Tikka with Nightforce NX8

[King12]

I recently got a tikka t3x superlite and looking to put a Nightforce nx8 2-20 on it. My question is does it allow enough eye relief since the front tube doesn’t allow for a lot of adjustment? I’d rather not use a rail and just use direct mount rings to the action. Any pictures would be helpful

 

[wind gypsy]

One person's desired eye relief might not work for others.

The UM rings are a bit more flexible for mounting location for direct mount though.

Do you already have the scope? Might want to consider the 4-32 instead based on consensus i've seen between the two.

 

[King12]

One person's desired eye relief might not work for others.

The UM rings are a bit more flexible for mounting location for direct mount though.

Do you already have the scope? Might want to consider the 4-32 instead based on consensus i've seen between the two.

Don’t have the scope yet but don’t really need that much power. What’s the consensus between the two

 

[wind gypsy]

Don’t have the scope yet but don’t really need that much power. What’s the consensus between the two

That the 2.5-20 is more critical of eye placement ("tight eye box"), more finicky on parallax settings, and shallower depth of focus. Less than an ounce lighter, probably not real good on 2.5-4x anyways with the ffp reticle. So with the 4-32 even if you only ever used it as a 4-20 you have more forgiving mounting situation with longer tube, more forgiving eye box, parallax, and depth of focus.

That is what I've gathered here and elsewhere from folks who've used both so take my input with a grain of salt but I'd recommend reading folks' comparisons. I've had my own disappointing experiences with high zoom ratio scopes jammed into a short form factor and it makes sense that the 2.5-20 would have similar issues.

 

[lintond]

Don’t have the scope yet but don’t really need that much power. What’s the consensus between the two

4-32 doesn’t have the same eye box issues and longer tube to provide more mounting flexibility. You don’t have to run it up to 32x. Mine stays below 20x most of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Get the UM rings, I think. And then look at a scope with less power. I am partial to a max of 12x.

What pictures do you want to see?




____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Lawnboi]

Get the 4-32

 

[PredatorSlayer]

That the 2.5-20 is more critical of eye placement ("tight eye box"), more finicky on parallax settings, and shallower depth of focus. Less than an ounce lighter, probably not real good on 2.5-4x anyways with the ffp reticle. So with the 4-32 even if you only ever used it as a 4-20 you have more forgiving mounting situation with longer tube, more forgiving eye box, parallax, and depth of focus.

That is what I've gathered here and elsewhere from folks who've used both so take my input with a grain of salt but I'd recommend reading folks' comparisons. I've had my own disappointing experiences with high zoom ratio scopes jammed into a short form factor and it makes sense that the 2.5-20 would have similar issues.

I own both the 2.5-20 and the 4-32 and the eye box issues are way over blown. They are both awesome.

 

[HuntHarder]

I also own both and are both mounted on Tikkas. I do think the 4-32 has a slightly better eye box. It also has a little more flexibility in mounting. Having said that, I had 0 issues using UM rings on both.

 

[King12]

I also own both and are both mounted on Tikkas. I do think the 4-32 has a slightly better eye box. It also has a little more flexibility in mounting. Having said that, I had 0 issues using UM rings on both.

Do you mind taking a picture of the one with the 2-20. I’m just curious how far back I can bring that scope. I normally run my scopes way back to where the bell almost hits

 

[HuntHarder]

Do you mind taking a picture of the one with the 2-20. I’m just curious how far back I can bring that scope. I normally run my scopes way back to where the bell almost hits

2.5-20 on chassis

 

[King12]

Get the UM rings, I think. And then look at a scope with less power. I am partial to a max of 12x.

What pictures do you want to see?




____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

I like more power especially for how open the terrain is that I hunt. I was curious if someone had any pictures of that scope on a tikka so I can see how far I can pull that scope back

 

[King12]

View attachment 9217242.5-20 on chassis

Thank you. Nice builds

 

[Dave Thomas]

How does the reticle on both scopes compare when on 4x? Is one easier to see or they both the same?

 

[Pilsner]

I like more power especially for how open the terrain is that I hunt. I was curious if someone had any pictures of that scope on a tikka so I can see how far I can pull that scope back

What is the "normal max" X that you use for hunting? That will determine what zoom range of optic that you works best. A scope normally has a sweet spot that is about the middle 1/3 of the magnification range:
i.e. a 4-16x optic will have the best "sweet spot" in the 8-10x range.
A 5-25x optic will have its best spot at around 12.5-17x or there abouts.
That is why NRL and PRS folks buy optics in the 5-25x or 7-35x range but only use them at 12-16x for 99.99% of shooting - thats the optical sweet spot for that glass.
For instance, if you are an Eastern guy who mostly used 5-6x on your optic and never really adjusts it in the field a 3-9x is perfect for ya.
If, as you said, you hunt out west and prefer more X's and walk around with your optic at 9x all the time then a 3-18x is about perfect for ya as its right in the optical clarity sweet spot.


