Scope selection... I have to ask.

[R_burg]

Why do Vortex Vipers have a great reputation on the tactical and long range side? Do these guys research glass at all?

Its fairly agreed upon in the birding / bino / spotting scope world that Vortex Vipers and below have mediocre glass and are marketed very well, hence their popularity. It seems like tactical and long range guys didn't get the memo, because when I research scopes I see tons of recommendations for Vortex PST's.

I have one, a 2.5-10. Its mediocre glass. I am going to sell it. It doesn't handle CA very well, its certainly not clear edge to edge, and at 10x I feel the clarity drops a noticeable amount. IMO the edge to edge and CA issues are prevalent in all of Vortex's glass below the Razor line (I've owned them). I think the Razor is a big step up. For Binos and spotters I would still go a different direction than the Razor line. For scopes I am considering them.

The reason I ask is, I am in the market for two scopes, a mid range 3-15 FFP (leaning towards the SWFA SS) and higher end, but not highest end (aka Burris XTR II 5-25, Vortex Razor HD Gen 1 5-20 or the like) scope and the general consensus that the Viper line has good glass and is fairly highly recommended really makes me wonder if I can trust any of these reviews and forum opinions I am reading. I live in major metro area and I still can't see all these scopes next to each other, so one way or another I'm taking a leap here.

Thanks for any opinions.

 

[Boman]

The reason that Vipers (Pst) get the recommendations is because they are fairly reliable when twisting turrets. Which for many guys outweighs the glass quality. I can tell you that the Burris XTR 2 glass is much better and while they haven't been around long enough to show long term reliability they have shown promise. I can't comment on the Thunder chickens..but they have a very solid reputation for reliability and decent glass. I would put the Razor gen 1 right with the Burris for my eyes.

I know not being able to compare them side by side is frustrating I like to do that as well but sometimes you have to take the leap. Good luck

 

[gumbl3]

I agree, for the MSRP of the PST I've seen VX-6, HD-5, Mark IV on sale that blow that scope away

 

[Jon Boy]

The reason that Vipers (Pst) get the recommendations is because they are fairly reliable when twisting turrets. Which for many guys outweighs the glass quality.

This..



Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

 

[R_burg]

The reason that Vipers (Pst) get the recommendations is because they are fairly reliable when twisting turrets. Which for many guys outweighs the glass quality. I can tell you that the Burris XTR 2 glass is much better and while they haven't been around long enough to show long term reliability they have shown promise. I can't comment on the Thunder chickens..but they have a very solid reputation for reliability and decent glass. I would put the Razor gen 1 right with the Burris for my eyes.

I know not being able to compare them side by side is frustrating I like to do that as well but sometimes you have to take the leap. Good luck

Haha, the thunder chickens are the SWFA, right? Thats funny.

My personal 2.5-10 PST doesnt track that well tbh and I have read other people with such problems, so its hard to even understand the reliability portion. I know I can send it back, but given that I am not impressed with the glass I'd rather sell it and just buy something else. I do understand they are 'feature rich' for the price point, but IMO you gotta back it up with glass. What good is ED if its only good in the center and gets worse when you zoom?


Anyway, I digress. I guess my issue is I am looking for reliable reviews and with so many people liking the Viper glass, I just cant trust them.


Would you suggest I take any other scopes or manufacturers into consideration? I am hesitant to ask on the tactical and long range forums, as I dont want to come off as an a-hole when I have to preface my request for suggestions with a statement that boils down to: If you like Vortex Viper glass, I probably will not agree with your assessment of other glass. Rokslide is more open to discussions like this, and has a lot of glass-snobs, so I trust people's opinions.

I agree, for the MSRP of the PST I've seen VX-6, HD-5, Mark IV on sale that blow that scope away

I went and compared scopes (I need a hunting optic as well, haha) and the VX-3i and the Monarch 5 were a step up from the Viper lineup in my opinion. You didnt even have to go to a VX-6 or the like.

 

[Formidilosus]

To preface- I like the people at Vortex and I like the company. I think the new Fury BRF will be a very good entry, and somewhere that their warranty really pays off.


Having said that, Vortex gets by on their marketing and warranty. They give up correct functioning, reliability and durability for features. Between myself and buddies, we've used several dozen Vortex scopes and every single one has failed- from the PST's to the Razor.


