Rifle Scopes Zero Compromise Optic update

OK, dumb question. Anyone know what this tool is for?!?
(Not the Allen wrench)

1A79511F-FD84-445E-964E-0A9D2211073B.jpeg
 
I will say ZCOs CS is second to none. Unfortunately I had to send my scope in to remove dust in the tube. Got a call from the owner to discuss the issue. I sent it in on a Friday and had it back in my hands the following Wednesday with the issue fixed and reimbursement for shipping.

Can't say I got the same treatment from another high end scope company which is why I switched ZCO. Happy I made the switch.
 
Took the 527MPCT2 out to the range today, since I had some business to take care of in town. Bore sighted, first shot on paper. One adjustment put the next 2 in the same hole, dead zero at 100. Set the RTZ, easy system - nice!

The extra magnification, clarity, great eyebox and forgiving parallax are perfect for my 338L Blaser to slap a nice bull (if I find one and do my part!)

Leica 2800.com via kestrel 5700 gave me a quick solution for the 548 yard diamond gong with reticle hold @ 15x for a nice ring for shot number four.

Dialed elevation, brought it up to about 22X held off .5 for shots 5 and 6 about 2” low @ 1149 but well centered with a mild 5-8 mph wind.

Nice work ZCO, well worth the money and wait for such a fine product. Now to put them through their paces here in the Rockies for 4 months of radical weather and conditions...

BFFDEEEB-5C0E-4FC5-9D97-A1E17C947103.jpeg
 
I'm definitely liking the 5-27.
Going to order another ZCO but for the life of me, I can't come up with a good reason to order the 4-20 - other than the looks. They'll both be on custom Maners PRS/Defiance 26" rifles so length isn't really an issue.

Again, other than the "looks" of an ultra short, is there a valid reason to go with the 4-20 rather than another 5-27.
(Also have an opportunity to pick up another March 5-40 for 2K, which is REALLY tempting. )

I know, first world problems/decisions.
 
I’m in the same boat! Have a 527 but want a 4-20 also but not sure I need it! ??. I’m wondering if the reticle image size is slightly bigger on the 4-20? I know they have to stay calibrated to the image at all powers but sometimes a reticle is more usable on lower power on a shorty than on the same power of a larger scope. Does that even make sense??. Don’t know how to explain it. But my eyes have a little trouble with reticle size at 12-15x where I use it most in prs. Didn’t know it reticle was slightly more usable for me at 12-15x in the 4-20 or if it appears exactly the same as my 5-27 at same power.

My offer still stands :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2 Roberts
Happy to say, that i was notified a few weeks ago that i'm next up for delivery. i opted for a cerakote application which added more time on the delivery. i was told that this is the first one to get the cerakote, so if anyone is thinking of getting it done and wants a picture, let me know. cs tactical is doing the Cerakote once the scope is delivered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CSTactical
Happy to say, that i was notified a few weeks ago that i'm next up for delivery. i opted for a cerakote application which added more time on the delivery. i was told that this is the first one to get the cerakote, so if anyone is thinking of getting it done and wants a picture, let me know. cs tactical is doing the Cerakote once the scope is delivered.

We will have it done shortly, thank you for your patience :)
 
I'm hoping someone who has used the scopes I'm interested in can lend a hand. I recently acquired an Accuracy International AX short action that now needs some glass. I'm looking at the NF ATACR 7-35 with Mil XT or a Z Comp 527 with MPCT2. For those who have tried both, is the Z Comp worth the extra $$$? More specifically, lets say you can buy the ATACR in the $2900 range and the ZCO at $3600. What does the ZCO bring to the table the NF doesn't?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squibbler
I'm hoping someone who has used the scopes I'm interested in can lend a hand. I recently acquired an Accuracy International AX short action that now needs some glass. I'm looking at the NF ATACR 7-35 with Mil XT or a Z Comp 527 with MPCT2. For those who have tried both, is the Z Comp worth the extra $$$? More specifically, lets say you can buy the ATACR in the $2900 range and the ZCO at $3600. What does the ZCO bring to the table the NF doesn't?

