me points. Yes, the effect of mirage is greater at higher magnifications, but I still can better determine the center of the target when it is larger. It also makes it much harder to determine precisely where the shot marker is placed to make accurate corrections. My opinion on F-class is that if you aren't going to make the effort to do it right and be legitimately competitive, there are better uses of your ammo/time/money.

 

[95LTZ]

I have been using a NF Competition 15-55 for several months now. It has the DDR reticle. I have heard that several folks that have not used the scope complain about the size of thecv dot. They say that it is too big. I am very happy with it & for me I see no need for change. While I have not shot F-Class with it I have used it in several 1000 yard shoots in Georgia hay fields. On one instance I was shooting two different rifles. One with the NF Competition & one with a FFP S&B 12-50. Due to the mirage I dialed back the power of both scopes without looking at the power setting. Just dialed back until the mirage was tolerable in both scopes. At the end of the match I looked to see what the power settings were. The S&B was dialed back to 19x & the NF was dialed back to 38x. I also checked the zero with the NF on 15x & again at 55x. There was no change in the point of impact. 3 shots @ 55x & 2 @ 15 which resulted in a 6.25" 5 shot group, which is pretty good for me.

 

[00bullitt]

If there are perceived issues other than dot size of the reticle in the Competition scope, it has not been communicated to Nightforce.

 

[7GRT]

I have seen the new NF comp and i thought the optics were ( through my eyes ) as good as i've come across and we compared it t a 12-50 S&B at 30x and the NF had the edge which supprised the hell out of me and the guy with the S&B . I thought the dot was okay certainly wouldn't of wanted it to be any larger but it was fine at 1000 yards . ( IMHO Maybe there aren't any problems with this scope just a rumour started by a company in the US )
I shot alot of F Class with the 12-42 NXS and my choice was always the CH-3 ret as the dot was so small you could place it around the V bull ( 10x ) when holding off the smallest amounts . I also use the CH-3 for foxes as the cross hairs are so fine its like looking through a spotting scope and then when you illuminate there is just a small dot which is amazing . Why Nightforce have you stopped making this because its superb !
A friend has just bought an atacr and i'm due to look at it this week but the only thing that is putting me off is the MOAR ret which i have on a 5.5-22x50mm and whilst i love the design the subtensions are too thicK at 0.140 for me and i which they'd kept them to the same size as NP-R1 or at least made the floating cross half the thickness.

 

[PeterPHWS]

I have just bought an NF ATACR ( I'm the guy 7GRT refers to in his post ) and my thoughts on the thickness of the reticle at 0.14 for F Class are "it depends on whether you will want to shoot using aim off" or whether you will "dial in" your adjustments - and whether you will shoot using a spotting scope - and how you will use the spotting scope.

These points are also qualified by the amount of mirage you will encounter and how you will want to deal with this.

To explain the first point - if you shoot the first detail of the day at around 8.00 am - and there is no mirage - then a finer reticle at a higher power ( usually 40x or 42x depending on March or NF scopes ) will give you that bit more "finesse" in aiming off around the bull or V bull if conditions are calm enough to enable you to centre your grouping for a maximum score.

On the other hand - if the comp you are in has heavy mirage the advantage gained by the higher power and thinner reticle will be jeopardised by the image quality of the target as this will appear to "oscilate" or "shimmer" and your "aim off" ability will be wholly dependant upon how well you can read the mirage and understand how the refraction of the light due to mirage has altered your point of impact compared to your point of aim.

Resolving a fine cross hair against a black target to centre the bull when the target appears to be jumping around the scope isn't easy.

In circumstances like this it may be more effective to shoot on a lower power which reduces the mirage effect and use a spotting scope to determine ( if possible ) the finer adjustments needed to the scope to ensure you are correcting your settings for changes to the condition.

Having shot in the States and in Canada in heavy mirage I would say the 25x on the ATACR is enough power for calm fine days where there is no mirage - and dialing down to 15x for heavy mirage - would be my choice for those conditions.

Using the thicker reticle at these powers is no disadvantage as you are conscious when shooting that you need to address the fundamental principles of marksmanship more - because the target image is smaller - rather than seeing a much closer image where the "wobble" in the sight picture at higher powers serves the same function and prevents you from shooting where you would be pulling the shot.

Yes, the reticle is a bit thicker - but your true point of aim at these lower powers is more likely to in line with your point of impact - so long as the wind call is correct - rather than relying on a finer reticle at higher power where the mirage abberations cause points to be dropped due to the "bull" being in a distorted position.

Naturally you could say that a finer reticle at lower power may be the best way to go but for me a finer reticle only serves as an advantage where you want to "aim off". If you shoot "centre of the target" all the time and dial in your corrections then the slightly thicker reticle is no disadvantage.

Aiming off at 15x or 25x is not going to be successful IMO - so the thicker reticle is not an issue.

What is true is that the image quality of the ATACR is superb. I took my Zeiss 6-24x72mm Diavari with me when I bought the scope and comparing the two on a tripod and sand bag it was clear that the ATACR had the brightest image. Pretty impressive when you allow for the greater objective lens of the Zeiss.

This improvement in the image and clarity of the reticle goes a long way to make up for any loss of precision caused by the reticle being slightly thicker.

