Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Administrator robby denning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    SE Idaho
    Posts
    4,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Review: Vortex Razor 3-15x42 HD LH, by Jared Bloomgren.



    Jared, the-man-of-all-weapon-types, Bloomgren is back with a review on this new little sweetheart of a scope from Vortex.

    If you want to shoot farther but not weigh down that lightweight gun with an obese scope, then you might like this review. At 16.5 ounces, sounds like there's plenty of performance for the sub-1000 yard crowd (and I'm sure even a few of the +1,000-guys could make this scope work wonders)

    Give it a read here and post up any questions or comments for Jared.
    Vortex Razor HD LH 3-15X42 Review

  2. Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post
  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    4,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by robby denning View Post
    Review: Vortex Razor 3-15x42 HD LH, by Jared Bloomgren.
    It's about time someone made a left hand scope. LOL. What's the LH stand for?

    Jared, what height rings did you use for this setup? And do you need a cheek piece for that scope height? Every rifle I've tried to put a rail on, I can't seem to find the right height rings to make it work. Maybe I should get a smaller objective scope.....duh.

  4. #3
    Senior Member Jared Bloomgren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    LH (Light Hunter)

    The Precision Matched rings are .87.

    Vortex Optics - Precision Matched Rings-30 mm .87 Inches

    I haven't put a cheek piece on this rifle. Honestly I have never used them and haven't had any trouble with accuracy. Yes, I know. I prolly don't know what I am missing!? lol...
    Jared "J-Rod" Bloomgren
    Rokslide Field Editor/Pro Staff/Blogger

  5. #4
    Administrator robby denning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    SE Idaho
    Posts
    4,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hey, good question 5miles. Jared, updated the article to include that.

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    182
    Post Thanks / Like
    How were the adjustments on the turrets? Precise and repeatable?

  7. #6
    Senior Member Jared Bloomgren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes and with solid clicks that are easy to feel.
    Jared "J-Rod" Bloomgren
    Rokslide Field Editor/Pro Staff/Blogger

  8. Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post
  9. #7
    Super Moderator Justin Crossley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Buckley, WA
    Posts
    3,165
    Post Thanks / Like
    Jared,

    Walk us through your process of testing the tracking on this scope. Are you box testing, or do you prefer another method? Also, you said that you tested it out to around 5oo yds or so. Did you dial for those, or use the reticle?

    Thanks!
    "You can't have a good day with a bad attitude, and you can't have a bad day with a good attitude".

    justin@rokslide.com

  10. Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
  11. #8
    Senior Member Jared Bloomgren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Crossley View Post
    Jared,

    Walk us through your process of testing the tracking on this scope. Are you box testing, or do you prefer another method? Also, you said that you tested it out to around 5oo yds or so. Did you dial for those, or use the reticle?

    Thanks!
    Justin, testing the tracking of a scope is an article that Rokslide should look at publishing. There are many out there that have no idea what it is and how to do it. I didn't want to muddy the waters if you will! Box testing is fairly easy to do and it would make a great article. Hint Hint Robby! lol....Lets maybe save diving into that for another article shall we?

    But yes, I did a mock up box test with this riflescope and it seemed to track fairly good. It also returned to zero multiple times during the testing and the scope remained with rounds impacting within a 1" square at all times at 100 yards. For most hunters who shoot inside of 600 yards this is pretty good.

    Since I wanted to use this scope without having to dial turrets due to the lack of external turrets and that the turrets are capped I determined where each reference mark would impact a target out to a little over 500 yards. I then wrote down what each reference point would be for yardage. The G4 reticle worked well for this.
    Jared "J-Rod" Bloomgren
    Rokslide Field Editor/Pro Staff/Blogger

  12. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like
    Curious, has anyone compared this to the Nikon Monarch 5 ED 3-15?

    Although the Razor is a 'higher end' scope, they seem like natural competitors.

  13. #10
    Senior Member Bwana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Deep in the Timber
    Posts
    225
    Post Thanks / Like
    Anyone ever get to compare this Razor against a Leupold VX-6 series ?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •