Nightforce SHV: good quality for the money?

[Rorschach]

Posted this question in the Bushnell LRHS thread, but for those subscribed to this thread, I thought I'd ask here too...

How does the Nightforce SHV line compare to the Bushnell LRHS? Any experience with this? I just ordered an SHV F1, but almost regret it since I didn't look around long enough to have come across the LRHS.

 

[dotman]

I'm not a fan of Bushnell products and haven't looked through the LRHS, seems like an ok scope. What made you go with the F1? Personally when you get the F1 I doubt you feel any regrets.

 

[Rorschach]

NF's reputation, and the SHV, specifically, due to cost. Honestly, the reason I didn't consider the LRHS is because I didn't come across it before I hit 'send' on my SHV order.

Only thing I'm concerned about now is eye relief. The LRHS has ~3/4" more eye relief than that SHV, and this is going on a Tikka T3x Superlite in 300wm, so I'm a little concerned now about being smacked. Is this a valid concern, do y'all think?

 

[dotman]

I wouldn't worry too much on the eye relief. You can always get a brake installed.

 

[Rorschach]

I'm going to shoot it without the break initially though, which is the scenario I'm fearing.

Never fired 300wm before. Fired 9 or 10 3.5" turkey loads (2 of them being a few weeks ago) before though, so it can't be worse than that.

 

[Justin Crossley]

I've been shooting the SHV scopes for a while on a bunch of different rifles and really like them. I think they are a great value. Just two days ago I was shooting the Nosler Liberty chambered in 28 Nosler with an SHV 4-14 without a brake. That rifle kicks quite a bit and eye relief has been a none issue for me.

Here is a full review I did with another SHV 4-14 mounted on my custom 300 win mag. (I just last night moved that scope to my AR15 and replaced it with a brand new 5-20 SHV.)

NIGHTFORCE SHV 4-14X MOA1000

 

[mmw194287]

I've got one of the new 5-20 SHVs on the way for my .300WM (replacing a Vortex HS-LR). Looking forward to it. It's hard to find a bad word about NF products, which is one of the factors that influenced my purchase.

 

[TheCougar]

I'm on the fence still as well, but I'm looking at it like this: would you rather have a budget scope from a renowned company that all other companies are measured against, OR the best product from an average company? I'm keeping this in mind as I look at the SHV, SWFA, Burris XTR, and bushnell LRHS

 

[Rorschach]

Interesting question. Not sure I know how I'd answer that.

I'm on the fence still as well, but I'm looking at it like this: would you rather have a budget scope from a renowned company that all other companies are measured against, OR the best product from an average company? I'm keeping this in mind as I look at the SHV, SWFA, Burris XTR, and bushnell LRHS

 

[Rorschach]

When I asked about the comparison between the two, it had more to do with (un)desirable features, and less with overall quality, although I would want to know about any chronic issues either one had (i.e., parts breakage, dialing not being repeatable, etc.). The eye relief question was one that is definitely pertinent, to my mind, just because it's going on a lightweight magnum.

I also kind of like the lower turrets on the Bushnell. Any word on whether or not that actually matters in the field (having taller turrets vs. lower profile ones)?

 

[USPcompact]

I'm on the fence still as well, but I'm looking at it like this: would you rather have a budget scope from a renowned company that all other companies are measured against, OR the best product from an average company? I'm keeping this in mind as I look at the SHV, SWFA, Burris XTR, and bushnell LRHS

Those are all good scopes, and it really depends on what you want out of it.

As an example, I've got an XTRII 3-15 on my AR that I use for coyotes. The glass isn't as good as the SHV, but mechanically it is excellent. For that application, I had a hard time justifying the SHV when I was out the door with the Burris for well under $1000.

For a .300 Win Mag, I'd probably go with the F1 SHV from that group.

Tangentially, I really wish there were more FFP scopes that were mil/mil and under 20 ounces. I'm looking hard at the March 3-24, but would really prefer 3-15 or 3-18 if that got me a bigger eye box and less weight. The Leupy 2-12 or 3-18 VX-6 is running a close second.

 

[dreamingWest]

Nothing about my SHV seems like a budget scope from a great company. More like a hunting scope from a tactical company.

I can't comment on eye relief. I've never even considered it. But my SHV is on a 10# .260.

 

[TheCougar]

I read a review on the SHV where the guy threw it at a brick wall, then used it to hammer a nail into a 2x4, then mounted it back on his rifle and it held zero and fracked perfectly. That sounds like a normal hunting trip for me.

 

[USPcompact]

I read a review on the SHV where the guy threw it at a brick wall, then used it to hammer a nail into a 2x4, then mounted it back on his rifle and it held zero and fracked perfectly. That sounds like a normal hunting trip for me.

Sounds about right.

I hate the way the term "bombproof" is tossed around so often, but I think applying it to Nightforce optics is absolutely appropriate.

 

[CaNINE]

I have a SHV MOA1000 I purchased from Bob Beck. I'm very pleased with the scope and have had no eye relief issues on my 300WSM savage VLP.

 

[wind gypsy]

I'm on the fence still as well, but I'm looking at it like this: would you rather have a budget scope from a renowned company that all other companies are measured against, OR the best product from an average company? I'm keeping this in mind as I look at the SHV, SWFA, Burris XTR, and bushnell LRHS

Keep in mind many of the bushnell elite tactical and nightforce optics are manufactured by the same people at Light Optical in Japan. I don't think you can go wrong with either the shv or lrhs.

 

[Rorschach]

How likely is it that turrets get bumped and turned when using exposed, tall turrets in a field situation? I usually have some kind of cover on the optic, if not the entire rifle, so maybe that mitigates this somewhat. But, I've never had a hunting rifle with turrets as tall as the ones on the SHV.

 

[dotman]

How likely is it that turrets get bumped and turned when using exposed, tall turrets in a field situation? I usually have some kind of cover on the optic, if not the entire rifle, so maybe that mitigates this somewhat. But, I've never had a hunting rifle with turrets as tall as the ones on the SHV.

Shv does not have tall turrets at all, they even are capped. I think the F1 may not have tha capped turret if my memory is correct. On the other SHV models the turret is the same size as what is on the swaro Z3/5 by scope. That said I would not be afraid to leave the cap off, they don't turn super easy and to me the NF shv has a more solid feel and click then my Swaro did that was exposed.

 

[Rorschach]

Ooops - I was talking about the F1 SHV.

 

[AustinL911]

I took a couple shooting courses with GunWerks LRU, and they ran through why they use NF optics. After hearing their explanation and seeing the abuse they can take, I think I'll definitely be putting NF glass on any future hunting rifles. The glass isn't the clearest, but they are built like a damn tank. They have one that they carry around for demonstration purposes that they repeatedly smacked on the concrete floor, mounted up, and tracked as true as could be. The things can seriously take a beating.

Their spotting scopes on the other hand, offered up terribly unclear glass. You couldn't see shit through those things. I don't feel like glass quality matters quite as much on a rifle scope as it does on spotting scopes/binos. I'd rather have the build quality, tight clearances, and the ability to take a tumble.