F-OPEN SCOPE

[Rogmay]

I'm in the market for an F open scope, I'm building at 284 for 600 and 1000 yard competition, I've got around $1000 to spend. Looking for my best options! Considering a used Nightforce bench rest 12-42 or new Sightron 10-50, let me know your opinions and other options I might not be thinking about, thank you in advance!

 

[jr600yd]

I have both. Either one will fill your need. The Nightforce is a heavy scope so take that into consideration. Both are great scopes.

 

[Lbart]

I would go with a 12-42x NF BR.

 

[wwbrown]

I would go with a 12-42x NF BR.

+1

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I would love to help you, but I only shoot F-TR with a .308.

If I could help you, I would first ask exactly which Sightron are you considering. The SVSS 10-50X60 or the SIIISS 10-50X60?

 

[boltman13]

I am pleased with my SightronIII's in 10X50X60 on both my F-Open and F-TR rifles. However, both the Sightron and Nightforce are great scopes, there is no wrong choice in my opinion.

 

[Rogmay]

I would love to help you, but I only shoot F-TR with a .308.

If I could help you, I would first ask exactly which Sightron are you considering. The SVSS 10-50X60 or the SIIISS 10-50X60?

I'm considering the SIII, the SV is a bit more $$$, for that money I would go for a used NXS and get the side focus!

 

[RDavies]

Another vote for the 10-50 Sightron. Optics are decent, it is reliable, good tracking, wider power range, enough adjustment and it also has the parallax adjustment on the side.

 

[500Stroker]

I have both. Either one will fill your need. The Nightforce is a heavy scope so take that into consideration. Both are great scopes.

Diddo

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I'm considering the SIII, the SV is a bit more $$$, for that money I would go for a used NXS and get the side focus!

Many people have stated over the years that the 12-42 BR appeared clearer than the 12-42 NXS. I believe the lenses are pretty much the same between the two scopes, however the difference is the way in which the scopes deal with parallax issues. The BR has an adjustable objective, a simple yet highly efficient mechanism to focus the objective lens to eliminate parallax; the NXS has a side focus mechanism which I believe involves an extra lens internally. Optically speaking, I much prefer an adjustable objective to a side focus, and having less lens elements in the light path makes for more light transmission, which may be why the BR is considered by many (not all, and maybe not even most,) to be clearer than the NXS.

I have an NF NXS 12-42X56 and I think it's a great scope, but it was replaced by a March on my F-TR rifle. It currently resides atop an AR-10.

As many have indicated here, either of the scopes you are considering will serve you very well. The difference in weight is about 6 ounces, 36 for the BR and 30 for the SIIISS. The BR is a 2.8X zoom, whereas the SIIISS is a 5X. They are both 30mm tubes and have about the same amount of internal adjustment.

I really like the NP-2DD reticle of the BR/NXS for F-Class and even though my March goes to 50X, I mostly run at 40X.

Given the 2 scopes, I would probably err toward the BR for its AO and NP2DD reticle. But as stated earlier, you won't go wrong with either one.

 

[perry42]

Check out the Vortex Golden Eagle for apprx $1,500.

perry42

 

[Rogmay]

Check out the Vortex Golden Eagle for apprx $1,500.

perry42

Only problem with a $1500 optic is the wife already has one testical in hand, can't afford the second! Which isn't necessary a bad thing!

 

[Rogmay]

Great replys guys, this is awesome advice! enjoying the night in my wall tent with cell service, last weekend of hunting season and my 12 & 14 year olds both smoked their cow elk tonight, Heading back in the morning to finish packing out!

 

[shot410ga]

I have the Sightron III 10X50 on my 6mm Norma. For the $$$$ it's the best scope I could buy. A new NF is twice as much. Lifetime warranty. Clear edge to edge. And I shoot the gun from 200-1000yds. Never had a problem tracking, and when I pull it out of the case no adjustments are necessary.