Rifle Scopes ZCO 4-20 or ATACR 4-20 for Hunting Application

mtnhunter22

mtnhunter22

Supporter
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Jan 20, 2020
599
216
#1
Looking for input from those who have had experience with both of these scopes.

Will be going on a hunting rifle. Not concerned about weight and I understand there’s lighter options.

Rokslide didn’t give the ZCO a great rep with the drop test, whereas the NF passed with flying colors. I’m sure there are some opinions on this!

Has anyone hunted with the ZCO and experienced any zero shift at any point in time? Will be used for backcountry hunts where the scope being bumped or dropped is a possibility.

Good glass is a priority, but more importantly I need something reliable with heavy use and a possible mishap. Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cat pitch and Early Cuyler
#2
You can pretty much throw Rokslides drop tests out the window. Nightforce tunnels and has narrow FOV at 4x, ZCO does not. ZCO is still the best ultra short from a purely optical standpoint. NF has a great reputation for durability, ZCO only been on the market for 5 years but also has great reputation. If the tunneling/FOV doesnt matter then choose which reticle and turrets you like the best. I wouldn't put either one as being more or less durable than the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheHorta, nickw, BurtG and 13 others
#3
mtnhunter22 said:
Looking for input from those who have had experience with both of these scopes.

Will be going on a hunting rifle. Not concerned about weight and I understand there’s lighter options.

Rokslide didn’t give the ZCO a great rep with the drop test, whereas the NF passed with flying colors. I’m sure there are some opinions on this!

Has anyone hunted with the ZCO and experienced any zero shift at any point in time? Will be used for backcountry hunts where the scope being bumped or dropped is a possibility.

Good glass is a priority, but more importantly I need something reliable with heavy use and a possible mishap. Thanks
Click to expand...
I hunted with it this year and checked zero many times. I didn’t have any shift at all. Used ARC rings at 35 in/lbs with no problem on a 30 Sherman mag. It’s heavy but I knew that already.
 
#4
I throw my rifles in and out of the truck, or UTV, and don’t really baby the scopes. I don’t believe quality erectors should be affected by ordinary forces, like banging around in the truck or even a drop. I haven’t noticed any issues with the 4-20 Zco. I haven’t had a nightforce in probably 8 years, and don’t remember issues with that one either.

Regarding the Rokslide “test”: it is absolutely laughable that those guys’ position was that dropping the rifle shifted the zero left, and then back right, and then 9 more drops after the first 6 drops magically knocked the zero back perfectly to dead nuts. That’s plain absurdity. There was obviously something else in play that wasn’t mechanical to the scope or the rings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pronghunter, Stoweit, godofthunder and 3 others
#5
Bangin said:
I hunted with it this year and checked zero many times. I didn’t have any shift at all. Used ARC rings at 35 in/lbs with no problem on a 30 Sherman mag. It’s heavy but I knew that already.
Click to expand...

I use 55 in/lbs per ARC instructions, with blue/medium loctite on threads and underside of hex screw (assuming the latter is to reduce friction from the screw shoulder).
 
#6
That was one of the worst "tests" I've seen. First he said he noticed the optic was slipping in the rings. So he continues to shoot with it after tightening a bit more. Once you notice it slipping and you're sure you used the correct torque, the mount in question is not reliable for the test and should be swapped out.

And then they are testing on a RUM and talking about "groups were larger than ever shot with rifle." Again in rings that have no confidence in. And now with a high recoiling rifle. Anything high recoil is involved, human error in shot dispersion is magnified significantly. Regardless who is shooting.

That's just a few things that were not good in what was obviously a very biased test.



We have run 20+ ZCO ourselves and sold many more. Zero issues with durability. Obviously no one is perfect. But don't base your decision on that fairly terrible "test."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pronghunter, Makinchips208, Glassaholic and 3 others
#8
Bangin said:
I hunted with it this year and checked zero many times. I didn’t have any shift at all. Used ARC rings at 35 in/lbs with no problem on a 30 Sherman mag. It’s heavy but I knew that already.
Click to expand...
ARC rings recommend 55 in-lbs. on both the base and ring clamp screws. Just FYI, incase you were not aware. I run all mine at 55, no issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stemikel, YotaEer and Glassaholic
#9
mtnhunter22 said:
Looking for input from those who have had experience with both of these scopes.

