Nightforce scope and reticle questions

C

coldblood

Regular
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Location
Alberta
For the long range shooting from the benchrest (up to 1000m):
1. BR 12-42x56 vs BR 8-32x56? At what distance I will still see the holes in paper through the either scope without using binoculars?
2. what reticle will best fit the purpose? what's the difference b/w NP-R2, NP-2DD, NP-1RR and NP-1?

Tnx.
 
coldblood said:
For the long range shooting from the benchrest (up to 1000m):
1. BR 12-42x56 vs BR 8-32x56? At what distance I will still see the holes in paper through the either scope without using binoculars?
2. what reticle will best fit the purpose? what's the difference b/w NP-R2, NP-2DD, NP-1RR and NP-1?

Tnx.
Click to expand...

Much depends on what calibre you shoot - .338 holes are bigger than .223 for example and also what background. Holes on a black background are hard to see and, of course, what are the conditions like.

I can see .308 holes with my NF NXS 8-32x56 at 300. My NF Benchrest 12-42x56 allows for a bit more. My best advice though it to use a quality spotting scope rather than try to rely upon your riflescope. A quality spotter will tell you more than just where your holes are. My spotter allows for the identification of .308 holes at 600m in good lighting conditions.

Re reticles - the NF website has quite some detail on it re reticle choice.

http://nightforceoptics.com/RETICLES_OVERVIEW/RETICLES_DETAIL/reticles_detail.html
 
Brutus said:
Kowa at least for a spotter.
Click to expand...

They are nice - very nice - but to say 'at least' is like saying to someone who wants a riflescope " S+B at least ". Can't fault advice re quality but may not be practical. I have a Pentax 80 ED which is a very good spotter and cannot be beat for the price.
 
Tomochan said:
They are nice - very nice - but to say 'at least' is like saying to someone who wants a riflescope " S+B at least ". Can't fault advice re quality but may not be practical. I have a Pentax 80 ED which is a very good spotter and cannot be beat for the price.
Click to expand...

Speaking of quality and overkill: As far as my research goes, Nightforce brand scopes are often used by the long range shooters. And I also have read that it is recommended to invest as much as you can to the quality optics. But is there such thing as a low end of the high end? Reliable, quality LR scope that is designed for the entry level LR shooters?

I checked some Nikon scope Monarch III 8-32x50 with fine crosshair. Seems like a nice scope, really clear, nice eye relief, good reticle. I think to spend all next season at 100-300 meters range, learning to read the wind and developing good shooting habits. Will be shooting from the prone or benchrest at the range only for now. I do plan to buy the high end scope in the future (may be in two-three years from now). But for while being and learning - can it be done with something less than Nightforce?

Thank you for your thoughts.
 
Tomochan said:
They are nice - very nice - but to say 'at least' is like saying to someone who wants a riflescope " S+B at least ". Can't fault advice re quality but may not be practical. I have a Pentax 80 ED which is a very good spotter and cannot be beat for the price.
Click to expand...
No disrespect intended, and we all have our own opinions certainly. I've been shooting at Bull Meadow and Homestead as well as lesser known venues. No-one has to take my advice. But IMO the most common amateur out is less reliable glass. I'm not here to argue with anyone, the OP asked for advice and I gave mine.

my two bits......
 
Last edited:
Brutus said:
No disrespect intended, and we all have our own opinions certainly. I've been shooting at Bull Meadow and Homestead as well as lesser known venues. No-one has to take my advice. But IMO the most common amateur out is less reliable glass. I'm not here to argue with anyone, the OP asked for advice and I gave mine.

my two bits......
Click to expand...

And it [advice] is definitely appreciated. (psst...op asked more questions ;))
 
^Hmmm yes I see that. I have only the NXS NF 12-42 as oppossed to the Benchrest Model.
My only other advice (especially since you have chosen 308 and I have my scope on a 308 as well) make sure you have enough MOA up if you choose to compete/practice at 1000 yards or more.
Example: on my Remington Model 700 Varmint with a 20 MOA base and my NXS 12-42 scope, I can get to 1000 yards with my handloads of 155 Scenars. But I have only 7 MOA up left in scope adjustments up. Eeek! Should have maybe chosen the 8-32 version (more MOA) with a 25-30 MOA base also.
My present setup is right on the razor's edge of limitations in this calibre with this scope & base.
Live & learn, & maybe you'll choose better than myself friend.
 
Last edited:
Brutus said:
^Hmmm yes I see that. I have only the NXS NF 12-42 as oppossed to the Benchrest Model.
My only other advice (especially since you have chosen 308 and I have my scope on a 308 as well) make sure you have enough MOA up if you choose to compete/practice at 1000 yards or more.
Example: on my Remington Model 700 Varmint with a 20 MOA base and my NXS 12-42 scope, I can get to 1000 yards with my handloads of 155 Scenars. But I have only 7 MOA up left in scope adjustments up. Eeek! Should have maybe chosen the 8-32 version (more MOA) with a 25-30 MOA base also.
My present setup is right on the razor's edge of limitations in this calibre with this scope & base.
Live & learn, & maybe you'll choose better than myself friend.
Click to expand...

Thank you! I hope to get there [1000 yards and then, a mile] some day. :)
 
With the sun at your back you will see 308 holes in paper out to 500 yards. With most NF scopes with a Min 50 - 56 objective I think its called. I like the NP-R1 reticle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom