Talk me out of a Nightforce NX8 1-8x10

[Marbles]

Thanks everyone, you all provided good food for thought and I had to go back and marinate for a while before making up my mind. I ordered the NX8 today. It might be a month or two before I have it in hand as I ordered it from Nightforce under their Mil/LEO program. Hopefully I'll have it by early August so I can start hunting with it.

I decided I wanted a ranging reticle for fast hold overs, which left me really wanting FFP. As the purpose of this set up is to be carried a lot over rough ground, I could not get comfortable with the idea of exposed turrets. These two things kept bringing me back to the NX8. It will be interesting to see how I feel about the other trade-offs inherent with its design and intended function once I'm using it.

 

[justinspicher]

You’re gonna like it, there’s not a lot to be upset about it’s functions, weight or capabilities. I’m growing my slush funds for another NF scope.

 

[Dobermann]

If the 1x-whatever is open, the SS 1-6x HD should be looked at. Again, excellent reliability and durability, they function correctly, and the reticle from 4-6x is better than the NX8.

Hi Form,

I know you posted elsewhere a little more recently about the NX8 being a great option for an LPVO ... just wanted to know if you have any other reflections on the SWFA 1-6?

I know it's only a month since your comments above ... just wondering if there's anything new to report?

 

[Formidilosus]

just wanted to know if you have any other reflections on the SWFA 1-6?

Not sure what you’re looking for, but the SS 1-6x’s have been excellent scopes when it comes to correct function and zero retention. The reticle on 1x is usable without illumination, the reticle on 6x is good for precision; everything works as it should.

The eyebox is a bit tighter than some, though better than most, and the illumination is not daylight bright. Other than that, they are solid.

 

[eoperator]

My 18" fieldcraft 308 with an nx 1-8 on it is a dream to handle. I found using the top of the center dot for 100yrd zero makes the bottom of the dot right on at 250yrds. 1x illuminated reticle is extremely fast for a quick or defensive shot.

 

[Marbles]

My 18" fieldcraft 308 with an nx 1-8 on it is a dream to handle. I found using the top of the center dot for 100yrd zero makes the bottom of the dot right on at 250yrds. 1x illuminated reticle is extremely fast for a quick or defensive shot.View attachment 198662

I will have to play with using the top and bottom of the center dot. I have been using the top of the fine line on the bottom post, but your method sounds more practical and keeps the center dot as a functional zero.

I like how it handles on a light rifle. This is a 30-06 84L cut back to 20.5 inches.

 

[justinspicher]

My 16” grendel with the NX8 1-8x.

 

[Marbles]

For anyone who has read this thread and is considering the NX8 1-8, I will share my opinion regarding low light. As others pointed out in this thread, the small objective size suggests low light performance would be limited. I'm happy with the scope, and the below does not change that as it brings many other qualities that I value.

In low light (dusk) the NX8 1-8 performs better than the naked eye on 4 x, but is not what I would consider usable above 4 x due to how important perfect eye positioning becomes. In darkness, it performs slightly better than the naked on 2 x, it did not feel very usable above 2 x. On 1 x it performs as well as the naked eye, the dot is dim enough that it does not flare (if that is the proper term).

For comparison, my Zeiss Conquest 8x42 binoculars greatly outperform the naked eye in darkness.

In what I'm calling darkness, with the naked eye I cannot make out a chain link fence line 50 feet away and on a near by building I can see white window trim, but cannot make out the cedar shake walls. At distance, I can see the sky over a mountain ridge (about 4 miles away) but cannot see the lower ridge line in front of it.

With the NX8 1-8, on 2x I can vaguely tell that I'm seeing a wall next to the window trim. Still cannot see the closer ridge line, nor the chain link fence.

With my Conquests, I can clearly make out both ridges and tell that one has tree cover and the other does not. I can make out the cedar shakes on the wall, and I can clearly see the fence line and even make out the the chain link.

I feel that the NX8 1-8 will let me shoot anything I can see with the naked eye. However, as Alaska does not have legal shooting hours, there will be shot opportunities I cannot take because while I could find the animal with my binoculars, I could not see them in my scope.

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Hey Marbles, I am also interested in the NX8 for a lightweight 338 Federal I have planned.
Any updates on how your hunting season went with it? How far have you ran it out to and did your groups tighten up as well with this scope compared to your Weaver?

 

[Marbles]

Hey Marbles, I am also interested in the NX8 for a lightweight 338 Federal I have planned.
Any updates on how your hunting season went with it? How far have you ran it out to and did your groups tighten up as well with this scope compared to your Weaver?

I had no noticable change in group size compared to the Weaver. The improvement in glas quality is huge though (as would be expected). The goup size appears to have been due to the rifle (primarily the stock forend as you observed).

I have not shot more than 100 yards with it as that is the limit of the gun range I have been going to. I have stared dialing to make the 2 mil hash mark my zero for precision on the range. Looking at deer through it at 250 yards the reticle felt more than adequate. I currently don't trust my own ability past 200 yards at the moment, so I'm not the greatest to evaluate long range capability.

I liked the scope for hunting, but only hunted for 5 days this season between work, school, and my second daughter being born. So, once again my evaluation is of minimal quality. If I could change something it would be a larger objective lense for low light.

If you want to shoot the scope, I would be happy to meet you in the Valley. You can shoot it on my rifle or drop it on anything you have with a pic rail. PM if interested.

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

I had no noticable change in group size compared to the Weaver. The improvement in glas quality is huge though (as would be expected). The goup size appears to have been due to the rifle (primarily the stock forend as you observed).

