Hello guys I have a couple Swarovski Z3 scopes I dont use turrets, just simple scopes on hunting rifles. Would like to try a Nightforce like maybe a SHV 3 x 10 How would the Nightforce compare to the Swaro

nightforce is a much better scope .

Optically, the Swarovski wins, mechanically the NF should be more robust. If you don’t dial and aren’t going to start, I’d probably stick with your status quo.

EBay had a 15% discount coupon and I bought a NightForce SHV 3-10x42mm .250MOA Riflescope, Forceplex Reticle for $773 to my door. Opticsplanet had it on EBay for $873, the coupon saved $100. Not sure if that coupon is still available.

I have Z3 and Z5, both with turrets, thinking the SHV will be a better twisting scope. Not sure if the optics are any better. Swaro glass is pretty good.

DF

I have 4 Nightforce scopes, 1 SHV, 2 NXS and 1 ATCAR. I like them all a lot! The Gen 1 ATACR is a 5-25x56 on a Gunwerks RevX 7mm RM, the glass is amazing, no experience with a Swarovski.

How does SHV glass stack up against NXS?

DF

Significantly more robust, reliable, and consistent. Function wise there is no comparison. “Glass” is about the same.










Mostly same/same with a bit more color pop than older NXS’s.

Thanks, look forward to getting my SHV.

Will report.

DF

you are comparing 2 totally different scopes, I think the z3 is a 1" tube isn't it? the z3 is a set it and forget it type scope. think erectors and springs inside not really setup to be robust and used a lot. its a scope designed for a hunting rifle to be light. The SHV is heavy duty and much more durable I would think. the SHV is going to be quite a bit heavier, like 50% heavier.

+1

DF

For a non turret-twister, I wouldn’t bother to switch. I’ve had good use out of the Z3’s on a lightweight hunting rifle and to my eyes their glass beats the NF I have and others I’ve seen noticeably. The NF SHV is almost a half-lb heavier too.

In my night-time chart tests, the glass in the Nightforce SHV's is a little brighter than the Z3 scopes. But higher-priced Swarovskis are brighter.


Z3's generally work fine as set-and-forget scopes. SHV's can be dialed repeatedly, with exactly the same results every time.

Yeah, my perceptions are subjective to be sure — no charts involved. And then at times, perhaps while looking through my SHV, I’m also looking through one of my “floaters.”

Older age brings a buffet of physical delights. 😏

You reckon....!!
😄

DF

Looking through my new SHV at 20 minutes after sunset. Light gathering and clarity was better than my Leupold VX3 and VX3i scopes, but not as good as my VX6 Glass. I’m satisfied with what the SHV offers me. 😎

I hear 'ya, and I hate those darn things.

One of the astonishing aspects of Nightforce SHV's that many hunters don't consider is they also work incredibly well as set-and-forget scopes, in fact far better than some similarly priced non-dialing scopes.

John, I’ve been shooting my SHV all summer and I do like it but I am sure having trouble with the MOAR reticle on dark backgrounds.

George,

Well, sure. You need the Forceplex reticle, which NF started offering last year for geezers like you and me. It's a basic plex-type reticle, which most "dial-scope" makers don't offer.

Last year I was leaned a test scope from a well-known dialing scope company for a black bear hunt. The reticle was so skinny it disappeared when tried against one of the black bear hides from our house, draped over a tree limb at only 50 yards. I mentioned this to the scope company guy, asking for the same scope with the plex-type reticle shown on their website. He said the plex had been recently dscontinued, because only a very few "traditional guys" bought them. He also said he'd hunted with the thin reticle with no problems. I considered asking if he'd hunted black bears with it--and how old he was--but didn't bother.

Nightforce listens.

FFP, thats what the reticles do on low power. most people shooting those scopes are only doing it at a gun range.

John,

I was taken aback about your so-ready agreement that we are geezers.

Well then, I’ll just take that bull at midday, in a big meadow, right after I wake from my nap.

This sounds like an aspiration!

Did George say his SHV with MOAR was a 1FP? 😎

My SHV 3-10x42 with Forceplex is in a brown truck somewhere between there and here, so I haven't handled it yet.

I think its a SFP.

DF

They are SFP.....

cumminscowboy,

While I generally refrain from joining in on the derogatory comments that sometimes come your way on the optics forum, in this instance you apparently are pretty dumb.

Contrary to what you assumed, the scope in questions was a second focal plane. The reticle was simply incredibly thin.

Do you really expect I don't know that FFP reticles get "smaller" on lower power? Or how to tell the difference between a FFP and SFP scope, since I own a bunch of each?

I was at Cabelas last week and they had a Nightforce SHV 3-10 return for $699 in the bargain cave. I looked through it and it was the MOAR reticle. I liked the layout but it was way too thin for me. I could tell it would be difficult to see in low light or dark timber. My favorite non duplex reticle is the one Leupold has in the VXR Patrol 3-9. It's a 2nd FF TMR that is really easy to pick up in low light. It's a great hunting reticle.

Ouch!

I am a fan of the SHV, but I do think there is room for improvement with the reticles. It’s like they’ve chosen two extremes, some fine computer display suitable for a bench or shooting in open terrain, or the basic Plex, and a relatively fine one at that. Seems to me you could have a reticle that helps when in the dark timber at first or last light, but also provides some windage reference when you’re out in the open. Each situation is very common when big game hunting. Given that they dial elevation so well, I’d really just want some windage reference.

I would as well, and they may eventually provide it. NF seems to be more open to customer desires than many other scopes companies.

couldn't agree more, I think the problem is there just isn't that many people that would buy the scope. you and I would, but its either simple hunting scopes, which I don't think sell all that well either, or PRS wanna be's with 15# rifles and 3# truck axle tube scopes.

I wish they would sell the German #4 in the US

Well here is my assessment of my SHV without implying I’m any kind of rabid NF user. After shooting a whole summer, mainly working up loads for a 300 WSM at a 100 to 300 yards, I do like the scope. But it’s not a lightweight scope and not the best (or even good?) match for a real lightweight rifle IMO either.

Very subjectively, I find the glass gives my eye a little less “pop” than the very light, set-and-forget Z3’s, but it’s still very good. The elev turret — up and down — has shown repeatability and I think it is very dependable from what I can see (pun here). However, the scope is not a light weight as mentioned at ~ 21 oz. and not what I would consider, in any way, as a component of a “mountain rifle” concept. Purely personal opinion and deference here..

But, here is my main question: who decided the MOAR reticle is an “all-around” hunting reticle (if they did), or even an “all-purpose” reticle? I would have to raise my hand in that business mtg and say “I can’t go for that.” While nature “abhors a straight line,” it’s the ONLY thing I find that differentiates it from a pile of fine, shaded brush at any distance ..if, and it’s a big IF, you have the time and patience to search and “find Waldo” in it.

I’m a 500-yd shooter/ hunter under the best of conditions. I did no better on targets with the NF 3-10x SHV with the MOAR reticle on a 300 WSM, 7 3/4 lbs rifle, at that range than I did with my 9 oz Leupold 6x LRD on a 5 1/2 lb custom 284, which is my idea of a mountain rifle.

So, not to criticize the scope as much as this reticle, one has to be very honest as to their very specific needs — and you had better study that MOAR reticle pretty hard and maybe have 25 y/o eyes if you are considering it as a hunting reticle before buying it.

You make some great points George.

+1

I have the Forceplex SHV headed my way. I'd afraid it may be a fine duplex, but we'll see.

My ideal duplex is the VX-6. It's fine enough for precision shots, coarse enough to be seen at dim light.

I'm thinking about replacing the VX-6 2-12x42 on my 7RM with the 3-10x42 SHV, having more confidence in the NF elevation turret. I know some have had good luck with the CDS, haven't equipped my VX-6 with one, yet. I want a robust, full proof twisting scope on that rifle. It's not a real light weight, so a few extra ounces shouldn't hurt.