I see and shoot most scopes made. The ones that work without issue-

Nightforce NXS/ATACR and the SHV's have done well also.
SWFA SS Series
Bushnell LRHS, HDMR, ERS, XRS


The Swarovski X5's seem to do well as a dedicated LR scope, however the design doesn't interest me.



The only Leupolds that truly work are the fixed power Mark 4's. Swarovski does not make a scope other than the X5's that will withstand dialing. The same goes for Zeiss, Nikon, etc. etc. "Hunting" scopes aren't made to dial. Nor are they made to take much abuse. Scopes have to be designed and built specifically to dial and be robust. Not just slapping a turret on a rebranded hunting scope.

 

[Jon Boy]

The leupys are a definite step up in glass but have a bad reputation in tracking reliability

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

 

[R_burg]

The reason that Vipers (Pst) get the recommendations is because they are fairly reliable when twisting turrets. Which for many guys outweighs the glass quality. I can tell you that the Burris XTR 2 glass is much better and while they haven't been around long enough to show long term reliability they have shown promise. I can't comment on the Thunder chickens..but they have a very solid reputation for reliability and decent glass. I would put the Razor gen 1 right with the Burris for my eyes.

I know not being able to compare them side by side is frustrating I like to do that as well but sometimes you have to take the leap. Good luck

To preface- I like the people at Vortex and I like the company. I think the new Fury BRF will be a very good entry, and somewhere that their warranty really pays off.


Having said that, Vortex gets by on their marketing and warranty. They give up correct functioning, reliability and durability for features. Between myself and buddies, we've used several dozen Vortex scopes and every single one has failed- from the PST's to the Razor.


I see and shoot most scopes made. The ones that work without issue-

Nightforce NXS/ATACR and the SHV's have done well also.
SWFA SS Series
Bushnell LRHS, HDMR, ERS, XRS


The Swarovski X5's seem to do well as a dedicated LR scope, however the design doesn't interest me.



The only Leupolds that truly work are the fixed power Mark 4's. Swarovski does not make a scope other than the X5's that will withstand dialing. The same goes for Zeiss, Nikon, etc. etc. "Hunting" scopes aren't made to dial. Nor are they made to take much abuse. Scopes have to be designed and built specifically to dial and be robust. Not just slapping a turret on a rebranded hunting scope.

I want to pick up the 3-15 SS for my AR, so I am glad to hear that. I shoot MOA so the Bushnells are out, unfortunately. The Nightforce is out of my price range for my foray into this. Eventually, maybe.

Do you mind going into detail about the Razor? Did it have tracking issues? I was hoping the Gen I razor and the XTR II would be decent enough glass and track well enough that I could get one of those for now, and look to move up in the future. They both hold their value as long as you pay a fair price. Anything you can say about these scopes? Please be detailed and feel free to be positive and negative, I would like honest opinions.

The leupys are a definite step up in glass but have a bad reputation in tracking reliability

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

Yeah, I am looking at the VX-3i with a CDS dial for a hunting scope and I am hoping that the tracking reliability is small enough it wont really matter on 400 yard and under shots.

 

[Formidilosus]

I want to pick up the 3-15 SS for my AR, so I am glad to hear that. I shoot MOA so the Bushnells are out, unfortunately. The Nightforce is out of my price range for my foray into this. Eventually, maybe.


Do you mind going into detail about the Razor? Did it have tracking issues? I was hoping the Gen I razor and the XTR II would be decent enough glass and track well enough that I could get one of those for now, and look to move up in the future. They both hold their value as long as you pay a fair price. Anything you can say about these scopes? Please be detailed and feel free to be positive and negative, I would like honest opinions.








Yeah, I am looking at the VX-3i with a CDS dial for a hunting scope and I am hoping that the tracking reliability is small enough it wont really matter on 400 yard and under shots.

Well, for one I would highly encourage you to make the move to mil/mil. There are significantly more options, it's an easier system to learn and teach, and the community (LR field shooting) has made it the standard.






As for the Razors-


1x Razor 5-20x that lost zero twice and also had an intermittent zero shift of between .2-.4 mils


1x Razor 5-20x catastrophically lost zero (over 3 mils) and then had the parallax adjustment lock up.


1x Razor 1-4x that had a lens rotate 45 degrees and fall.


Multiple Razors that had between 5% and 10% tracking errors.








The Burris XTR's have had issues as well. Point in fact I was talking with a Burris rep about issues, with him denying of course, and he started talking up the 1-8x. I looked through it and said "so, is the reticle supposed to be all the way the left of the FOV?"...... (lens had shifted and fallen). He mumbled that it wasn't like that an hour ago and stopped talking.