 

[00bullitt]

Just FYI on the reticle thickness in the ATACR. It is actually .110moa

Although, I'm sure too thick for most; just wanted to clarify.

 

[7GRT]

http://nightforceoptics.com/pdf/MOAR.pdf

Nightforce seem to think it's 0.140

 

[00bullitt]

Its .140 on the 15x and .125 in the 22x and 32x(when on 22x)

That reticle sheet does not reference the 5-25 ATACR, of which is .110 in line thickness

Nightforce told me so......trust me

 

[JByrd]

you may be surprised who your talkin to on here some times

 

[RobertB]

I wouldn't feel held back with one.

I have a 12-42xBR NF one one of my rifles and a 8-32 NXS on another. I have done well with both. The 1/8 adjustment is nice at times and the DD reticle is pretty fine but the NPR1 isn't bad either.

As far as reticle size, I shot a F-Class a few weeks ago with my short 6.5 CM with a 3.5-21G2DMR and did well with it too. IF you apply good sight picture and positions I did fine with a rifle that really needs a cheek rest and a field grade scope.

So all in all, any of the NF's look good to me. I'm sure a very seasoned F-Class shooter might feel different.

 

[7GRT]

If the Atacr was set to 22x would the line thickness differ from my NXS 5.5-22 MOAR set at 22x ? I'm amazed that there seems no reference to these changes on the web site ?
Assuming we are being told by someone who works there ?

 

[PeterPHWS]

Its .140 on the 15x and .125 in the 22x and 32x(when on 22x)

That reticle sheet does not reference the 5-25 ATACR, of which is .110 in line thickness

Nightforce told me so......trust me

Thanks for the heads up on this. I see from your profile that you are NF's Business Development Manager - so I will trust you !

As a bit of feed back the spec's on the ATACR could do with being mentioned on the web site and in the box which comes with it. The reticle sheet with mine makes no mention of the ATACR spec and the manual is a generic one which covers all NXS's with a zero stop function. The ranging magnification is also not included and there is no explanation of the dot mark on the power band at 12.5 x which I assume is there to show the position where the reticle hash marks double in value.

Spending this sort of money on the ATACR had me research the scope on the web and I was aware of the power ranging band ... but this is the first time I have come across reticle specification information.

From the reviews I have read some have suggested that a finer central cross hair would improve the finesse on aiming at ELR targets which the scope is designed for and I have to say its not a bad idea if it can be done. It's a small point in the round scheme of things but these things matter when pitching a scope at the top end as it is often these small points which single a scope out as being the "best of the best".

If it could be done I also think illuminating just the central cross hair would be the better than the whole reticle. This would preserve a clearer back ground picture at dawn/dusk and when truly dark would work better with lamping or front end mounted night vision. The need to see the whole reticle at night seems unlikely to be encountered compared to the benefits of a smaller illuminated point of aim.

As I said though ... these are just a few minor observations ... the quality of the glass in the scope combined with its high internal elevation and reliability of adjustment are the main things IMO which make this a great scope.

For F Class I see no problems in using the scope with a .110 cross hair if you dial in your corrections but a few tweaks here and there would be icing on the cake. Myself and Greg ( 7GRT ) have done a lot of F class and are both former GB National F Class Champions and World Team Champions ( we were on the 2009 winning squad - not the current 4th place squad ) and we do a fair bit of ELR too. We need scopes with high internal adjustment and if these can be used for F Class as well - that's just perfect!

 

[00bullitt]

If the Atacr was set to 22x would the line thickness differ from my NXS 5.5-22 MOAR set at 22x ? I'm amazed that there seems no reference to these changes on the web site ?
Assuming we are being told by someone who works there ?

The ratio was meant for it to be equivalent to the line thickness of the 5.5-22x if used on 22x in the ATACR.

You are correct, there should be reference of such on the website and there are changes in the works. All I can do is apologize.

I will say that there are several of us that monitor and participate on this forum and others as we are shooters like the rest. We read, take note, and listen. Sometimes feedback equates to eventual change.

 

[7GRT]

Great reply & top company .

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

You see a lot of new 15-55 for sale right after or I should say shortly after purchase. I also read they only have 92% light transmission is that true? Three I think the redicals they came out with on this scope for the purpose intended suck.

 

[7GRT]

I can speak for what i saw and that was the new glass was better than the 12-50 S&B and my NXS at 30x , not sure about %'s all that matters is what you see with our own eyes . If i had to be picky , the new comp scope didn't feel as robust as the NXS but then its a scope for competition and weight is an issue so there's my answer . I would certainly be happy using the scope in F Class but Please Nightforce give us more options in the Ret Dept . CH-3 would be perfect in this scope !

 

[David S]

I can speak for what i saw and that was the new glass was better than the 12-50 S&B and my NXS at 30x [...]

I agree with 7GRT. I compared the ATACR against a bunch of scopes, including my 12-42 NXS, and it was quite an improvement. I was so impressed that I even went ahead and bought one, and boy, am I glad I did! I've only had it a few weeks now, but it's already my favorite scope; I'd not hesitate to use it at long distance. The reticle lines are just a bit thick, as many others have noted, but that really is the closest thing to a complaint that I can muster. Certainly can't bitch or whine about six full revolutions of adjustment...

-David