Rifle Scopes NX8 4-32 eye box and image quality

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

I'm looking to replace my twice failed AMG with an NX8 4-32.
I have no doubt they're solid scoped that track true but I'm a little concerned about the eye box and image quality.
I've read reviews saying the eye box on the 2.5-20 is a bastard.
I'd love to hear from anyone with a 4-32, I have a MK5 and I'd like the glass to be as good on the NX8

 

[Eric32]

I dont have an NX8, but i must ask what happened to your AMG that it failed. I had one go down on me after stage one of a match.

 

[1shot2kill]

My NX8 is a solid performer although the Illuminated reticle randomly turns itself on.

 

[Krob95]

@Jefe's Dope

 

[Totoro]

My NX8 is a solid performer although the Illuminated reticle randomly turns itself on.

Sounds like it needs to go back to NF for a check over...failure to un-illuminate

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

I dont have an NX8, but i must ask what happened to your AMG that it failed. I had one go down on me after stage one of a match.

The internal mechanism for the parallax adjustment broke after about a week of use and it flat out would not focus.
I got it fixed and after about 50 rounds it broke again.
I've lost my trust in vortex

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

My NX8 is a solid performer although the Illuminated reticle randomly turns itself on.

Have you noticed any issues with the eye box being fussy?
How's the glass on higher mag?

 

[Sprayed99]

I have #2 on the way and I can say the optical quality is near an AMG and the eye box isn't all that bad with a proper cheek weld. The only gripe is the tunneling from 4-5 and it does get a bit "dim" above 24x. That being said I'm absolutely fine running it from 4-24 and I often will never shoot it any higher than 16x.

I have/had 6 AMGs. The first three were/are early builds with the 7 reticle and they were great. #4 was a bastard and went back the Vortex a couple times for the same issue. #5 was new in box and sold off and #6 hasn't made it here yet. #6 is for my wife as she expressed she liked the AMG after I sold the extra new one I had so I bought another for her recently ☹. I'm hopeful it will be a good one.

 

[Birddog6424]

The $1500 to $2000 price point has a lot of great scope options. Having looked through a few of the NX8s versus other models and brands, it would be well down the list for me.

Not a bad option strictly as a hunting scope where you spool it up for one shot at one distance. But many better options for less money out there for a target or multi use optic.

 

[Jefe's Dope]

@Jefe's Dope

the eye box isn't all that bad with a proper cheek weld. The only gripe is the tunneling from 4-5 and it does get a bit "dim" above 24x. That being said I'm absolutely fine running it from 4-24 and I often will never shoot it any higher than 16x.

This mimics my experience. The reticle, MIL XT, is awesome.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

Thanks guys
I'm not looking for the best glass out there but I'd like it to be good like the AMG.
Most importantly though I want a scope that tracks and doesn't break all the time.

I know there's a ton of scopes in that price range with really good glass but that means nothing to me if it has issues.
At least NF has a reputation of reliability

 

[littlepod]

The $1500 to $2000 price point has a lot of great scope options. Having looked through a few of the NX8s versus other models and brands, it would be well down the list for me.

Not a bad option strictly as a hunting scope where you spool it up for one shot at one distance. But many better options for less money out there for a target or multi use optic.

I am guessing your vote in this price range is still the XTR III 5.5-30x? I ended up with the Tract 4.5-30x, but as multiple have mentioned in other threads, the FoV isn't nearly as good as the XTR III or NX8.

 

[Birddog6424]

I am guessing your vote in this price range is still the XTR III 5.5-30x? I ended up with the Tract 4.5-30x, but as multiple have mentioned in other threads, the FoV isn't nearly as good as the XTR III or NX8.

Yes and no.

I've compared the NX8 to the XTR3 several times. The Burris is a nicer scope. @WJM said the same thing in his very in depth review of the XTR3 as compared to the NX8. At an NRL22 match I compared my 30x to my buddies 32x NF and he sold it for an XTR3. If the XTR3 said NF on the side, people would be raving about what an amazing value it is. The actual NX8 is not that great a scope. Certainly not up to their standards.

But I believe there are other great choices as well, the Tract Toric being one of them. I havent seen the new 30x in person, but the reviews are all very positive. And there aren't a plethora of posts complaining about finicky eyebox, shallow depth of field, constant parallax issues, and distortion in the glass as can be seen in many NX8 posts. When Koshkin reviewed the NX8 in his video of short scopes, he simply gave it a very politically correct "not my kind of scope" response and moved on. He liked the Eotech Vudu better.

The Delta Stryker and the Cronus BTR are other scopes I would rather have. I've never really been an Athlon fan, but their scope from LOW is pretty nice.

 

[littlepod]

Yes and no.

I've compared the NX8 to the XTR3 several times. The Burris is a nicer scope. @WJM said the same thing in his very in depth review of the XTR3 as compared to the NX8. At an NRL22 match I compared my 30x to my buddies 32x NF and he sold it for an XTR3. If the XTR3 said NF on the side, people would be raving about what an amazing value it is. The actual NX8 is not that great a scope. Certainly not up to their standards.