Will be going on a hunting rifle. Not concerned about weight and I understand there’s lighter options.

Rokslide didn’t give the ZCO a great rep with the drop test, whereas the NF passed with flying colors. I’m sure there are some opinions on this!

Has anyone hunted with the ZCO and experienced any zero shift at any point in time? Will be used for backcountry hunts where the scope being bumped or dropped is a possibility.

Good glass is a priority, but more importantly I need something reliable with heavy use and a possible mishap. Thanks
Click to expand...
Lightweight hunting scope... If you can afford the ZCO, no question about it, I'd go that route. NF are good scopes, but they don't compare to the ZCO glass & FOV. Like was stated, the NF has a constricted internal FOV (tunneling) and downrange FOV.
 
#11
Thanks for the input guys. I did find it odd that he mentioned the rings as a potential issue but then never retested with different rings. Strange.

Anyway sounds like the ZCO is a winner. Was kind of exactly what I was looking as for some season I prefer the mpact2 over the mil xt.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: gebhardt02 and CSTactical
#12
mtnhunter22 said:
Thanks for the input guys. I did find it odd that he mentioned the rings as a potential issue but then never retested with different rings. Strange.

Anyway sounds like the ZCO is a winner. Was kind of exactly what I was looking as for some season I prefer the mpact2 over the mil xt.
Click to expand...


PM me your contact information and I’ll answer any remaining questions you have and get you in line for a ZC420 😎
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldrifleman
#14
Do you spin turrets or use the reticle? What are approximate min and max distances?

I run the ZCO on a 300WM for hunting and love it, but there are other good options too. How and where (and when) you hunt is as important as all the rest.
 
#15
Dial for elevation, hold for wind.

All out west so typically mid to longer range. No crazy distances but typical to shoot across canyons. For me, I don’t like anything over 800 on game. Just a personal opinion.

I have a couple NX8s and they’re fine. For some reason I just don’t love looking at NF reticles. Love everything else about them though. I think I prefer the turrets on the NF over the ZCO but that would be about it.

Have a chance to pick up the ZCO or ACTAR instead of another NX8 so thought I would give one a try.
 
#17
I use both for hunting. Have used NF ATACR 4-16, 4-20 and 7-35. Now use ZCO 527. Haven’t owned the 4-20 ZCO though.

Mil XT in NF and MPCT3 in ZCO. I believe the ZCO is a step up in glass at last light especially. My 7-35 was better than my 4-16 and 4-20. My ZCO was slightly better than the 7-35 atacr.

I have no plans to sell my 7-35 atacr or ZCO 527. Both are excellent optics. I did sell my 4-20 atacr only because I wanted more magnification for my hunting application.

ATACR except the 4-16 will tunnel. The 4-20 is more like 5.5-20. The ZCO I own tunnels slightly. Like a 5.5-27.

The Mil XT is my favorite reticle. But the mpct comes in several flavors I’m sure will suite you well. Both reticles I can shoot to last light without illumination if needed

Two big differences that go in the ZCO favor are the illumination (ZCO is a dial where NF is a push button). I think the dial works much better on the ZCO and is easier to use with gloves. The other is the rotating ocular on the NF. When you adjust magnification the entire ocular rotates. Which can be a pain if you have lens covers on. Not a big deal if you have time but a fast adjust during a hunting scenario may be an issue for you. Personally for my use the rotating ocular wasn’t an issue and the tenebraex caps rotate out of the way very easily

Every scope has its issues. If you search hard enough you’ll see internal lenses shattering on ZCO, atacr that arrive dead in the water, scopes not holding zero etc. I believe ZCO service is better. They come on here and help out regularly when needed. That said I haven’t had a single issue with the many NF I’ve owned. Which is several atacr’s, 1 comp and 1 NXS models.

