Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Nightforce NXS 3-15x50 or 5.5-22x50?

Carl,

The 4-16x ATACR F1 is an awesome scope. It is "better" then the 3.5-15x NXS, of course with the price increase as well.





Ackley,

The SHV's do very well. They're not quite literally as bomb proof as the NXS and ATACR scopes, yet are very good in their own right. I have no issues with their build.

Good to know.....thanks

Formidilosus,
I'm not trying to hijack this thread, but how would you rank the SWFA SS 3-15x42 FFP Mil-Quad scope with the others you have mentioned?

Thanks,
Steve

Like all of the SWFA SS Classic series it gives up "features" to get mechanics. The eye box is a bit tighter on 15x than the others, but the scope works well.

Formidilosus,
Thanks for the response. So, it comes down to solid mechanics and utility vs some extra features. The price is certainly attractive. I have some fixed SS's, an SHV, and an NXS. I like things about all of them. The reason I asked is because I have never even seen, let alone use a variable SS.

Thanks again,
Steve

Wally, pretty much.


For the variable SS's are solid mechanically, but don't have as many features and depending on model have either decent glass or really good glass. Now I generally don't care about "glass" as most scopes made have glass better than required, but that is one of the things that superstars the different SWFA scopes.. The 3-9x42mm SS is in my opinion the best 3-9/10x scope being made right now when taken as a whole. The 3-15x SS is good, glass is decent. The 5-20x SS has really good class- clarity, contrast and brightness.

So the Mil Relation formula, or MOA ranging formula doesn't work with the 5.5-22x 50 NXS, only on the 3-15x50 versions ?

Good to know.

That is incorrect. The 5.5-22x50 is offered with Mil-R or Mil-Dot reticles for mils, and MOAR, or MOAR-T reticles for MOA, all of which may be used for ranging and/or measurements for corrections, holdovers, and holdoffs.

The 3-15 is calibrated at 15x and the 5.5-22 calibrated at 22x. Turning the magnificantion down in half doubles the value. So on the 5-22, 22x is 1 MOA hash marks, at 11x would be 2 MOA, as an example. Works the same with mils, which are also calibrated at 15x and 22x respectively, i.e. maximum magnification. SFP v. FFP is a whole different discussion.

http://nightforceoptics.com/nxs/5-5-22x50

Pretty sure there was a little sarcasm in Mackay's post......

Formidilosus and others, what (if any) difference would you say there is in the maximum practical hunting range capability between the 2.5-10x42 and the 3.5-15x50 F2 NXS?

I think it comes down to personal preference and the setup of the rifle. I don't think theres a specific distance where the 2.5-10 ends and the 3.5-15 picks up. 10X has been plenty enough power to make accurate hits at 1000 and beyond, which more than covers any practical hunting distance. For most cases, the maximum practical distance for the 2.5-10 would be the same for the 3.5-15 or any other higher magnification.

Thanks for the take Wareagle.

I like having some X's on the top end, but I do recognize it as a crutch. My longest kill is a deer at 602 yards in high altitude sage (pretty open)... I was using a Zeiss with a 20x top end and was glad for every X. My second-longest is 520 yards, cross canyon, with a Swaro that topped out at 10x. It was adequate but I won't lie, I was wishing for more at the time.

I shoot steel a lot and am headed out right now to do just that. I have a vitals-sized plate at 900 yards and the 10x top end is certainly adequate for seeing and hitting a white 11" plate at 900.

As with the OP of this thread I'm buying a Nightforce soon.. it'll be my 3rd one... just trying to wrap a brain around putting a 2.5-10 "dialing" scope on a rifle I'm intending to use a bunch at longer ranges. Then again, I come back around to putting a 30-oz scope (3.5-15 NXS) on a rifle that's not a heavy. Round and round I go. At least I'm used to it by now <g>.