Vortex Razor Gen II 1-6 Review with some SR-15 thrown in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John10-19

@CS Tactical Have you been able to compare the eyebox of the Gen II-E to the original Gen II and the Nightforce 1-8 ATACR. I know eyebox is very subjective. I was impressed with the Gen II's eyebox and am interested if is has changed in the E version.

Thanks!
John

---

The Razor is functionally identical which is fantastic, I have not been able to compare them side by side but expect the ATACR to be just as awesome. Here's how I'd use them for example:
NX8 for an SBR, 16" and under lightweight setup, think of it as an Aimpoint Micro that has magnification IMO, great for a defensive/duty setup.
Vortex Razor Gen II HD-E for a General Purpose Rifle, 3 gun, Defensive/duty setup (and at a great price)
1-8 ATACR same as the Vortex with additional capabilities at medium to longer range distance with FFP 8x and the grid type reticle. Also very well suited to larger than 5.56 caliber semi-autos.

I'm a huge fan of the Vortex Razor 1-6. The glass is insanely clear, and I really like the Jerry Miculek helped design the reticle. The only criticism I have of it is that it's a little bit heavy compared to some other scopes, but I don't really mind the weight.

Haven't had a chance to compare NF options NX8/ATACR to the Razor Gen II-E. However, comparing the Razor to previous LPV's I've run, including my existing Leupy Mk IV 1.5-5, the Razor is a nice upgrade. Mainly for 3 reasons: true 1x, 6x is > 5x, and daylight bright illumination (that's always seemed to be a challenge for Leupy scopes).

What I still like better about the Mk IV: the horseshoe reticle (they call it "CMR-2"), the glass is subjectively slightly better at low/high magnification, and the scope is nearly 4oz lighter than the Razor (18oz vs 21.8 oz, unmounted).

Even with its limitations of 1.5x and not truly daylight bright reticle, the Mk IV is still so good that I will continue to run it on another rifle, even as I upgraded to the latest Razor 1-6.