In the end if reliability is put aside the ZCO will be the better choice for glass and features. That said I still trust my atacr the most and if I was going to use it for “hard use” that be the optic I would grab.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tex68w, eric90503, Pronghunter and 1 other person
#18
Id say im a tad partial against NF now. Id Take the $ and get a Vortex comp?

Or get the ZCO - its a leap but ZCO is the real deal and the 420 ticks so many boxes

YouTube is........1 source...
 
Last edited:
#22
For serious hunting applications where budget isn't a big part of the conversation, I have trouble not recommending Swaro, they figured out hunting optics a long time ago and they are just about perfect - EXCEPT for those spinning turrets. My turret spinners don't wear swaro, everything else does, especially the stalkers. If you can dope the reticle, Swarop all day, every day. if you wanna spin, not so much. But, theya re so good, I hesitate to not mention them.

I am a big Vortex fan, but would not put them in the same category (optically or in weight) with ZCO. The TT 315 is awesome in glass and turrets, but is bulky and not light weight.
The TT hunter, if it borrows significantly from the old Premier hunter, should be just about absolutely perfect in every way. I took the old Premier hunter to Africa about 10 years ago and it was absolutely flawless - I sold it when Premier went tits up - sorta wish I had not. It is the perfect mix of not heavy, easy to get behind, great reticle, great illumination, and great low light performance.

Last mention is March 1.5-15x42. Is titties, but might not be great for 800+ yards. Mine sits on a turret-spinner and I really like the turrets. The eyebox is a bit tighter, but the view is quite good. And 1.5X on the low end means if you jump something up ckose, you'll see more than some fur with no frame of reference - which I like.
 
#24
jmw said:
What about tt3-15m compared to the zcomp 4-20
Click to expand...
I have both. Both track perfect and have been solid mechanically. TT315M has better reticle for hunting, is lighter, and slightly better optically IMO. Tangent also has better turrets and slightly better depth of field. ZCO is heavier and has a better "eyebox". I prefer the ZCO for a do-everything scope, with maybe a little bit of hunting. I prefer the Tangent as a hunting specific scope with maybe a little bit of doing everything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HenryTheAce and jmw
#25
I’m sure this won’t be a popular opinion, but I sold a ZCO 4-20 and went to a Atacr 4-20 on one of my hunting rigs.

The glass in the ZCO blows away the Atacr. I won’t argue that at all. The FOV seems even better then what’s on paper in the ZCO and no tunneling at all.

I didn’t care for the turrets on the ZCO at all. Now that you can get the NLE or whatever it’s called it might slightly change my mind a little. I really prefer capped windage on a hunting rifle and I don’t really care for the sub zero option. I want to be able to feel the zerostop in the dark. I know there are workarounds for this but it wasn’t my cup of tea. I also didn’t care for the illumination or the 15 mil a rev on the ZCO.
Weird little complaints I know. But at the end of the day for a beat it around, down and dirty hunting scope I prefer the Atacr.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mtnhunter22
#26
Ckleeves said:
I’m sure this won’t be a popular opinion, but I sold a ZCO 4-20 and went to a Atacr 4-20 on one of my hunting rigs.

The glass in the ZCO blows away the Atacr. I won’t argue that at all. The FOV seems even better then what’s on paper in the ZCO and no tunneling at all.

I didn’t care for the turrets on the ZCO at all. Now that you can get the NLE or whatever it’s called it might slightly change my mind a little. I really prefer capped windage on a hunting rifle and I don’t really care for the sub zero option. I want to be able to feel the zerostop in the dark. I know there are workarounds for this but it wasn’t my cup of tea. I also didn’t care for the illumination or the 14 mil a rev on the ZCO.
Weird little complaints I know. But at the end of the day for a beat it around, down and dirty hunting scope I prefer the Atacr.
Click to expand...
I do know of several other members here who’ve gone from NF to ZCO then back to NF. For various reasons similar to yours. So you’re not the only one with that opinion for sure

I will add between mine the ZCO seems less finicky in the parallax. Which gives you one less thing to mess with in a hunting situation.