Also, have you ever had an eye test? Do you know if you have 20/20 vision? Having your optic set that far back compared to others usually means that you have poor eyesight and/or haven't set the focus via diapoter adjustment on your optic. I ran into this with a new shooter during a class recently. He kept adjusting his optic fore and aft in the rings and was amazed that the diapoter fixed his problem without setting the optic so close to his face that he got scoped at positions other than prone.

 

[King12]

How does the reticle on both scopes compare when on 4x? Is one easier to see or they both the same?

I would be getting 2nd focal plane so same. Can’t stand ffp on low power

 

[King12]

What is the "normal max" X that you use for hunting? That will determine what zoom range of optic that you works best. A scope normally has a sweet spot that is about the middle 1/3 of the magnification range:
i.e. a 4-16x optic will have the best "sweet spot" in the 8-10x range.
A 5-25x optic will have its best spot at around 12.5-17x or there abouts.
That is why NRL and PRS folks buy optics in the 5-25x or 7-35x range but only use them at 12-16x for 99.99% of shooting - thats the optical sweet spot for that glass.
For instance, if you are an Eastern guy who mostly used 5-6x on your optic and never really adjusts it in the field a 3-9x is perfect for ya.
If, as you said, you hunt out west and prefer more X's and walk around with your optic at 9x all the time then a 3-18x is about perfect for ya as its right in the optical clarity sweet spot.


Also, have you ever had an eye test? Do you know if you have 20/20 vision? Having your optic set that far back compared to others usually means that you have poor eyesight and/or haven't set the focus via diapoter adjustment on your optic. I ran into this with a new shooter during a class recently. He kept adjusting his optic fore and aft in the rings and was amazed that the diapoter fixed his problem without setting the optic so close to his face that he got scoped at positions other than prone.

What is the "normal max" X that you use for hunting? That will determine what zoom range of optic that you works best. A scope normally has a sweet spot that is about the middle 1/3 of the magnification range:
i.e. a 4-16x optic will have the best "sweet spot" in the 8-10x range.
A 5-25x optic will have its best spot at around 12.5-17x or there abouts.
That is why NRL and PRS folks buy optics in the 5-25x or 7-35x range but only use them at 12-16x for 99.99% of shooting - thats the optical sweet spot for that glass.
For instance, if you are an Eastern guy who mostly used 5-6x on your optic and never really adjusts it in the field a 3-9x is perfect for ya.
If, as you said, you hunt out west and prefer more X's and walk around with your optic at 9x all the time then a 3-18x is about perfect for ya as its right in the optical clarity sweet spot.


Also, have you ever had an eye test? Do you know if you have 20/20 vision? Having your optic set that far back compared to others usually means that you have poor eyesight and/or haven't set the focus via diapoter adjustment on your optic. I ran into this with a new shooter during a class recently. He kept adjusting his optic fore and aft in the rings and was amazed that the diapoter fixed his problem without setting the optic so close to his face that he got scoped at positions other than prone.

I like a low end around 3-4 wouldn’t want anything higher and around 12-16 on the top. But I do want a little extra just in case.
I do have astigmatism but not horrible. The diopter normally works the best when turned almost all the way in and set there.

 

[King12]

What is the "normal max" X that you use for hunting? That will determine what zoom range of optic that you works best. A scope normally has a sweet spot that is about the middle 1/3 of the magnification range:
i.e. a 4-16x optic will have the best "sweet spot" in the 8-10x range.
A 5-25x optic will have its best spot at around 12.5-17x or there abouts.
That is why NRL and PRS folks buy optics in the 5-25x or 7-35x range but only use them at 12-16x for 99.99% of shooting - thats the optical sweet spot for that glass.
For instance, if you are an Eastern guy who mostly used 5-6x on your optic and never really adjusts it in the field a 3-9x is perfect for ya.
If, as you said, you hunt out west and prefer more X's and walk around with your optic at 9x all the time then a 3-18x is about perfect for ya as its right in the optical clarity sweet spot.


Also, have you ever had an eye test? Do you know if you have 20/20 vision? Having your optic set that far back compared to others usually means that you have poor eyesight and/or haven't set the focus via diapoter adjustment on your optic. I ran into this with a new shooter during a class recently. He kept adjusting his optic fore and aft in the rings and was amazed that the diapoter fixed his problem without setting the optic so close to his face that he got scoped at positions other than prone.

Plus I don’t like pulling the gun way in and leaning way in. I shoot pretty upright barely leaning in