NF ATACR 4-16x50 F1 Low Power For Hunting

[Desert Dan]

Hello,
Getting close to picking up the ATACR 4-16x50 and have been reading and watching anything I can to narrow it down between the F1 or F2 model. Looking for anyone on here who has some experience with the F1 that can say from experience whether or not the reticle is too fine to be usable in a hunting scenarios at lowest magnification. To be a little more specific, at least to start out the scope will go on a .223 for coyote hunting in southern Arizona so the shots typically hang around 125 yards and under so my scopes are frequently on low power. (I will also use the setup for shooting longer range steel targets since the elevation travel is so good in case anyone is wondering why I am going with a scope with that much range for the purpose of rather close range hunting and I may end up swapping it onto my 6.5 PRC.)
So again, anyone with first hand experience with this optic please share your thoughts. I know there are a lot of options out there and everyone has their preference but I'm only asking about the ATACR 4-16x50. Thanks!

dan

 

[JollyRoger]

I’ve got the 4-16x42 F1 Mil-R ATACR and hunted with it all year. For me it rode mostly on 6x when walking around. It seemed to provide the best mix of magnification and usable reticle for me. Yes the reticle gets thin at 4x, but I thought at 5 or 6 it was much easier to pick up and still provide good field of view


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Desert Dan]

I’ve got the 4-16x42 F1 Mil-R ATACR and hunted with it all year. For me it rode mostly on 6x when walking around. It seemed to provide the best mix of magnification and usable reticle for me. Yes the reticle gets thin at 4x, but I thought at 5 or 6 it was much easier to pick up and still provide good field of view


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What were you hunting and did you find using the illumination lower than 6 made a difference? Thanks for your help.

 

[JollyRoger]

I went after bear, deer, and elk. Deer and elk were mostly wide open country. Bear was steeper country and patches of thick forest. To be honest I never used the illumination while hunting. But it definitely helps make the reticle more visible at low power in limited light.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ckleeves]

I think reticle choice plays a role here too. I hated the MOAR reticle in FFP, but the MIL-C is pretty useable on 4x depending on background and lighting. At 6x it’s good to go in just about any light. I haven’t owned had a FFP mil-r so I can’t comment on it.

 

[pc3]

I have a couple of the older f1 3.5-15x50's the gen 2 Mil dot and another gen 2 mil reticle I can't recall the name of. Both are fine for close in hunting, I pull th illumination on if required.

Not the 4-16x42 atacr I know but I think you'll be fine, close in you won't need to use the hash/numbers etc just centre your reticle on target.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

This is my opinion so take it for what it is worth.

Go to a store and ask to take the scope outside. If you are limited to 125 yards on your shots, look at dark objects 125 yards. See how much magnification you will need to clearly see the reticle. Then do it again near dusk. I know for me hunting bear in AZ the FFP is a no-go since shots can be relatively close when hunting in the timber. If it was solely for long range with zero chance of shots up close, then I'd have bought it.

When the NX8 first was released I wanted it in a bad way. However, my desire quickly disappeared once I looked through the scope (awesome glass) and placed the reticle on a tent screen @ 70ish yards. Could not see the reticle against the tent screen.

 

[skywalkr]

I used my ATACR 4-16x42 MIL-C for the first time this year deer hunting. Both shots were under 200 and I took the shots on around 6x or lower for the second. No issues with the reticle being too small, didn’t use the illumination for either.

 

[Desert Dan]

Ok guys thanks. I appreciate it. I was a little surprised to hear the Mil-C was better than the MOAR. It looked to be even more fine than the MOAR. Good to know though. Good news is I have a little more time to think it over. I'm looking more into a Mil scope over an MOAR now too.

 

[Chris86]

I used my ATACR 4-16x42 with tremor 3 reticle for caribou this past year. Distance was 128 meters. I switched it to my 300 win mag and plan to use it this upcoming season.

 

[ckleeves]

I should have also added that I wouldn’t be the guy to talk you out of a SFP ATACR. I hunted with a 4-16x50 sfp for a season and had zero complaints. Your not dealing with a huge power range (5-25, 3-27 or anything like that) so wind holds aren’t difficult at all with the sfp reticle imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Desert Dan]

Thanks guys. Very helpful information.

 

[Maz7869]

I run the scope and it performs well, on low power settings I turn on the illumination and it’s usable but I prefer 6x and up. The glass is great it gives you the extra 5 minutes at prime time. I have taken it out to 1 mile on my 6.5 PRC and can spot impacts and dirt splash.