I have not shot more than 100 yards with it as that is the limit of the gun range I have been going to. I have stared dialing to make the 2 mil hash mark my zero for precision on the range. Looking at deer through it at 250 yards the reticle felt more than adequate. I currently don't trust my own ability past 200 yards at the moment, so I'm not the greatest to evaluate long range capability.

I liked the scope for hunting, but only hunted for 5 days this season between work, school, and my second daughter being born. So, once again my evaluation is of minimal quality. If I could change something it would be a larger objective lense for low light.

If you want to shoot the scope, I would be happy to meet you in the Valley. You can shoot it on my rifle or drop it on anything you have with a pic rail. PM if interested.

Thanks for the insight. I will PM to have a look at it atleast.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Arctic_Beaver]

And then you remember you want your scope to maintain zero and not ruin a hunt should you take one of those tumbles, bumps, you name it...so you keep the Nightforce and live with the weight for the reliability and peace of mind. But that's just me talking...

Just to add to this line of thinking on an SHV. While I was packing a goat off the mountain, down a steep grassy/shale slope, my crampons tripped me up and I went a$$ over teakettle a total of three times downhill. This was with a loaded pack and my Barrett Fieldcraft strapped to the side. I have an SHV 3-10x42 on a picatinny rail and Seekins rings. I ended up giving myself a nice high ankle sprain, smacked my head on a rock. It was a pretty serious tumble. I know the scope smacked a few rocks, hard. Anyways, when I shot this rifle at the range after the trip, it was still dead on and my zero didn't shift at all. If people doubt the durability of an SHV compared to a NXS, I can't imagine the kind of fall it would take to knock one off zero. Probably not one you could walk away from. You would have more pressing issues than a scope losing zero.

 

[Joshuajosh]

I would run the 2.5x10 NXS. I have one on my lightweight 6.5SAUM and it's flat out superb. Sits low, reliable, fairly lightweight and repeatable dials day in day out.

How is the clairity and lowlight ability ?

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Hey Marbles,
update on my experience with the NX8 1-8.
I mounted one on my new Kimber Adirondack 338 Federal and took it to Kodiak.

I had fired the rifle out to 500 yards on steel at my mountain shooting “range” previously.
The scope worked, despite the large center dot.

However once I got on target on a buck that was bedded down in brush, late in the evening, that’s where the reticle really hindered me.

He was only at 250 yards, but the center dot just covered too much of the animal. I tried holding over instead, but then the center dot obscured the entire top half of the buck and made it hard to know where I was holding exactly.

I struggled for far too long before deciding to take the shot. It worked out, but I wasn’t happy with the process I went through.

Also the clarity of the scope was just not up to the same standard as my NXS 2.5-10x32, to my eyes atleast, despite the “lower quality” glass. I would always have to mess with the diopter to get a clear view, and even then, it would not be that great.

I swapped out the NX8 for my NXS 32 and bought a new 42 mil NXS for the Fieldcraft 6.5.
I’m completely happy now.

The rifle feels far more versatile and allows for more precise shots at 200 yards and further.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[eaglemountainman]

If I had to put a heavy NF on a Montana, I would opt for the 1-8X24, since it is the lightest of the 3 choices, though still much heavier than I prefer. But durability is your #1 concern, and they certainly are that. Also, 8X is all I need since I don't shoot game much beyond 300

 

[BjornF16]

I had no noticable change in group size compared to the Weaver. The improvement in glas quality is huge though (as would be expected). The goup size appears to have been due to the rifle (primarily the stock forend as you observed).

I have not shot more than 100 yards with it as that is the limit of the gun range I have been going to. I have stared dialing to make the 2 mil hash mark my zero for precision on the range. Looking at deer through it at 250 yards the reticle felt more than adequate. I currently don't trust my own ability past 200 yards at the moment, so I'm not the greatest to evaluate long range capability.

I liked the scope for hunting, but only hunted for 5 days this season between work, school, and my second daughter being born. So, once again my evaluation is of minimal quality. If I could change something it would be a larger objective lense for low light.

If you want to shoot the scope, I would be happy to meet you in the Valley. You can shoot it on my rifle or drop it on anything you have with a pic rail. PM if interested.

Marbles

What are your thoughts a year on with this scope?

I’m in the market for another scope…

 

[ETtikka]

What are everyone’s thoughts on trijicon credo 2-10x36 ?

Ffp
Mil mil
Similar size and weight as shv NXS and swfa 3-9

Price similar to shv

Reticle looks a little thin, seems to be bigger at con, but initial reviews say daytime illumination makes reticle usable at lower mag

 

[Marbles]

Marbles

What are your thoughts a year on with this scope?

I’m in the market for another scope…

It is a good scope, but probably not the best choice for a general hunting scope. I have been working 12 hr shofts the past few days, but will try to pull my thoughts together better come Tuesday or Wednesday when I'm off.

 

[Marbles]

Marbles

What are your thoughts a year on with this scope?

I’m in the market for another scope…

I think the value of this scope really depends on intended use. Close in on low power it is great. Fast to get on target and easy to aim. It has taken rough use without issue.

For longer shots, I find the reticle difficult to aim. I had thought I could just use the hold overs for precision (which you can) but I find it difficult for my eye to focus on the hold overs as the reticle design really draws my vision to the center.

As is quite predictable, the small objective really struggles in lower light. In rain with over cast it is difficult to impossible to see antlers on a deer at 200 yards. This results in having to pick the animal of interest out of a herd with binos, then keep track of its movements to avoid mistakenly taking a doe, Etc.

My binos are still functions (Zeiss 8x42 Conquests) in light were the scope can see nothing more than outlines.

Over all, as a general purpose hunting scope I would not buy it again and it will eventually be migrated to my AR when I have the funds to replace it.