Thread: Are we on the wrong 'No.1" criteria when scope buying?

A lot of assumptions going on here!

Sent from my SM-A025F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by andyanimal31

A lot of assumptions going on here!

Sent from my SM-A025F using Tapatalk

What?

I was hoping this thread would not turn into a 'Pro/Con Nightforce one' ...... (now that is an assumption)

Originally Posted by Flyblown

I think we all understand Nightforce hardiness in the field. Unfortunately for many of us it is an unaffordable luxury way outside what we’d pay for a rifle, scope and accessories combined. For me that doesn’t seem to affect the amount of animals I shoot. I do well with cheapish gear.

Nightforce scopes are undeniably tough, but they are not infallible, nor is any brand. Shit happens.

What is an unacceptable risk for me is Nightforce’s limited liability warranty. Like most premium manufacturers, they will not cover accidental damage. Considering how they market their product as being the toughest, and how much they cost, you think they’d be there for you if the unthinkable happened. But they’re not. And to me, the thought of $4000+ being at risk to something as simple as being dropped, that’s untenable.

I get what you’re saying about the hunt of a lifetime and so on and so forth. But most of us are hunting reasonably regularly, and not on a hunt of a lifetime, and consequently if there is a gear failure there is always the next time to make up for it. Like I say, shit happens.

What happened in the NZ Hunter episode was incredibly unfortunate and I think it was admirable that Greg manned up and showed the episode warts and all. Especially considering what he told us directly on this forum about the rifle having been dropped and no one owning up to it, which is really uncool. But what none of us could ever possibly know, is whether a Nightforce scope would have survived that incident unscathed. We just don’t know. Probably, possibly, maybe not. We don’t know and never will.

Shit happens!

Just a note that I would pretty much guarantee that if a nf was damaged through an accident it would be sorted.
Re the bloke on here that by total accident destroyed his coatings on his big nf.
It got sent back to client no charge all damaged lenses replaced.
Not to bad I reckon.
Some of you may not have noticed but nf have reduced their prices in nz as well.
We all might not be taking shots at once in a life time animal but I'm sure as hell never want to doubt my scope in almost all situations when hunting ethically and trusting my gear to perform to my expectation.

Sent from my SM-A025F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Hermitage

What?

I was hoping this thread would not turn into a 'Pro/Con Nightforce one' ...... (now that is an assumption)

It's not about pros and cons,
It's about what traits are you looking for in an optic.
If it's about accurate tracking there are several scope brands besides nf that can do this.
If you want ruggedness with reliability your scope choice got a whole lot smaller.
Just saying.......

Sent from my SM-A025F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by andyanimal31

Just a note that I would pretty much guarantee that if a nf was damaged through an accident it would be sorted.
Re the bloke on here that by total accident destroyed his coatings on his big nf.
It got sent back to client no charge all damaged lenses replaced.
Not to bad I reckon.
Some of you may not have noticed but nf have reduced their prices in nz as well.
We all might not be taking shots at once in a life time animal but I'm sure as hell never want to doubt my scope in almost all situations when hunting ethically and trusting my gear to perform to my expectation.

Sent from my SM-A025F using Tapatalk

Dude @andyanimal31 , like I said I want this thread to be about dialing vs glass as the number 1 criteria for scope purchase... NOT about Nightforce scopes which we all know you LOVE

Yes Nightforce are great for clarity and mechanical quality....accepted by all.

However most of us don't have the money to partake....

But thankyou 'fanboyNF' for you imput.

Originally Posted by Hermitage

Dude @andyanimal31 , like I said I want this thread to be about dialing vs glass as the number 1 criteria for scope purchase... NOT about Nightforce scopes which we all know you LOVE

Yes Nightforce are great for clarity and mechanical quality....accepted by all.

However most of us don't have the money to partake....

But thankyou 'fanboyNF' for you imput.

Just trying to make you see reason!
Ok I will play your game.
Tracking first glass second.

Sent from my SM-A025F using Tapatalk

Just Saying ....

My opinion is the number one priority is holding zero over many shots, hot, cold, knocks and "sh@t happens" within reason.

Number two is that next time you go to fire at an animal, the shots still go where they did when you sighted it in 2 years ago.



Nice to haves: light weight and slim profile specially the ocular, clarity, eyebox, KISS reticle, eyebox, low light visibility, clicks move what they're supposed to when sighting in (covered caps)

For special applications: Dialling, FFP, holdover reticle, illumination but as noted these are mostly useful only for longer range hunting, for field target use or if you've got as low velocity cartridge. You will know if you need them.

Originally Posted by andyanimal31

Just trying to make you see reason!
Ok I will play your game.
Tracking first glass second.

Sent from my SM-A025F using Tapatalk

No that's wrong you see?
Because if the majority of hunters at NOT using rangefinders then they are not dialing....which means that lens clarity/glass would be more important (the number 1 criteria) for them.

So turret accuracy is only the #1 criteria for those that dial.

The question now is how many hunters actually dial or just MPBR?

sub 300 yards in good light NEITHER MATTER a hoot on zeroed rifle...... at 30yards in bush on moving animal......even less. see average range where animals are shot thread.....

