Does anyone know the specifics of the build quality differences between the NXS and the SHV scopes? Nightforce is pretty vague about any specifics. Do they use the same erector system and adjustment components? Just wondering if the $1000 difference in price is worth it for a NXS,especially since we can get a forceplex reticle in the SHV? I think they have the same glass,so where is the price difference,especially in the non illuminated model NXS scopes? I can understand more money for illumination.

The shv is a very nice scope but it’s not in the NXS realm of glass or robustness. The erectors are not the same and when turning the knobs it’s obvious.

I like the SHV but my first Nightforce was a NXS 5.5-22x56 MOAR next was a SHV 4-14f1 and I far and away like the NXS more. I have a NXS 3-15x50 waiting at home.

All that said in about 2 months my (on Order) US optics B-10 in Moa will arrive and I will truly decide if the Nightforce SHV gets to stay or go.

When you get the USO.. if you decide to dump the SHV let me know. I have the same 4-14F1 scope and am in love with it... would be happy to build a 6.5 PRC to put under it’s twin ;]

Copy that if I dump it I will pm you first.

I have a NXS 3.5-15x50 and a SHV 4-14x50. I'll take the NXS all day, every day and twice on Sunday. My main beef with the SHV is the lack of eye relief. That drives me nuts. For SHV money, you're better off with a Burris XTR II. If willing to spend more, go NXS.

I don’t find the eye relief of the SHV 3-10 to be lacking at all. Haven’t tried the 4-14.

I have used the 3-10 shv, as well and the shv line is nothing to turn your nose up to but the NXS is just that much better.

I really do appreciate all the input. I am fairly sure I will get the NXS but I do wish I knew the specifics of components that make the NXS more expensive-better.

One other question concerning reticles.
The one I have borrowed is a dial,not push button NXS illuminated 2.5-10X32. It is a Mill dot reticle. I've noticed in really low light that I wish the illumination went a bit lower. I'm talking the last few minuets of legal light. It would work better in a hunting application for me in only a smaller portion of the reticle was lit so I wouldn't be dealing with quite as much illumination in front of a target.That made me wonder about the IHR reticle and if it is perhaps a better reticle for last light hunting because of the smaller illuminated area. Also though if the newer 2.5-10X42 NXS would get even dimmer,that would work great too.

Having looked and compared the SHV 5-20 side by side to the my NXS 5.5-22 I doubt I could tell which scope just looking through them if I was to just spot up behind each without knowing which one I was looking through. The NXS glass doesn't appear superior at all and if it is its barely discernible to me. The NXS erector I understand is more robust as is the scope bodies I am told but thats all hear say who knows. That said the better erector, true zero stop (not zero set of the SHV), and more travel per rev (with the high speed turrets) are the real upgrades of the NXS over the SHV in my mind. Given I am not jumping out of helicopters and such so I feel the SHV line is more than adequate for my uses. If I was going to pay for a NXS 3-15...I would likely just pony up and go ATACR 4-16 if the SHV 4-14 doesn't strike your fancy. You get even more turns per rev, still right at 30 oz like most of the NXS line with 50mm objective, a capped windage and a better IMO illumination system and much better glass than the SHV or NXS and that difference is discernible to even myself and I really could not care too much about glass though as the SHV/NXS glass is more than adequate.. Granted it is 30% more than the NXS 3-15.....but I just don't think the NXS is worth the 50% price jump over the SHV line for the most part. As such my NXS was sold down the road last month.

That's the reason I sold off my Mil, MOAR, and NP-R2 32mm scopes, and went with the IHR's, all 32mm's as well.

Lowest setting is almost too dim, & generally I need a click or two off the bottom.

Devnull,

Nice to hear I am not the only one who thinks the 4-14 x 50 FI's eye relief is too short. I brought up that fact here months ago and was condemned as a jerk who couldn't shoot a rifle properly. I even took the time to call Nightforce and talk to a tech about it. He yawned and said little. I suppose that 4-14 would be just fine for a 10 lb creedmoor. Certainly not a big magnum unless getting the Kaibab eye didn't concern you. (Col Jeff Cooper's term)

For those reading.

SHV 4-14 x 50 FI eye relief is 2.8" to 3.1"

SHV 3-10 x 42 eye relief is 3.5"

My experience with the IHR reticle also. I am running them all in 32mm's as well.

I took the 4-14 F1 off my 300 win (it’s heavy) and ordered a 3-15 nxs for it then put the 4-14 F1 on my 7wsm with a break. I am thinking that my heavy 6.5-284 will be the final resting spot for the SHV and the USO I have on order will sit on the wsm. I did not like the short eye relief for my 300 and it’s physically way to long for my wsm.

Can only speak to the 3-10 SHV. My NXS is a 5x22; just a whole different deal.

No difference in glass or optical properties between the 2.5-10 NXS and 3-10 SHV that I or my buddy could see. He has the NXS, I have the SHV. Physically they are virtually identical.

The turret itself is a more robust mechanism on the NXS; then again, they are big, and un-capped. It's possible a capped SHV turret is MORE robust than an uncapped NXS turret, if you think about it. Can't speak to the underlying erectors. My SHV tracks and returns to zero very excellently.

From a hunting perspective, the SHV is a bit less bulky and has capped turrets. The NXS has illumination. Those are your only practical diff's as far as hunting. If you want to rappel out of a helicopter with a knife in your teeth and darkness in your heart... go NXS.

Just came in from using a 2.5-10x42 IHR at last light. 1 push up from the lowest is perfect for way later than's legal.

I love the IHR at first and last light.....but wish the heavy posts were solid all the way in, especially when used in heavy woods. I hate the hollow posts.

Yep, I regret buying the SHV 4-14x50 F1. Lack of eye relief and 5 Mils per revolution suck at that price point when Burris, Vortex, and Athlon offer more for less. If I had to do over, it would have been an NXS. There's better options than the SHV.

It looks like the 3-10x42 has good eye relief but I can't believe with the higher power SHV scopes they would fail to do something as basic as giving it adequate eye relief. It can't be that hard for them to make them properly.

You have to decide what matters more, a few small features or reliability. I'd still pick the NF over the others you listed.

Which leads back to the original post... I'm curious about the exact build differences between the 3-10 SHV and the 2.5-10 NXS. Some of the extras in the NXS I could live without although I am enjoying them. If the tube, glass, erectors, and build quality ("mil-spec bonded lenses", etc...) are the same it's likely as robust just sans fluff. If those things aren't the same then the SHV is likely not as reliable.

I'm guessing they aren't the same, otherwise NF would be touting them. So the SHV may be losing features...and losing reliability to the NSX? Don't know...I guess no one but NF knows.

I messaged nightforce, tube and glass are the same and they did not mention anything about bonded lenses in the shv

Someone, maybe Form(?) said a while back that every individual scope in the tactical lines gets run through the testing mill, while the SHV line gets sampled. That would account for a lot of price difference.

Pretty sure an SHV would work well fir my wimpy needs, and I prefer capped turrets for hunting, anal or not.