Q&A on NF NX6 scope reviews

[Dave Thomas]

Assuming this was in response to my use case.

Sure, I suppose I could, but I have exactly zero desire to touch the turrets after zeroed. Just a difference in preferences.

Heck I'd love for all these super reliable and capable scopes to have super short turrets like scopes 20 years ago where even with the cap on they were maybe 2-3 stacked quarters tall. Just that much less to get snagged on. But thats just not what the majority of the buyers want based on what the market keeps putting out. I fully accept that.

Ok. I see what you're wanting to do. We all have our personal preferences. I'm not one to tell you that you're doing it wrong just because it's a different way. As long as it works for you then great.

 

[5RWill]

Curious how it the 5-30 performs compared to the ZP5 or gen III razor? Parallax is basically set and forget for both of those and glass is spectacular. But I’m trying to make weight for my NRL Hunter build and the Gen III at 54oz with the Spuhr is a bit of hindrance right now.

 

[Remington92]

It’s good. “If” they turn out to be typical NF quality/reliability- I think they’re the best overall scopes the makes for PRS, and general shooting.

Well that’s promising. I’m sure you’re waste deep with the prototype scopes but any chance you could compare to a razor g3 or atacr?

 

[wapitispokes]

I had a good meeting with NF at SHOT. They are aware of this thread. They told me to tell ya they are listening.

Ryan, that is good to hear and we should keep speaking up, but it is obvious they have not been listening. Maybe, just maybe, if we withold our $$'s they would add some better reticles.

But why would they do that now when essentially nothing has changed to this point?

They went into it already knowing that RS members believe that NF reticles "suck for hunting" and knowing that RS members LOVE the NF durability and would buy them by the truckloads if they didn't "suck for hunting". What has changed? Serious question.

[By the way, does anybody know approximately what NF annual non-military sales are of the various scope lines, ideally by reticle?, or what production volume in a particular reticle to move down the production price curve?]

We should keep complaining even though it is improbable that NF cares. Maybe we will get lucky and they will offer a better reticle. But it does NOTHING to solve the current problem.

I believe I made a comment in an earlier post that I (and I am sure many others) would contribute some $$ to the development of a better reticle if that is what it took to get NF to build a line of scopes for RS / S2H/ UM / EuroOptic.

It wouldn't seem to be too dificult for S2H / UM perhaps along with EuroOptic to contract for the production of a suitable quantity of scopes with suitable reticles. I believe I made the point that it would be like when Ruger runs special variations of its single action revolvers and sells batches to various firearm distributors who then get to offer / control that "unique" version. I think @Formidilosus replied to my post saying that "they" (I think that meant Form himself or perhaps other S2H folks) ALREADY MADE THAT OFFER to NF and it was DECLINED by NF. (Hopefully I summarized that correctly.

SMH.

It's just hard for me to imagine what is going on at NF, but i do know that just because a person or small group of people start a successful small business that does NOT mean that they optimize the business and it does NOT mean they are particularly bright. Lots of small businesses are very dysfunctional and not optimized for maximum profitability. Sometimes the owners try to set them up for their view of optimum quality of life and current income, or optimal employment for kids, or .... the list goes on.

I talked to NF on the phone when the NX6 first came out. That CS rep was oblivious that the NX6 reticles (esp. on the 2-12) "sucked for hunting". Either that or he was well trained to act oblivious. I even mentioned RS and he acknowledged awareness.

To @Formidilosus point earlier ... Form essentially said - "yes, NF knows, we have talked to NF and they just don't care". (Hopefully I summarized that correctly)

 

[Dave Thomas]

A modified mil r reticle would be perfect for hunting.

 

[Shraggs]

Ryan, that is good to hear and we should keep speaking up, but it is obvious they have not been listening. Maybe, just maybe, if we withold our $$'s they would add some better reticles.

But why would they do that now when essentially nothing has changed to this point?

They went into it already knowing that RS members believe that NF reticles "suck for hunting" and knowing that RS members LOVE the NF durability and would buy them by the truckloads if they didn't "suck for hunting". What has changed? Serious question.

[By the way, does anybody know approximately what NF annual non-military sales are of the various scope lines, ideally by reticle?, or what production volume in a particular reticle to move down the production price curve?]

We should keep complaining even though it is improbable that NF cares. Maybe we will get lucky and they will offer a better reticle. But it does NOTHING to solve the current problem.

I believe I made a comment in an earlier post that I (and I am sure many others) would contribute some $$ to the development of a better reticle if that is what it took to get NF to build a line of scopes for RS / S2H/ UM / EuroOptic.

It wouldn't seem to be too dificult for S2H / UM perhaps along with EuroOptic to contract for the production of a suitable quantity of scopes with suitable reticles. I believe I made the point that it would be like when Ruger runs special variations of its single action revolvers and sells batches to various firearm distributors who then get to offer / control that "unique" version. I think @Formidilosus replied to my post saying that "they" (I think that meant Form himself or perhaps other S2H folks) ALREADY MADE THAT OFFER to NF and it was DECLINED by NF. (Hopefully I summarized that correctly.

SMH.

It's just hard for me to imagine what is going on at NF, but i do know that just because a person or small group of people start a successful small business that does NOT mean that they optimize the business and it does NOT mean they are particularly bright. Lots of small businesses are very dysfunctional and not optimized for maximum profitability. Sometimes the owners try to set them up for their view of optimum quality of life and current income, or optimal employment for kids, or .... the list goes on.

I talked to NF on the phone when the NX6 first came out. That CS rep was oblivious that the NX6 reticles (esp. on the 2-12) "sucked for hunting". Either that or he was well trained to act oblivious. I even mentioned RS and he acknowledged awareness.

To @Formidilosus point earlier ... Form essentially said - "yes, NF knows, we have talked to NF and they just don't care". (Hopefully I summarized that correctly)

I think if they are listening their analysis shows hunters must be a small segment of sales and the development isn’t wort the squeeze. I’d wager this negative press is what has their attention.

NF, my suggestion. THLR the developer of the original vs the reduced content S2H scope reticle has posted some remarkable information about the original design. In fact it was intended for tactical or professional use if I recall in a recent few posts.

That reticle is available currently and obviously would serve both professionally and hunting. A risky comment - is the professional community may really not know or understand they would benefit far more than your existing entire line up.

 

[chizelhead]

I had a good meeting with NF at SHOT. They are aware of this thread. They told me to tell ya they are listening.

Maybe we can do a reticle poll to give them some market demand data. That being said, based on people's comments, the data may have a large spread. Still. Data is data. My vote would be the NX6 2-12 ffp in Mil-R.

 

[KBTX]

Maybe we can do a reticle poll to give them some market demand data. That being said, based on people's comments, the data may have a large spread. Still. Data is data. My vote would be the NX6 2-12 ffp in Mil-R.

If they can get the reticle sized right (visible) on low 2X power in FFP. Better go ahead and make a MIL-R in SFP also. 12X is not too much magnification to be on to use the reticle for ranging and holds and is a sweet spot IMO. The rest of the range lower range I want visible in brush without needing illumination.

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Better go ahead and make a MIL-R in SFP also. 12X is not too much magnification to be on to use the reticle for ranging and holds and is a sweet spot IMO.

Both those things would not be doing any service to those of us that want NF to do better. If they want our money, it needs to be actual change, not variations on crappy reticle/scope designs that already exist and suck.

 

[KBTX]

Both those things would not be doing any service to those of us that want NF to do better. If they want our money, it needs to be actual change, not variations on crappy reticle/scope designs that already exist and suck.

I'm coming at this from a practical hunting range application where as a non cluttered reticle with usable highly visible and quick to pick up low range visibility is priotity 1 on a 2X Scope, particularly the NX6 2-12. 2nd priority and still very important in my opinion is the ability to use precision well and range at higher power say 10-12X range. Chizelhead and I both gave our opinion with detail for an actual solution for this. You can say nightforce reticles suck all day long , but why don't you provide an explanation and solution rather than meerly saying nightforce has failed us and their reticles are poopoo. If Nightforce were to read that they much like the rest of us would say to ourselves with the question okay, well what does this guy want then? He gives no solution to his problem.
Myself, ideally i would love a hunting scope in 2-10 or 2-12 which Nightforce now has and I appreciate, but with a reticle like i explained such as the MIL-R or similar. Pretty much I like a plex style center visible in all magnification ranges as they really draw your eye to center with the addition of fine hash marks that arent intrusive/clutered at low magnification which allow me to range and hold over better at max magnification. 10x or 12x. IMO a scope under 12X doesn't need nor do i desire xmas tree and other cluttered crap in that power range. I don't want a Jack of all trades master of none scope for hunting and i don't believe there is a master of all in existance nor possible, but qhat i do want and have seen possible is a master of low range and Jack of pretty darn good practical long range. Im actually sick and tired of seing scope manufacturers following the social influencer BS and extreme long range target scopes oh and ontop of that make them stupid lightweight to where their tubes crush under proper ring torque paper thin ultralight long range ninja wanabe scopes. Leupold fell into this trend and although i give credit for probably the best hunting reticle designs on the market and best magnification ranges, I do not buy their unreliable and frigile scopes. I also don't want a boat anchor on my rifle weighing it down like the ATACR. I think the NX6 2-12 as far as weight and magnification range is a home run for practical hunters and is only lacking some additional "hunting reticles" appropriate for it's magnification and where that scope really shines at. A 5-25X or 30X scope the reticles should be diffirent completely expecially in reticle scale. Right tool for the job and purpose same as caliber selection is what im looking for in hunting, ill buy two diffirent scopes best for each rifle's master intent over big compromise jack of all everytime.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

