Q&A on NF NX6 scope reviews

[Brandon.miller.4]

. Those have a pretty awful BC and combine that with a light bullet and heavy wind, yeah you probably had to hold. You wouldn’t have had to hold for wind if you were shooting a 6.5 prc with 147s or a 6cm with 115s. Gotta pick the right tool for the job.

I have a couple 223s and I love shooting them in the wind because its an exteme example and helps with practice. I hunt with high BC bullets, all over .3 so I don’t have to worry about wind and a 300 yard shot.

I can say with certainty there is times to hold wind sub 600 yards. I shot a pronghorn at 480 and the correct Windhold had me 6-8" off of his body. With a very slippery 133 berger elite hunter from a 25-284 going ~3k.

 

[cottonant]

On a target or game? Ray Charles could hit a deer at 400yds on 9x!

Zero at 100

 

[The Harbor Master]

I didnt read all 13 pages yet, so delete if this has been talked about... but just saw NXS 2.5-10x42 are over $2k at @EuroOptic right now... I guess the NX6 is enough of a flop to raise demand for NXS? Or just that the NXS will be discontinued...

 

[Jake Larsen]

I didnt read all 13 pages yet, so delete if this has been talked about... but just saw NXS 2.5-10x42 are over $2k at @EuroOptic right now... I guess the NX6 is enough of a flop to raise demand for NXS? Or just that the NXS will be discontinued...

Not gonna lie, I’m not upset that I own a couple of the NSX 2.5-10 in MIL-R…looking like that was a good investment lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

For reals, this reticle-

MEDIA]


1,280 yards, 12x-

View attachment 1004755

How is that possible to not being on 49 power

I am left handed . I also think the 4-16x42 ATACR is the perfect hunting scope. I don’t think there is a better option available.

Sonuva, I'm buying a lottery ticket.

 

[Formidilosus]

How is that possible to not being on 49 power

I know, right?


Almost 1,300 yards, 12x- aiming at the head, no issue:

 

[BAKPAKR]

1,280 yards, 12x-

View attachment 1004755

At first glance, I thought there was a fence behind the elk.

 

[Gstew1930]

I know, right?


Almost 1,300 yards, 12x- aiming at the head, no issue:
View attachment 1005314

I do not need a ZP5, I do not need a ZP5

 

[WRO]

I know, right?


Almost 1,300 yards, 12x- aiming at the head, no issue:
View attachment 1005314

Without magnification, doesn’t the bullet lose wallop?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sled]

Without magnification, doesn’t the bullet lose wallop?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, just authority

 

[Formidilosus]

Without magnification, doesn’t the bullet lose wallop?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You know…. It is a type of Vortex, isn’t it…?

 

[Dobermann]

I do not need a ZP5, I do not need a ZP5View attachment 1005327

Wellll ... seeing as it's unclear if they're available or not, you might not have to worry.

Or you can join the sharktank here when one or two people get theirs, decide they're too heavy and/or the don't understand the reticle, and then list them in the classifieds ...

 

[JDMBEND]

I know, right?


Almost 1,300 yards, 12x- aiming at the head, no issue:
View attachment 1005314

I did not want to like this reticle.

 

[WRO]

You know…. It is a type of Vortex, isn’t it…?

Doesn’t have enough shit in it to work properly, needs at least 10 more mills of wind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[2-Stix]

Taco rocker...I have said this before to the FNG...hang out, read a little and relax and learn something. We all have been doing so. A LOT has been proven around these parts that Pappy didn't teach us.

 

[alexnelon]

I did not want to like this reticle.

I actually don’t like it. I’m sure I’m wrong and an ignorant fool or whatever but there’s too much going on. I don’t want all the tricks and secret shortcuts and gizmos. It’s busy and occluded.

 

[Sled]

I actually don’t like it. I’m sure I’m wrong and an ignorant fool or whatever but there’s too much going on. I don’t want all the tricks and secret shortcuts and gizmos. It’s busy and occluded.

I agree. It would seem the new S2H reticle is a modified version of this. Hopefully it is less busy, yet still functional.

 

[Formidilosus]

I actually don’t like it. I’m sure I’m wrong and an ignorant fool or whatever but there’s too much going on. I don’t want all the tricks and secret shortcuts and gizmos. It’s busy and occluded.

The THLR? If so, nah. It’s the most open, clear and unobtrusive reticle on the market. You look straight through the other stuff unless you specifically want to see it. People spot more actual shots with that scope and reticle than any other I’ve seen.

This what your brain sees in use.

 

[Dobermann]

I actually don’t like it. I’m sure I’m wrong and an ignorant fool or whatever but there’s too much going on. I don’t want all the tricks and secret shortcuts and gizmos. It’s busy and occluded.

I can confirm what Form says about the milling features disappearing in use.

And remember that in Form's image above, that's at 12x - check earlier in this thread for images at lower magnification - they're barely noticeable, even if you are looking for them. The whole point is that they're at the position and scale that they're more visible when you're more likely to need them. (And this is almost the opposite of the silly 20 MOA Christmas tree reticles that then aren't in view once you dial in to sufficient mag that you'd actually be able to use them.)

The genius of the THLR reticle is pretty hard to overstate.

 

[nm.otter]

I don't have a dimensioned drawing of the THLR Minox design, but it looks like the point of the bottom stadium is at 1.5 mils and the base of the arrow might be 2.0 mils. If so, it should allow holds to 350-400 yards depending on elevation. I'm in.