But I believe there are other great choices as well, the Tract Toric being one of them. I havent seen the new 30x in person, but the reviews are all very positive. And there aren't a plethora of posts complaining about finicky eyebox, shallow depth of field, constant parallax issues, and distortion in the glass as can be seen in many NX8 posts. When Koshkin reviewed the NX8 in his video of short scopes, he simply gave it a very politically correct "not my kind of scope" response and moved on. He liked the Eotech Vudu better.

The Delta Stryker and the Cronus BTR are other scopes I would rather have. I've never really been an Athlon fan, but their scope from LOW is pretty nice.

Thanks for the detailed reply. Tract is also made in LOW I believe along with the Stryker and Cronus. They all have the same FoV at normalized magnification. It's not high though ~ 4.4ft at 25x. I find the Parallax and Turrets on the Tract much nicer than the Cronus, same with the eyebox. The clarity of glass though I don't see that much of an improvement.

Cutting through heavy mirage I feel they do the same, and comparable to also the Razor AMG, but not as nice as the S&B, Kahles, and ZCO.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

Yes and no.

I've compared the NX8 to the XTR3 several times. The Burris is a nicer scope. @WJM said the same thing in his very in depth review of the XTR3 as compared to the NX8. At an NRL22 match I compared my 30x to my buddies 32x NF and he sold it for an XTR3. If the XTR3 said NF on the side, people would be raving about what an amazing value it is. The actual NX8 is not that great a scope. Certainly not up to their standards.

But I believe there are other great choices as well, the Tract Toric being one of them. I havent seen the new 30x in person, but the reviews are all very positive. And there aren't a plethora of posts complaining about finicky eyebox, shallow depth of field, constant parallax issues, and distortion in the glass as can be seen in many NX8 posts. When Koshkin reviewed the NX8 in his video of short scopes, he simply gave it a very politically correct "not my kind of scope" response and moved on. He liked the Eotech Vudu better.

The Delta Stryker and the Cronus BTR are other scopes I would rather have. I've never really been an Athlon fan, but their scope from LOW is pretty nice.

Nicer scope or nicer glass?
I haven't heard many good things about the xtr

 

[Birddog6424]

There's bunches of great reviews out. With the exception of few hiccups, which was pretty minimal for a brand new design coming to market, pretty much all of the reviews have been really good. Here's just one of several from right here on the Hide.

If you want to dig back far enough, you can find WJM308's review where he compares it directly to an NX8 and Kahles. He calls the XTR3 the "best value under $2000". This thread below compares the Burris to the $3000 ATACR, giving "the edge" to the NF for glass clarity, but the nod goes to the XTR3 for eyebox and FOV.

Rifle Scopes - Burris 5.5-30X56 XTR III Review

So my Burris 5.5-30 review got posted so I thought I'd share it here like I did my Bergara B-14R review. I've also included some comments from another thread that expound on some FOV comparisons with the 5-25 ATACR that I mentioned in the article but didn't expand on as a way to consolidate my...

www.snipershide.com

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

Yeah I'm concerned about the more recent reports of mechanical failures and QC issues.
After having my AMG break twice I'm not at all interested in a scope with that kind of track record.
I'm sure some xtr3's are great but it's not good when a bunch of guys are already sending them back for repairs.

 

[Birddog6424]

Yeah I'm concerned about the more recent reports of mechanical failures and QC issues.
After having my AMG break twice I'm not at all interested in a scope with that kind of track record.
I'm sure some xtr3's are great but it's not good when a bunch of guys are already sending them back for repairs.

I follow several forums and talk to Burris management. I'm aware of 4 scopes going back for repair out of over 1000 of them on the market. I'm also aware of a few early models having a funny colored anodized top turret. That was some early releases. Beyond that no QC issues I'm aware of. And these were months ago.

I'm personally aware of about 20 of these scopes in the wild between friends and fellow PRS competitors. No issues amongst those guys.

So beyond the ocassional issue that all manufacturers see no matter what brand you buy, there are no ongoing mechanical or QC issues. The glass is clear from edge to edge, tracking is perfect, the eyebox is forgiving even at 30x, the depth of field, parallax, and FOV are all excellent. As pretty much pointed out by everyone.

And I have to admit, with the multitudes of posts about the mechanical and glass issues of the NX8, it seems funny that you would make that statement about the XTR3.

It's your money brother, I'm just one opinion...

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

Anyways back to the NX8....
Keep the reports coming

 

[zaprosper]

Nicer scope or nicer glass?
I haven't heard many good things about the xtr

Where are you obtaining these negative reviews of the XTR? Is it the XTR2 or the XTR3? I have heard almost nothing bad about the XTR3 for the price point it sits at. Main negative about the XTR2 was the glass