-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes LPVO ATACR 1-8 vs RZR Gen 3 1-10
- Thread starter TEzNJ
- Start date
I've owned both. The 1x on the Razor Gen 3 isn't as crisp (I don't know the technical term) as the 1x as the ATACR. I also prefer the FCDMx reticle in the ATACR.
The decision point for me with the Gen 3 was that the 1x made me want a 45 degree micro where the ATACR does not. Just my two cents.
The decision point for me with the Gen 3 was that the 1x made me want a 45 degree micro where the ATACR does not. Just my two cents.
I have used both, and we sell both. All other things being equal, the ATACR is the standard for LPVO, in my opinion, from which I measure all other scopes. If one could own just one scope, and could afford it, it would be the ATACR 1-8x. It handles true 1x like a red dot, and zooms to 8x, which is what military snipers were using 25 years ago. Now, if you are running long range, beyond 600m, you will want another scope.
That being said, one of the reasons I prefer the NF is that it is so damn durable. You cannot hurt it. The turrets click with purpose. I think the optics are pretty much on par with the Razor, although, I have seen less chromatic distortion with the NF, but to compare the optics is like asking how many angels dance on the head of the pin. The next guy will swear that the Razor is better, so let's call them equal. The Razor does get you to 10x, so that is a nice thing.
Now, I am a scope snob and always a learner. I think I know a thing or two, but there are many more people who know more than me. For example, we recently started carrying ZCO scopes, and I have come to know Nick and Jeff, and to hear them talk about what is sacrificed as a scope manufacturer ventures out in the zoom beyond 6-7x has opened my eyes to say, you cannot get everything you want, and when you have 10x zoom, you are sacrificing something. but, you are getting 10x zoom.
From a practical standpoint, you can only get so much distortion at 8x or 10x, and both scopes have a very large eyebox and the ability to use two eye open shooting at 1x, so they are very similar. The three things I would look at are:
1) do you want or need a scope that you can throw in the mud and pick it up and keep working without question? If so, get the ATACR.
2) do you want or need that extra 10x power? If so, get the Razor.
3) which reticle are you going to be the most comfortable with. This is probably the best question. Take a look at both online. This becomes very personal. A scope and the reticle must fit the shooter.
To me, both scopes look good, perform well, and have nice clicks. We have seen some of the higher magnification Razors not do so well in the field. Either you get a good one or you don't and Vortex warranty is super, so you can get a new one if yours is DOA. We have not seen the same issues with the LPVO Razors. They seem to have a failure rate that is very small.
That being said, one of the reasons I prefer the NF is that it is so damn durable. You cannot hurt it. The turrets click with purpose. I think the optics are pretty much on par with the Razor, although, I have seen less chromatic distortion with the NF, but to compare the optics is like asking how many angels dance on the head of the pin. The next guy will swear that the Razor is better, so let's call them equal. The Razor does get you to 10x, so that is a nice thing.
Now, I am a scope snob and always a learner. I think I know a thing or two, but there are many more people who know more than me. For example, we recently started carrying ZCO scopes, and I have come to know Nick and Jeff, and to hear them talk about what is sacrificed as a scope manufacturer ventures out in the zoom beyond 6-7x has opened my eyes to say, you cannot get everything you want, and when you have 10x zoom, you are sacrificing something. but, you are getting 10x zoom.
From a practical standpoint, you can only get so much distortion at 8x or 10x, and both scopes have a very large eyebox and the ability to use two eye open shooting at 1x, so they are very similar. The three things I would look at are:
1) do you want or need a scope that you can throw in the mud and pick it up and keep working without question? If so, get the ATACR.
2) do you want or need that extra 10x power? If so, get the Razor.
3) which reticle are you going to be the most comfortable with. This is probably the best question. Take a look at both online. This becomes very personal. A scope and the reticle must fit the shooter.
To me, both scopes look good, perform well, and have nice clicks. We have seen some of the higher magnification Razors not do so well in the field. Either you get a good one or you don't and Vortex warranty is super, so you can get a new one if yours is DOA. We have not seen the same issues with the LPVO Razors. They seem to have a failure rate that is very small.
Every time I look through the NF at 1x I wonder "why do people buy this?"
I keep thinking it'll be better next time I look through one, but it never gets better.
I keep thinking it'll be better next time I look through one, but it never gets better.
Have both. Run both. 1x on Vortex has zero tunnel/ring. Scope just disappears. Black ring on ATACR at 1x is very visible and intrusive. Vortex is more crisp and contrasty at all magnifications. VO is bigger, but NF has noticeably better / more forgiving eyebox at max magnification. VO at 10x requires effort to keep open.
