New NF 15-55

[6BRinNZ]

Sounds like guys are quitting their NF12-42s in favour of the new 15-55...why is that? Surely 42 power is easily enough...

The reason I am asking is - I am building a new FTR rifle and I have a choice to make with respect to scopes. Sure weight will drive my choice to some degree - is the new NF 15-55 offering that much over an NF 8-32 or 12-42 outside of weight? My philosophy is if it ain't broke don't fix it....hence my question...

I have posted in the competition section as its the F/FTR opinions I am after...

TIA

 

[ShootDots]

I think there are 2 basic reasons behind the "switch"..
1.) The "ED" glass should GREATLY enhance clarity, especially at ranges beyond 4-500 yards; and
2.) The adjustment turrets have a "complete rotation" of 5 m.o.a. rather than 6 m.o.a., thereby making it somewhat easier to "calculate" where you need to go and where you are, in relation to where you "were" at sight-in. I would have like to have seen 20 m.o.a. or 10 m.o.a. at the least>>>but nevertheless, 5 m.o.a. adjustments are easier to calculate than the 6 m.o.a. on the BR models..
Since I do not own one, I am only hazarding a guess at this response>>>however, having said that, the aforementioned reasons would be why I would buy one instead of a BR model..

 

[Immike]

I am not the ftr opinion but shot a bench match today with a top competitor that had one on his rifle. I asked him if it was better and he said oh yeah!!

 

[bozo699]

I think there are 2 basic reasons behind the "switch"..
1.) The "ED" glass should GREATLY enhance clarity, especially at ranges beyond 4-500 yards; and
2.) The adjustment turrets have a "complete rotation" of 5 m.o.a. rather than 6 m.o.a., thereby making it somewhat easier to "calculate" where you need to go and where you are, in relation to where you "were" at sight-in. I would have like to have seen 20 m.o.a. or 10 m.o.a. at the least>>>but nevertheless, 5 m.o.a. adjustments are easier to calculate than the 6 m.o.a. on the BR models..
Since I do not own one, I am only hazarding a guess at this response>>>however, having said that, the aforementioned reasons would be why I would buy one instead of a BR model..

I think you are probably spot on and also I do own two 12-42 and I use all of it and wished I had a little more on cool clear mornings, I can see 30 cal holes with it but the 6mm's are hard to see but with 8 more power and better glass I think I could see the little holes at anyrate I have a friend that has one and I will be looking through it next weekend, and I will try to get a report from him and will try to get back on here with a report.
Wayne

 

[xswanted]

I got to handle a couple of the new competition scopes the other day.

VERY nice, the glass is exceptional, however I was inside so no real comparison to exsisting scopes.

I was impressed with the weight. All the power and the scope feels about the same as a 5-25NXS...haven't looked at the specs but it has to be close!

VERY nice optics.

 

[6BRinNZ]

Thanks - I get the ED glass thing - but I wondered if there was actually a need for any more clarity.....its not as though NXS or BR models were shabby to start with...I am curious if the ED glass is in fact better in mirage conditions. In NZ mirage doesn't occur often and disappears easily, I am curious if the ED glass helps to pick up mirage more easily and allows you to stay on the higher powers when mirage is coming on strong...if not I'm back to the mechanical reliability equation...new product vs old proven product.

Long range BR - I think I can easily understand the benefits of better glass...F/FTR since there is a spotter...clarity greater than already good clarity not so much...

 

[ShootDots]

I have (3)- 12 - 42 BR models and (1) 12-42 NSX... In my humble opinion, the BR models have NOTICEABLY better glass than the NSX model... Why that would be I have NO CLUE! Nevertheless, I see a considerable difference. I am actually considering ditching the NSX in order to obtain a 15-55 Competition model.. I would like to peer through a comp. model to see if taking the $$$ hickey would be worth it...

 

[sdbob]

I bought another 12-42 BR today, could have had the new 15-55 Comp.

I just could not write the check out, $1400 compared to $2350. I'm sure the new scope is great, maybe another day.

Reading the wind takes trigger time and the money I saved allows that.

 

[dreever]

I personally like the 12-42 NXS with high speed adjustments the best. I like the big knobs which are easy to read with no pesky covers to remove and misplace.The high speed adjustments are the real deal in my opinion. The new scope is way to pricey in my opinion for what you are getting. However, to each his own. If you have the bucks and want to be on the cutting edge well go for it.
Bang for the buck still has to be the BR models though.

Danny

 

[bozo699]

Danny,
What are you using your scopes for, ......what disipline?
Wayne.

 

[CJ6]

There is a thread on Benchrest Central on the NF and a March both set at 50X check it out.

 

[oht]

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?85843-New-Nightforce-Competition

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?85267-New-NF-15-55X52-Competition-scope/page2

 

[dreever]

Wayne,

I shoot Ground Hog Matches out to 500 meters and play around with some informal tactical type shooting out to 1000 yards.
Danny

 

[bozo699]

Wayne,

I shoot Ground Hog Matches out to 500 meters and play around with some informal tactical type shooting out to 1000 yards.
Danny

Danny,
Then I would tend to agree with you and understand your thoughts on the turrets as for that type of shooting I like my nsx scopes better myself, for straight br shooting the br model is much better IMHO.
Wayne.

 

[mysticplayer]

Thanks - I get the ED glass thing - but I wondered if there was actually a need for any more clarity.....its not as though NXS or BR models were shabby to start with...I am curious if the ED glass is in fact better in mirage conditions. In NZ mirage doesn't occur often and disappears easily, I am curious if the ED glass helps to pick up mirage more easily and allows you to stay on the higher powers when mirage is coming on strong...if not I'm back to the mechanical reliability equation...new product vs old proven product.

