New NightForce NXS?

[johara1]

22oz. maybe the box.........jim

 

[TonyR]

A March 10X60X52 weighs 23 oz so it could be done.

 

[johara1]

Tony, yes it can, but do you think they will ? I had no luck with a March and they will not get me again.......jim

 

[20PPC]

I don't remember him saying whether it was a BR or a NXS but he did mention he thought retail was going to be somewhere close to 1700.00, so that makes it sound like a NXS.
I will see him tomorrow so I will try to get more info. He also mentioned that a very good shooter that everyone knows had a lot of input into the design of this scope.

 

[T 700]

Let us know what you find you find out

 

[johara1]

The NXS sells for 1885 so if they if the power goes up to 55 from 42 and the weight goes down you can bet the price will not go down. If it turns out to be true and they do bring out a 22 oz. scope it would have to be the BR series but i hope the eye relief gets longer. if it stays the same they can keep them,that is the reason i sold mine. The side focus is the other reason,and i don't need 55 power,weight of 22 oz. is the only feature that is interesting.......... jim

 

[TonyR]

Tony, yes it can, but do you think they will ? I had no luck with a March and they will not get me again.......jim

I've go two March scopes and like them very much. The optics are good enough that I rarely use my spotting scope anymore except for scoring. The March MTR-1 reticle has 1 MOA hash marks on both crosshairs which is way better for me than the NP-R2 NF reticle. I have one rifle that would never make weight for F-Class with a NF, but my other gun will and I have an NXS with 1/8 MOA clicks on order for it. The one real issue with the March I have noticed is that my eye has to be in a certain position to get the full field of view, so it would slow me down if I were a BR shooter but it has not been a problem for F-Class. So I guess there are good reasons for a person to buy one or the other. But, with respect to the OP and what the new "Super NF" might be, it would be interesting to know if the eye position issue with the March is related to the optics of either 6X zoom range of the 10X60X52 or to the 10 ounce difference in weight vs the NF.

 

[johara1]

Tony, I had problems with my March. Impact shift, and it was not as clear as my NF. Kelblys sent it back and the impact shift was cured but i still could not see 6mm holes at 500yds but i could with NF.I now have 3 NXS scope on my BR rifles.......jim

 

[TonyR]

Tony, I had problems with my March. Impact shift, and it was not as clear as my NF. Kelblys sent it back and the impact shift was cured but i still could not see 6mm holes at 500yds but i could with NF.I now have 3 NXS scope on my BR rifles.......jim

I wish I had your eyes!

 

[johara1]

Tony, No you don't, and eye not eye's and now left only........jim

 

[T 700]

Any body heard any thing

 

[Geronimo Jim]

Not me.

 

[243Mendoza]

To Mikecr,
Thank you for making me realize that I was focused on only my particular shooting discipline being L-R sling prone, and not looking at the needs of all shooters. ... In regards to the .125 vs. .250 adjustments, when you are working with 2 MOA scoring rings, you hardly ever make a single .250 adjustment, more likely a 1/2 MOA, so again, the .125 adjustment is just a PITA for my application.
Thanks for making me think of the bigger picture,
Lloyd

I am also a sling prone competitor and I think that 1/4 moa windage adjustments are too large for 1000yd and would like to see 1/2 moa. Also there is not enough windage for the windy days on the range.e.g. when winds are more than 15mph.

Also Nightforce has no suitable reticle for this game. The prone position with a sling does not allow a rock-steady hold so the sight picture will bounce with your pulse and it's hard to see a thin reticle bouncing in the black. I have one 12-42x56 scope modified with the FC2 reticle which is the best reticle available for my eyes giving a .4moa dot but this reticle has been dropped by Nightforce. I think that Nightforce is now concentrating on its military, law enforcement customers and tactical crowd, i.e. the people with the money.