This gun is a MkV with #2 Brux in a McWoody Wby Express, has a Timney trigger and is very accurate. I hope the NF tube is long enough to fit the Talley LW's.

DF


[img]https://i.imgur.com/Y6CjfUZ.jpg?1[/img]

Oldelkhunter, I would also prefer a bold #4 (like Meopta’s) over the Forceplex. But I think they can do better than that. Give me 95% of the dark timber capability of the #4 and some windage reference, 4-5 MOA max, and I’ll be very happy.

George, I agree with you on nearly all accounts. I will say that I have found the SHV on my 84M to be a very nice combination (reticle aside). Certainly not as light as all the other scopes I’ve run on it, but the overall package feels surprisingly good. Mine is 6lb 9oz with SHV. With a few other scopes it was right at 6lb. Would I prefer if the scope was 12-15oz, yes, but I can live with it in that instance. My real issue with weight comes when putting the SHV on a rifle that isn’t as light to start, such as my walnut stocked Fieldcraft. That rifle feels better with a lighter scope than with the SHV.

The Forceplex is my preference of the NF offerings for a hunting scope by a LONG shot....and it's still much finer than I would prefer. Make the heavy lines 1 to 1.5 MOA and the thin inner lines .25 MOA. The narrow opening between the plex gives a hold off of 2.5 MOA which is useful for windage.....I think it was prm who'd suggested a step-wise increase at 5 MOA for a second windage hold (or something to that effect).

How does the Forceplex compare to a VX-3 Duplex? Is it finer than that one?

I know it's gonna be finer than the VX-6 Duplex, which I really like.

My Z-3 has a rather fine duplex, but is usable. My Z5 duplex was so fine, I sent it back for a #4.

I await the arrival of my SHV with some concern about the Forceplex.

DF

Looking at the Leupold chart, it's difficult to compare to the NF because it appears each Leupold is different. The thick part of the Forceplex is .75 MOA FWIW.

The SHV/Forceplex is not bad. The glass is quite good and really excels as it gets darker. My "issue" with the scope is that the reticle is the limiting factor in very specific low light situations, not the glass. It is only a potential issue at first/last light, overcast, under a canopy, etc. and trying to point through a bunch of branches to a darker hide. Though a specific scenario, it's one I find not all that uncommon. I have scopes with bolder reticles that will work better for me than the SHV. I don't want to make it sound like I think the SHV/Forceplex is bad, it is actually quite good. But it could so easily be better!

Yeah, losing the reticle before the glass give it up isn't that uncommon.

That's why I like the VX-6 duplex.

DF

They might want to copy Vortex G4 reticle on their HD LH. That is the one thing that attracts me to those scopes aside from the lightweight and excellent glass.

Got my NF 3-10x42 Forceplex SHV mounted in med LW Talley rings on my Creed McWoody 700 Mtn. Rifle with #2 Shilen. I like it.

Seemed like a much better fit due to action length than the MkV 7RM, which would have required a Picatinny rail. Will leave the VX-6 2-12x42 on that one.

DF

Looks Good!

Looks perfect!

I put a 3-10 SHV each on a Rem long and short 700. The two SHV's replaced two VX-3, 3.5-10's

I know a lot of people fret the weight and despite being heavier than the Leupolds, I had a hard time noticing it when the SHV's were mounted and ready to go. So far both SHV's have worked great also. Very pleased.

The 3-10x42 SHV's are half a pound heavier than 3.5-10x40 Leupolds, not much in the big scheme of things. I have one on my NULA 30-06, which has broken several other scopes. Brought the weight up to 7 pounds.

Thanks, handles great, comes up fast with good eyebox; the reticle is very good.

I think this combo could become a favorite.

This gun is very accurate. I want to find a good 147 ELD-M load, get a ballistic tape and do some twisting.

DF

In this case, the wt. is between the hands, balances out really well, gun doesn't feel heavy.

The more I mess with it, the better I like it.