Long range BR - I think I can easily understand the benefits of better glass...F/FTR since there is a spotter...clarity greater than already good clarity not so much...

If the type of lenses are similar to the optical qualities of MARCH, then they will see "through" mirage well.

For this FTR shooter, that is not a good thing. At this time, I do not shoot with a spotting scope.

Under similar conditions, my Sightrons will pick up mirage much sooner then a March and high mag S&B

I found I need to use about 1/3 more mag on the MARCH to start seeing the air vs the Sightron. Not ideal as I want to be able to see a few targets wide and typically only shoot up to 40X even at 1000yds.

At 55X or so, the field of view of the MARCH was too narrow for my tastes and it was starting to get dim.

I shoot with a few guys that swear by their MARCH. Others their S&B's. I have looked through them quite a bit in hopes of seeing an advantage vs the dollars spent.

For me without a spotter, the sightron lets me see more of the air at lower mag sooner in the day. This suits my style of shooting better.

If I went with a spotter, my scope choice might change....
YMMV.

Jerry

 

[6BRinNZ]

Thanks - I get the ED glass thing - but I wondered if there was actually a need for any more clarity.....its not as though NXS or BR models were shabby to start with...I am curious if the ED glass is in fact better in mirage conditions. In NZ mirage doesn't occur often and disappears easily, I am curious if the ED glass helps to pick up mirage more easily and allows you to stay on the higher powers when mirage is coming on strong...if not I'm back to the mechanical reliability equation...new product vs old proven product.

Long range BR - I think I can easily understand the benefits of better glass...F/FTR since there is a spotter...clarity greater than already good clarity not so much...

If the type of lenses are similar to the optical qualities of MARCH, then they will see "through" mirage well.

For this FTR shooter, that is not a good thing. At this time, I do not shoot with a spotting scope.

Under similar conditions, my Sightrons will pick up mirage much sooner then a March and high mag S&B

I found I need to use about 1/3 more mag on the MARCH to start seeing the air vs the Sightron. Not ideal as I want to be able to see a few targets wide and typically only shoot up to 40X even at 1000yds.

At 55X or so, the field of view of the MARCH was too narrow for my tastes and it was starting to get dim.

I shoot with a few guys that swear by their MARCH. Others their S&B's. I have looked through them quite a bit in hopes of seeing an advantage vs the dollars spent.

For me without a spotter, the sightron lets me see more of the air at lower mag sooner in the day. This suits my style of shooting better.

If I went with a spotter, my scope choice might change....
YMMV.

Jerry

Thanks Jerry - good info - I am not a fan of the ultra high magnifications as I have seen too many guys cross fire as they can't pick up the target number when shooting fast strings...more so with FTR and the heavies....so the plan has been to run around 30+

I was hoping the good lenses with 30+ power would pick up the mirage - I am a little uncertain if the NXS 8-32 or 12-42 would have good enough optics to do so, whereas I would have thought a March or New NF would be fine hence the question to understand why everyone is swapping...

Interesting comment about the Sightron

 

[aj300mag]

There are a few benefits to choose the Nightforce Competition scope over the Benchrest model or the NXS...

First off is the weight savings. No explanation needed. Secondly the Competition scope has 60MOA of windage/elevation adjustment. Some of us shoot Mid Range Fullbore matches (300yards) and need to hold on for that range (simple reticle without hash marks or mil dots). If you set your scope up for this you'll be near the top of the vertical adjustment at your 1000 yard zero which limits windage adjustment with the BR.

Personally I prefer a scope that has excellent resolution so it's posible to pick out the rings and numbers on the target to use as hold off points for windage. Seeing marige isn't an issue. If the paralax is adjusted properly the mirage you see is at the target, not exactly in the zone where you should be concerned. The extra magnifacation is an added bonus. If someone is cross firing they aren't paying attention....

Having the paralax adjustment on the turrent is an added bonus over the BR model. You don't have to get out of position to make adjustments. A few clubs where I shoot require you to shoot on a verification target placed at aprox 90 yards before taking your first shot on target (at 600 yards).

The dials are well marked and easy to read. I always go to the line with a 100 round ammo box, I toss the turrent caps and lens caps into the ammo box and haven't lost them as of yet.

As usual... YMMV ;D

 

[jamesl]

I've got a competition and overall I like it. I needed the weight saving (2lbs 3.25oz with shade and nf ultralights) and thought the extra magnifacation would be nice along with the increased adjustment range. At normal range conditions the glass might be slightly better than my br at the same power (a resolution chart might prove otherwise to me they are very close) but was better than nxs. The comp was the darkest of the 3 by a noticeable margin. the parallax adjustment is very fine which some may or may not like.

James

 

[dreever]

If you are a lefty like me side focus isn't that much of a benefit. I also like the 56mm objective of the BR/NXS variants. Seems to me what you gain with ED glass you lose with objective diameter. Weight can be a consideration for some, especially those shooting short range IBS or NBRSA, but for the rest of us it really isn't that much of a worry.

 

[6BRinNZ]

I've got a competition and overall I like it. I needed the weight saving (2lbs 3.25oz with shade and nf ultralights) and thought the extra magnifacation would be nice along with the increased adjustment range. At normal range conditions the glass might be slightly better than my br at the same power (a resolution chart might prove otherwise to me they are very close) but was better than nxs. The comp was the darkest of the 3 by a noticeable margin. the parallax adjustment is very fine which some may or may not like.

James

Thanks James - how do you find the eye relief compared to the NXS? - This was another question I had when using the higher powers...is it any more or less critical than an NXS for the same setting? I know the specs but it is always good to get an opinion.