Convince me I am wrong

[Rock’N Tacos]

I don’t think there is a better back country western hunting scope than the ATACR 4-16x42. I know she is a little chunky at 30oz, but most of the alternatives from Maven and Trijicon are 24-27oz. Mine sits on a 5.5lb rifle, so the whole package is still light enough to haul into hell and back and give me the confidence I need that it is going to hold zero and track reliably no matter what shit I put it through.

Full disclosure I have turned into a NF snob and all my rifles wear one now. I started out with trijicons when I started reading the drop tests and have slowly been upgrading when funds allow and now have a solid mix of NXSs, NX8s and ATACRs.

 

[wapitibob]

I went the other way, sold NX8 and bought Trijicon Tenmile hx. I have zero interest in a Maven.

 

[Mike D Texas]

The 4-16 F1 Mil-R ATACR is currently
My favorite hunting scope.

I would consider the Trijicon Tenmile more if they would get rid of the tree reticle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Rock’N Tacos]

I went the other way, sold NX8 and bought Trijicon Tenmile hx. I have zero interest in a Maven.

I have owned about 6 tenmile HXs. I also have zero interest in Maven. I think the ATACR eyebox, glass etc is amazing - much better than the NX8.

 

[Rock’N Tacos]

The 4-16 F1 Mil-R ATACR is currently
My favorite hunting scope.

I would consider the Trijicon Tenmile more if they would get rid of the tree reticle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It’s an amazing optic. I like the locking elevation turret more than I thought I would.

 

[ThreeOhSeven]

First year with my ATACR and I'm spoiled. Will be hard to shoot anything else.

 

[JGRaider]

I've killed 46 mule deer bucks since 1971. None with a NF, Trijicon, or SWFA.

 

[Johnwell]

For a ~30 oz scope you could almost get the minox zp5 and have one of the best hunting reticles ever devised. Seems solid on drop testing. Kinda pricey.

There’s also the Schmidt and bender polar 4-16 (or 3-12) that is lighter at 23-28 oz and would be even better in low light situations. Also good on drop testing. A little more pricey.

But I’m sure the Nightforce is good enough. If you can’t afford the other two, just say so. (I jest, I run SWFA 3-9’s and one 5-20 because I am a poor)

 

[Macintosh]

Meh. Its a good enough scope if you cant get closer to your critters.

 

[khart_6882]

I've killed 46 mule deer bucks since 1971. None with a NF, Trijicon, or SWFA.

Cool?

 

[waspocrew]

I was thinking of going with that very ATACR for a 6 ARC Tikka, but ended up coming across a crazy deal on a new NX8 ($1590 from Optics Planet - and yes it was delivered haha).

I have a Tenmile Hx - honestly, it’s an ok optic, but I haven’t been as impressed as I thought I’d be based off feedback on this forum.

 

[Rock’N Tacos]

For a ~30 oz scope you could almost get the minox zp5 and have one of the best hunting reticles ever devised. Seems solid on drop testing. Kinda pricey.

There’s also the Schmidt and bender polar 4-16 (or 3-12) that is lighter at 23-28 oz and would be even better in low light situations. Also good on drop testing. A little more pricey.

But I’m sure the Nightforce is good enough. If you can’t afford the other two, just say so. (I jest, I run SWFA 3-9’s and one 5-20 because I am a poor)

I see people on this forum keep talking about usable hunting reticles…i don’t get it. I personally dislike the christmas tree reticles, but can still hunt with them without problem. What does a good hunting reticle look like?

 

[Rock’N Tacos]

I was thinking of going with that very ATACR for a 6 ARC Tikka, but ended up coming across a crazy deal on a new NX8 ($1590 from Optics Planet - and yes it was delivered haha).

I have a Tenmile Hx - honestly, it’s an ok optic, but I haven’t been as impressed as I thought I’d be based off feedback on this forum.

I really like both of my NX8s - I have a 2.5-20 and 4-32. Can’t go wrong there IMO. I agree with you about the tenmiles - when europtic had the tenmiles and credos on clearance a couple years ago, they were an incredible value and even without the massive discount they are decent value for something reliable and drop tested. The quality is not the same as NF - the turrets, the design, the glass etc isn’t as good imo.

 

[Johnwell]

I see people on this forum keep talking about usable hunting reticles…i don’t get it. I personally dislike the christmas tree reticles, but can still hunt with them without problem. What does a good hunting reticle look like?

In my opinion a perfect reticle really shouldn’t need illumination to be effective within legal shooting hours. If it does, it’s not a perfect reticle.

In my eyes, the perfect hunting reticle would be basically a ffp German #1 with a couple mils of wind holds on either side, and maybe .5 mil of fine reticle above the post. That way at low magnification you have a super bold reticle that draws your eye to the center of the target for fast shots, or shots in low light.

At higher magnification you still have a super fine aiming point and wind holds.

I’m not personally a fan of scopes with 10 mils of wind and elevation holds; I just won’t ever use that much. To be honest, I don’t know if I’d take the shot on an animal if it was even 1 mil of wind.

The THLR reticle minox has is about as close as I’ve seen, but it’s too busy in my opinion. Form has an excellent write-up and pictures of the reticle on this post. https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/minox-zp5-5-25x56mm-thlr-field-evaluation.253283/

 

[Macintosh]

I see people on this forum keep talking about usable hunting reticles…i don’t get it. I personally dislike the christmas tree reticles, but can still hunt with them without problem. What does a good hunting reticle look like?

Depends entirely on where and how you hunt, maybe your eyes. My earlier comment was entirely facetious, its clearly a great scope, I just dont think it can possibly be a universal thing. As someone who hunts 90+% in extremely thick timber (ie exceptionally busy background, often lower light, 99.9% extremely close range, often hurried shots) having an uber-bold reticle is a necessity, not a nice to have. NF just doesnt make reticles that are good in this regard, at least for my eyes. The ability to extend my range and dial for a longer shot only happens when I travel to hunt, so thats the “nice to have” part and is far less important to me. Consequently, for a do it all scope, the only NF model I’d even really consider is their shv 3.5-10 with a duplex reticle. If they had a bolder ffp reticle that was easily useable at lowest magnification in dark conditions against a very busy background I’d for sure own one.

But if I were in what Im guessing are your shoes—mainly western spot and stalk hunting—I would be much less concerned with the reticle and something like this scope would make a lot more sense. No one will argue its not an exceptionally good choice for the purpose.

 

[Rock’N Tacos]

Depends entirely on where and how you hunt, maybe your eyes. My earlier comment was entirely facetious, its clearly a great scope, I just dont think it can possibly be a universal thing. As someone who hunts 90+% in extremely thick timber (ie exceptionally busy background, often lower light, 99.9% extremely close range, often hurried shots) having an uber-bold reticle is a necessity, not a nice to have. NF just doesnt make reticles that are good in this regard, at least for my eyes. The ability to extend my range and dial for a longer shot only happens when I travel to hunt, so thats the “nice to have” part and is far less important to me. Consequently, for a do it all scope, the only NF model I’d even really consider is their shv 3.5-10 with a duplex reticle. If they had a bolder ffp reticle that was easily useable at lowest magnification in dark conditions against a very busy background I’d for sure own one.

But if I were in what Im guessing are your shoes—mainly western spot and stalk hunting—I would be much less concerned with the reticle and something like this scope would make a lot more sense. No one will argue its not an exceptionally good choice for the purpose.

I really like leupolds firedot reticle for the purpose you described. Wish their scopes were more reliable

 

[PaulB84]

I really like leupolds firedot reticle for the purpose you described. Wish their scopes were more reliable

So much this....

I think the Swarovski 4W-I reticle is pretty close to perfect. Illuminated center dot and a few windage marks.

A good FFP reticle like the original 1-4x SWFA that is basically a red dot at low magnification and has usable hash marks at higher powers is what I'm after in a 3-15x or similar

 

[PaulB84]

For a ~30 oz scope you could almost get the minox zp5 and have one of the best hunting reticles ever devised. Seems solid on drop testing. Kinda pricey.

There’s also the Schmidt and bender polar 4-16 (or 3-12) that is lighter at 23-28 oz and would be even better in low light situations. Also good on drop testing. A little more pricey.

But I’m sure the Nightforce is good enough. If you can’t afford the other two, just say so. (I jest, I run SWFA 3-9’s and one 5-20 because I am a poor)

Forgive my ignorance but that reticle looks basically identical to the NF Mil-R?

 

[Macintosh]

Forgive my ignorance but that reticle looks basically identical to the NF Mil-R?

The minox reticle? No they are different.
Mil R is a standard mil reticle. I find it pretty fine at lower magnifications in ffp, but the main difference is that the reticle is the same at all magnifications, despite scaling with zoom as all ffp reticles do.

The THLR reticle (which is the one that gets folks here underwear in a bunch) in the zp5 uses strategically thicker/finer lines in various parts of the reticle so that at any given magnification the parts of the reticle that you arent using are INVISIBLE, and only become visible as you zoom in. Its a pretty busy reticle that I dont think is super relevant for my personal uses, but in concept it addresses the main complaint people have in reticles being either too fine or too thick…ie “use a variable-thickness line, dummy”! It seems like a no-brainer concept that could (should) be applied to lots of ffp reticles to make them better across their magnification, but unfortunately isnt.

 

[77TMK]

I see people on this forum keep talking about usable hunting reticles…i don’t get it. I personally dislike the christmas tree reticles, but can still hunt with them without problem. What does a good hunting reticle look like?

The problem with the internet is you have no idea who's making that claim.

Personally, the majority of people I hear pining over "hunting reticles" are people best served by a red dot, because all they want is something impossible to not see for their 30 yard 300 WM shot on a 150 lb southern whitetail. And a red dot is probably the best thing for them then.