DF

Another nice rig DF. Really like that one. Please update on your experience with the SHV. I liked the Forceplex, but haven't used one and only fiddled with it once.

looks like there was room to reverse the rear ring.....

I think that's the way it's gotta go. If reversed, it would stick out over the bolt slot.

It's the front one that can go either way...

DF

Just got it put together tonight.

First impression is very good. I like my scopes mounted back a bit for a heads up approach; I don't stock crawl.

With the med LW Talley rings, it seems about perfect. The Mtn. Rifle comb isn't too extreme, allows good head position, good cheek weld while looking squarely into the scope. It seems to have a generous eyebox like our VX-6's. The glass is really good, probably somewhere between VX-3 and VX-6.

The reticle isn't quite as bold as the VX-6, but as bold if not bolder than the VX-3, sorta in between.

I don't think you'll lose this reticle in dim light. The Forceplex is not like the wide VX-5 duplex, just the opposite, more like the VX-3, the thick part may be even closer to the center, fine wires are pretty short.

You have enough fine reticle for precision shooting, enough heavy reticle to be there in dim light. They did a good job with this reticle, well thought out, IMO.

This scope is built like a tank and looks the part.

DF

Uhhh, OK, whatever you say.....
My kimber ones go both ways....

Personally, I'd want all the ring spacing I could get, even IF it stuck over the 'bolt slot'. Wouldn't be any different than a rail over it. But it's your baby.

With a 700 and Talleys, the problem is more so that the bolt would hit it if reversed.

Correct.

DF

I'm the same way.

Like it....

Oddly enough, I like my SHV the most on my rather light 84M. Yes, the scope is heavy, but in that case the overall package remains pleasant to carry and it points really well. It’s when the rifle is a bit heavier to start and then the overall package becomes burdensome where I find the SHV less appealing. Still like it, but wish it were a bit lighter.

That's basically what JB was saying. Putting it on a light gun sorta balances out the total package.

This gun is 7#'s, even; the scope runs it into the mid 8's, but due to balance, it feels lighter than that.

It would be even lighter if the Mtn. Rifle McWoody was Edge rather than std. fill; I picked it up used here on the Classifieds, would have ordered Edge if buying it new. The irony: McM will no longer sell an Edge in McWoody. Because the black carbon Edge shell sometimes showed thru marble type finishes, they now only offer Edge in marble finishes with black backgrounds. Of course, the McWoody background color is brown.

DF

weight or having a pretty rifle don`t concern me, when I am killin animals,accuracy and being able to see thru my scope in all weather conditions is what I need always and to be honest ,I hunt in very cold conditions sometimes -20 below these nightforce scopes seem to stay clear , stay zeroed in, even when I just leave my rifles outside or in the truck and they do get beat up a little too. >have you ever seen the Nightforce advertisement on the American sniper soldier with the bullet thru his nightforce scope ? and this soldier just kept using that shot up Nightforce scope and that scope never failed him so that`s why I use them. good luck with your choice,Pete53

I appreciate that endorsement of the NF. I get your point about utility over aesthetics.

But, I'd rather have a pretty gun that performs than an ugly gun that performs.

But, I have no issue with guys who shoot ugly guns, date ugly girls or drive Dodge trucks...

To each his own...

DF

That's why I use them too, you never know when you might take a round. It's war out there in the deer woods, I tell ya!

Now that's funny!

No one has mentioned the illuminated Forceplex reticle:

Illuminated Forceplex

Wouldn't the illuminated Forceplex alleviate concerns about the Forceplex reticle's performance in low light?

SHV doesn’t have the illuminated reticle.

Dirt farmer, real nice rifle, what’s it weigh?

If you look at the top right of the link I posted it states: "Available in: Second focal plane Nightforce™ SHV™ riflescopes."

8#’s and change. The gun is an even 7#’s.

DF

I don’t have the 3-10, but do have the SHV 4-14 F1. Based on its performance, you could certainly count on the 3-10 SHV to track correctly and return to zero reliably. Here is five shots at 100 yards with the scope being dialed from zero to max elevation between every shot.

