Nightforce NX8 2.5-20f1 versus 4-32 f1

[longrange13]

I’m in the market for one of these scopes. I’m fine with either, just want one that has the most usable reticle. I’d likely get the moar reticle. Curious where the usable reticle range is for each scope. I can’t imagine the reticle is usable at all at 32 power nor do I ever imagine needing to crank up to 32. I currently use a mark 5 3-18 with pr1 reticle. Absolutely love that thing but unfortunately the durability isn’t there. Most of my shots on game at long range are at around 15 powder I’d say. Is the 2.5-20 usable at 20 or do I need to bump up so I have a usable reticle at 20?

 

[Mike D Texas]

I’m in the market for one of these scopes. I’m fine with either, just want one that has the most usable reticle. I’d likely get the moar reticle. Curious where the usable reticle range is for each scope. I can’t imagine the reticle is usable at all at 32 power nor do I ever imagine needing to crank up to 32. I currently use a mark 5 3-18 with pr1 reticle. Absolutely love that thing but unfortunately the durability isn’t there. Most of my shots on game at long range are at around 15 powder I’d say. Is the 2.5-20 usable at 20 or do I need to bump up so I have a usable reticle at 20?

What do you mean the reticle not being usable at the top end of magnification?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[longrange13]

What do you mean the reticle not being usable at the top end of magnification?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Just wondering if it’s too big and clunky to get a precise hold at 20x. Seems like most first formal plane reticles have a sweet spot for a magnification range where the reticle is very visible but not so big it’s useless.

 

[PineBrook413]

I find the 4-32 NX8 to be an awesome set up. Reticle is a little fine at 4x but useable. 32x is totally useable at the range and I find it very handy while shooting 1000 yards or more.

For hunting I basically use it between 4-20x

 

[Formidilosus]

Just wondering if it’s too big and clunky to get a precise hold at 20x. Seems like most first formal plane reticles have a sweet spot for a magnification range where the reticle is very visible but not so big it’s useless.

FFP reticles are the same size in relation to the target at all magnifications.

 

[longrange13]

FFP reticles are the same size in relation to the target at all magnifications.

Good to know, must be an optical elusion on my part. I’ve never looked through a nightforce ffp, just some of the older vortex and then the Leupold mark 5 that I’m currently using.

 

[longrange13]

I find the 4-32 NX8 to be an awesome set up. Reticle is a little fine at 4x but useable. 32x is totally useable at the range and I find it very handy while shooting 1000 yards or more.

For hunting I basically use it between 4-20x

That’s perfect, great to hear. I also just realized that the two scopes are within a half ounce of each other. That makes the 4-32 a no brainer.

 

[dirtytough]

The same reticle can be different sizes on different scopes. I believe that’s the case with the two scopes you mentioned.

The lower the mag the thicker you want the reticle. The higher the mag the thinner.

I can’t find the info so I’m going off memory.
2.5-20 is 0.04 thick
4-32 is 0.035 thick

And I believe the unit of measure is inches.

So if both scopes are set at the same x, the 2.5-20 will be a bolder reticle. Easier to see, might cover more of the target than you want though on the higher end of the mag range.

I could be completely wrong since I’m going off of memory and can’t find the actual info.

 

[ZAR EC]

The same reticle can be different sizes on different scopes. I believe that’s the case with the two scopes you mentioned.

The lower the mag the thicker you want the reticle. The higher the mag the thinner.

I can’t find the info so I’m going off memory.
2.5-20 is 0.04 thick
4-32 is 0.035 thick

And I believe the unit of measure is inches.

So if both scopes are set at the same x, the 2.5-20 will be a bolder reticle. Easier to see, might cover more of the target than you want though on the higher end of the mag range.

I could be completely wrong since I’m going off of memory and can’t find the actual

Given the specs on reticle thickness, I too assumed the 2.5-20 would be bolder at all magnification ranges. There seems to be an idea that the 4-32 has a bolder reticle which doesn't make sense given the specs. Does anyone have both versions and can confirm?

 

[gearguywb]

I use a 4-32 a lot. FFP, on my hunting as well as some other rigs.

I doubt I have ever used the full magnification, but its there if you need it.

 

[RussDXT]

When I had a 2.5-20 I would keep it on 5x while walking. 2.5 with no illum would be very difficult to shoot quick.

 

[KineticPerformance]

When these came out Sean at NF brought one of each for me to look through at a PRS match. I was looking for a dual purpose LR hunting and NRL22 optic (needed close range parallax for paper stages). They weigh the same, are close enough in length, but the 4-32x looked better to me and was his recommendation. I'm general, for best performance I want my most used magnification to be 80%, or less, of maximum magnification; it will just perform better in that range which is why I use the 7-35x on match rifles. My NX8 4-32x has been perfect for me in those roles : I can dial out to 400yds with the .22 or shoot as close as 7yds or put it on a pretty light gun and it isn't like a Harley hauling firewood. Most guys I know who use and like the NX8 use the 4-32x.

 

[longrange13]

Solid info, thanks everyone.

 

[longrange13]

Last question, has anyone here used the new moa-xt reticle? I don’t really care about the Christmas tree, but the floating center dot is superior to the moar reticle in my opinion. Just wish the moar had a floating center lol.

 

[SDHNTR]

I found the bigger one much easier to get behind. Better eye box. No issues with the reticle at 32x but faint below about 8x, but just turn the light on and prob solved.

 

[longrange13]

I found the bigger one much easier to get behind. Better eye box. No issues with the reticle at 32x but faint below about 8x, but just turn the light on and prob solved.

Is the entire reticle illuminated or is it just the center?

 

[Mike D Texas]

Good to know, must be an optical elusion on my part. I’ve never looked through a nightforce ffp, just some of the older vortex and then the Leupold mark 5 that I’m currently using.

If you are using the Mark 5 FFP with the TmR reticle I can see why you would think that. It’s pretty heavy.

But the NF Mil-C reticle is much finer and has a center dot and is very usable even at max magnification.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[SDHNTR]

Is the entire reticle illuminated or is it just the center?

Depends on which one you get. Look at the chart.

 

[Howlin23]

4-32 hands down winner here.

 

[longrange13]

4-32 hands down winner here.

Yup that’s what I ended up with, it’s an awesome scope