*JUST RELEASED* Nightforce NX8 FFP 1-8x24mm 30mm Tube & ATACR F1 1-8x24mm 34mm Tube Models

Feb 16, 2017
23
15
3
I will also say....while both my units have capped adjustments, they track perfect and are finger adjustable with great feeling clicks. I zeroed them and RTZ'ed without issue.
About to wrap up todays range session, but so impressed so far. I've got a ton of time on various LPVO's; both SFP and FFP variety, and these are well done.

The NX8 on a 12.5" gun still leaves enough room to get a clip on enabler in front without issue. My Vortex was a little long. So if you wonder why size matters for discreet use on short guns....there ya go.

Once I get more time on them both, I will get more in the weeds.
 

VegasHKShooter

Always Learning
Feb 28, 2013
144
27
28
Las Vegas, Nv
I run the dual capped version on my AR. I don’t find the dot to be too large at all. This is likely a two fold deal. First is that at any distance I’m LIKELY going to be shooting, the center illuminated dot with segmented circle is perfect. Super fast at 1X, run it like a red dot. As the power level goes up, the segmented circle with center dot becomes a perfect “bracketing reticle”. Bracket the target/suspect inside the circle, red center dot on high center mass and send it. VERY fast, and plenty accurate at room clearing distance. Second reason it’s not too big is that I’m not going to dial with this scope. At distance, I’m going to hold. In holding, the reticle is fantastic. I shot out to 500 yesterday on steel. I had no trouble at all making hits by holding in the mil reticle.

I definitely think we have to remember that NF I’d primarily looking at a mil/Leo market with these scopes. For that market, the reticle is very usable. If I was looking for a scope for long range shooting with a fine center aiming point, this would not be the scope for me. As a CQB, out to X distance in civilian law enforcement, I think it’s outstanding.
 
Feb 16, 2017
23
15
3
Range session went longer than expected. Had an opportunity to run through a shoothouse at the range.
My Vortex 1-6 is impressive for CQB and very swift inside 25 yards. Eyebox is quick to get behind and FOV is judicious. Kind of a benchmark for CQB use.

I ran my 16" 6.5CM through and it was quickly apparent that I gave up absolutely nothing to my Vortex on an URGI upper.
At room clearing distances, you are talking about 5" less FOV compared to the Vortex. The overly generous eyebox of the ATACR and ED glass quality were phenomenal. Red dot was stupid bright due to being about twice as large as the Vortex on 1x. So now, I have a slightly shorter, lighter, more powerful LPV.....I'M IN LOVE!!! NF did a fabulous job with the FC-DM reticle....very well rounded for close proximity and extended range work.

I didn't have enough time to do any work with my NX8 other than a few dry runs, but its obvious that it was not meant to compete performance wise with the ATACR.

Regardless, I love them both. The NX8 fits the bill perfectly for my piggie slayer where I use a clip on thermal full time at night.
 
Likes: branson1369
Jun 8, 2011
113
52
28
51
Fort Worth, TX
Range session went longer than expected. Had an opportunity to run through a shoothouse at the range.
My Vortex 1-6 is impressive for CQB and very swift inside 25 yards. Eyebox is quick to get behind and FOV is judicious. Kind of a benchmark for CQB use.

I ran my 16" 6.5CM through and it was quickly apparent that I gave up absolutely nothing to my Vortex on an URGI upper.
At room clearing distances, you are talking about 5" less FOV compared to the Vortex. The overly generous eyebox of the ATACR and ED glass quality were phenomenal. Red dot was stupid bright due to being about twice as large as the Vortex on 1x. So now, I have a slightly shorter, lighter, more powerful LPV.....I'M IN LOVE!!! NF did a fabulous job with the FC-DM reticle....very well rounded for close proximity and extended range work.

I didn't have enough time to do any work with my NX8 other than a few dry runs, but its obvious that it was not meant to compete performance wise with the ATACR.

Regardless, I love them both. The NX8 fits the bill perfectly for my piggie slayer where I use a clip on thermal full time at night.
Excellent information and thanks for passing it on.

A quick question though, you stated that the ATACR performed as good as, or better than the Razor, but wouldn't you expect it to? The ATACR costs twice as much as the Razor. I am not trying to be a smart ass, just trying to understand.
 
Feb 16, 2017
23
15
3
The RAZOR 1-6 is a stud of an optic and IMO, SFP 1-6's have primarily owned the LPV space with the Vortex, Kahles and Swaro leading with the Vortex taking the best value category without a doubt.

Having had a Swaro and Kahles, the Vortex won with me for cost to performance ratio; meaning very bright daytime dot, overly generous eyebox and very acceptable FOV. It all equated to rounds on target as fast as an Aimpoint or Eotech.

00bullitt covered some of the virtues of SFP and FFP design limitations earlier in this thread. Considering that, comparing paper specs and then putting rubber to pavement really clarified some things for me in terms of reality. FOV at 100 yards equates to inches at room clearing distance. I typically let paper specs determine what I might be buying.

I think the NF ATACR is in the catbird seat for a FFP 1-8 on par with the SFP 1-6's that have been all the rage.

The advertised spec of the ATACR is 97' at 100 yards. Actual measurement by me was 105'. The Vortex claims 115' and my measurements matched that almost perfectly with me getting closer to 116'

Being that my NF 7-35 actually had 132moa of total travel when they advertise 100moa, leads me to believe NF errs on the conservative side of their specs.
My NX8 had an actual measurement of 108' at 100 yards which was closer to the advertised 106'.

So, in short, it wasn't so much due to cost at all for me as it was measured performance. The Vortex was a benchmark and the ATACR gives up nothing to it in CQB....an area that the Vortex kills in.

Does that make sense and answer your question?

Unfortunately I don't think its all about what costs more, necessarily performs better as much as you get what you pay for. I don't feel like I was overcharged for the ATACR 1-8. Hell, when the CQBSS came out, I don't feel I was overcharged then given it was the first of its kind. I did ultimately abandon it for the Swaro and then a Kahles 1-6 as I wanted a certain level of performance in 3 Gun Competition. 3 Gun is the reason LPVO's are placed where they are in the market today.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Kremvh
Jun 8, 2011
113
52
28
51
Fort Worth, TX
The RAZOR 1-6 is a stud of an optic and IMO, SFP 1-6's have primarily owned the LPV space with the Vortex, Kahles and Swaro leading with the Vortex taking the best value category without a doubt.

Having had a Swaro and Kahles, the Vortex won with me for cost to performance ratio; meaning very bright daytime dot, overly generous eyebox and very acceptable FOV. It all equated to rounds on target as fast as an Aimpoint or Eotech.

00bullitt covered some of the virtues of SFP and FFP design limitations earlier in this thread. Considering that, comparing paper specs and then putting rubber to pavement really clarified some things for me in terms of reality. FOV at 100 yards equates to inches at room clearing distance. I typically let paper specs determine what I might be buying.

I think the NF ATACR is in the catbird seat for a FFP 1-8 on par with the SFP 1-6's that have been all the rage.

The advertised spec of the ATACR is 97' at 100 yards. Actual measurement by me was 105'. The Vortex claims 115' and my measurements matched that almost perfectly with me getting closer to 116'

Being that my NF 7-35 actually had 132moa of total travel when they advertise 100moa, leads me to believe NF errs on the conservative side of their specs.
My NX8 had an actual measurement of 108' at 100 yards which was closer to the advertised 106'.

So, in short, it wasn't so much due to cost at all for me as it was measured performance. The Vortex was a benchmark and the ATACR gives up nothing to it in CQB....an area that the Vortex kills in.

Does that make sense and answer your question?

Unfortunately I don't think its all about what costs more, necessarily performs better as much as you get what you pay for. I don't feel like I was overcharged for the ATACR 1-8. Hell, when the CQBSS came out, I don't feel I was overcharged then given it was the first of its kind. I did ultimately abandon it for the Swaro and then a Kahles 1-6 as I wanted a certain level of performance in 3 Gun Competition. 3 Gun is the reason LPVO's are placed where they are in the market today.
It does, thanks so much. I have to accept that we all have different expectations and that they are formulated using different factor.
 

Kremvh

New Hide Member
Mar 30, 2018
11
0
1
The RAZOR 1-6 is a stud of an optic and IMO, SFP 1-6's have primarily owned the LPV space with the Vortex, Kahles and Swaro leading with the Vortex taking the best value category without a doubt.

Having had a Swaro and Kahles, the Vortex won with me for cost to performance ratio; meaning very bright daytime dot, overly generous eyebox and very acceptable FOV. It all equated to rounds on target as fast as an Aimpoint or Eotech.

00bullitt covered some of the virtues of SFP and FFP design limitations earlier in this thread. Considering that, comparing paper specs and then putting rubber to pavement really clarified some things for me in terms of reality. FOV at 100 yards equates to inches at room clearing distance. I typically let paper specs determine what I might be buying.

I think the NF ATACR is in the catbird seat for a FFP 1-8 on par with the SFP 1-6's that have been all the rage.

The advertised spec of the ATACR is 97' at 100 yards. Actual measurement by me was 105'. The Vortex claims 115' and my measurements matched that almost perfectly with me getting closer to 116'

Being that my NF 7-35 actually had 132moa of total travel when they advertise 100moa, leads me to believe NF errs on the conservative side of their specs.
My NX8 had an actual measurement of 108' at 100 yards which was closer to the advertised 106'.

So, in short, it wasn't so much due to cost at all for me as it was measured performance. The Vortex was a benchmark and the ATACR gives up nothing to it in CQB....an area that the Vortex kills in.

Does that make sense and answer your question?

Unfortunately I don't think its all about what costs more, necessarily performs better as much as you get what you pay for. I don't feel like I was overcharged for the ATACR 1-8. Hell, when the CQBSS came out, I don't feel I was overcharged then given it was the first of its kind. I did ultimately abandon it for the Swaro and then a Kahles 1-6 as I wanted a certain level of performance in 3 Gun Competition. 3 Gun is the reason LPVO's are placed where they are in the market today.
This helped me out a ton as well. Thanks!
 

bikeracer

Formerly Robb57
Aug 10, 2011
102
23
18
60
I've owned the NXS 2.5-10 x24 SFP for a while now and really like it - no issue with the eye box at higher magnification - it's on an SR15. I also bought a ATACR 1-8 and put it on a SCAR 17. But, after following this post - specifically Fenix Mike and 00Bullits contributions which I've read several times - I realize I kind of got lucky with these choices because I now know about 10X as much as I did when I bought them!

Great post OP and some really superb contributions from a couple of SMEs.
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2013
50
2
8
The RAZOR 1-6 is a stud of an optic and IMO, SFP 1-6's have primarily owned the LPV space with the Vortex, Kahles and Swaro leading with the Vortex taking the best value category without a doubt.

Having had a Swaro and Kahles, the Vortex won with me for cost to performance ratio; meaning very bright daytime dot, overly generous eyebox and very acceptable FOV. It all equated to rounds on target as fast as an Aimpoint or Eotech.

00bullitt covered some of the virtues of SFP and FFP design limitations earlier in this thread. Considering that, comparing paper specs and then putting rubber to pavement really clarified some things for me in terms of reality. FOV at 100 yards equates to inches at room clearing distance. I typically let paper specs determine what I might be buying.

I think the NF ATACR is in the catbird seat for a FFP 1-8 on par with the SFP 1-6's that have been all the rage.

The advertised spec of the ATACR is 97' at 100 yards. Actual measurement by me was 105'. The Vortex claims 115' and my measurements matched that almost perfectly with me getting closer to 116'

Being that my NF 7-35 actually had 132moa of total travel when they advertise 100moa, leads me to believe NF errs on the conservative side of their specs.
My NX8 had an actual measurement of 108' at 100 yards which was closer to the advertised 106'.

So, in short, it wasn't so much due to cost at all for me as it was measured performance. The Vortex was a benchmark and the ATACR gives up nothing to it in CQB....an area that the Vortex kills in.

Does that make sense and answer your question?

Unfortunately I don't think its all about what costs more, necessarily performs better as much as you get what you pay for. I don't feel like I was overcharged for the ATACR 1-8. Hell, when the CQBSS came out, I don't feel I was overcharged then given it was the first of its kind. I did ultimately abandon it for the Swaro and then a Kahles 1-6 as I wanted a certain level of performance in 3 Gun Competition. 3 Gun is the reason LPVO's are placed where they are in the market today.
Really great review.

I look forward to your comparison between the NX8 and the ATACR.
 
Dec 9, 2011
59
1
8
39
Williamsport, PA
So the actual center dot is .35mil/1.2moa. The segmented circle is 2mil across(6.875moa). On 1x, the circle changes in relation to the target to form the dot....ala FFP......so the dot is 2mils on 1x and you see the 2mil segmented circle with .35mil dot in center at 8x. Very well designed. Too big for long range precision.....maybe a smidge. 1moa would have been more appropriate, but I think the reflective surface area is why its sooooo freaking bright! Perfect for CQB and ultimate speed inside 200 yards.

The .35mil dot could be too big depending on the target size you are shooting at a specific distance. Its all relative I suppose.

I zeroed today and pushed out to 600 yards on 6" plates and the dot was covering it when I dialed, but holding over with either the FC-MIL or FC-DM was beautiful. Still easy to hit 6" plates at that distance.

I actually pushed out to 1k on 12" plates and was nailing them. The .35mil dot covered it edge to edge perfectly and allowed for excellent windage holdoff.
This is good info, and given that the primary purpose of the LPVO is 1x, it makes sense to me.
 

branson1369

Gunny Sergeant
Oct 6, 2008
1,071
6
38
54
NC Foothills
Spent some time zeroing both NXS 1-8 yesterday at Clinton House in a small bay (100-300 bay closed for 3 gun). Initial results 1X rocked very quick on target. Given in a small bay 8X results min but during serving worked great.

I did not have any issues with eye box size in CQB and also across truck bed. I will get more time next Friday on 100-300 range with multiple target/ speed drills and positional.

IMHO eye box issue is minimal especially given designed purpose of this scope. Plus I keep hearing in my “grape” a USMC PMI yelling technique, sight pictures, #@*x@#! Private....... even with all the gray hair some thing the CRS cannot take away.

I suspect with solid practice any eye box challenges (if you have them) will work out quickly practice practice practice
 

Surtr

New Hide Member
Mar 29, 2018
9
2
3
anyone have any experience with the nightforce offerings vs the vortex razor 1-6?

Considering switching my sbr from eotech+magnifier to lpvo and cant decide if i want to try the razor or get another atacr.
 

VegasHKShooter

Always Learning
Feb 28, 2013
144
27
28
Las Vegas, Nv
anyone have any experience with the nightforce offerings vs the vortex razor 1-6?

Considering switching my sbr from eotech+magnifier to lpvo and cant decide if i want to try the razor or get another atacr.

Yes, I have both. The Vortex is a great scope. It has a fantastic field of view, very clean glass (some of the best in the industry) and it is built like a tank. Now, the downsides: it’s HEAVY....like change the balance of your gun heavy. I never noticed it as much until now, since I’ve been shooting the NX8. Also, the Razor is a SFP. You can decide if that is a positive or negative, I’m not sure either way in only a 1-6. The illumination is NOT as good. It’s daylight bright, but no room to spare. Did I mention it’s heavy?? In all seriousness, I used to think the Razor was the be all in LPV’s. Now that I own both I can say the NX8 outdoes it in most things. The Razor still has better FOV, and you can’t argue about the quality of the glass. That said, the NX8 is 10oz lighter, fantastic illumination, very good glass, FFP, and a 1-8, all in a much smaller footprint.

I won’t sell my Razor....yet, but it’s definitely not on my primary “run and gun” rifle anymore. It’s been replaced by my NX8.

ETA: for an SBR, that’s where the NF would walk away from the Razor. Weight and size would be great on a SBR.
 

Surtr

New Hide Member
Mar 29, 2018
9
2
3
Yes, I have both. The Vortex is a great scope. It has a fantastic field of view, very clean glass (some of the best in the industry) and it is built like a tank. Now, the downsides: it’s HEAVY....like change the balance of your gun heavy. I never noticed it as much until now, since I’ve been shooting the NX8. Also, the Razor is a SFP. You can decide if that is a positive or negative, I’m not sure either way in only a 1-6. The illumination is NOT as good. It’s daylight bright, but no room to spare. Did I mention it’s heavy?? In all seriousness, I used to think the Razor was the be all in LPV’s. Now that I own both I can say the NX8 outdoes it in most things. The Razor still has better FOV, and you can’t argue about the quality of the glass. That said, the NX8 is 10oz lighter, fantastic illumination, very good glass, FFP, and a 1-8, all in a much smaller footprint.

I won’t sell my Razor....yet, but it’s definitely not on my primary “run and gun” rifle anymore. It’s been replaced by my NX8.

ETA: for an SBR, that’s where the NF would walk away from the Razor. Weight and size would be great on a SBR.

Thanks for the input. Only problem I'm having is spending another $2700 and then $350 for another geissele mount lol, I can do it but my brain is saying $1300 scope and $350 mount then $950 in ammo or reloading supplies. Not sure how I feel about need 8x and ffp on an 11.5 sbr either, I think max shots would be 400 - 500 yds with 5.56. Decisions decisisons.
 
Mar 15, 2018
28
13
3
Thanks for the input. Only problem I'm having is spending another $2700 and then $350 for another geissele mount lol, I can do it but my brain is saying $1300 scope and $350 mount then $950 in ammo or reloading supplies. Not sure how I feel about need 8x and ffp on an 11.5 sbr either, I think max shots would be 400 - 500 yds with 5.56. Decisions decisisons.
The MSRP on the NX8 is $1,750; the ATACR 1-8 is $2,800 MSRP
 
Jun 8, 2011
113
52
28
51
Fort Worth, TX
Yes, I have both. The Vortex is a great scope. It has a fantastic field of view, very clean glass (some of the best in the industry) and it is built like a tank. Now, the downsides: it’s HEAVY....like change the balance of your gun heavy. I never noticed it as much until now, since I’ve been shooting the NX8. Also, the Razor is a SFP. You can decide if that is a positive or negative, I’m not sure either way in only a 1-6. The illumination is NOT as good. It’s daylight bright, but no room to spare. Did I mention it’s heavy?? In all seriousness, I used to think the Razor was the be all in LPV’s. Now that I own both I can say the NX8 outdoes it in most things. The Razor still has better FOV, and you can’t argue about the quality of the glass. That said, the NX8 is 10oz lighter, fantastic illumination, very good glass, FFP, and a 1-8, all in a much smaller footprint.

I won’t sell my Razor....yet, but it’s definitely not on my primary “run and gun” rifle anymore. It’s been replaced by my NX8.

ETA: for an SBR, that’s where the NF would walk away from the Razor. Weight and size would be great on a SBR.
I have been wrestling with the same question/decision on a LPVO. In your opinion, do you think that the reduced weight of the GEN II-E 1-6x would make a big difference in the balance of the rifle when compared to the GEN I?
 

VegasHKShooter

Always Learning
Feb 28, 2013
144
27
28
Las Vegas, Nv
I have been wrestling with the same question/decision on a LPVO. In your opinion, do you think that the reduced weight of the GEN II-E 1-6x would make a big difference in the balance of the rifle when compared to the GEN I?
That’s a great question, and one I don’t have an answer to. I don’t know what the new Gen II Razor weighs. Last night I was literally shooting two of my SPR/DMR rifles side by side. One with the Razor, one with the NF. Can’t get more “compare/contrast” than that. Side by side, same night, same target.
At the prone position, I look through my Razor, and still love it. It has VERY little to criticize. BUT, standing up, shooting multiple targets, running drills, moving with the rifle, really “driving” the gun, the NF is much better. My cost on the NF NX8 (LEO) makes the price between it and the Razor VERY close. Because of the similarity in cost, the NF becomes the clear choice FOR ME. That’s just me though. One guy’s opinion.
Long winded answer, sorry. I just think OVERALL, the NF is the best thing going right now.
 
Jun 8, 2011
113
52
28
51
Fort Worth, TX
That’s a great question, and one I don’t have an answer to. I don’t know what the new Gen II Razor weighs. Last night I was literally shooting two of my SPR/DMR rifles side by side. One with the Razor, one with the NF. Can’t get more “compare/contrast” than that. Side by side, same night, same target.
At the prone position, I look through my Razor, and still love it. It has VERY little to criticize. BUT, standing up, shooting multiple targets, running drills, moving with the rifle, really “driving” the gun, the NF is much better. My cost on the NF NX8 (LEO) makes the price between it and the Razor VERY close. Because of the similarity in cost, the NF becomes the clear choice FOR ME. That’s just me though. One guy’s opinion.
Long winded answer, sorry. I just think OVERALL, the NF is the best thing going right now.
Not long winded at all. The GEN II-E weighs 21.5 ounces, which is about 4 ounces lighter than the earlier version.
 
Likes: Surtr