John

Impressive.

Thanks for sharing.

DF

The 3-10x42 SHV isn't available with illumination.

That's unfortunate. Perhaps it will be in the near future.

For not much more money you can get one of the Steiner Nighthunter Xtremes 2-10x50 from Doug. Great scope with an illuminated plex.

I should have been more specific, the 3-10x42 doesn’t have an illuminated reticle option. Forceplex or MOAR in North America.

Edit: I see that was already pointed out.

Alright, DF,

Here's a pic of my rifle.

Mid-70's 700 action, started life as an ADL .243.

Trued the receiver, Pac Nor barrel (remage), Grayboe stock, Timney trigger.




Ordered some Aadmount flip-up covers, too.

Nice.

Those are some massive rings. What are they?

DF

SWFA-branded on an EGW rail.

The Nightforce Forceplex™ reticle was
created by and for hunters. Designed
with direct customer feedback, it is
simple and uncomplicated, with a clean,
unobstructed field of view. The fourplex
design has long been prized by hunters
around the world for the way the heavier
lines center your eye quickly on the
target…yet we’ve made no compromises
on precision, with 0.125 MOA^RSMU
center crosshairs that allow precise shot
placement on the smallest target—even
at extended distances.
The Nightforce Forceplex™ is available
in illuminated and non-illuminated
versions, depending upon the SHV™
riflescope you choose. It is superb in
low-light environments, and will serve
you well on any game, from the dense
forests of North America to the vast
plains of Africa.

Headed in the right direction to be the best.
I might need to get another NF Scope.
Take care

I was told Nightforce will offer illumination in the 3-10 SHV in 2019. The illumination will replace the parallax adjustment. It is supposed to offered with the forceplex and MOAR reticle.

That's good news. I will definitely get one.

Oh heck yeah.

I do wonder if parallax correction is really necessary at 10X.

I won't hurt, but is it a big factor?

That is good news. Although I kinda figured they would come out with illumination shorty after i made my purchases...

Any word on price?

I was told the same price, I guess because they eliminated the adjustable parallax they are able to keep the same price point. I don’t think illumination would be as necessary on the Forceplex but could definitely see it being useful with the MOAR, and a deal maker also.

I’d rather keep the parallax, skip illumination, and just tweak the reticle a tiny bit.

Me too.

I'm not familiar with the latest Steiner products but is this scope really in the same league with Nighforce?

The SHV is an okay scope. It's a good value for <$800 bucks. It is not in the same league as the Nightforce NXS series.

For a set and forget scope, in my opinion, the Swarovski Z3 has better glass and weighs less. Never had an issue with any of my Z3s.

I would take my Nighthunter Xtreme 7 days a week and twice on Sunday over the SHV. Again, the SHV is a good value, but seems to me to be hyped up by forum members.

If you are going to dial, the Athlon Ares BTR, at about the same price point, is a better choice. Glass is equal to the SHV, FFP, zero stop and higher magnification.

To go a step further, again, just my opinion, the best buy and value in a scope right now under $800 is the Bushnell LRHSi 4.5-18X44 being sold by GAP.

I'd be curious to hear Mule Deer's opinion. He rated the Nighthunter an 8 on his line chart and likes the SHV too.

Optics preference is certainly subjective and it does seem everybody's eyes are different.

Have you used the SHV?

Yes. Even managed to shoot a buck with one last year.

Every scope I mentioned I either own, or have owned, and some in multiples.

As we can see, one cannot make everyone happy.

We can all agree on that......

Everybody has their preferences. I prefer no parallax setting on a scope that only goes to 10x....I'd much rather have illumination on it.....but I'd prefer bolder outer posts on the Forceplex to illumination (which I'd have no objection to in addition).

....and how about adding a zero stopped elevation turret to the 3-10 SHV.

...and how about adding the Illuminated Forceplex to the NXS 2.5-10....of course, making the outer posts heavier as well.