Scopes are the main point of failures with rifles. The ones I recommended I did so for a reason. I did not leave any out.

 

[WRO]

Formildosious,

Have you looked/used the Kahles PMR series, specifically the 6x24 PMR?

 

[Formidilosus]

WRO,


I have. They were quite popular with PRS shooters for a bit, however they had/have quite a bit of problems.

 

[Clarktar]

I have only ever used and am familiar with MOA. It seemed fairly easy for me to understand. Hate the idea of switching and having to learn something new, but maybe I will/should.

 

[WRO]

WRO,


I have. They were quite popular with PRS shooters for a bit, however they had/have quite a bit of problems.

What kind of problems, Granted my experience is with the newest generation, but I haven't heard any complaints or problems yet.

 

[R_burg]

Well, for one I would highly encourage you to make the move to mil/mil. There are significantly more options, it's an easier system to learn and teach, and the community (LR field shooting) has made it the standard.

As for the Razors-

1x Razor 5-20x that lost zero twice and also had an intermittent zero shift of between .2-.4 mils

1x Razor 5-20x catastrophically lost zero (over 3 mils) and then had the parallax adjustment lock up.

1x Razor 1-4x that had a lens rotate 45 degrees and fall.

Multiple Razors that had between 5% and 10% tracking errors.

The Burris XTR's have had issues as well. Point in fact I was talking with a Burris rep about issues, with him denying of course, and he started talking up the 1-8x. I looked through it and said "so, is the reticle supposed to be all the way the left of the FOV?"...... (lens had shifted and fallen). He mumbled that it wasn't like that an hour ago and stopped talking.

Scopes are the main point of failures with rifles. The ones I recommended I did so for a reason. I did not leave any out.

Thank you for the response.

It always seemed daunting, but really this article makes it appear more basic than I thought.

Mils vs MOA which one is right for you ? - Sniper's Hide - Scout

 

[Formidilosus]

I have only ever used and am familiar with MOA. It seemed fairly easy for me to understand. Hate the idea of switching and having to learn something new, but maybe I will/should.

Thank you for the response.

It always seemed daunting, but really this article makes it appear more basic than I thought.

Mils vs MOA which one is right for you ? - Sniper's Hide - Scout

I hated mils when we got the first NF F1's. Within about an hour I never wanted to shoot an MOA scope again.

Switching to mils is the easiest thing in shooting. They are both angular measurements, neither is tied to the metric or imperial system, its just that one uses tenths.

 

[R_burg]

I hated mils when we got the first NF F1's. Within about an hour I never wanted to shoot an MOA scope again.

Switching to mils is the easiest thing in shooting. They are both angular measurements, neither is tied to the metric or imperial system, its just that one uses tenths.

I appreciate your insight. Out of curiosity, I have "heard" the new Sig Tango 6 is made by NF. Do you have any inside info if that is true or not? Also, do you have any opinion on Athlon? I know they are the new big thing on sniper's hide.

 

[Formidilosus]

The Sigs are definitely not made by NF. They do have some that are manufactured by LOW out of Japan however. LOW also manufacturers some NF, the Bushnell LRHS and HDMR/ERS/XRS, and most of the SWFA SS line. There's a common theme there....

As for the Sigs themselves... ehh. Man it's ALL about QC and I haven't seen anything that makes me think Sig is or will apply the same standards as the above mentioned companies/scopes.


Just say no to Athlon. Take to the bank that you do not get anything for free. Pick three- features, "glass", reliability/durability, price. If you have a scope that has all the features, good "glass" and a "good" price.... It's giving up the one that's left.

 

[WRO]

How about the March scopes?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Scottyboy]

How about the March scopes?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I recently went back and forth about 200 times between march, nightforce and swaro. Long story short I ended up with a X5 and a NXS/G7.

my only turn off for the march (well, 2 things I guess) is that I couldn't molest a scope before purchase and the limited warranty offered. Yes I know that statistically march has a low return rate (the exact number is posted on Bullets or march.com..I forget which) I just had a hard time dropping 2500 with the military discount without having the warm fuzzy from the factory. The magnification range and the glass is awfully appealing though..

 

[fightthenoise]

I get the LEO discount for Vortex stuff and I'm shopping for binos. I was just about to pull the trigger on Vipers and saw your post. After waffling back and forth between the Viper and Razor, is the Razor really worth the extra $500?