The FAL Files

The FAL Files (
-   Optics (
-   -   NightForce ATACR (

paulo December 30, 2017 14:53

NightForce ATACR
Any thoughts on the ACTAR 5-25 X 56? First or second focal plane? Don't really use the current scope for ranging.
Currently have a NXS 5.5-22 X 50. Is it worth the up-grade?


CG&L December 30, 2017 15:22

I chose the NXS 5.5x22x50 over the ATACR and really don't see the ATACR as an upgrade to the NXS. Is there an advantage to a 34mm tube over a 30mm?

It really boils down to what you want the scope for. You already have the NXS employed on a rifle. Where is it lacking?
That answer would be the determining factor.

paulo December 31, 2017 06:38

I've never looked through ED glass, just wondering if the ED glass was worth the extra cost?

CG&L December 31, 2017 09:32

It appears you like the Nightforce line-up of scopes and would like to give the ATACR a try.

The worst that can happen is you'll end up with a most excellent scope. You'll also end up with first-hand experience with the ACTAR compared to the NXS.

As always, there's a point of diminishing returns with everything. Is the ATACR on the downward slope? Of course it is, just like everything else.

You're trying to justify the extra expense, this is not the right way to do things. I say, buy the ATACR
You'll be dead sooner or later and that little extra you paid for the ATACR will mean nothing

gunplumber December 31, 2017 10:11

been wondering the same. I have used the NXS and loved it, but had to sell it to finance something more important. Now I just have a MkIV Leupy 10x and a SHV 2.5x10. I think the NXS was better than the SHV (other than the illumination vs not), but I really need the two side by side, which is not possible right now. I assume it's better, but if I cannot discern the difference in quality, because of my eyesight, is it worth paying double?

Then the ATACR is around $500 more.

I have been looking at replacing the NXS that I sold, or getting a ATACR in 4x14. I understand mathematically the 34mm tube is better, but in practice? I see the main benefit is it being almost 2" shorter.

tac-40 December 31, 2017 12:58

Mark hit the nail on the head. Why pay for something that you cannot, because of physical limitations, utilize to the fullest extent, while owning something that currently does (at a much cheaper price)?

Think of audio equipment; why pay $5000 for a system that performs far beyond your hearing capabilities when a $500 system gives you good performance just beyond your limits?

paulo December 31, 2017 19:44

Points well taken.

55bird January 04, 2018 16:59

Using my experience in Amateur Astronomy optics that spans 50 years ED glass excels over standard achromatic objective lenses and in eye pieces but is pricey. Is color and fine detail at higher powers necessary? You choose. This will be more pronounced at low light levels. But then my eyes are fading from age and I wouldn't know anymore either at this point in time.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:41.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©1998-2018 The FAL Files