Hunting with a Nightforce Scope

[dtucker]

I am looking to purchace a Nightforce scope for varmint hunting here where i live. I have not had 1 of their scopes or ever looked through 1. I will be using it to coyote, ground hog and fox hunt with. Not sure which retical to choose and was hoping to get some opinions from those that use their scopes and do that type of hunting. I am looking for something that will be easy to pick up on the target and does not get lost easy if you know what i mean. Something that will draw your eye in if you need to get on it pretty quick. Thanks for any input you fellows have.

 

[Preacher]

Look no further than the NP2-DD reticule, it will do all you want to do...
This was taken at 200 yards...

 

[lynn]

Dan
My father and myself only hunt longrange and we have a half dozen Nightforce scopes on our rifles.
What we have found out is we prefer a lower power setting on the bottom end.I tried a straight 36 Leupold and a 12x42 Nightforce and if you need a quick follow up shot you lose so much field of view you can no longer find the animal.
Naturaly we hunt mainly early in the morning from a stand but a 5.5x22 is now our main scope.
Our terrain is heavy brush and steep bowls so this problem may not apply to you.
Lynn

 

[dtucker]

I have set in my mind that the 5.5x22x50 is what i would like to get. I do not travel and PD hunt. Most all my hunting is around and near the Ohio river where i live outside of Cincinnati. The terrain is hilly with lots of woods and open fields. To be honest most of the shots are within a couple hundred yards and if i call in coyote or fox 99% will be within 100 yards. I like the NP2-DD but i am afraid the dot will get lost to easy and be hard to pick up. The NP 1 with the cross hair looks like you could pick up easy even if you have to get on it quick and you could still use it for farther out. But it seems i do not see many use it and maybe their is a reason for it. I also like the NP-1RR real well since it has a cross hair and some dots for futher out if shooting ground hogs but not sure if all the stuff at the bottom will be to distracting.

 

[bozo699]

Dan,
I have three N/F scopes, the 5.5-22X56 Varminter it is designed for varmints with ranging capabilities for the little critters but unless you take the time to get familiar with it, it can be confusing as it is quite busy, the other two I have both have the NP2-DD retical that Preacher pictured in his post, one in a 3.5-15 on my hunting rifle and the other is a 12-42 on my BR rifle, I believe this is a fast and easy scope to acquire your target, it actually self centers for you just like a peep site, in lower light if your worried about loosing the dot turn the illumination on that's what it is for and the batteries are cheap. I think all there reticals have there place and are well thought out but for me I range and dial so the simplicity of the NP2-DD is perfect. Other then the single dot this design will give you the most unclouded sight picture of any of the N/F scopes IMO.
Wayne.

 

[6BRinNZ]

I use the R1 in 5.5x22x56...out varminting the wind is the big unknown and it can be real handy to bracket an animal with the windage marks...the 2moa hash marks are slightly larger than a rabbit at 300yrds...

I range and crank elevation but hold windage....

I don't have a problem with the busy R1 reticle but I wouldn't describe it as one that draws your eye in as you stated in your first post...

 

[Coleridge]

The DD is were it's at for a point & shoot scope. I hunt with three NF. I have two DD & one NP-R2. The DD centers itself & you can easily bracket with the dark side hair if your woried about the dot. However, I've never lost the dot in daylight. When it starts getting dark, turn on the illumination.

I like the NP-R2 for qick shots without time for dialing. For what you described DD all the way.

This pic was @ 300 yards. The center dot shows up more than the pic shows

 

[HEAD0001]

I am not trying to be the odd guy out. But here goes. You do realize how heavy those scopes are?? Is that what you are looking for-a super heavy rig??

If you are only shooting to 200 yards and like to move around alot then I think you will not like a 5.5X22 scope for hunting. Just too much magnifaction, and way too much weight for a hunting rifle if you are a mobile hunter. Most coyote and fox hunters like a simple lightweight 3X9.

However just the opposite if are a fixed position hunter.

But I question why you would want exposed target knobs for a rifle to be used to 200 yards?? Or even 300?? Tom.

 

[JRS]

I agree I use a 2.5-10x45 on my 264 Win mag out to 500 yards, and have never needed or wanted more magnification.

 

[bozo699]

I am not trying to be the odd guy out. But here goes. You do realize how heavy those scopes are?? Is that what you are looking for-a super heavy rig??

If you are only shooting to 200 yards and like to move around alot then I think you will not like a 5.5X22 scope for hunting. Just too much magnifaction, and way too much weight for a hunting rifle if you are a mobile hunter. Most coyote and fox hunters like a simple lightweight 3X9.

However just the opposite if are a fixed position hunter.

But I question why you would want exposed target knobs for a rifle to be used to 200 yards?? Or even 300?? Tom.

I hunt in the rugged blue mountains 1200-6500 feet is what my property varies, very steep and very rugged. I weigh 270lbs, I should weigh 220 I don't have any trouble chasing cattle or hunting in these hills yet but when a 32oz scope verses a 22 oz is too much for me I'll loose 20 lbs I agree if your only shooting 200-300 yards, turrets would not be necessary if you were only shooting deer but a 3-9 sighted in at 100 would be total guess work on a rabbit or ground hog at 300 yards so for that purpose to get humane one shot kills turrets would almost be a total necessity , I have a 12-42 and many times I wished it had 60 power. However I know guy's that will buy a custom $2500 hunting rifle and put a 3-9 vari X II or world class Tasco ?? Personally I would rather have a $2000 scope on a $200 stevens rifle, if you cant see it you cant hit it.
Wayne.

 

[JRS]

That's funny Wayne ??? ;D Guess work at 300 yards with a 3-9 scope ??? Not only does the extra weight of a boat anchor heavy scope become a pain in the butt after carrying it all day, it also throws the rifle out of balance. You need clarity and field of view on a scope used for hunting. Sitting at a bench and shooting at varmints is another story.

 

[bozo699]

That's funny Wayne ??? ;D Guess work at 300 yards with a 3-9 scope ??? Not only does the extra weight of a boat anchor heavy scope become a pain in the butt after carrying it all day, it also throws the rifle out of balance. You need clarity and field of view on a scope used for hunting. Sitting at a bench and shooting at varmints is another story.

I won't argue with you JRS but a rifle with a 3-9 no turrets, zeroed at 100 yards is guess work at 300 yards when your talking your shooting at some animals the size of pop cans!! If this rifle was only to be used on game animals I would totally agree, but thats not the case here! The day I am too FAT and LAZY to pack as much as a 15 # rifle around I will quit the game, I see people all the time with huge back packs that must weigh 50# and belly ache if there rifle is over 6# ??? My rifle that I use on Varmints, ground hogs, red diggers and the occasional deer is a 6.5*284 f-class, I replaced the f-class stock with the HS Precision 20 minute rail with a 5-25X56 PMII Schmidt & Bender and harris bi pod total weight 16.4 lbs. Never a issue and whatever I aim at from 25-1000 yards is dead! and there have been a few well over 1K, to each his own I guess, a 2.5-10X32 NSX only weighs 19 oz and would make a great adjustable scope for the OP's needs but then again I suppose a 1X weaver on a chipmunk 22lr would also work ??? :-X :-X :-X

 

[JRS]

I don't see how a slightly heavier scope would throw off the balance when it is mounted near the balance point of the rifle?

When I referenced balance, I'm talking about the proportion of weight between your hands. On a rifle used for hunting, it is of utmost importance when you shoulder the gun.

 

[JRS]

Wayne,
You could be right about the 22. The OP didn't state at what distances he would be shooting. I use a straight 6x Sightron on one of my smaller calibers, and will assure you, a rabbit at any reasonable distance is soon to be a snack.

 

[bozo699]

I have set in my mind that the 5.5x22x50 is what i would like to get. I do not travel and PD hunt. Most all my hunting is around and near the Ohio river where i live outside of Cincinnati. The terrain is hilly with lots of woods and open fields. To be honest most of the shots are within a couple hundred yards and if i call in coyote or fox 99% will be within 100 yards. I like the NP2-DD but i am afraid the dot will get lost to easy and be hard to pick up. The NP 1 with the cross hair looks like you could pick up easy even if you have to get on it quick and you could still use it for farther out. But it seems i do not see many use it and maybe their is a reason for it. I also like the NP-1RR real well since it has a cross hair and some dots for futher out if shooting ground hogs but not sure if all the stuff at the bottom will be to distracting.

Wayne,
You could be right about the 22. The OP didn't state at what distances he would be shooting. I use a straight 6x Sightron on one of my smaller calibers, and will assure you, a rabbit at any reasonable distance is soon to be a snack.

Yes he did, and your way handier with a rifle then I, Happy hunting
Wayne.

 

[JRS]

Yes, he certainly did Wayne. My mistake. Based on the distances he'll be shooting, a 6x scope is plenty. Have you looked through a quality 6x scope at 300 yards? Plenty of FOV to pick up even a moving target, something you won't be doing with a big heavy target scope, and the magnification is more than sufficient. When I was in the Army, we hunted 2 legged prey at ranges you'll likely never hunt at. Our scopes happened to be 10x. We're talking about scopes used for hunting, not target shooting. Hunting coyotes and fox usually presents a target that is on the move.
If this is something new to the OP, my advice, for whatever it's worth, would be to purchase a quality scope with no more than 10x on the upper range, and keep the overall weight of the gun (with scope) as light as possible. Something on the order of 3-9, 2.5-10 or 3.5-10 mounted on a little 223 is some serious varmint medicine at the distances he'll be shooting. Not to mention the ease of packing it around all day.

 

[drop_point]

If its going to be used for a walking gun, I'd avoid the 5.5-22x56 or anything larger. For big game I'd really suggest the 2.5-10x, but for the groundhogs a little more magnification would be in order, depending on the range. I have a 3.5-15x50 with an NR-R2 and love it. Its quite easy to range with plus the ticks are 2 MOA at 15x. Cut the power ring in half and they are 1 MOA, so hold-overs are easy to do on the fly.

 

[HEAD0001]

If you want to pack around a 15# rifle in the mountains then that is your business. However you hopefully know that you are the minority. And by minority I mean maybe 1/2 of 1% of the hunters out there want to carry that type of rifle around in the mountains. Probably much less than 1/2 of 1%.

I have no idea how many hunters I have seen in my life above 5,000 feet in elevation. And I don't think I have ever seen a hunter carrying a 15# rifle in the mountains. Personally the heaviest rifle I have ever seen in the mountains is a Sharp's rifle that I was hunting with. With open sights. Heaven forbid if you had to shoot with open sights. Good lord how would you adjust them??

It doesn't matter to me if you beat your chest like King Kong when you carry that 15# rifle up the mountain. Calling a person who wants to carry an appropriate weight rifle "fat and lazy" is uncalled for.

I also do agree that it takes good glass to see. And I also believe in your theory about a $2,000 scope and a $200 rifle. I also agree with that.

But that does not make the NF a better choice for hunting. Sure NF has good glass. But it is not Swaro. glass!! NF is known for its durability, but they do not have the ultimate high grade glass.

A 3X10 Swaro., even with the ballistic turret would be a much better choice for what the OP asked about. And that Swaro. glass would be of better optical quality than your three times as heavy NF.

And who sights a rifle in dead on at 100 yards for hunting?? Nobody. Normally everybody sights there rifle in one to 3 inches high for fairly flat trajectory to 300 yards. Which is 100 yards past the OP's 200 yard range. I do it all the time. And that is with a slower 223.

And exposed turrets for most mountain hunters is definitely not a good choice. Tom.

 

[Rock Knocker]

I agree that the NP-R2 is a great reticle, I would prefer 2 or 3 moa windage hashs instead of 5 moa but it gets the job done. I havent shot a NP-R1 but if you put the verticle of the R2 on it i would buy several in different powers. They are busier than some of the reticles but i have never seen it be a nuesance, even looking through overgrown Minnesotan woods. Ranging targets is as easy as any reticle could make it.

Bring a big gun, put a big scope on it. Just excersize before you start hiking up mountains....... Being 25 years old has its perks i guess :-X No Viagra I mean

 

[dtucker]

Would the Nightforce and Leupold MK4 glass be comparable to each other in quality.