 

[bozo699]

To Mikecr,
Thank you for making me realize that I was focused on only my particular shooting discipline being L-R sling prone, and not looking at the needs of all shooters. ... In regards to the .125 vs. .250 adjustments, when you are working with 2 MOA scoring rings, you hardly ever make a single .250 adjustment, more likely a 1/2 MOA, so again, the .125 adjustment is just a PITA for my application.
Thanks for making me think of the bigger picture,
Lloyd

I am also a sling prone competitor and I think that 1/4 moa windage adjustments are too large for 1000yd and would like to see 1/2 moa. Also there is not enough windage for the windy days on the range.e.g. when winds are more than 15mph.

Also Nightforce has no suitable reticle for this game. The prone position with a sling does not allow a rock-steady hold so the sight picture will bounce with your pulse and it's hard to see a thin reticle bouncing in the black. I have one 12-42x56 scope modified with the FC2 reticle which is the best reticle available for my eyes giving a .4moa dot but this reticle has been dropped by Nightforce. I think that Nightforce is now concentrating on its military, law enforcement customers and tactical crowd, i.e. the people with the money.

Steve,
If 1/4 moa is to large of a adjustment at 1K (2.5") then WHY would you want to go larger?....1/2 moa?...(5") I don't understand that theory,..please explain.
Wayne.

P.S when there is no wind,..( first match of the day) the 1/8 moa is really nice IMO 1 1/4" per click at 1K, I for one like hitting the X with out holding,
(guessing)

 

[243Mendoza]

I am also a sling prone competitor and I think that 1/4 moa windage adjustments are too large for 1000yd and would like to see 1/2 moa. Also there is not enough windage for the windy days on the range.e.g. when winds are more than 15mph.

Steve,
If 1/4 moa is to large of a adjustment at 1K (2.5") then WHY would you want to go larger?....1/2 moa?...(5") I don't understand that theory,..please explain.
Wayne.

P.S when there is no wind,..( first match of the day) the 1/8 moa is really nice IMO 1 1/4" per click at 1K, I for one like hitting the X with out holding,
(guessing)
[/quote]I agree that with no wind 1/8moa is good for an F-Class target but 1/4 is enough for the standard NRA target. But at the range that I should, Rattlenake, the wind almost always blows even on relay 1. Many of the Palma iron-sight competitors use the 1/2 moa windage version of Warner sight. I do not think that many people can judge wind within 1/2 moa, let alone 1/8 moa. If you click for wind change, 1/8moa is a bear. Also for older eyes, seeing the hash marks on the turrets is very difficult and frustrating. I think the 1/8 moa is probably great for the shorter ranges and milder winds.

 

[bozo699]

I am also a sling prone competitor and I think that 1/4 moa windage adjustments are too large for 1000yd and would like to see 1/2 moa. Also there is not enough windage for the windy days on the range.e.g. when winds are more than 15mph.

Steve,
If 1/4 moa is to large of a adjustment at 1K (2.5") then WHY would you want to go larger?....1/2 moa?...(5") I don't understand that theory,..please explain.
Wayne.

P.S when there is no wind,..( first match of the day) the 1/8 moa is really nice IMO 1 1/4" per click at 1K, I for one like hitting the X with out holding,
(guessing)

I agree that with no wind 1/8moa is good for an F-Class target but 1/4 is enough for the standard NRA target. But at the range that I should, Rattlenake, the wind almost always blows even on relay 1. Many of the Palma iron-sight competitors use the 1/2 moa windage version of Warner sight. I do not think that many people can judge wind within 1/2 moa, let alone 1/8 moa. If you click for wind change, 1/8moa is a bear. Also for older eyes, seeing the hash marks on the turrets is very difficult and frustrating. I think the 1/8 moa is probably great for the shorter ranges and milder winds.
[/quote]
Steve,
Thanks for explaining, that makes sense and I totally can sympathize and relate to the trying to see the hash marks ;D
Wayne.

 

[Steve Blair]

I do not think that many people can judge wind within 1/2 moa, let alone 1/8 moa. If you click for wind change, 1/8moa is a bear. Also for older eyes, seeing the hash marks on the turrets is very difficult and frustrating. I think the 1/8 moa is probably great for the shorter ranges and milder winds.

Steve,

I shoot F-Class with more than a few folks who routinely judge within 1/2 MOA. Our X-ring is 1/2 MOA. At the 29 Palms Long Range Regional, I shot 38% X. At the Arizona Palma Championship, it was 40% X. The tournaments were 5 20X1000 and 3 Palma, respectively. My 1323-54X in Phoenix was only good enough for second place. Sunday morning, first relay at 800, I had a 12-14 mph gusting headwind at 38°F. Both locations are western desert and quite windy. It is worth noting that I did not shoot an "8" in either tournament. Our "9" ring is 2 MOA. What I shot is not exceptional, only what is required to be at or near the top of the F-Open leaderboard.

My old eyes can see the turrets well enough and I do not wear corrective lenses when shooting. F-Class is a different game than sling High Power. It is all about precision. But, we shoot under the same conditions and constraints. As you correctly noted, what is right for one game may not be right for another.

 

[FroggyOne2]

1/8 might be ok for a "smallbore" gun, but for anything NRA Highpower wise. No!

 

[243Mendoza]

Steve,

I shoot F-Class with more than a few folks who routinely judge within 1/2 MOA. Our X-ring is 1/2 MOA. At the 29 Palms Long Range Regional, I shot 38% X. At the Arizona Palma Championship, it was 40% X. The tournaments were 5 20X1000 and 3 Palma, respectively. My 1323-54X in Phoenix was only good enough for second place. Sunday morning, first relay at 800, I had a 12-14 mph gusting headwind at 38°F. Both locations are western desert and quite windy. It is worth noting that I did not shoot an "8" in either tournament. Our "9" ring is 2 MOA. What I shot is not exceptional, only what is required to be at or near the top of the F-Open leaderboard.

My old eyes can see the turrets well enough and I do not wear corrective lenses when shooting. F-Class is a different game than sling High Power. It is all about precision. But, we shoot under the same conditions and constraints. As you correctly noted, what is right for one game may not be right for another.

Great shooting, Steve. I envy the people who can read wind within 1/2 moa especially in 12-14mph winds. Maybe the type of cartridge may determine the effect of wind change. For Palma, it used to be that 1/2 moa equated to 1/2mph of wind; maybe with the high bc 7mm bullets that F-Class people are now using, 1/2 moa may be a 1mph wind and even reading a 1mph change in high wind condition is quite a feat.
Also, to read those small hash marks on the BR scopes, I would have to take out my reading glasses! I love the wide hash marks on the NXS.

 

[Steve Blair]

1/8 might be ok for a "smallbore" gun, but for anything NRA Highpower wise. No!

F-Class is part of NRA High Power. We shoot on the same ranges and, in many cases, use the same cartridges that sling High Power shooters use. While 1/8 MOA clicks are not required, many competitors find them pretty useful, especially when maintaining a vertical zero. I do not usually click windage unless the condition has significantly changed. I will click vertical if my shots start to move up or down in the 10 ring. If you want to maintain a high X-count and minimize the possibility of slipping a 9, it is important to stay as close to vertically zeroed as possible. 1/8 MOA at 1000 is ~1.3" and I can see that on the X. If you do not think you need it, don't use it. Most of the top competitors I see use a scope like a NF BR with 1/8 MOA. I just received a new NF NXS with 1/8 clicks and R1 reticle for F-Open. That combination is what I want but is certainly not right for everybody. That is why scope manufacturers offer a variety of options.

BTW, my .284 is not generally considered a "smallbore" gun. When I was working on the 155mm Ultra Lightweight Howitzer, my colleagues at Picatinny would have said it was. Of course, they thought everything under 20mm was smallbore.