Give me a ring and I'll be happy to go over both of those fantastic scopes :)
 
I'm hoping someone who has used the scopes I'm interested in can lend a hand. I recently acquired an Accuracy International AX short action that now needs some glass. I'm looking at the NF ATACR 7-35 with Mil XT or a Z Comp 527 with MPCT2. For those who have tried both, is the Z Comp worth the extra $$$? More specifically, lets say you can buy the ATACR in the $2900 range and the ZCO at $3600. What does the ZCO bring to the table the NF doesn't?
Zach, talk with @jwknutson17 if you want first hand experience with both as he owns the ZCO and has time behind the 7-35 ATACR as well. I only have the ZCO and ZP5 to compare to, both are superb optically and I'd say about on par with each other, it was hard to discern a clear winner, ZCO has better turrets with regard to the click/feel. Maybe a question would be - would having 5x on the lower end or 35x on the top end help you out more for the type of shooting you intend with this rig. If neither is a big enough factor for you then it might come down to ergonomics, the ZCO is shorter but NF can focus closer, the ZCO offers more mils of elevation, NF uses 34mm rings which you may already have vs. 36mm rings for the ZCO. Based on these factors can you justify the additional cost of the ZCO? I will say this, looking through the ZCO is definitely a "wow" experience, maybe even moreso than the ZP5 because of the huge sight picture, oddly enough the ZCO does not have quite as wide FOV as the ZP5 but it "looks" bigger because of the sight picture.
 
Last edited:
Zach, talk with @jwknutson17 if you want first hand experience with both as he owns the ZCO and has time behind the 7-35 ATACR as well. I only have the ZCO and ZP5 to compare to, both are superb optically and I'd say about on par with each other, it was hard to discern a clear winner, ZCO has better turrets with regard to the click/feel. Maybe a question would be - would having 5x on the lower end or 35x on the top end help you out more for the type of shooting you intend with this rig. If neither is a big enough factor for you then it might come down to ergonomics, the ZCO is shorter but NF can focus closer, the ZCO offers more mils of elevation, NF uses 34mm rings which you may already have vs. 36mm rings for the ZCO. Based on these factors can you justify the additional cost of the ZCO? I will say this, looking through the ZCO is definitely a "wow" experience, maybe even moreso than the ZP5 because of the huge sight picture, oddly enough the ZCO does not have quite as wide FOV as the ZP5 but it "looks" bigger because of the sight picture.

This is the biggest thing about the ZCO. Side-by-side, everything else looks like looking through a toilet paper tube. I've seen it side by side with the 7-35 ATACR and the NF felt really restrictive, lol. I don't even think I can get across how big the picture is from the ZCO. It's massive and it's one of the things I love most about my 527.
 
I'm hoping someone who has used the scopes I'm interested in can lend a hand. I recently acquired an Accuracy International AX short action that now needs some glass. I'm looking at the NF ATACR 7-35 with Mil XT or a Z Comp 527 with MPCT2. For those who have tried both, is the Z Comp worth the extra $$$? More specifically, lets say you can buy the ATACR in the $2900 range and the ZCO at $3600. What does the ZCO bring to the table the NF doesn't?

Locking turrets, set and forget parallax for the most part, mpct reticles (if you prefer them), the best ergonomics as far as knob tension, better eybox, larger perceived image. Auto off/sleep on illumination if that matters. General consensus is better glass than atacr, though some I’m sure like the NF better.

I might be forgetting something, but that’s what I can think off off the top of my head.

For me personally, only reason to go with the NF is if you like grid reticles or the 35x magnification is something you want/need.
 
You guys are REALLY making me think I’m going to just wait to buy big (ZCO) and skip the rest. Used to do tons and tons of photography (shoot, self developed, printed my own, published) w/ED glass. Nothing like seeing crystal clarity. I can feel the pleasure a ZCO would engender...S**T, have to wait a bit longer now....S**T. ??