Somebody please explain the Nightforce SHV vs NXS to me

[cliffy110]

I'm not a rich guy and I settled for the Nightforce SHV 3-10x42 scope for a good general purpose scope. My goal was a scope with no more than 3X on the low end, prefer 10-12X on the top, dialable elevation, illuminated reticle and a reticle with wind holds. I wanted this on a Steyr Scout for literally everything. Snap shots at 10 yards, hunting Central Virginia pastureland out to 250ish and taking long range classes out to 1000. I wanted light weight and tried to keep it under 20 ounces.

No such thing exists. Not even close. Everything is either too heavy, turret can't dial enough (f-you Leupold), no wind holds (f-you again Leupold) or no illumination. I didn't care about FFP because if the top end is 10X, the need for it is radically diminished.

The only thing that met my criteria was the Nighforce NXS 2.5-10X42. Being a cheap bastard, I noticed that the SHV was pretty similar. I spoke to a guy at Nightforce and was told the glass is actually the same between the two. I figured that was a good savings of $600 if the glass is really the same.

It worked. It was okay. I quickly noticed that when shooting longer ranges however, that everything just seemed washed out. Nothing was crisp. It was noticeable at 350 and by 600, it was really bad. I took a class with it and was making hits at 1040 but it was a struggle to see good definition at that range.

Somebody once asked me if the lack of parallax bothered me and I said, "ummm... what?" I didn't get it. I have since figured out that this is a much bigger issue than I had though. I now have a Vortex Strike Eagle 3-18X44 and even when dialed back to 10X, the image is just sharp and clear.

My question is this. Is my problem with the Nightforce the glass or the lack of parallax? I have thought about selling the SHV and getting the NXS but if the glass is the same and the glass is the issue, that will not solve anything. I could also get one of the new Leupold Mark 4 2.5-10X42 which should have better glass but doesn't have parallax adjustment, just like the SHV. Will I be in the same boat with that?

 

[b6graham]

the SHV is an old design...the NXS is even older

i wouldn't expect all that much at 1k yards with a 42mm SHV

parallax makes a difference for sure though

i'd probably look at a 3-15 or 4-16 type scope if you're actually shooting to 1k. adjustable parallax, FFP, better reticles

 

[gr8fuldoug]

SHV:
•Entry-level Nightforce® riflescope
•Developed for all around use
•High-Quality glass with simplified features
•Best selling MOAR reticle
•ZeroSet™ elevation or capped adjustments

NXS:
•Hard-use Nightforce® product line
•Legacy product line that established Nightforce within the marketplace
•Used by elite military snipers and warfighters
•High-quality glass and features
•Positive clicks for windage and elevation dialing
•ZeroStop™ elevation adjustment

NX8:
•New generation Nightforce® product line with NXS-type ruggedness in a mid-range F1 option
•8x magnification zoom ratio
•Compact and lightweight
•High-quality glass and features
•Built for extreme durability

ATACR:
•Highest level product Nightforce® has to offer
•Most advanced technology features
•Used by long range competitors, elite military units and extreme long range hunters
•ED Glass with high performance features
•ZeroStop™ /ZeroHold™ elevation adjustments
•Power Throw Lever integrated to magnification ring
•Digillum™ – digital reticle illumination
•Flip-up caps standard

 

[fdkay]

What you seek is a Trijicon Credo 2.5-15, I would opt for the 56mm for maximum exit pupil, though I would prefer a 50mm objective.
I run one, it's a pretty damn good scope.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

There is nothing high quality about the SHV glass. Its worse than the NXS, which has pretty shitty glass in its own regard. Its like looking through a soda straw. They are like 15 year old designs at the point and there is WAY better stuff on the market for what these sell for.

 

[Cutout]

If you are shooting at ranges varying from 300 to over 1000, you really should consider a scope with adjustable parallax. If you are shooting within 50-300 yards, then it probably doesn't that much. A lower-powered scope will have a pretty forgiving depth of field, but it's not infinite. Fixed parallax will become a limitation at some point.

 

[264win]

The NXS 2.5-10 x40 is notably better than the SHV. I think the nxs would be a good fit for the uses described by the op.
For shooting at distances especially past 600 parallax makes a difference.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

The SHV’s kinda suck, the NXS sucks a little less. I recently sold my 2.5-10x42 NXS and like some other NF’s I’ve had the parallax and focus was weird. I was on infinity by 300 yards with it and it was parallax free from there on but the image needed more focus. Yes the diopter was properly adjusted.

IMO for that price range you can do better than any of them. Why are you stuck on only a 2-10 or whatever though?

I’d put something with a little higher magnification on it since it just opens you up to so many options and piggyback a red dot on top for the up close stuff and have the best of both worlds.

 

[B y r o n]

You know the ocular (eye piece) adjustment keeps the reticle crisp and clear. Parallax does the same for image clarity. Fixed parallax (100 or 150 yards) means those images are clear, anything outside those yardages are not as clear. Parallax set to the proper yardage makes those images crisp and clear.

If your images were out of focus they would not be clear. It also means your crosshairs could drift on the target and affect impacts.

 

[Aftermath]

You desire clear image? Adjustable parallax?

Swarovski Z6i 2.5-15x56 BRH-I Riflescope Black 69537

Get Swarovski Z6i 2.5-15x56 BRH-I Riflescope Black 69537 for sale at EuroOptic.com. The Swarovski Z6i rifle scope is an amazing hunting scope with great capabilities on the shooting range also. Get free shipping on order of Swarovski Optik scope.

www.eurooptic.com

 

[FuhQ]

There is nothing high quality about the SHV glass. Its worse than the NXS, which has pretty shitty glass in its own regard. Its like looking through a soda straw. They are like 15 year old designs at the point and there is WAY better stuff on the market for what these sell for.

Maybe 15 for the SHV... The NXS was first released in 1998... I don't think they've even changed the glass ever since. LOL

 

[chevy_man]

99% of users aren't using a 10x scope past 2-300 yards.

They drop the adjustable parallax to drop weight and make it simpler.


Go to a decent 3-18 with adjustable parallax. Honestly a 5-25 or bigger for 1000, and keeping your shv for the close stuff makes more sense.

 

[cliffy110]

99% of users aren't using a 10x scope past 2-300 yards.

They drop the adjustable parallax to drop weight and make it simpler.


Go to a decent 3-18 with adjustable parallax. Honestly a 5-25 or bigger for 1000, and keeping your shv for the close stuff makes more sense.

I knew this would happen in this thread. Your reply makes a lot of sense and that is what I did for a very similar rifle (Sig Cross in 6.5). I got the Vortex 3-18x44 and am quite happy with it. My goal on that Steyr is light, handy and versatile. Most of the shooting is done inside 300 yards but I wanted something that could stretch out if needed but that isn't the primary purpose. An MPVO is what I was after and having a 2 to 3 power on the low end was important as is image quality when needed.

Did I mention light weight? The two that I'm looking at right now are 20 ounces (Leupold Mark 4 and NXS) and one should have better glass and the other has adjustable parallax. I can't find another scope in this class that has both and still weighs so little.

I do appreciate the replies and it is helpful.

 

[Cutout]

I knew this would happen in this thread. Your reply makes a lot of sense and that is what I did for a very similar rifle (Sig Cross in 6.5). I got the Vortex 3-18x44 and am quite happy with it. My goal on that Steyr is light, handy and versatile. Most of the shooting is done inside 300 yards but I wanted something that could stretch out if needed but that isn't the primary purpose. An MPVO is what I was after and having a 2 to 3 power on the low end was important as is image quality when needed.

Did I mention light weight? The two that I'm looking at right now are 20 ounces (Leupold Mark 4 and NXS) and one should have better glass and the other has adjustable parallax. I can't find another scope in this class that has both and still weighs so little.

I do appreciate the replies and it is helpful.