I don’t care about this issue but the numbers on the parallax aren’t even close on the NF. If you range a deer at 600 you won’t be able to just throw your parallax to 600. For how I use mine I could just blackout the numbers but some do care about this
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brym427 and TheOtherAndrew
#27
Ckleeves said:
I’m sure this won’t be a popular opinion, but I sold a ZCO 4-20 and went to a Atacr 4-20 on one of my hunting rigs.

The glass in the ZCO blows away the Atacr. I won’t argue that at all. The FOV seems even better then what’s on paper in the ZCO and no tunneling at all.

I didn’t care for the turrets on the ZCO at all. Now that you can get the NLE or whatever it’s called it might slightly change my mind a little. I really prefer capped windage on a hunting rifle and I don’t really care for the sub zero option. I want to be able to feel the zerostop in the dark. I know there are workarounds for this but it wasn’t my cup of tea. I also didn’t care for the illumination or the 14 mil a rev on the ZCO.
Weird little complaints I know. But at the end of the day for a beat it around, down and dirty hunting scope I prefer the Atacr.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the honest opinion. I don’t care for the turrets on the ZCO either. They’re fine but I prefer the NF

No problem in using what YOU like and what works.
 
#28
If you want a 4-20x, ZCO is probably top choice. I did not have any issues with their reticles.
If you do not need 20x, I prefer Tangent's 3-15x50 TT315H or TT315M optically, although not by much. I do really like Tangent's turrets. They've got that figured out. The 30mm tube Tangents are also lighter which helps on a hunting rifle.
ATACR is a nice scope, but it is a step down form TT and ZCO optically.

ILya
 
  • Like
Reactions: HenryTheAce and JRAY6
#29
hafejd30 said:
I do know of several other members here who’ve gone from NF to ZCO then back to NF. For various reasons similar to yours. So you’re not the only one with that opinion for sure

I will add between mine the ZCO seems less finicky in the parallax. Which gives you one less thing to mess with in a hunting situation.

I don’t care about this issue but the numbers on the parallax aren’t even close on the NF. If you range a deer at 600 you won’t be able to just throw your parallax to 600. For how I use mine I could just blackout the numbers but some do care about this
Click to expand...
Ya, the parallax isn’t finicky on the ZCO at all I kinda forgot about that. Optically I truly had zero complaints. If it had a 34mm tube and you could cut the middle of the scope out and replace it with everything NF I would never have switched.

I’m sure some of that is just familiarly with Atacrs, after thousands of rounds with any scope
you just get used to a particular feel. Just like the rotating ocular, I don’t necessarily like it but I find myself grabbing and trying to turn it when I’m behind other scopes.
 
#30
I have a pile of ZCOs PRS, Hunting, NRL. I have put them through a good bit of hell. Last hunt was half way around the world. 3 planes, god only knows how many miles riding in the back of a truck and beating through the bush. Zero shift was not a thing and 15 dead animals from 130yds to 1184yds. My expirience with nightforce in the past wasn’t bad it just isn’t a ZCO optically.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: HenryTheAce, nickw, BurtG and 2 others
#33
The 4-16 ATACR is a better hunting scope over the 4-20 ATACR. I've ran them both. Easier to get behind, better parallax adj, better hunting turret, better size envelope. 17-20 power is surprisingly hard to notice at distance.. another reason I reverted back to the 16x.

ZCO 4-20 is really a nice scope optically. I don't care for the turrets or 36mm scope on smaller hunting rifles. Overall, however, it is a "nicer" scope and should be for the price difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RayDBonz, HaydenLane and Ckleeves
#34
I own neither scopes, but add, I do a lot of hunting with my 3x15 set at 5 or 6 X. Power is nice when you need to scope out a critter, but for general shooting, I keep it low. So, what’s important is good FOV and good depth of Field. In my estimation these are the important points to consider, and from what is said by the others, the ZCO is a winner.
 