...and how about adding.......

It can go on forever....

None of those scope you mentioned is even remotely close in reliability, durability, and correct function to the SHV. “Glass” is the most over hyped, over talked, over spent, least needed, least important, least used, piece of the scope puzzle.


One can not like them, however as aiming devices SHV’s are only bested by NXS/ATACR’s.

I’m starting to like the S&B Klassik 3-12x42 Precisión Hunter with P3 reticle. The BDC dial has 3.2 mils of elevation and has consistently returned to zero every time I’ve “run” it up and down. 3.2 mils gets me out to 600 yards which is more than I’m going to shoot at game.
At 21 oz with scope covers, it’s a lot to like. I really wish they made a PMII 3-12x42 like it.

I wasn't speaking strictly in terms of "glass." I already mentioned some of the other features. Durability is over hyped too. The pendulum has swung far the other way where posters speak strictly in terms of durability. No one on this forum is an "operator." We aren't using scopes to pound tent stakes, nor will ever need a scope to function after taking a direct hit. Most of the audience here are simply hunters and shooters.

You have way more experience behind scopes than me, for sure. And were I back in uniform and if my life depended on it, the choices may be different. But for a hobbyist shooter, and that ~$800 price point we are speaking of, those scopes will get the job done.

I beg to differ. I've had enough scopes go wonky on me, as a "simple hunter and shooter" that I value mechanical function and durability over all else in my scope choices. My days of worrying about my scope holding zero or tracking correctly are nearly eliminated.

exactly right, Jordan.

Have mentioned this before, but I've had 19 brands of scopes go wonky on my rifles, from sheer shooting. That's brands, not individual scopes. These days I only use scopes I KNOW are reliable, and the more the rifle they're on recoils, the more I rely on well-proven scopes.

Have wasted far too much time and ammunition on scopes that have gone bat-crazy on rifles, especially in the past decade. When I have to test a rifle for a magazine deadline, so don't have time to dink around with sloppy adjustments, much less the possibility of the scope failing during the tests. While I don't use Nightforce exclusively, I'm sure they'll work, especially if the testing will involve considerably shooting on a harder-recoiling rifle.

On average, us typical hunters likely stress a rifle/scope less frequently. But it’s not zero. On the rare occasion something happens like a fall, it’s nice to think you’ve tilted the odds in your favor with good equip. That doesn’t even speak to functionality. I spent a lot of ammo chasing what turned out to be a wonky scope. I’d rather not do that again. Two others had a piece hanging loose, no troubleshooting required. I’m a fan of the SHV.

Form,

I thought you liked the Bushnell LRHS. You don’t think they are close to a Nightforce?

I went to the range today, my .308 with the new SHV was among the ones I took.

Another rifle had a Superchicken.

Though I did not do an extensive and exhaustive test, I found out enough about these two scopes to cause the "warm and fuzzies" to persist.

Great point.

A scope if primarily an aiming device. That's it's first and most important role.

Glass is nice, but IMO, secondary to #1.

Other than being a tad heavy, I find no fault with the SHV or the Forceplex reticle.

DF

I believe that is an incorrect statement.

I think as a whole, those interested, are more educated on what is currently considered the most reliable optics than in the past. Therefore it has become a common discussion.

I have scopes from $100 - $1000, with any of them if I can see an animal with my naked eye I can see it thru my scope. Sure some glass is better but when I cant see with my naked eye its time to go home.

I think riflescopes and or scope mounts have been the most common weakest link in not being successful in hunting or shooting. Now we have more choices. I prefer the weakest link to be me and not my equipment.

I will continue to use cheap scopes for some applications, but for simply hunting big game I will use what I believe is the most reliable scope with the best glass I can afford. If said scope can drive stakes that's even better. If its an issue that it weighs 10 oz more, I wont eat breakfast that morning.

Never understood why NF didn't offer it initially (have it on the 56mm version).
I'll definitely break out the wallet next year for one... or more.

