LPVOs in 2023 and beyond

[Nephrology]

I'm using the Aimpoint 3x-C magnifier. I've tried the "military" 3xmag-1 with the same setup and didn't find enough advantage (or really any) to justify the additional cost.

I like that I get true red dot capabilities with the added ability to see and identify further. I've had some of the best LPVOs and even the ones with the most generous eye box just can't compete with an Aimpoint when it comes to weird firing positions where you may not be able to get your head lined up perfectly. The magnifier flipping to the center instead of off to the side is a game changer to me. Other than the additional weight, you don't notice its there like you do with flip to side mounts that affect the balance of the gun and your field of view.

The setup is a bit lighter than even the lightest LPVO + mount setups, and I can pop the magnifier off to shave more weight if I won't need it AND includes BUIS (although I run a fixed front instead of the built in front). It also gives me the ability to share one magnifier across multiple guns, although I'll probably buy another at some point.

It obviously won't be as good at ranging as a scope with a reticle designed for that, but I live in a mostly urban setting where I'm very unlikely to have to engage anything past 100 yards.

With that in mind, what do you feel the Vortex 1-10 offers that the other scopes you mention do not (beyond the obvious 10x high end mag, I guess)

[joshs]

I've definitely thought about going with a higher mag scope and using an offset RDS for true 1x. I've been poking around for candidates - the trijicon Credo 2-10x36 so far is the most appealing (FFP, illuminated, 23oz). Would be nice to get the mag up to 15 or so on the higher end but seems hard to do without going with a much heavier or much more expensive scope.

The Athlon Midas Tac 4-16x44 fits most of your criteria, but it isn't illuminated. If you want an illuminated scope, then there are definitely some cost/weight penalties in that magnification range.

[Mitch]

Has anyone used both a PST gen 2 1-6 and a Razor? Is the Razor really worth 2.5x more?

[dontshakepandas]

With that in mind, what do you feel the Vortex 1-10 offers that the other scopes you mention do not (beyond the obvious 10x high end mag, I guess)

I think it just does the best job of combining usability at 1x and 6x or higher. Since that gun is my "longer ranged" focused gun I prefer the FFP reticle for the ability to use it at any magnification, but it also gives up VERY little at 1x especially with the illumination on. I cross shopped the Nightforce ATACR 1-8, but never haven't shot with it. I picked the Razor for the extra magnification, lower cost, and finer aiming point. For a 5.56 gun I really don't need more magnification than 10x, so being able to have that along with the 1x performance of the 1-6 model was pretty appealing.

For my use, I wasn't comparing the Razor 1-10 directly with the Kahles and Razor though. If I was the primary use case was going to be 1x running and gunning type use I would prefer to go with a SFP reticle and something that weighs a little less. Ultimately those options got beat out by the RDS + magnifier and not the Razor 1-10 since I would use them for different purposes. That said, the only place I feel like the Razor 1-10 really loses out at 1x is with no illumination so you really aren't giving up much with that choice if the extra few ounces doesn't bother you.

[joshs]

Has anyone used both a PST gen 2 1-6 and a Razor? Is the Razor really worth 2.5x more?

The PST gen 2 is certainly the better value. The Razor is a little bit "flatter" on 1x with better FOV and a little clearer. The Razor also has a longer track record from a durability standpoint, but I haven't heard of many problems with the PST Gen 2s. That said, I still have the Razor Gen IIE and I sold the PST, so . . .

[Nephrology]

The PST gen 2 is certainly the better value. The Razor is a little bit "flatter" on 1x with better FOV and a little clearer. The Razor also has a longer track record from a durability standpoint, but I haven't heard of many problems with the PST Gen 2s. That said, I still have the Razor Gen IIE and I sold the PST, so . . .

Durability would be the biggest reason to upgrade from the PST line for me. That said, I just got a PST 3-15x44 in from Europtic (on sale for $600) and they can build a really build scope in the Phillipines... my only concerns re:durability come from reading too much Snipershide, where seemingly every scope manages to break eventually.

[joshs]

Durability would be the biggest reason to upgrade from the PST line for me. That said, I just got a PST 3-15x44 in from Europtic (on sale for $600) and they can build a really build scope in the Phillipines... my only concerns re:durability come from reading too much Snipershide, where seemingly every scope manages to break eventually.

That's a great deal on the 3-15. I was going to suggest that in addition to the Athlon, but I don't have any experience with the 3-15 (just the 1-6 and 5-25).

[Nephrology]

That's a great deal on the 3-15. I was going to suggest that in addition to the Athlon, but I don't have any experience with the 3-15 (just the 1-6 and 5-25).

I was really curious to try the Meopta Optika6 3-18 as SportsOptics have the MRAD FFP in stock for ~$650 after their discount but I don't have a gun I can justify buying it for :P

I did briefly consider the PST II for the 16" AR but it would be a porker with an offset dot. I do appreciate that the gun handles very well with the PST 1-6 on it, even with bipod. Wouldn't want any replacement optic(s) to be substantially heavier.

[joshs]

I was really curious to try the Meopta Optika6 3-18 as SportsOptics have the MRAD FFP in stock for ~$650 after their discount but I don't have a gun I can justify buying it for :P

I did briefly consider the PST II for the 16" AR but it would be a porker with an offset dot. I do appreciate that the gun handles very well with the PST 1-6 on it, even with bipod. Wouldn't want any replacement optic(s) to be substantially heavier.

That's why I like the US Optics TS-12. It's light and compact, so it doesn't completely change the handling of a relatively light weight carbine.

[Nephrology]

That's why I like the US Optics TS-12. It's light and compact, so it doesn't completely change the handling of a relatively light weight carbine.

It's priced very competitively... how does it compare vs. the trijicon?