USO vs Nightforce

[bigten109]

Re-doing (and rethinking) my optics for my ARs and Scar 17. A background, have 2 ARs, one has a RDS, and the other a 1-6x variable. My scar 17 currently needs an optic. I'm deciding whether to go a dedicated long range optic (something in the 3 or 5-x) or looking at something like the USO BT 10 or NF 2.5-10x just so I have the option of reaching longer but keeping the weight down.

Any thoughts? Also, any reviews of the USO 1.8-10s or the NF? I know USO is FFP and the NF is SFP in those particular models.

[diving dave]

My opinion, you cant go wrong with either...I hang out at the FN forums also, and the NF 2.5-10 is a popular choice on the 17..I run a TA 55 acog on mine...I dont have time one those exact models, but I do have a USO SN3 on my bolt gun...Great glass and built like a tank. If it were me I'd go USO, but I think they are more cash than the NF

[docsherm]

Re-doing (and rethinking) my optics for my ARs and Scar 17. A background, have 2 ARs, one has a RDS, and the other a 1-6x variable. My scar 17 currently needs an optic. I'm deciding whether to go a dedicated long range optic (something in the 3 or 5-x) or looking at something like the USO BT 10 or NF 2.5-10x just so I have the option of reaching longer but keeping the weight down.

Any thoughts? Also, any reviews of the USO 1.8-10s or the NF? I know USO is FFP and the NF is SFP in those particular models.

I would look at the new line of USO. They are very nice and have they have made some great upgrades. NightForce is a good scope but they have not progresses with the latest tech as some of the other companies have done.

[NotDylan]

I have the NF 2.5-10x42 and the new USO B-17. Optically, the USO is superior, has better lumination, and I prefer the erek 2 elevation turret. The windage turret is a little sticky.

The NF has a much nicer finish on it and isn't far behind optically. On my long range AR, I prefer the USO to the NF due to the higher clarity and magnification.

If I were limiting myself to the 10x offerings, it would be a tougher choice. The uso is a good bit heavier and longer. And I prefer the NF's SFP design, makes the 2.5x very usable. I imagine the uso will be better to look through and cheaper than the x42 NF.

[DCraig]

I use an uso sr8c on my scar 17. The 1-8x really comes in handy for me. It's a tough optic that gives me the close to mid range that I want out of the gun.

[bigten109]

I have the NF 2.5-10x42 and the new USO B-17. Optically, the USO is superior, has better lumination, and I prefer the erek 2 elevation turret. The windage turret is a little sticky.

The NF has a much nicer finish on it and isn't far behind optically. On my long range AR, I prefer the USO to the NF due to the higher clarity and magnification.

If I were limiting myself to the 10x offerings, it would be a tougher choice. The uso is a good bit heavier and longer. And I prefer the NF's SFP design, makes the 2.5x very usable. I imagine the uso will be better to look through and cheaper than the x42 NF.

Any other suggestions in that magnification range? Also, I got an email back from uso, the exit pupil for the B10 is 3.2mm across all magnifications.

[docsherm]

Any other suggestions in that magnification range? Also, I got an email back from uso, the exit pupil for the B10 is 3.2mm across all magnifications.

I have been a huge fan of March Tactical for some time. Their 1-10X is very nice for a SFP. They also have a FFP 1-8X.
https://www.bearbasin.net/category_s/3536.htm

[bigten109]

What about a 3-12 mag, does anyone think I'm losing out a lot on weight or FOV by jumping up in magnification?

[yoni]

We had scopes from both of these companies. Only the NF never failed us.

[Failure2Stop]

NightForce is a good scope but they have not progresses with the latest tech as some of the other companies have done.

I disagree with this, unless we're just discussing the 2.5-10x only, or the NXS line only; in which case I'd agree that it isn't as advanced as other lines.
The ATAC-R line is absolutely cutting edge state of the art, and I would not at all consider a 4-16x 42mm objective lens to be overkill on a SCAR-H.
NF in general has excellent image, second to none in click value accuracy, excellent zero-stop setup, and the most current reticles (specifically T3).

The NF ATACR 4-16x 42mm is 30oz, and 12.6" long.
The USO 1.8-10x is 29.3 oz, and 13" long.
So, there isn't much advantage with going to the USO on weight or length, unless a low power of 2x is in some way a significant advantage (which is a hard sell considering the reticle options).

For a Mk17 though, I'd lean toward something more in the 1-6/1-8 area.
I've shot t Leupold Mk6 1-6s out to 1200, and the BDC is good to go.
I have held a long relationship with the Mk8 1.1-8x with H27D reticle, and I think that it is the single most capable 1-8x in real world application that is currently available (8/10/2017).

However, to give the OP a good recommendation, I would ask for some additional detail:
What target/target size do you want to hit at what distance under what conditions?
What additional enablers/accessories pertinent to firearm employment will you be using?
What pertinent past optics experience do you have? What 1-6 do you have? What do you like/dislike about that 1-6?