Originally Posted by Bagheera

Just Saying ....

My opinion is the number one priority is holding zero over many shots, hot, cold, knocks and "sh@t happens" within reason.

Number two is that next time you go to fire at an animal, the shots still go where they did when you sighted it in 2 years ago.



Nice to haves: light weight and slim profile specially the ocular, clarity, eyebox, KISS reticle, eyebox, low light visibility, clicks move what they're supposed to when sighting in (covered caps)

For special applications: Dialling, FFP, holdover reticle, illumination but as noted these are mostly useful only for longer range hunting, for field target use or if you've got as low velocity cartridge. You will know if you need them.

Come on 'Holding Zero' as your #1 criteria ??

Holding zero is a given. The scope WILL hold zero if it has great glass and great tracking.
It's only between tracking and glass NOT 'holding bloody zero'

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

sub 300 yards in good light NEITHER MATTER a hoot on zeroed rifle...... at 30yards in bush on moving animal......even less. see average range where animals are shot thread.....

Yes 'MD'

We all know that you are not a 'long range shooter'.....what with your love of Leupold 4x and the 270.

We know most animals are shot under 30 yards....BUT we don't care!

We want to know we can take the long shot IF required.

ouch...now I remember why you are on ignore list....Im too old n ornary to put up with impolite ignoramusus who argue a point for sake of argument itself.
diferent strokes for diferent folks...just because someone holds a differing view to your own doesnt mean they are WRONG.
I politely suggest you re-read title of thread...... what is important is PERSONAL and matters to HOW and WHERE and WHEN you hunt...
oh and the 270 has taken deer over 300 yards,only a handful over 350...but it has happened single round each...BUT JUST LIKE SCOPE CHOICE its a personal thing and what turns you on doesnt do it for me.
tomorrow Im going for bush stalk with a good mate,single shot rifle with open sights that I KNOW is good for 75 yards.... I am NO LESS ethically prepared, to shoot deer in my given parameters, than some flash Harry with 5K of gear who can twiddle n fiddle, and shoots nuts of a gnat at 800 yards in howling NW wind.....

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

ouch...now I remember why you are on ignore list....Im too old n ornary to put up with impolite ignoramusus who argue a point for sake of argument itself.
diferent strokes for diferent folks...just because someone holds a differing view to your own doesnt mean they are WRONG.
I politely suggest you re-read title of thread...... what is important is PERSONAL and matters to HOW and WHERE and WHEN you hunt...
oh and the 270 has taken deer over 300 yards,only a handful over 350...but it has happened single round each...BUT JUST LIKE SCOPE CHOICE its a personal thing and what turns you on doesnt do it for me.
tomorrow Im going for bush stalk with a good mate,single shot rifle with open sights that I KNOW is good for 75 yards.... I am NO LESS ethically prepared, to shoot deer in my given parameters, than some flash Harry with 5K of gear who can twiddle n fiddle, and shoots nuts of a gnat at 800 yards in howling NW wind.....

Wow....your post makes little sense and I am 'too' middle aged to try to understand it.
Seriously please keep me on your 'blocked list'....thanks.

Originally Posted by Hermitage

Well from reading these replies, I've reached a conclusion that hardly anyone actually dials their scopes when out shooting!

Seems like most hunters are just using MPBR....."1 1/2 inches high at 100yds and that will do it".

I suspect very few of the forum members are actually carrying rangefinders.....therefore no rangefinder = no dialing. And if you are not dialing then you would not be interested in accurate turret tracking tests...."Just give me a good optical clarity at 5 minutes before dark test".

I'm always on my rangefinder and turrets....but then I'm not hunting in the bush.
How many members actually dial their scopes and use rangefinders?

I do dial at the range and I am comfortable shooting sub moa at 600 yards, however it’s the wind that gets me. Hence I opt for closer shots when out in the field because I feel I can’t ethically kill at that range unless it is a dead calm day. Until I feel more confident judging wind, 300-400 is my limit. Maybe a kestrel will be my next purchase.

I always carry a rangefinder on me and have taken shots between 500-600 yards when the weather conditions are in my favour. Also think it’s important to carry a range finder because in some terrain it is hard to judge distances.

What ranges do you generally shoot at @Hermitage?

Originally Posted by Liam258

I do dial at the range and I am comfortable shooting sub moa at 600 yards, however it’s the wind that gets me. Hence I opt for closer shots when out in the field because I feel I can’t ethically kill at that range unless it is a dead calm day. Until I feel more confident judging wind, 300-400 is my limit. Maybe a kestrel will be my next purchase.

I always carry a rangefinder on me and have taken shots between 500-600 yards when the weather conditions are in my favour. Also think it’s important to carry a range finder because in some terrain it is hard to judge distances.

What ranges do you generally shoot at @Hermitage?

I have a 6.5 creedmore heavy barrelled rifle that I use with a Sightron SIII 10-50x60.

It's on rabbits to 700 yards so dialing accuracy is my number #1 criteria, which the SIII it gives.

But yes it is the wind that is the constraint to dialing effectiveness....even with Kelstal at hand.