I have the NXS for the same reasons. It's light and durable, with adjustable parallax and decent glass. Not exactly feature-packed, it but fits for what I wanted it to do. I think you might be happier with the SHV if you weren't trying to push it past its limitations. On a 50-300 hunting rifle, it would be a nice scope. It's kind of like going offroading with a Subaru Outback. You're going to get further than you would in a Toyota Camry, but if you try to use it like a Jeep, it's going to show you its limitations.

 

[cliffy110]

It's kind of like going offroading with a Subaru Outback. You're going to get further than you would in a Toyota Camry, but if you try to use it like a Jeep, it's going to show you its limitations.

That's actually a great quote. I'm stealing that. That EXACTLY describes the situation.

 

[chevy_man]

I knew this would happen in this thread. Your reply makes a lot of sense and that is what I did for a very similar rifle (Sig Cross in 6.5). I got the Vortex 3-18x44 and am quite happy with it. My goal on that Steyr is light, handy and versatile. Most of the shooting is done inside 300 yards but I wanted something that could stretch out if needed but that isn't the primary purpose. An MPVO is what I was after and having a 2 to 3 power on the low end was important as is image quality when needed.

Did I mention light weight? The two that I'm looking at right now are 20 ounces (Leupold Mark 4 and NXS) and one should have better glass and the other has adjustable parallax. I can't find another scope in this class that has both and still weighs so little.

I do appreciate the replies and it is helpful.

I personally would be looking at the mark 4 4.5-18 with adjustable parallax then.

3 to 4.5 isn't a huge jump.

 

[Makinchips208]

I'm not a rich guy and I settled for the Nightforce SHV 3-10x42 scope for a good general purpose scope. My goal was a scope with no more than 3X on the low end, prefer 10-12X on the top, dialable elevation, illuminated reticle and a reticle with wind holds. I wanted this on a Steyr Scout for literally everything. Snap shots at 10 yards, hunting Central Virginia pastureland out to 250ish and taking long range classes out to 1000. I wanted light weight and tried to keep it under 20 ounces.

No such thing exists. Not even close. Everything is either too heavy, turret can't dial enough (f-you Leupold), no wind holds (f-you again Leupold) or no illumination. I didn't care about FFP because if the top end is 10X, the need for it is radically diminished.

The only thing that met my criteria was the Nighforce NXS 2.5-10X42. Being a cheap bastard, I noticed that the SHV was pretty similar. I spoke to a guy at Nightforce and was told the glass is actually the same between the two. I figured that was a good savings of $600 if the glass is really the same.

It worked. It was okay. I quickly noticed that when shooting longer ranges however, that everything just seemed washed out. Nothing was crisp. It was noticeable at 350 and by 600, it was really bad. I took a class with it and was making hits at 1040 but it was a struggle to see good definition at that range.

Somebody once asked me if the lack of parallax bothered me and I said, "ummm... what?" I didn't get it. I have since figured out that this is a much bigger issue than I had though. I now have a Vortex Strike Eagle 3-18X44 and even when dialed back to 10X, the image is just sharp and clear.

My question is this. Is my problem with the Nightforce the glass or the lack of parallax? I have thought about selling the SHV and getting the NXS but if the glass is the same and the glass is the issue, that will not solve anything. I could also get one of the new Leupold Mark 4 2.5-10X42 which should have better glass but doesn't have parallax adjustment, just like the SHV. Will I be in the same boat with that?

The shv3-10, while a good scope for a price point, it does not have the same prescription as the nxs. So essentially, not the same glass. Also has a fixed parallax/focus at 125m. Regardless, it obviously doesn’t perform as good.
It does have capped turrets, which some may like for a scabbard or something.

Comparatively, the nxs 2.5-10 is much better optically, (better glass and also has parallax aka focus knob) has much better turrets with zero stop, better illumination, and it is machined, assembled, and tested in Idaho.

The nxs will give a noticeably better image than the shv at further distances. I have used both.

But then again, for the price of the nxs 2.5-10 there are a lot of really good options.

 

[cliffy110]

The shv3-10, while a good scope for a price point, it does not have the same prescription as the nxs. So essentially, not the same glass. Also has a fixed parallax/focus at 125m. Regardless, it obviously doesn’t perform as good.
It does have capped turrets, which some may like for a scabbard or something.

Comparatively, the nxs 2.5-10 is much better optically, (better glass and also has parallax aka focus knob) has much better turrets with zero stop, better illumination, and it is machined, assembled, and tested in Idaho.

The nxs will give a noticeably better image than the shv at further distances. I have used both.

But then again, for the price of the nxs 2.5-10 there are a lot of really good options.

That's great info. Exactly what I wanted to know. I know there are other options and that the NXS is dated. It frustrates me that there are no really solid MPVOs that are under a pound and a half. The existence of the NXS proves that it can be done, even with all the features, but they haven't followed it up. The new Leupold Mark 4 looked so promising but then I realized that the lack of parallax would likely put me right back to where I am now.

 

[Makinchips208]

That's great info. Exactly what I wanted to know. I know there are other options and that the NXS is dated. It frustrates me that there are no really solid MPVOs that are under a pound and a half. The existence of the NXS proves that it can be done, even with all the features, but they haven't followed it up. The new Leupold Mark 4 looked so promising but then I realized that the lack of parallax would likely put me right back to where I am now.

Just sayin the nxs2.5-10x42 isn’t as dated as some say, it was released in 2013 if I recall correctly, and the glass is manufactured to current specs. It’s a pretty amazing optic! only 21 ounces.

I know hunters that love it and shoot ‘em to 1000 yards for target practice.

Would be cool if you could try one before you buy.

 

[wvfarrier]

Personal opinion but I found my XTRII to be better than both the SHV and NXS in every aspect

 

[rmiked]

I was familiar with the NXS line from 20 years ago when a guy in our hunt club had one. Glass seemed great to me then. I didn’t like the difficulty of changing illumination but the durability videos are unbelievable. You have to remove the parallax knob and turn an adjustment screw to change illumination brightness. It’s probably very reliable and for military or law enforcement use not a big deal. Nightforce was always out of my price range , leaning towards Vortex PST for $700-900. No complaints about the Vortex. I recently got a new AR10 (Seekins SP10 in 6.5 CM). I bought the Nightforce NX8 2.5-20 x50mm. I love it. The digillum illumination works great IMO. I hunt and need 2nd focal plane. The 2.5 power is great field of view in case an animal is close. The 20 power is more than I’ll ever need. It’s amazing to me 8x zoom scopes can be made. Pretty good deals were available over Black Friday weekend. +1 for Nightforce here. I didn’t realize the SHV had no parallel adjustment. I wish Nightforce put approximate yardages on the parallax knob. Only mark is infinity so you know which mark is minimum (11 yds) distance. But if you are using the focus ring for the shot at hand at least you know when parallax is properly adjusted out, provided you adjusted the diopter correctly.

 

[SWWI Shooter]

If you want to get rid of the SHV and it is MOA, please let me know. I have one and am considering getting another one. I have a Zeiss Conquest 4-16x44. That may be a good fit for you if you are occasionally shooting out farther.

 

[kyotekiller25]

SHVs are a cheaper option to get into a NF. They're not even comparable to an NXS...Whoever thinks or says so is ignorant and doesn't know much about scopes or quality.

I have a 5-22x56 NXS and my cousins have the 5-20x56 SHVs. Again, they're not even comparable.

Their are much better scopes to be had than the SHVs in the $1K price range IMO.

And I don't know what Leupolds you're looking at, but I've never had any problems reaching out to 1K on any of the older VX2s, VX3s, or MK4s...

 

[cliffy110]

If you want to get rid of the SHV and it is MOA, please let me know. I have one and am considering getting another one. I have a Zeiss Conquest 4-16x44. That may be a good fit for you if you are occasionally shooting out farther.