I'm coming at this from a practical hunting range application where as a non cluttered reticle with usable highly visible and quick to pick up low range visibility is priotity 1 on a 2X Scope, particularly the NX6 2-12. 2nd priority and still very important in my opinion is the ability to use precision well and range at higher power say 10-12X range. Chizelhead and I both gave our opinion with detail for an actual solution for this. You can say nightforce reticles suck all day long , but why don't you provide an explanation and solution rather than meerly saying nightforce has failed us and their reticles are poopoo. If Nightforce were to read that they much like the rest of us would say to ourselves with the question okay, well what does this guy want then? He gives no solution to his problem.
Myself, ideally i would love a hunting scope in 2-10 or 2-12 which Nightforce now has and I appreciate, but with a reticle like i explained such as the MIL-R or similar. Pretty much I like a plex style center visible in all magnification ranges as they really draw your eye to center with the addition of fine hash marks that arent intrusive/clutered at low magnification which allow me to range and hold over better at max magnification. 10x or 12x. IMO a scope under 12X doesn't need nor do i desire xmas tree and other cluttered crap in that power range. I don't want a Jack of all trades master of none scope for hunting and i don't believe there is a master of all in existance nor possible, but qhat i do want and have seen possible is a master of low range and Jack of pretty darn good practical long range. Im actually sick and tired of seing scope manufacturers following the social influencer BS and extreme long range target scopes oh and ontop of that make them stupid lightweight to where their tubes crush under proper ring torque paper thin ultralight long range ninja wanabe scopes. Leupold fell into this trend and although i give credit for probably the best hunting reticle designs on the market and best magnification ranges, I do not buy their unreliable and frigile scopes. I also don't want a boat anchor on my rifle weighing it down like the ATACR. I think the NX6 2-12 as far as weight and magnification range is a home run for practical hunters and is only lacking some additional "hunting reticles" appropriate for it's magnification and where that scope really shines at. A 5-25X or 30X scope the reticles should be diffirent completely expecially in reticle scale. Right tool for the job and purpose same as caliber selection is what im looking for in hunting, ill buy two diffirent scopes best for each rifle's master intent over big compromise jack of all everytime.

Agree, 2-12 be ideal base, then get technical about what we want to see instead of 'they suck, or can't see em at low mag'...offer solutions by data, numbers etc.

Like so;

FC-Mil base - delete the 2 mil 0.5 mil thick fat donut and large center dot.
https://www.nightforceoptics.com/reticles/fc-mil

Take only 1 thing from MR-X (the illum. stadia)
And take from DMX the .2 mil center dot, and the 2 dots above it at 1 & 2 mil, and the skinnier .3 mil thick donut.
And that would be awesome but we can do one better if wanting to keep capped guys happy and reticle only. Vision issues to see turrets or just simply not into variable zero scopes. Or both.
If do right we can ditch the donut altogether but everything else needs to be a little thicker and could get down to illum. center dot only too.
Ditch the donut only (keep 1 & 2 mil dots above the center dot, keep them non-illuminated)
Double the heavy bar thickness to 4 mil (go up to 3 mil minimum)
Up the Stadia thickness to 0.1 mil and likely no need to illuminate that part like MRX or Mil-R etc.
Square the heavy bars to same mil range east, west, AND south (like a 5 mil German, 10 works but 5-6 would be more hunty)
Reduce DMX/MRX tree wind dots down to 2-3 mil outward and have the numbers run down the 3-4 mil line.

That's my initial drafting studying those 3 reticles and having time with the DMX and loving most everything about it, it's the only one I've played with outside handling a 2-12 athalon that was fully illuminated...didn't like it as much and only have looked at these as hunt to 500-600 max guy so can't comment on what others would want who wish to shoot further. The DMX is great from 3x (non illuminated mpbr type hunting) to 8x and really comes alive for solutions at 6x...so not a lot to change to fit 2x to 12x. But low light non illuminated stadia need to be a little thicker if want to see em for longer and the added bump in mag will help run it up to where you can but .06 still too skinny, at least .1 and could prolly even get up to 0.2 as in the 0.2 mil center dot doesn't seem to cover that much so somewhere in the .1 to .2 mil stadia thickness would go a long ways on stadia and not needing illumination. The DMX/MRX fatties don't need to be 10 mil either way so FC-Mil looks better there but the fatties still not fat enough, they don't get in way so 3 mil or 4 mil thick those for the 2x stuff. Donut then prolly not needed but I like that 4 mil donut anyway with the killer illum, just a bonus on lower mag and centering, if everything else thick enough not needed and easily live without, I'm 50/50, need one or the other with current thicknesses imo.

