Ruger Forum banner

New Nikon 3~9 EFR scope

8.6K views 15 replies 7 participants last post by  Iowegan  
#1 ·
Yesterday I received my new Nikon PROSTAFF EFR rimfire scope ... 3~9X 40mm. EFR stands for "Extended Focus Range", which is Nikon's way of saying "Adjustable Objective Lens" or AO. Today I mounted it on my CZ-452-E2 (bolt action 22 LR rifle). I used extra high Redfield tipoff rings. The bell of the front objective lens barely clears the barrel ... just right. I haven't had a chance to do any more than bore sight it yet but I have tested the scope in the back yard. It tracks exceptionally well ... parallax correction can be a adjusted from 10 yards to 300+ yards via the AO ring. The optics are very bright and crystal clear. It came with the standard Nikon Precision reticle, which I really like. If it works as good as it appears, I will be a happy camper.

Prior, I had a 2~7x Nikon P-22 mounted on the CZ. It's a fantastic scope for the $$$ but I wanted a scope with a little more magnification that would reach out to 100 yards without parallax problems. My first "replacement" was a 3~9x 40mm rimfire PROSTAFF. I liked the scope but with its fixed 50 yard parallax correction, it just wouldn't track beyond 60 yards on 8 or 9X, so ... Cabela's got it back. Nothing actually wrong with the scope ... just a bad combination for parallax tracking.

The 2~7X Nikon P-22 is now installed on my Henry H001T. I think it is a very practical scope for any 22 LR hunting or plinking rifle .... good from 20 yards to 70 yards ... also very sharp and bright. It mounted easily on the Henry once the rear sight had been removed, however there isn't much clearance between the scope's power ring and the hammer so I will need an offset hammer spur.

Here's some details on the 3~9 Nikon EFR. It cost $184 including shipping (Amazon) ... about $40 more than basically the same Nikon scope without ERF .... and in my opinion, well worth the difference in cost. Leupold also makes a 3~9x rimfire with AO but at more than double Nikon's price, I figured the Nikon was a more practical purchase with a minimal difference in overall quality.

Nikon PROSTAFFs are made in the Philippines, which seems to be a trend for medium priced scopes these days ... like Burris Fullfield II. Much better quality than Chinese made scopes ... not quite as good as US made scopes, but still very respectable with a modest price tag.

I checked out the scope thoroughly and here are some comments: Turrets have "hand-turn" knobs under the plastic caps. Each click is 1/4" at 50 yards ... worst case is about one bullet diameter per click at normal shooting distances. The turret knobs are spring loaded so after you get the rifle sighted in, you lift the knob and set it to the zero reference point. The dials for both knobs are calibrated in 1 inch increments .... 12" for one complete turret knob rotation, 4 clicks per 1 inch dial increment at 50 yds ... in other words, 1/2 MOA per click. 1/4 MOA per click is traditional with scopes intended for centerfire rifles so I may have to adapt. Turret screws are "zero reset", meaning if you move the turret screws several clicks then back to the zero pointer, POI will also return to zero. Zero return turrets are not normally found in scopes costing less than $300.

Nikon's "Precission" reticle is similar to other scopes with a "Dual X" reticle except the thickness of the cross hairs and the distance between posts is calibrated ... a nice feature for estimating shooting distance. The scope has a "quick focus" eyepiece, making it much easier for multiple shooters to adjust the scope's focus for their eyes. The lenses are fully coated glass ... not polycarbonate ... excellent clarity and very bright. The AO ring adjusts parallax from less than 10 yards to more than 300 yards. IMO, this is probably the single most important feature, making cross hair drift virtually disappear at any shooting distance.

After I get both rifles sighted in and the 3~9 EFR run through its paces, I'll provide a range report with photos. So far I'm impressed with this Nikon ... hope I can say that after firing a couple hundred rounds.
 
#5 ·
ZommyGun, Nikon could use some good marketing skills ... not that they misrepresent their products ... they just don't make things very clear. On the box it says ... "Designed and engineered for 22 LR , air rifle, and other applications where the versatility of focusing at extended ranges - both close and distant - is desired. The Target EFR features an adjustable objective lens that allows focusing from 10 - meters to infinity and the Purpose-Designed Precision Reticle". No where does it say adjusting focus also corrects parallax.

The owner's manual is a joke ... very poorly written and a horrible size ... 3x9" ... however it does have 7 different languages!!! The only good part about the manual is the "Nomenclature and Specification sheet". The rest is just a few sentences per page. The only subtle mention of parallax is in the "Adjustable Objective Focusing Ring" paragraph where it says ... "Rotate the adjustable objective focusing ring to focus the riflescope precisely within the range of at least 9.14 m (10 yards) ~ infinity. By adjusting the focus, parallax can be eliminated and sight alignment will become accurate."

Despite Nikon's poor communications skills, they did engineer a fine scope ... especially considering the cost. Yesterday when I was checking the Nikon out ... I was very impressed with the attention to detail and calibration. I set up a target in my back yard at exactly 50 yards. When I adjusted the AO for precise focus then looked at the AO ring scale ... it indicated exactly 50 yards. At 50 yards, the reticle "posts" are supposed to be 15" apart (on 9X). Both vertical and horizontal posts measured exactly right. With the scope clamped down, I rotated the windage turret knob one full turn, which is supposed to be 12". Indeed the crosshairs moved exactly 12". Next I did the classic "return to zero" test. With the scope clamped down and aiming directly at a magic marker "plus sign" .... 8 clicks up, 8 clicks right, 8 clicks down, and 8 clicks left. The cross hairs did indeed return to zero ... dead center on the plus sign. BTW, most scopes will fail this test.

If I were able to make any changes to the 3~9 EFR ... it would be the plastic turret caps. No big deal but I like metal turret caps much better.
 
#8 ·
After downloading and reading and rereading your paper on scopes I bought the Nikon Prostaff 3-9X40 BDC. I am very happy with it. Finally got it zeroed yesterday. I even was able to lob in some shots at the 200 yard steel. 2' hold over. Thanks to you and all the great info here on this forum. Next is building a portable table and rest. Thanks, Ron.
 
#9 ·
Thanks for the great write up Iowegan. I bought that exact same scope from Optics Planet last month based largely on ZommyGuns recommendation. Nice to know that I made a good choice.
I'm hoping to get to the range on Monday for the first time.
 
#10 · (Edited)
ronpaul50, It's nice when a project comes together and it WORKS!!!!

Got up early this morning and went to the farm to sight in my Henry H001T with a Nikon 2~7X rimfire scope and my CZ 452-2E with a Nikon 3~9X EFR scope. After laser bore sighting, it only took a few rounds each to dial in at 60 yards. I had planned to run the 3~9 through its paces but the weather man had other ideas. It started sprinkling so I packed up and went home. Looks like rain is in the forecast for the next few days so I'll just have to wait.

I had already run the 2~7X Nikon through several tests and it passed all of them with flying colors. Here's some examples ... with the scope sighted in at 50 yards and set on 7X, fire additional 3 shot groups when set on 6X, 5X, 4X, 3X, and 2X. The groups should all be centered on the bullseye and indeed they were with this scope.

I did this same test with a Barska and a Tasco (both rimfire 3~9X). The Barska failed .... groups moved to the right more and more with each power setting and were 4" off center by the time I got down to 3X. Went back and tested at 9X and it was back to zero. This tells me the cheap mechanical internals did not track with magnification. IMO, this turns a variable scope into a fixed power because it doesn't stay zeroed except on the magnification where it was sighted in.

The Tasco fared much better ... it was only off by about an inch vertically from 3X to 9X. I can live with that, however when I changed the rear focus lens (rotated it 180 deg) 9X groups moved 2 inches left @ 50 yards. That tells me the focus lens was not mechanically tracking ... groups should remain constant as the focus ring is adjusted. This is not a big issue unless the rifle will be fired by more than one person where the focus is set for their individual eye. The focus lens tracked just fine with both the Barska and Nikon.

I also did a parallax tracking test with all three scopes where parallax was factory adjusted for 50 yards with all three. Using the 1X per 10 yard rule, I tested each scope at the lowest and again at the highest magnification at their respective distances. For the Nikon 2~7X (zeroed at the 50 yard parallax corrected distance) I set magnification to 2X then set up a target at 20 yards. By holding my eye as far right as possible where you get vignetting but can still see the crosshairs, fire one shot. Again with holding my eye as far left as possible, fire another shot. Measure the distance between the holes to determine maximum cross hair drift. Repeat the same procedure at 7X @ 70 yards. For the Nikon 2~7X, my max crosshair drift at 20 yards was just over 1/2" and at 70 yards just under 1" ... a worst case scenario. This is very acceptable .... with my eye centered on the reticle (no vignetting) cross hair drift was almost nonexistent. Both the Barska and Tasco failed this test miserably. Not so bad at 30 yards and 3X ... but almost 6" cross hair drift at 90 yards and 9X. It was hard to tell if the spread was because of crosshair drift, ammo, or the gun itself so I fired 3-shot groups @ 90 yards and had two defined groups about 4 inches apart.

Most people never test their scopes and just assume focus, magnification, and parallax will track properly. Here's where you can really tell the difference between a cheap scope and a quality scope. For most people, it probably doesn't matter but for anal people like me, it matters a lot. I can't wait to try the Nikon 3~9 EFR ... hopefully it will be as good as the Nikon 2~7X.
 
#12 ·
ronpaul50, It not threading the plastic caps off or on ... it's just a cheap thing on an otherwise excellent scope. Even my el cheapo Tasco has metal turret caps.
 
#14 ·
The sun popped out and winds were dead calm so I got in another hour of shooting in with the CZ 452 and the new Nikon 3~9 EFR. Checked focus tracking and magnification tracking. Both were perfect ... no problems at all. I really like the AO ... parallax was dead on at all shooting distances. Before the wind came up, I was able to shoot some 100 yard groups. With the scope sighted in at 60 yards, I fired two ten shot groups with CCI MiniMags and one ten shot group with Wolf Target Match. The MiniMag groups were 6" low but in a nice cluster measuring 1.25". The Wolf groups were 9" low but were just under an inch ... pretty amazing for a non-match grade rifle.

By process of elimination, the four main factors for shooting 100 yard 22 LR groups ... the gun, the scope, the ammo, and the shooter (me) were resolved. I was shooting from a benchrest using an Outer's rifle rest ... very stable and no wind. The scope performed exceptionally well, and the ammo too. I am a very happy camper ... just waiting for the weather to clear up so I can have some more fun.