#35
mtnhunter22 said:
Looking for input from those who have had experience with both of these scopes.

Will be going on a hunting rifle. Not concerned about weight and I understand there’s lighter options.

Rokslide didn’t give the ZCO a great rep with the drop test, whereas the NF passed with flying colors. I’m sure there are some opinions on this!

Has anyone hunted with the ZCO and experienced any zero shift at any point in time? Will be used for backcountry hunts where the scope being bumped or dropped is a possibility.

Good glass is a priority, but more importantly I need something reliable with heavy use and a possible mishap. Thanks
Click to expand...


The nightforce in my opinion is the most fun to dial. I never even second guess when I fail my shots, off I always right off as me. The glass is not as good as schmidt bender, tangent theta or zco.

The zco, TT and Schmidt bender line of scopes, are able to see in the shadows, under trees, much better than the nightforce. In anything but the most ideal lighting conditions. All scopes return to zero,

My favorite scope, the only one I do not currently own is the zco. I will be adding one soon. The zco is everything the night force is great at, and the glass of the others, get the zco
 
  • Like
Reactions: CSTactical
#36
Have the ZCO420 on LR loghtweight hunting 280AI which gets bumped around a bit riding on quads etc. Haven’t had any major bangs yet but no issues with zero shift on the smaller ones either.
Glass quality is very very close to swaro Z8 at low light. My eyes are -10.5 prescription so I do notice glass quality a lot more then most haha.

Would be interesting to compare directly side by side worth TT315 but being in Australia not much chance of that. Mate has the 4-20Atcar and he loves it altho agrees the ZCO gives a fair hit longer low light and finds easier to identify animals especially in shadows etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BurtG, TheOtherAndrew, niabber and 1 other person
#37
viking78 said:
I dont know about the NF, but ZCO 420 is on my hunting rifles.
Shot 3 black grouse in October.
Longest shot on bird was over 500-yards, and it came down, vital are on that bird is not much more than 4".
Click to expand...

Where the F are you hunting that you can safely make sky line shots ?

3B3AA8AD-8151-4521-8044-525D584E1CFD.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jsp556 and NateVA
#43
For anyone else wondering lol

4AFF8409-2412-4BF8-8555-E4F6D263FAFC.jpeg


The lowland nyala or simply nyala(Tragelaphus angasii)[3] is a spiral-horned antelope native to southern Africa. It is a species of the family Bovidae and genus Tragelaphus, previously placed in genus Nyala. It was first described in 1849 by George French Angas. The body length is 135–195 cm (53–77 in), and it weighs 55–140 kg (121–309 lb). The coat is maroon or rufous brown in females and juveniles, but grows a dark brown or slate grey, often tinged with blue, in adult males. Females and young males have ten or more white stripes on their sides. Only males have horns, 60–83 cm (24–33 in) long and yellow-tipped. It exhibits the highest sexual dimorphism among the spiral-horned antelopes. It is not to be confused with the endangered mountain nyala living in the Bale region of Ethiopia
 
  • Like
Reactions: FuhQ
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mjwilcox38
Next scope purchase (ATACR, ZCO, DMR) Thoughts??? Feedback
Replies
105
Views
4K
Cody S
Cody S
K
ATACR 4-16 vs Zeiss S3 4-25
Replies
15
Views
1K
Charger442
Charger442
N
Rifle Scopes Nightforce 4-20 ATACR vs 5-25 ATACR
Replies
20
Views
1K
nick338
N
G
SOLD WTS Nightforce ATACR 4-16x42 with locking turret. Mil-C and Hawkins rings Price Drop!
Replies
12
Views
948
gamewarden
G
L
NF Atacr FFP 4-16x42 v SFP 4-16x50 Mil-R
Replies
7
Views
740
sjbryan65
sjbryan65
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts