Is Tangent Theta worth the $ over NF?

[KY_Windage]

I've got a TT315m and an NX8. No comparison. I've shot next to an atacr 4-16 and still no comparison. Only thing TT isnt the best in is the mag ring. Pretty stiff.

The NX8 does not have ED glass, so that's not really a valid comparison.

But there is SOOO much more to the analysis than glass quality, especially once to get to quality as good as with the NF ED glass. OP is talking about shooting to 1,500 yds. Sure, you can do that with Weaver K10, but when I am shooting true precision at even 600 yards (trying to hit a 3" X-ring, not just "hit the plate") I want more than 25x. Others do, too, which is why the most popular scope you will see at an F-Class match is the NF 15-55 Comp.

TT also does not offer a target reticle, which is a must for me for targets. I have gotten to where I want nothing but either the NF MOAR-T reticle in an ATACR or the FCR-1 reticle in the Comp. The thickness of TT's MOA reticle is 0.1". NF's MOAR-T is 0.06". The thickness of the FCR-1 is much, much thinner than the MOAR-T. Of course, those thin reticles are available only in SFP scopes, but I prefer those anyway.

It is a personal preference thing, but for LR shooting I want both at least 35x and a reticle no thicker than the MOAR-T. I can get both in an ATACR 7-35 (though I do not have one, as I prefer the 5-25 ATACR for the varmint hunting I do and the 15-55 Comp. for LR target shooting -- but I could get it in one scope if I wanted to compromise, and TT offers nothing bigger than 5-25 and no fine reticle option.

So I would not choose a TT even if they were the same price as a NF.

Then there is the reliability/durability issue. I have no idea what TT's is, but I know what NF's is, and it is astounding. Of course you pay for that in weight in the NXS and ATACR models, but when you flew somewhere or drove a long way to shoot something, it is nice to know your reticle is highly unlikely to break.

I want to see a video of a TT guy pounding the crap out of a wooden bench with one of their scopes, and then putting it back on the rifle and shooting to same POI it did before the pounding. I have seen the NF video.

 

[cjl2010]

The NX8 does not have ED glass, so that's not really a valid comparison.

But there is SOOO much more to the analysis than glass quality, especially once to get to quality as good as with the NF ED glass. OP is talking about shooting to 1,500 yds. Sure, you can do that with Weaver K10, but when I am shooting true precision at even 600 yards (trying to hit a 3" X-ring, not just "hit the plate") I want more than 25x. Others do, too, which is why the most popular scope you will see at an F-Class match is the NF 15-55 Comp.

TT also does not offer a target reticle, which is a must for me for targets. I have gotten to where I want nothing but either the NF MOAR-T reticle in an ATACR or the FCR-1 reticle in the Comp. The thickness of TT's MOA reticle is 0.1". NF's MOAR-T is 0.06". The thickness of the FCR-1 is much, much thinner than the MOAR-T. Of course, those thin reticles are available only in SFP scopes, but I prefer those anyway.

It is a personal preference thing, but for LR shooting I want both at least 35x and a reticle no thicker than the MOAR-T. I can get both in an ATACR 7-35 (though I do not have one, as I prefer the 5-25 ATACR for the varmint hunting I do and the 15-55 Comp. for LR target shooting -- but I could get it in one scope if I wanted to compromise, and TT offers nothing bigger than 5-25 and no fine reticle option.

So I would not choose a TT even if they were the same price as a NF.

Then there is the reliability/durability issue. I have no idea what TT's is, but I know what NF's is, and it is astounding. Of course you pay for that in weight in the NXS and ATACR models, but when you flew somewhere or drove a long way to shoot something, it is nice to know your reticle is highly unlikely to break.

I want to see a video of a TT guy pounding the crap out of a wooden bench with one of their scopes, and then putting it back on the rifle and shooting to same POI it did before the pounding. I have seen the NF video.

Sir, to be fair, this thread isn't about proving Anything to you. OP wants opinions on NF vs TT. You have made it very clear the ED glass in the atacr line is the best out there and I doubt anything we say, that would be people who have actually handled both TT and NF atacr, will change your mind.

@JARHEAD1371 Primal Rights has been using TT for a long long time. He would be a great source to talk to about what a TT would offer you over a NF. Good luck in your search.

 

[Privi457]

No it's not worth it but a Schmidt Bender is.

 

[406precision]

Next scope over here will be a ZCO without question the TT are also a superb scope and you really can't go wrong with Nightforce either ..at the price point you are talking about id buy the one that looked best to my eyes and dsicount what others have said ..i just wish there where more light weight smaller options from these companies for hunting optics ..which is probably the reason I went with a vortex amg on my last personal build that and its American made.

Never a better time to be a consumer lots of excellent optics available

Jordan@406

 

[Gone Ballistic]

I think scopes are a matter of personal preference. For me, it's about getting the best bang for the buck and due to limited amount of money I have, Nightforce is barely within my reach. But, for overall performance from a scope, nothing within the money range of them comes close and at double their cost, few are any better.
I would prefer to use the money for something else other than buy a scope for a few extra bells and whistles, because I know I can't ever outshoot a Nightforce scope.

 

[sixfivefanboy]

I'm looking at different scope options for my new build, 25 SST. I'll be using it for hunting and practice out to around 1500 yds. I'm waiting on the XLR and CarbonSix barrel so I have a couple of months to decide. I was going with a NF ATACR, but TT has gotten my attention.

For those who have used both, do you feel the TT is worth almost twice the price of NF? I don't mind paying the premium price, assuming the product is also premium. Thanks for any input.

When it comes to tracking, Nightforce can NOT hang with TT - its not even close.

 

[Pro2A]

I'm looking at different scope options for my new build, 25 SST. I'll be using it for hunting and practice out to around 1500 yds. I'm waiting on the XLR and CarbonSix barrel so I have a couple of months to decide. I was going with a NF ATACR, but TT has gotten my attention.

For those who have used both, do you feel the TT is worth almost twice the price of NF? I don't mind paying the premium price, assuming the product is also premium. Thanks for any input.

Incremental gains cost BIGGER and BIGGER increments of cash. Optics must have been where the Law of Diminishing Gains was discovered. Appreciation of scopes is truly in the "Eye of the Beholder." Been behind both. Use a lot of NF et el. Not a TT todate. Didn't get to run tracking/repeatability testing....just looky see and shoot. My old eyes say stick with what brought me this far. Within my cash flow rounding error; beyond my gain appreciation. If you absolutely can't find anything else to dump your cash on....there's a lot of mighty fine toys and women out there......then try the TT. Otherwise, pull out a great Stoogie and set your money on fire. YMMV....but that's why America is GREAT. Happy Independence Day, Americans!!!!

 

[Pro2A]

Tangents are a hand made, very precise product. Great glass and turrets

Today, hand fitted usually means "can't machine ****." Just MHO as a 45+ year practiced engineer. YMMV.

 

[Pro2A]

When it comes to tracking, Nightforce can NOT hang with TT - its not even close.

Yeah, those NFs are feet off on tracking, and famously fragile, and resemble Coke bottle bottoms. That's why they are priced half what TT costs. That's why USSOCOM is putting NF instead of TT on the new Barrett MK22 ASR. The MK22 Development Team checked out everything they could get their eyes on. To me that's a pretty pragmatic application. When one gets down to 0.00000, how much better does one expect, and how does TT get there....and how do you know they are getting there??? Just pondering...........

 

[Pro2A]

To add to my previous post - IF I had no multi caliber rifles I would most certainly own only NF. The durability (because I use my rifles and optics) is a huge allure for me to go that route. The turrets are excellent, tracking is spot on and the glass and reticle selection leave you wanting for not much.

I do have multi-caliber rifles, and typically go with NF for many reasons. I set a common base zero and spin from there for everything else. I find I can rely on the NF tracking and repeatability. YMMV>

 

[sixfivefanboy]

Yeah, those NFs are feet off on tracking, and famously fragile, and resemble Coke bottle bottoms. That's why they are priced half what TT costs. That's why USSOCOM is putting NF instead of TT on the new Barrett MK22 ASR. The MK22 Development Team checked out everything they could get their eyes on. To me that's a pretty pragmatic application. When one gets down to 0.00000, how much better does one expect, and how does TT get there....and how do you know they are getting there??? Just pondering...........

Lots of testing and shooting ... your comment shows your ignorance. Anybody who has spent a significant amount of time behind a TT and any other scope testing their tracking and calculating scope error will realize TT is far and away the best. Military contracts don't mean anything, unfortunately...

 

[Pro2A]

Clarity and resolution. I don't feel I can measurably tell a difference between eyebox. I haven't noticed any CA.

Braunschweiger, always interested in learning. How are you measuring clarity and resolution to differentiate the NF/TT difference? Numbers, please. I might change my direction.

 

[Mc Fraser]

I really don't buy in to most I read on products, someone always has something to gain or prove. My KIA will do everything your Mercedes will ....

In what universe that statement is true? LOL I mean no offence. Whoever says something like that clearly never owned a Mercedes. I love the fact that I can get a heated massage while driving and I don't move sideways when the car changes directions because of the "wings" in the seat that move with the direction and speed of the car to keep me in the same spot every time to get the best massage a car can offer. After a 10hr drive, I'm fresh as a baby.

Anyhow, I cant offer a fair comparison because I never hunted with TT but I did shot at the range with it. It is by far the best glass that I've to look through (never owned a Swarovski). Is it worth it twice as much? For me yes, if I get and an extra ~10% advantage I will pay the premium.
At the end of the day, one's opinion is heavily based on affordability. I usually don't buy premium products based on feedback from forums or reviews online.

 

[bigngreen]

Others do, too, which is why the most popular scope you will see at an F-Class match is the NF 15-55 Comp.

One of the most sent back optics out there because of not holding zero, you have to run them on a scope checker in live fire to make sure you have one that will hold zero and even then you have to keep checking them.