PLxC vs NX8: A look through two of the most popular 1-8x LPVOs 

Ayeee, Mike! As I recall you like the plxc quite a bit.

So happy you found it!

Bruh… me too

Thanks, boss! I thought I invented this technique until I found your videos. Your channel is great by the way.

@@compulsivegunbuyer too kind! Keep up the cool vids.

Thanks for the kind words!

Yep that was great work

Always thrilled to hear that.

Thanks, friend! Happy I could hlep.

Thanks! Glad I could help.

Green?!

@@nickadkins7765 dark earth

@@nickadkins7765no.

They do with the nova 1-6. Unfortunately that level of brightness is really difficult to pull of on a FFP retical.

@@southern842 I like the NX8 ergonomics better than the PLx. The NX8 zoom and lever are more functional, smoother and faster. The profile of the NX8 makes moving fast and slinging easier. It just works easier for me and I have shot better with the NX8 when moving and shooting.

Thanks for watching!

I appreciate it!

My pleasure

Sorry for the late reply. I think the PA is a good option. People that have run them hard still seem to like them.

I have that reticle in mine and I love it

The turrets are capped now too. The only issue really with the new NX8 is the fisheye at 1x. It's a great scope and does not deserver the hate.

I was planning to buy atacr.but the fc dmx and capped turrets fixed a lot on nx8….. better fov and lighter

Yes, I have a video in the works that, I expect, will make this point more explicitly.

That's a neat idea

For the daylight scope footage, I used $10 gopro bike mount attached to the buffer tube (usually with the stock removed).

Haven't got my hands on one, but they do look cool

Have you ever actually seen one irl, let alone looked through one? The eyebox and fishbowl are atrocious, and the parallax is adjustable only because if it was fixed, it would be unusable. The amount in focus at a given parallax setting is comically small. It's junk.

@@Jiggaboots420 Good to know. On paper is not real life.

It's to expensive for virtually everyone. That's why you don't see it.

Because normal people can’t afford to buy one and not end up liking it 😂

I have some footage of the two from the same day, but I don't know how illustrative it is.

Only in sfp tho

Just send me the ATACR and I'll get it done!

@@compulsivegunbuyer let you know when I have one lol

I subtracted the mount in the calculation on the screen

I wonder if this offer holds true today

@@Electricianarchery yes they still have this savings program, i just got my plxc recently

You're not the first to notice, but it is all accounted for in the onscreen annotations. The number I give for the nx8 would be ridiculously low if it included the mount.

It gets better with practice, but like I said in the video, the nods demo is more to show the relative light transmission.

Send me two scopes, and I'll be happy to.

Of course, you can make either work with enough math and/or practice, but moa is intuitive with yards. Also, the context was discussing a yards vs metric bdc reticle.

Read the annotations, my friend. It's all there.

There are some good ones for sure!

Great thoughts. I like my nx8 as well but I do wonder if the plxc fits the niche better.

@@compulsivegunbuyer great review, btw.

@@CutlassOutdoors thanks for watching!

The PLxC is, to my eyes, the closest truly 1x optic I've ever used. After setting the diopter I could get a flat, consistent image in as little as 2 and a half yards. Any other optic I've tried that with had fisheye and issues at varied distances, but the PLxC kept the image extremely flat throughout. The durability may be different, but as someone that has broken some high and low end scopes in the name of science, even the cheaper options are significantly more durable than most people are inclined to believe. The dive ratings are quite a bit different but I genuinely could not care less about that. The only real gripe I have with the PLxC is the lack of a truly daylight bright illumination. Here in the PNW it's rarely super sunny, so that's a concession I'm willing to live with. Overall, there's very few places where the NX8 is a better scope than the PLxC and I'd highly recommend you give it a try when you have an opportunity. Over the years I've gone from Razor, to ATACR, to Kahles, to PA PLx, to Razor Gen 3, to NX8, to Swaro, to PLxC, and basically every other LPVO under the Sun and the Gen II-E Razor and PLxC are still kings of the pack in the SFP and FFP LPVO configurations respectively.

@@evey0259 Thank you for sharing your perspective. Being from Washington originally, I understand that “daylight visible” is good enough when it is overcast most of the year. But now that I live in Idaho, where the vast majority of the year is either very sunny or covered in snow, “daylight bright” is pretty much a necessity for a FFP LPVO. Still, I’ll have to get my hands on a PLxC and see how it compares. I know my NX8 seems to have a very genuine 1x to my eyes (admittedly there is some distortion around the edges) and it seemed to me in the video that the two scopes had slightly different magnification on 1x and 8x. But I haven’t owned as wide a variety of scopes as you have, so I will concede that my opinion is limited. That being said, diopter can have an effect on how true a 1x setting is, and how flat it is, and since diopter is set to the individual shooter, it is very possible for the 1x experience on a scope to be somewhat subjective. I know that sounds like fanboy cope, and maybe it is to some degree, but the reality is that we are comparing semi-high end scopes and none of them are bad options. We all want to get our money’s worth, and of the scopes you listed, I don’t think you’d fail to do so with any of them. In a perfect world, we’d have all of our options available at the local gun store, and could see for ourselves before buying. Anyway, I’m curious about the 1x on the PLxC now, so I’ll see if I can get my hands on one to compare it to my NX8 in person. Thanks!

Would love to check out a Kahles, just never have.

If you read the annotations on the screen, you will see I accounted for that.

I'm not opposed to it, but I don't see this one out in the wild much. Do you?

That was factored in the calculations