The other factor I may have mentioned before is there's FAR less difference in riflescope optics than 20-25 years ago, when so many hunters obsessed over bright optics. The top end hasn't changed, at least from what I can tell through night-testing on my optics chart, with the very brightest scopes, since none have ever rated more than an 8 on the chart.

But for many years only a very few scopes rated an 8, and they all came from Europe and cost over $1000. Now far more scopes rate 8, and some cost under $1000.

In the meantime the vast majority of scopes costing around $500 will rate a 7, which was noticeably above average 20 years ago, and some costing in the $200 to $300 range rate a 7 as well. This is far brighter than the average non-European scope of 20-25 years ago, and brighter than some high-priced Euro-scopes back then.

All the Nightforce scopes I've tested in recent years have rated a 7+, as close to an 8 as possible on the scale. In hunting, there's no practical difference, and the reticle itself will make FAR more difference in aiming ability than that slight amount of optical brightness.

+1, well said.

Nightforce makes the SHV 3-10 with illumination (German #4 I think), it is not available in the North American market! Why isn't it? Beats the fugg out of me!

Skeen,

Form is trying to help everyone, whether they are open to it is a different problem. If the buck of a lifetime walks out, the scope needs to work correctly right then, not after a trip back to customer service. I recently purchased a barely used MRC 308, not exactly a hard recoiling rifle. It came with a Pentax scope on it, which I decided to try. It broke on the first range trip with under 30 rounds of cream puff loads with 130's I was working up for my wife. The first few groups were fine, typical ladder test group sizes. Then they started opening up with erractic placement. Same with a Zeiss that came on a lightly used 308 last year. It did not work correctly right from the beginning. The glass was fantastic, the groups looked like a shotgun spraying the target. Stuck a NXS Compact up top, and the photo below was the very first three shot group.

NF is arrogant and knows what you need and do not need. They make an outstanding product but have their heads up their ass in other ways. In addition they piss me off in that they will not sell the 1-8 with capped elevation and windage to ordinary mortals, its too good for us and can only be sold to LEO's and mil. Why do I need to dial a damn 8 power scope with no side focus parallax correction???

Better to be pissed off, than pissed on......

Now, that's a quotable...

DF

The original LRHS’s were really good. Bushnell let go of several key people that were responsible for the HDMR and LRHS lines, kind of losing what had made their tactical division what it was. Since then, while generally very reliable, there have been more problems from them. More in the last two years than all from the beginning until then in fact.



Regardless, what no one matches NF on is pre shipment checks. No one else checks every single scope for correct functioning, and POI shifts before the ship. So to that, regardless of how well something is built, it will have more failures than a NF.


A long way of saying, that while the LRHS are generally good scopes and I use them, no they are not NF reliable.

The 3-10 is coming with an illuminated duplex. I’ve already ordered them.

Sweet, when might they be in stock?

Great!

Ordered with whom?

Does it weight even more then?

Any other new options you can share?

Nothing big. I’ll probably get in trouble with them for even mentioning this!

Darrik,

Well done!

I think you're safe now :

http://www.nightforceoptics.com/shv/3-10x42

Gee, a few posts back somebody rather, uh, forcefully mentioned that NF doesn't listen to potential customers about what they want....

Right???!!!!!!

It's the optics forum, is there any other way to mention anything here?

Don't know where that accusation came from, not from facts.

Seems NF is about the most responsive of just about any scope manufacturer or importer.

DF

From what I see, NF is one of the few that do listen and consider what customers want.

Although, what customers want, could really have a company heading down a slippery slope if not carefully thought through.

DF,
It's called confidence in ignorance..LOL:

You're all wrong....the fact of the matter is that SAS spoke it and immediately it happened! 'dat's PULL right there!

The real revelation to me is the Whitaker’s carries Nightforce!

Perhaps they're selling all they make to the intended market, leaving none for you, similar to the situation with ACOGs at one point.

Just a thought.

Out of the closet...He's safe...

So, it's either parallax or illumination.