So jump in with what you'd change by numbers etc. If anyone will take the time to study reticle spec sheets and compare to things they already know and then see what they need to see to add data changes to create their reticle specs.

 

[SDHNTR]

Nightforce doesn’t care. Theyve had multiple opportunities to fix this. It wouldn’t even be hard just make something like the MOAR or Mil-c/r with thicker stadia lines that come in closer to center so the reticle can be used at low power. Or even just add some subtended hashes to the horizontal wire on the IHR. None of this is hard. They just don’t care. They deserve to lose market share.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Nightforce doesn’t care. Theyve had multiple opportunities to fix this. It wouldn’t even be hard just make something like the MOAR or Mil-c/r with thicker stadia lines that come in closer to center so the reticle can be used at low power. Or even just add some subtended hashes to the horizontal wire on the IHR. None of this is hard. They just don’t care. They deserve to lose market share.

I'm desperate enough at this point I'd be fine with them just making the MIL-C as thick as the MIL-R in the NX6 line of scopes. Since they're discontinuing the MIL-R reticle.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Nightforce doesn’t care. Theyve had multiple opportunities to fix this. It wouldn’t even be hard just make something like the MOAR or Mil-c/r with thicker stadia lines that come in closer to center so the reticle can be used at low power. Or even just add some subtended hashes to the horizontal wire on the IHR. None of this is hard. They just don’t care. They deserve to lose market share.

We know, but we also know they are watching, we've already covered the bashing part thoroughly.

So give us your reticle...spec by spec, in numbers, thickness etc. That 'MAY' help NF more than another round of nut kicks lol.

 

[SteveFlock]

No matter what they come out with, the same amount of complaining willl take place. So althought I'm not saying they are off the hook, I am going to say .... they can't win either.

 

[Kimber7man]

YMMV but the NX-6 2-12 FFP with a gen 2 mildot reticle (like tangent thetas) would be ideal for me.

 

[Jake Larsen]

We know, but we also know they are watching, we've already covered the bashing part thoroughly.

So give us your reticle...spec by spec, in numbers, thickness etc. That 'MAY' help NF more than another round of nut kicks lol.

Easy. The modified S2H THLR reticle

The full feature THLR is hands down the most useful and intuitive hunting reticle I’ve ever been behind. The stripped back version kept everything that’s useful and got rid of the rest.

For context, I currently shoot a NF with MIL-R

NX-6 2-12 with the modified THLR and capped windage would be as good as it gets. But we already know they won’t do it. Because S2H/Form already tried to make that happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Okie_Poke]

YMMV but the NX-6 2-12 FFP with a gen 2 mildot reticle (like tangent thetas) would be ideal for me.

It really could be this easy. I'm looking forward to trying the S2H modified THLR, but a basic mil dot or mil hash reticle that doesn't go past 4-5 mils from center before getting bold would probably work just fine.

 

[SDHNTR]

We know, but we also know they are watching, we've already covered the bashing part thoroughly.

So give us your reticle...spec by spec, in numbers, thickness etc. That 'MAY' help NF more than another round of nut kicks lol.

Well, I think they need the nut kicks more than anything else!

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Easy. The modified S2H THLR reticle

The full feature THLR is hands down the most useful and intuitive hunting reticle I’ve ever been behind. The stripped back version kept everything that’s useful and got rid of the rest.

For context, I currently shoot a NF with MIL-R

NX-6 2-12 with the modified THLR and capped windage would be as good as it gets. But we already know they won’t do it. Because S2H/Form already tried to make that happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yes it will take more than one hunt reticle to do it, so not that easy, some want capped and solutions in reticle mandatory for that option, others want dialling only with a bit of wind hold etc, zero lock/stop and or capped swapping a good thing to have and nx6 has that ability now even cut turrets for the 4a-i be a solid option, unit no matter but wouldn't hurt them to make that a 3 mil (.5 mil increment) 4a-i and run a mil turret instead of the moa only no wind only option they have for the super minimalists., mils/moa too, but they must get these good starting points to get the hunting part defined, couple different hunt categories to segment the definitions they need to actually cover the hunters, they got the people killing and competition stuff well covered lol, come on NF, hunters lives matter

the 2-12 nx6 is the base to build on, the hardware part is covered, need about 4 reticle options and most of them doubled to cover mil/moa, may as well throw both the capped and zero lock turret options in the box from the get go, I could live with less decals in trade