I appreciate that offer but I ended up finding a buyer for it and it is gone. I'm still on the hunt for the right MPVO for my application.

 

[sjbryan65]

I am in the market for the NXS 2.5-10x42 myself. I'll let you know what I think of it once I get one.

 

[jbuck88]

Unfortunately the NXS 2.5-10x42 needs some competition. I hunt with one and shoot it to 1000yds and it just plain works. The steiner h6xi 2-12 looks promising and the new leupold mark4hd 2.5-10 looks interesting.

 

[cliffy110]

Unfortunately the NXS 2.5-10x42 needs some competition. I hunt with one and shoot it to 1000yds and it just plain works. The steiner h6xi 2-12 looks promising and the new leupold mark4hd 2.5-10 looks interesting.

There is a real dearth of MPVOs with the feature set needed for true general purpose work. I have an Athlon Helos BTR gen 2 2-12x44 on order which seems to be on intergalactic backorder. I looked the the Leupold and the lack of parallax adjustment worries me. That Steiner does look really good although with only 70 MOA internal adjustment, it will require a 20 MOA base and it is rather spendy.

 

[SWWI Shooter]

I am in the market for the NXS 2.5-10x42 myself. I'll let you know what I think of it once I get one.

There is a real dearth of MPVOs with the feature set needed for true general purpose work. I have an Athlon Helos BTR gen 2 2-12x44 on order which seems to be on intergalactic backorder. I looked the the Leupold and the lack of parallax adjustment worries me. That Steiner does look really good although with only 70 MOA internal adjustment, it will require a 20 MOA base and it is rather spendy.

I agree. I would love a 2-12 or 3-12 set up like the Steiner but in 2nd focal plain. If I'm shooting far enough that I need to hold over, I will be at 12x anyway so I don't need FFP. There are other nice looking 12x scopes out there, but they don't have holdover reticles or the reticles are set up for a predetermined drop, not MOA.

 

[jbuck88]

The Swarovski line of BRH reticles look nice. I was on the fence about trying one. Their z5i 2.4-12 looks nice. Or the z6 2-12 with a 30mm tube.

 

[SWWI Shooter]

The Swarovski line of BRH reticles look nice. I was on the fence about trying one. Their z5i 2.4-12 looks nice. Or the z6 2-12 with a 30mm tube.

I don't like that they have no parallax, and the reticle options aren't to my liking. How are the turrets? Would they work well for removing the caps and dialing if needed? That is one thing I really like about the SHV 3-10. I make my own zero stop for those. (It doesn't stop it at exactly zero but keeps me from going a full rotation past zero).

 

[jbuck88]

The turrets aren't designed to be dialed like you are talking about. But it's a lighter sfp scope with a simple tree reticle that would work with a range card out to around 700yds to 800+yes, depending on caliber. The added weight to make the turrets robust to hold up is going to add up. One of the nice things about the nxs is it's only ~20oz

Not saying it's perfect, but just making an observation. For me it could be a option.

 

[SWWI Shooter]

The turrets aren't designed to be dialed like you are talking about. But it's a lighter sfp scope with a simple tree reticle that would work with a range card out to around 700yds to 800+yes, depending on caliber. The added weight to make the turrets robust to hold up is going to add up. One of the nice things about the nxs is it's only ~20oz

Not saying it's perfect, but just making an observation. For me it could be a option.

I have had two of the NXS (actually 3 if you count a 3-15x) and I really didn't like them. I couldn't even tell you exactly why right now, but I didn't keep them long. If I remember right, they didn't seem very optically sharp to me (maybe my eyes) , I didn't like the illumination system, etc. Not saying that I'm right and all of the guys that love them are wrong. Just saying that for how I use them, I actually like the SHV 3-10 better than the 2.5-10 NXS.

 

[jbuck88]

I agree someone should enter the market. Upto about 12x for me ffp vs sfp don't matter. Currently looking for my precious. Cycling through a bunch of different scopes for 2 different hunting rifles. So far the nxs 2.5-10x42 is my only for sure.

 

[Mj30wilson900]

I have had two of the NXS (actually 3 if you count a 3-15x) and I really didn't like them. I couldn't even tell you exactly why right now, but I didn't keep them long. If I remember right, they didn't seem very optically sharp to me (maybe my eyes) , I didn't like the illumination system, etc. Not saying that I'm right and all of the guys that love them are wrong. Just saying that for how I use them, I actually like the SHV 3-10 better than the 2.5-10 NXS.

Shv stands for shooting hunting varminter. A lighter budget scope for nightforce. Gives you a wider variety of choices and offered second or first focal plane scopes and mil or moa. I think recently they even added target turrets where the first ones had capped turrets.
The nxs is older tech, moa and build like a tank more robust and more precisely built to exceed military standards and are all second focal plane.

 

[SWWI Shooter]

If leupold would make the VX6 2-12 or VX5 2-10 with a decent reticle and adj parallax , that would be great too. I had a VX6 3-18x that I liked a lot other than 18X was too high for my use.

 

[WeiserBucks]

The nxs is older tech, moa and build like a tank more robust and more precisely built to exceed military standards and are all second focal plane.

The little 42mm NXS is available in MIL.

 

[Mj30wilson900]

The little 42mm NXS is available in MIL.

Bought time they started offering those in mils. I would have bought more of the nxs line if they had the larger mag scopes in mils. Love the build quality of them.

 

[jbuck88]

They have offered the other nxs line in mils, both f1 and f2

 

[kyotekiller25]

MOA or MILs, who cares. They do the same thing at the end of the day, and MOA is more precise anyway...I don't understand why everyone is so hell bent on MILs honestly lol.

 

[Todc]

MOA or MILs, who cares. They do the same thing at the end of the day, and MOA is more precise anyway...I don't understand why everyone is so hell bent on MILs honestly lol.

MPH wind system much?

 

[kyotekiller25]

What's MIL do in the wind that MOA doesn't exactly? I dial for wind, but I'm listening anyway...

 

[lastshot12]

The NXS offers better glass quality, zero-stop turrets, increased durability, and it's a few ounces lighter. I see you've done your homework, but in my view, there are scopes out there that meet your requirements within your budget.

 

[tacoman69]

What's MIL do in the wind that MOA doesn't exactly? I dial for wind, but I'm listening anyway...

wind bracketing in mils is much easier that's why everyone uses it. keep dialing though in moa lol good luck with that

 

[tacoman69]

I appreciate that offer but I ended up finding a buyer for it and it is gone. I'm still on the hunt for the right MPVO for my application.

not quite mpvo but look up the trijicon credos or tenmiles they can be had under 1000$ on sales and you get similar reliability of nightforce with some better features

 

[kyotekiller25]

wind bracketing in mils is much easier that's why everyone uses it. keep dialing though in moa lol good luck with that

I typically dial for wind, and then hold off depending for a quick 2nd shot if need be. Still works for me anyway. More than 1 way to skin a cat ya know.

 

[chevy_man]

MOA or MILs, who cares. They do the same thing at the end of the day, and MOA is more precise anyway...I don't understand why everyone is so hell bent on MILs honestly lol.

Because we all discovered that small numbers on a base 10 system make more sense than a base 4 system.

Because there are 2 moa systems out there.

1/4 moa = .07 Mill. I think dialing .1 is close enough. The more precise argument is silly unless you can actually shoot less than .1 mill all day long...

Smaller numbers are easier to remember for most people. I'm really good at counting to 10, but I will lose track if I'm trying to count in 1/4s to 28.5 if I need to dial without looking.

It breaks people from thinking in inches. Inches don't matter. Centimeters don't matter. We're concerned with angular units but for some reason most can't get away from moa=inches.

At the end of the day, use the ruler in the scope and it doesn't matter. We're just all trying to make our lives simpler.