Got a Vortex Viper 1-6 and Razor HD 1-6 Gen 2-E. The talk about the Viper being 80% of a Razor for 50% of the cost is very accurate. I like the Razor a bit more but the Viper seems like a steal.
Got a Vortex Viper 1-6 and Razor HD 1-6 Gen 2-E. The talk about the Viper being 80% of a Razor for 50% of the cost is very accurate. I like the Razor a bit more but the Viper seems like a steal.
I guess I should elaborate on my last cause I hate when people make "x is better than y" posts but don't explain.
1. Razor build quality just feels better (this is super subjective and is probably influenced by knowing that there are SOF units using these)
2. Clicks feel similarly tactile but not overly stiff like on my Viper. The Viper felt fine just playing around with the scope indoors but making adjustments with in 100 degree heat with sweaty hands, it wasn't good. Not a big deal because for me adjusting the LPVO turrets is an admin task.
3. Razor is a bit shorter, the Viper is pretty long. When I had the Viper on the gun I didn't think the length would matter to me at all given that the gun is already long, but for some reason I do actually like that the scope is a little shorter.
4. In theory the Razor may be more durable but that's basically not a consideration IMO, given that I'm not privy to any kind of comparative testing data to actually prove that. This is totally conjecture.
5. Locking illumination is nice.
6. On 1x through the Razor, the "ring" of the ocular looks thinner than with the Viper.
7. The Razor glass looks just a tiny bit better than the Viper glass to me. Again I think it is very likely that my perception of this is influenced by knowing the price points and knowing where the scopes are made. If I were to double blind test the scopes, I don't think most people would be able to tell.
Reticle wise I'm torn. I got JM1 for the Razor cause it's what I found a deal on, but some part of me thinks the MRAD is better because the JM1 reticle doesn't really give you anything to work with for windage holds. Even with the MRAD I kind of don't like that you're just holding off in space vs having some kind of Christmas tree or or wind dots like on the 1-10 BDC reticle. All that being said, it's a SFP scope and I'm using it on a gun with a 14.5" chrome lined barrel, so the idea that I'm going to read the wind and get first round hits at long distance is a little questionable. Maybe the better solution is just learning the holds with a system like holding left 1/4 of target, left edge, etc. which will work on any magnification vs just 6x.
Between the two scopes the eyebox feels the same BUT I haven't tested it properly, just going off my perception. I've noticed that when people compare eyeboxes across scopes, it's like chicks measuring dicks (pardon the crude simile), they have 0 frame of reference for how the subjective impressions line up with measurable reality. So you end up with people saying that X scope feels the same as Y scope when the exit pupil is different, or you get people saying X scope is better than Y scope but the exit pupil is totally the same.
Last edited by Eyesquared; 06-26-2021 at 12:02 PM.
I'll add onto this and say it seems like people are far more prone to hyperbole with the internet culture so if the eyebox on one scope isn't that good you'll have people say "That has the worst eyebox ever." or if the eyebox on something is good it will be "This eyebox is insane!" and then it will become a meme and everyone will believe it.Originally Posted by Eyesquared
I really think the only way to know if you'll like a scope is to go try one out so buy from a company with a good return policy online or go in person.
I did a rather sloppy 100 yd zero on the 16” BCM/Viper 1-6 combo. I realized I have a lot to learn about proper scope placement especially with an adjustable stock.
Is there a best practice for this? It just seems like I am nearly always in the wrong place. It makes me want to just put a fixed stock on. Plus the distance from my eye to scope
seems to change from standing to prone.
Any guidance appreciated I don’t know my head from a hole in the ground in figuring out fore-aft placement of the scope.
Current set up with kiddo.
edited to add: I am going to read through this article.
https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/h...a-rifle-scope/
After reading that I see my main issue is I don’t really know where I want my adjustable stock to sit. I can mount the optic properly, I am just not experienced enough with ARs to pick a setting on the stock, which is a whole different issue. My prior red dot experience never made me have to commit before!
Last edited by Doc_Glock; 06-29-2021 at 09:37 PM.
Kyle Defoor has a good video or two on YouTube about this. Retractable AR stocks will generally work best extended as far as possible, while still being comfortable. If you’re five foot nothing, having it all the way out will likely not be ideal. Same if you’re six five and have it fully collapsed. I’m 72” even, have average wingspan for my height, and prefer it one click in unless I’m in armor, then I drop it two clicks in. I mark the location on my buffer tube with a paint pen so that I don’t have to count every time. Vortex scopes (viper 1-6, razor 1-6, razor 1-10) tend to have the start of the ocular lens about even with the end plate for me. Then from there, it’s diopter adjustment. Once that’s done, I also mark that with a paint pen.I did a rather sloppy 100 yd zero on the 16” BCM/Viper 1-6 combo. I realized I have a lot to learn about proper scope placement especially with an adjustable stock.
Is there a best practice for this? It just seems like I am nearly always in the wrong place. It makes me want to just put a fixed stock on. Plus the distance from my eye to scope
seems to change from standing to prone.
Any guidance appreciated I don’t know my head from a hole in the ground in figuring out fore-aft placement of the scope.
Current set up with kiddo.
edited to add: I am going to read through this article.
https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/h...a-rifle-scope/
After reading that I see my main issue is I don’t really know where I want my adjustable stock to sit. I can mount the optic properly, I am just not experienced enough with ARs to pick a setting on the stock, which is a whole different issue. My prior red dot experience never made me have to commit before!
ETA - I’ve also never shot NTCH style with an optic. Seeing a difference in positions is not uncommon, and you’ll definitely see a difference in eye box at differing zoom levels.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks. It looks like standard A2 length is 13.5”. I measured a bunch of long guns in the safe and they were all 13-13.5” and I bet the designers know a thing or two. I stand 73” but usually run my AR stocks pretty short, 11.5-12” or so. The 1301 is as short as possible at 12.5”
Sounds like I should standardize to a longer LOP on the ARs as I am a pretty typical ~6” 70kg male that most models are designed around. At least they were back in the day.
I'm kind of done with anything below a Vortex Razor at this point, and have seen some recent failures on the Gen II Razors. They have great marketing, a good warranty, but I their products just don't hold up that well.
Based on issues I have personally had, I have moved to the high end Bushnell and Burris stuff for that price point, and have never had an issue with any Nightforce products for the pro grade applications.. One of my Nighforce scopes is 22 years old and works like new.
-Seconds Count. Misses Don't-
What problems are you seeing?
Agreed with their marketing. Leupold certainly could have taken a lesson with regard to the Redfield line of budget imports.
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
A good friend had one fail on his SCAR-17, which are notorious for being hard on scopes, and another shooter had the reticle go wonky on a 5.56 AR.
-Seconds Count. Misses Don't-
I don't know if I'd condemn the Razor based on SCAR. As you note that gun is known to kill optics.
That's one thing about Leupold. Love them or hate them they do have a reputation for durability.
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote