Q&A on NF NX6 scope reviews

[B_Reynolds_AK]

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.

This has been discussed ad nauseam in multiple threads for years.

 

[dreamingWest]

Mil-R isn't that bad.
On the 4-14 SHV, it's actually on the too thick side at 14X. Which stands to reason, they could easily tune it better for a 4X erector.

The NX6 2-12 looks awesome on paper. If they could copy the modified THLR, give simple mil-dot, or tweak the Mil-R as I stated, it would be an easy buy until the S2H is released for $800 less.

 

[Mike D Texas]

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.

Wait, what? Where did you see they are discontinuing the MIL-R reticle?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[KBTX]

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.

Spot on!

 

[JohnJohnson]

Wait, what? Where did you see they are discontinuing the MIL-R reticle?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

It's word on the street from Terry Cross as well as a few other people. It does seem to line up with what we've seen from them. I guess they're also discontinuing some or all second focal plane ATACR scopes as well as the SHV line? He mentions it on Page 6 of that thread and I'd say he and Stanley are generally pretty informed. I guess they could be wrong but it doesn't seem like it on the surface.

NF NX6

I preordered a 3-18x50 F1 in MIL-C for a hunting optic but I'd have preferred the MIL-R reticle option since it's slightly thicker and easier to see on lower powers. But I guess that goes back to them assuming no one hunts with MIL optics so they don't see a need to offer that reticle.

www.snipershide.com

 

[eoperator]

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.

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.

Very well said

 

[Southern Lights]

NF has had reticle feedback for years. I've certainly commented to them about it but why should they listen to some rando customer?

I actually think the FC-Mil was OK when I first saw it for hunting, with the exception that the stadia should *always* come to the full edge at low power. Trijicon did it also in the Tenmile 3-18 reticle and it just ruined the sale for me. You give up all this fine real estate to make a thick stadia to draw the eye to the center by not doing this and makes it harder to level the rifle fast without the stadia to edge reference in the view.

The reticles NF are shipping are for long range shooting and it's obvious that's what they are targeting (no pun intended). I like shooting LR as much as the next guy, and certainly we all have that fantasy of knocking over that ram at 1153 yards and have it effortless slide down the mountain and land at our feet. But the reality is for most hunters your time is probably spent in the low power 3-6X zone at sub 300y where the windage/elevation is not much of a concern but reticle visibility is. However, you sometimes want the scope to go longer and that's when some modest elevation hold (no more than a couple mils) is useful and windage again no more than 4 mils would ever be needed. At longer ranges you should be dialing, not doing ridiculous holdovers. Also, most hunters are probably not lobbing bullets at animals past about 600y which is a really long shot in field conditions on an animal for just about anyone despite what people put on YouTube.

The problem with NF though is that their reticles are obviously setup for the longest range shooting at max power (probably on steel targets that don't run off when you miss). They have optimized for the exact opposite problem most hunters will be facing, even those that sometimes shoot longer ranges at animals.

Just to put this in clearer perspective: A hunting reticle needs to be designed to make the first round hit. If it is not doing that, it's not a good hunting reticle.

A reticle that has 10 mils of wind, 20 mils of elevation, Christmas trees, etc. is not made for a first round hit. It's made for people that are flicking lead at targets. They are going to miss and want a fast way to correct and hit on a piece of steel that doesn't start running away after the first shot miss spooks it. If that's your game, then these kinds of reticles are fine. But for hunting it's just not the priority when you often have seconds to get on the animal and make the shot and missing often means the animal is running off and you probably are not going to get a second chance (let alone at long range due to time of flight, low chance of hitting moving target, etc.).

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

NF has had reticle feedback for years. I've certainly commented to them about it but why should they listen to some rando customer?

I actually think the FC-Mil was OK when I first saw it for hunting, with the exception that the stadia should *always* come to the full edge at low power. Trijicon did it also in the Tenmile 3-18 reticle and it just ruined the sale for me. You give up all this fine real estate to make a thick stadia to draw the eye to the center by not doing this and makes it harder to level the rifle fast without the stadia to edge reference in the view.

The reticles NF are shipping are for long range shooting and it's obvious that's what they are targeting (no pun intended). I like shooting LR as much as the next guy, and certainly we all have that fantasy of knocking over that ram at 1153 yards and have it effortless slide down the mountain and land at our feet. But the reality is for most hunters your time is probably spent in the low power 3-6X zone at sub 300y where the windage/elevation is not much of a concern but reticle visibility is. However, you sometimes want the scope to go longer and that's when some modest elevation hold (no more than a couple mils) is useful and windage again no more than 4 mils would ever be needed. At longer ranges you should be dialing, not doing ridiculous holdovers. Also, most hunters are probably not lobbing bullets at animals past about 600y which is a really long shot in field conditions on an animal for just about anyone despite what people put on YouTube.

The problem with NF though is that their reticles are obviously setup for the longest range shooting at max power (probably on steel targets that don't run off when you miss). They have optimized for the exact opposite problem most hunters will be facing, even those that sometimes shoot longer ranges at animals.

Just to put this in clearer perspective: A hunting reticle needs to be designed to make the first round hit. If it is not doing that, it's not a good hunting reticle.

A reticle that has 10 mils of wind, 20 mils of elevation, Christmas trees, etc. is not made for a first round hit. It's made for people that are flicking lead at targets. They are going to miss and want a fast way to correct and hit on a piece of steel that doesn't start running away after the first shot miss spooks it. If that's your game, then these kinds of reticles are fine. But for hunting it's just not the priority when you often have seconds to get on the animal and make the shot and missing often means the animal is running off and you probably are not going to get a second shot (let alone at long range).

Preach