I got parallax, but would probably go with illumination over parallax with a 10X scope. I think it would be more useful.

DF

Maybe I need to try illumination. The idea of an illuminated reticle, batteries, having to turn on, extra weight, etc. has been a turn off to me. Seems like an overly complex solution to the problem of low light shooting. Willing to try though. Maybe...

If they trade the parallax mechanism for illumination, may not be heavier.

I'd check on electronic parts warranty..

Leupold's lifetime warranty, IIRC, is 2 years on electronics. Not sure about NF.

DF

Other than the scopes I wrote above, as well as S&B’s, Hensoldt, Kaps, etc., scopes are almost always the single point of failure in rifles.

In the last two hunting seasons of regular week long backpack hunts, two people have brought scopes that were not a SWFA, NF, or Bushnell Elite Tactical. The only problems we had was with those two scopes- one lost zero and had a first round miss at 160’ish yards, but was able to get a second round hit. The other was a rodeo with a complete erector system failure sometime between working fine at the range and four or five days later on a mule deer. It’s first shot was just over the back at 280’ish yards, second was off nearly two feet with a hit in the hip, third was a foot low but good left and right. Deer ran into a tight draw. A bit later the deer jumped out on the other side. Another miss high at a hundred and something yards, the next perfect, the next a miss- finally the deer went down. At the range the scope had point of impact shifts of 8-10 MOA or more between shots.

You think that guy believes that “durability is over hyped”?



The only rifle system failures I’ve seen on hunts in the last decade have been triggers failing (Remington 700’s) and scope failures with about 50-75% of the regular scopes having issues.


Maybe I’m weird but I try to learn from my, and others failures. Why would someone have to have thier Swarovski fail on a hunt to get a lesson when they can talk to 10 guys that actually hunt and shoot, and 3-4 of them have had problems?

[quote=skeen]




You guys really are pole vaulting over mouse turds.

Looks like the price did change with illumination, $955 at Eurooptic.

I would like to know the reasoning behind the "no 4A in North America" policy.

I prefer it to all the other reticles and would be willing to special order one. Why even make one if it isn't available here?

Electronic warranty isn't a big deal until the light goes out.

Then, who knows.

I don't see weight being an issue in an already heavy NF scope.

DF

Nah, just picking fly [bleep] out of pepper.

Illuminated reticles are one solution to low light aiming, and as I said, it's one I'm willing to try and warm up to. Good glass, which the SHV has, and a good reticle are another solution. As for being picky about the SHV, for me it's only because it is so close to being perfect FOR ME. I'm not mentioning tweaks to other brands I've tried lately because they are too significant to bother. I've thought a lot about where I hunt, the conditions, the ranges, the types of shots I may take, etc. I know exactly what I want, and why. The 3-10 SHV is oh so close. Two things I feel would make the SHV a better pointing device: One: FOR ME, the outer bars of the Forceplex need to be a bit thicker for my 51yo eyes. It helps them stand out when pointing in dark timber with lots of branches at first/last light, overcast, and a canopy. A very specific circumstance, yes, but one I have actually experienced the SHV limited as a pointing device. Illumination would also address that. Two: a little more refined windage reference. The Forceplex has the 2.5MOA, I'd like something close to a 2, 4 and 6 MOA indicator. A small reticle change to the Forceplex and all my wants are addressed, in a simple, relatively low cost manner. They could even ditch the parallax on the 3-10 if it would save weight and cost. More better. Looking at the updated options, maybe the illuminated MOAR is the ticket, though I know I'll never need 20 MOA of windage for a hunting shot. For laughs I played in JBM to see what conditions warranted 20 MOA of windage. For my rifle, it's a 950yd shot at sea level with a 30MPH crosswind component. At 10k' hunting elk and mulies we're talking indirect fire I'd be shooting so far. I think my short range threading a shot through dark timber use case is more realistic.

Now, that's a word picture that's hard to erase...

He has a way with words...

DF

LOL, this is the Olympic Training Center for mouse turd pole vaulting.

The Eliminations......