# Nightforce vs. Leupold



## RangerRudy (Oct 3, 2013)

All I've ever used for optics is Leupold, both in the military and LE side. One of my LE SS instructors had an AI with a Nightforce scope. It seemed to be built very well, and I liked the idea of laser etching the reticle. 

Before I drop down money on either (Zeiss is also on the list), I'd like some feedback from anyone who has a Nightforce. Thanks.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 3, 2013)

I'm a big fan of Nightforce, I've been using them for about 6 years now. I will never go back to a Leup'y again.

Quality is outstanding, adjustments are true, and the glass is excellent.  Price sucks, but well worth the investment.


----------



## x SF med (Oct 4, 2013)

A buddy of mine has allowed me to use his AI (surgeon) with a nightforce...  nice...  he went back to a custom Leupold on his DPMS Custom....  and has moved both scopes on both...  I'll take the Leupold/AI combo.   The Leupold is a custom, Horus/superfine/etched...  not an off the shelf. 


eta:  I sometimes hate the owner, he's placed highly in the SOCOM Sniper Comp, and gets huge discounts on rifles and optics because of it - the leupold should have been a 4K scope and he got it for about 1K...   but he is a friend and fellow SF guy, and lets me play with his toys.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 4, 2013)

$4k for a Leupold is crazy (I get your buddy didn't pay that, $1k is an awesome deal), I get custom, but for coin like that, I would be all over Schmidt & Bender or US Optics, etc. 

I'm a bit stuck on old school, I'm still working MIL/MOA. I need to move on to MIL/MIL just for the simplicity of it, but I've been doing MIL/MOA for well over a decade, and then to change all my kit, data, etc.... I just don't have the coin or time to do all that right now.

A good buddy of mine is all about Horus reticles, but my minimal ranged time with it, just didn't have me jumping across the street. I'll stick with my mil-dots (for now anyway).


----------



## x SF med (Oct 4, 2013)

@JAB ...  he compared it to a S&B, and Zeiss and US Optics (all were in his price range at the time) and that's the one he felt worked best for him...  it shoots under 1/4 moa groups at 300m...  right at 1/3 - 1/2 moa at 500-1000m ...  it's tuned to him.  everybody has their own favorite glass, and that's about the bottom line, what works for you, right?

He only shoots with 185 gr .308 match.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 4, 2013)

Right on brother, I agree, its whatever your pleasure, at the upper end of optics, etc. 

I personally never have cared for Leupold, while in the Army or on the civi side. But I know some great shooters, who only use leup'y products, etc.

Didn't like S&B....wow!


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 4, 2013)

x SF med said:


> I'll take the Leupold/AI combo.



Just out of curiosity, what did you not like about the Nightforce, or what was better about the Leup'y?


----------



## x SF med (Oct 4, 2013)

Personal preference, eye distance, comfort, the parallax could be more closely tuned to my astigmatism, clarity of the outer edges of the field, and a slightly larger field...   just me, but the nightforce  seemed to have a haze at the outside edges of the field and a little wave out there too - it was distracting - it could have just been that one optic though.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 4, 2013)

Interesting. Yeah, I haven't had any of those issues at all. Clarity is superb, no fog, haze or imperfection.  Eye relief and parallax take a bit to get use to. Especially if you are not use to high magnification 15x or better.

Thanks for the reply.


----------



## x SF med (Oct 5, 2013)

Because I got a deal on it ($25, yup, that's right...), I use a medium-high grade lighted reticle BSA 6-24x40 on the model 70...  clear, nice relief distance (only been bit once) and I like the stadia lines...  my old lighted reticle Weaver 4-10x50 is being used by a friend...   the FN is irons all the way, no prob out to 300m (well, except for my eyes, but that's all on age and genetics)


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 5, 2013)

You don't like Nightforce, but like BSA and Weaver? 

We are not allowed to talk optics anymore....;)


----------



## x SF med (Oct 5, 2013)

JAB said:


> You don't like Nightforce, but like BSA and Weaver?
> 
> We are not allowed to talk optics anymore....;)


 

The BSA was cheap and available when I was at a gun show...    the weaver came with the rifle, and both were 'compensation' for a favor to a friend...  use what you have, and what you can afford...   I'm saving for nice optics, but life keeps getting in the way.  Plus, I can still shoot irons pretty decently out to 300- 400 m...  not pin point but I knock down the target.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Oct 5, 2013)

I've looked through both of those pieces he's talking about... the weaver he has is better than any NF i've put eyes to.  Hilarious, actually. I couldn't stop giggling about it,  although that might have been the blackberries talking.   

I'll be honest, I'd rather have a Trijicon Accupoint than a Nightforce, but that's just personal preference having tried them out before.


----------



## RangerRudy (Oct 5, 2013)

The Zeiss I looked at was outstanding.  Great clarity and light gathering ability.  Like SF Med said, it all depends on what works for the individual.


----------



## surgicalcric (Oct 5, 2013)

x SF med said:


> ...it shoots under 1/4 moa groups at 300m...  right at 1/3 - 1/2 moa at 500-1000m ...



BULLSHIT!!!

1/4 moa @ 100yds is close to impossible for the vast majority of bolt guns, even custom ones so unless your friend is Jesus Christ, it ain't happening at 300 yds.  

Next, a persons ability to group, after variances in weapon and ammo is removed, depends solely on the shooters ability to clearly see his aiming point and at a 1000 yds that isn't happening with a 40x scope well enough to shoot a 3-5" group.  I will refrain from getting into wind calculations and barometric pressure changes when shooting LD targets or the fact that the bullet is in subsonic flight making it unstable, into the equation. 

You need to tell him his 1/4" at 300yd story has been called out.


----------



## surgicalcric (Oct 5, 2013)

JAB said:


> ...
> 
> I'm a bit stuck on old school, I'm still working MIL/MOA. I need to move on to MIL/MIL just for the simplicity of it, but I've been doing MIL/MOA for well over a decade, and then to change all my kit, data, etc.... I just don't have the coin or time to do all that right now.



Move a couple decades to the right by picking up a mil/mil scope and ballistic calculator that will "true" your rifle and you can throw away your DOPE book or donate it to your library of outdated books.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 5, 2013)

I know, my next optic is a MIL/MIL S&B, but money is not what it was, so it will still be awhile.

As for a data books, I still like keeping data, even though I have three different data apps, that are spot on and get used for calculation, etc. I still like to record and maintain them.

I normally build cheat cards and tape them to my buttstock.

I don't like using a kestrel or laser range finder, either. I can range +/-25m and call wind faster than most of my buddies can turn on their gear.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 5, 2013)

surgicalcric said:


> BULLSHIT!!!
> 
> 1/4 moa @ 100yds is close to impossible for the vast majority of bolt guns, even custom ones so unless your friend is Jesus Christ, it ain't happening at 300 yds.
> 
> ...



I agree from a consistency stand point, I've seen, as I am sure you have, some pretty amazing sub-moa groups at distance, but normally followed with inability to repeat.

Staying sub-moa at 1000m with a 308, with consistency, is pretty unusual.


----------



## x SF med (Oct 6, 2013)

surgicalcric said:


> BULLSHIT!!!
> 
> 1/4 moa @ 100yds is close to impossible for the vast majority of bolt guns, even custom ones so unless your friend is Jesus Christ, it ain't happening at 300 yds.
> 
> ...


 
He's an honor grad of Lvl 3, and has placed in the top 5 at the SOCOM Sniper Comp...  It is very possible that I  mistook what he said...  I've seen the paper at 100 and 150, all the punches touched without a calculator ...  haven't had a chance to get to a longer range with him.


----------



## surgicalcric (Oct 6, 2013)

x SF med said:


> He's an honor grad of Lvl 3, and has placed in the top 5 at the SOCOM Sniper Comp...  It is very possible that I  mistook what he said...  I've seen the paper at 100 and 150, all the punches touched without a calculator ...  haven't had a chance to get to a longer range with him.



LVL1, not 3 bro...I dont know why but every other course thats taught by USASOC they change the 1 and 3 - I think its to confuse us.


----------



## x SF med (Oct 6, 2013)

surgicalcric said:


> LVL1, not 3 bro...I dont know why but every other course thats taught by USASOC they change the 1 and 3 - I think its to confuse us.


 
Yeah talk to 6 guys that have graduated...  3 will have been in a lvl 1 course, and 3 will have been in a lvl 3 course.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 6, 2013)

Back when I graduated the eleventeen level course, our test was to shoot a 0.001 MOA group at twelveteen thousand meters with a cross bow, using a Barska infinity power scope, with interface death ray, laser range finder. Just sayin!


----------



## x SF med (Oct 7, 2013)

JAB said:


> Back when I graduated the eleventeen level course, our test was to shoot a 0.001 MOA group at twelveteen thousand meters with a cross bow, using a Barska infinity power scope, with interface death ray, laser range finder. Just sayin!


 
This guy is a good cat, a member here (not on for a while) and an SF guy...  SOCOM level TIC course graduate...  Like I said I probably screwed up with the numbers...


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Oct 7, 2013)

I was just joking around bro, I think I know who you're talking about (remember messaging with him). As for SOCOM, JSOC & NATO ran courses....I wouldn't know anything about them, or the levels,  phases, etc.

I always figured it was all the same shit (precision long range marksmanship) with different tactics and technology dependant on the mission statement. Like a SF Sniper graduate probably doesn't need to know high profile venue,  where someone working for JSOC, may need that type of training. Marksmanship part tends the be the same no matter where you go, there are really only so many ways you 'make it better' before you end up full circle of the re-inventing of the wheel.


----------



## Cabbage Head (Nov 9, 2013)

I like leupold.  My AIAE in .308 has over 6500rds through it with the same LR/T 4.5-14 scope.  We shoot scope tracking drills regularly to make sure everyone's scope works.  We have a Robar .50 that has a NF on it.  Sadly we don't shoot it enough to give a good review on how it holds up.  We just got ammo for it, so I hope to have a good review soon!


----------



## x SF med (Nov 10, 2013)

ummmmmmmmm... D, you are in shape in that pic...  round is a shape, like a cabbage...:-":wall:


----------



## Cabbage Head (Nov 10, 2013)

That's my winter insulation ....


----------



## x SF med (Nov 10, 2013)

Cabbage Head said:


> That's my winter insulation ....


 
Check the buttons on the jacket, they may not all be there anymore...  and it isn't even cold yet...  you must have started the insulation in July...


----------



## x SF med (Nov 10, 2013)

x SF med said:


> Check the buttons on the jacket, they may not all be there anymore...  and it isn't even cold yet...  you must have started the insulation in July...


 

If you would have made a trip out here, I could have helped get the insulation started with a barley pop or two...  maybe some nice salmon, or a buffalo burger...  but no...  you went and ate a cow or two all by your lonesome...


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 10, 2013)

x SF med said:


> If you would have made a trip out here, I could have helped get the insulation started with a barley pop or two...  maybe some nice salmon, or a buffalo burger...  but no...  you went and ate a cow or two all by your lonesome...



There ain't nothin wrong with eating those moo cows... although a Bison ribeye sounds pretty damn good right now.


----------



## x SF med (Nov 11, 2013)

JAB said:


> There ain't nothin wrong with eating those moo cows... although a Bison ribeye sounds pretty damn good right now.


 
It's not the moo cow that was the dis...  it was the fact he didn't share.  I was offering to help him insulate for winter...


----------



## KOPFJAGER (Mar 21, 2014)

I've personally used Nightforce scopes on some DARPA XM3's. Great quality scope and it holds a great zero even when I was on a Osprey. The ospreys tend to rattle in flight if you have never been on one. My premier reticles scope on my M110 SASS is garbage compared to the Nightforce. One of the lenses moved itself while in an Osprey one time. For ruggedness, I'd go with a Nightforce because they beat the crap of out each scope before they sell them on the market. At the factory, each scope goes through about five stations and each station batters it against a desk or post about five times to test its ruggedness and durability. Otherwise, Schmidt & Bender is a great piece of glass as well. It's equal or better to the Nightforce. I've been using S&B for about 7 years now on my bolt actions, and I couldn't ask for a more clearer, reliable piece of glass. I am a big fan of both and stick to MIL/MIL because we are in a new century and modern technology is relying on the metric system more and more. It keeps your shots consistent as well as you.


----------



## pardus (Mar 21, 2014)

KOPFJAGER said:


> I've personally used Nightforce scopes on some DARPA XM3's. Great quality scope and it holds a great zero even when I was on a Osprey. The ospreys tend to rattle in flight if you have never been on one. My premier reticles scope on my M110 SASS is garbage compared to the Nightforce. One of the lenses moved itself while in an Osprey one time. For ruggedness, I'd go with a Nightforce because they beat the crap of out each scope before they sell them on the market. At the factory, each scope goes through about five stations and each station batters it against a desk or post about five times to test its ruggedness and durability. Otherwise, Schmidt & Bender is a great piece of glass as well. It's equal or better to the Nightforce. I've been using S&B for about 7 years now on my bolt actions, and I couldn't ask for a more clearer, reliable piece of glass. I am a big fan of both and stick to MIL/MIL because we are in a new century and modern technology is relying on the metric system more and more. It keeps your shots consistent as well as you.



Post an intro as per the rules you signed before you post again. Thank you.


----------



## RangerRudy (Mar 21, 2014)

Thanks, KOPFJAGER. Looks like I need to start looking at Nightforce more seriously.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Dec 29, 2015)

Currently have a Leupold MK4 illuminated...has ton of stuff on it where I'm like wtf do I use that for.


----------



## DA SWO (Dec 29, 2015)

ThunderHorse said:


> Currently have a Leupold MK4 illuminated...has ton of stuff on it where I'm like wtf do I use that for.


What kind of stuff?


----------



## RangerRudy (Dec 29, 2015)

ThunderHorse said:


> Currently have a Leupold MK4 illuminated...has ton of stuff on it where I'm like wtf do I use that for.



What kind of "stuff"? What power? Cost?


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 29, 2015)

ThunderHorse said:


> Currently have a Leupold MK4 illuminated...has ton of stuff on it where I'm like wtf do I use that for.



Crazy thing about instruction manuals, if you read them, they'll tell you how and what and where to use all that "stuff".


----------



## ThunderHorse (Dec 29, 2015)

Manuals are great when the guy who builds your rifle gives it to you.
Elevation, Windage, Illumination, magnification...so the one I've never fucked with has been the side focus...probably should knowing what that is.  I'm guessing that does a lot more than the ocular lens focus.  Only optics I've used previously were the 68 and ACOG on my M4.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 29, 2015)

ThunderHorse said:


> Manuals are great when the guy who builds your rifle gives it to you.
> Elevation, Windage, Illumination, magnification...so the one I've never fucked with has been the side focus...probably should knowing what that is.  I'm guessing that does a lot more than the ocular lens focus.  Only optics I've used previously were the 68 and ACOG on my M4.



It's a parallax/focus adjustment knob, and should be covered in the manual. Not going to dive into it, but basically, as you change magnification and target distance, adjust it as you look through the optic until the retical and the target come into focus. You won't see a hell of alot of difference at 100yds but past 500yds it really helps.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 2, 2016)

.................and you can, you know, download the manuals online so you actually know what you can do with your scope


----------



## SpitfireV (Jan 2, 2016)

You can WHAT?!


----------



## ThunderHorse (Jan 2, 2016)

Jajajaja did that, understood.


----------



## x SF med (Jan 2, 2016)

Ranger Psych said:


> .................and you can, you know, download the manuals online so you actually know what you can do with your scope



Remarkable, just magic I tell ya, that internetzmachinethingy is just remarkable...


----------