DMX reticle beats VO by a nose.
DMX reticle beats VO by a nose.
You don't happen to also have a S&B 1-8 in your bag of toys that you could compare to the others, do you?
I do, but haven’t really done a direct comparison. The SB CC is a monster. I think it has, hands down, the best glass and least distortion of any LPVO.
I liked this comment. But I also dislike it, because I am now tempted to live with only one kidney.
For the idiotic money Schmidt is charging these days it damn well better.
I’ve had the ATACR for over a year now. I don’t have any experience with the razor.
I have zero issues with the ATACR. Most of my optics don’t last that long before switching to something else, so that says a lot for me to spend this kind of cash and not be willing to let it go.
I have zero issues with the ATACR. Most of my optics don’t last that long before switching to something else, so that says a lot for me to spend this kind of cash and not be willing to let it go.
I bought an NX8 and Razor3 when both were relatively new to the market. both have their advantages. I used both in an advanced carbine class the summer of 2020.
if length and weight are the primary concern then the NX8 is a really great choice. (I had the first gen reticle)
for everything else the Razor is the clear choice for me - I've replace that NX8 with another Razor3. I've only had minimal time with the ATACR and it looks like an absolute winner. However, the Vortex is less expensive and neither have the compact footprint of the NX8. both companies have stellar reputation for customer support - I don't think there is a wrong choice, just depends on your budget & use case.
if length and weight are the primary concern then the NX8 is a really great choice. (I had the first gen reticle)
for everything else the Razor is the clear choice for me - I've replace that NX8 with another Razor3. I've only had minimal time with the ATACR and it looks like an absolute winner. However, the Vortex is less expensive and neither have the compact footprint of the NX8. both companies have stellar reputation for customer support - I don't think there is a wrong choice, just depends on your budget & use case.
Once you add an ATACR or Razor weight class LPVO, a light, a can, etc. what was a light carbine becomes fairly heavy.
The Vortex is superior to the ATACR8 in every way, despite what people here type.
I would say that they are priced too high especially with a weak illuminator. Are they substandard? That is debatable. Glass wise it is clean and bright, I am very happy with the glass (subjective). The eye box is forgiving and easy/quick to get behind. My big issue is the illuminator is only good in lower light situations, other than that it is a really nice optic.
Just my .02
The grey (partially transparent) reticle of the 1-10 makes it suck for precision shooting at closer ranges.
I’ve had both and now use the NF 1-8 exclusively.
The Vortex 1-6 is better on 1X and 6X than the vortex 1-10.
I’ve had both and now use the NF 1-8 exclusively.
The Vortex 1-6 is better on 1X and 6X than the vortex 1-10.
We have new and demo Vortex Razor gen III 1-10's and the FDE ATACR 1-8 in stock right now 
If anyone needs some assistance on either model or to grab one than please PM us or call 916-670-1103.
If anyone needs some assistance on either model or to grab one than please PM us or call 916-670-1103.
I have pretty much every top tier LPVO except the ATACR. I have done side by side testing with them and included my buddies ATACR so I am very familiar with it. When I get around to it I’ll post me summary, but the short version is the Razor 1-6x has the best eyebox bar none. Of the 1-8x the ATACR is the best followed by S&B dual CC then Kahles. The Razor G3 1-10x is about middle of the road for eyebox, same for the March shorty dual focal plane.
That being said when I went to purchase another LPVO I got a second Razor G3. Every LPVO is a compromise (including the S&B), but I find it has the best all around features. What kills the ATACR for me is the tunneling at 1x. It feels a lot tighter then it is and I am not impressed with the glass. The image on the Vortex is huge and the tube almost goes away, so it feels more forgiving even though technically it isn’t. It is super tight at 10x, but when I use that much magnification I have a pretty stable shorting platform so it’s kind of moot.
That being said when I went to purchase another LPVO I got a second Razor G3. Every LPVO is a compromise (including the S&B), but I find it has the best all around features. What kills the ATACR for me is the tunneling at 1x. It feels a lot tighter then it is and I am not impressed with the glass. The image on the Vortex is huge and the tube almost goes away, so it feels more forgiving even though technically it isn’t. It is super tight at 10x, but when I use that much magnification I have a pretty stable shorting platform so it’s kind of moot.
I really appreciate your insight, it has been very helpful reading your insights. I am trying to buy the best option for my JP 223. I am also looking at the NF atacr, vortex razor 1-10 or the new Kahles 1-8 version 2 coming out shortly. With that being said, do you think the Kahles will be any better than the NF and/or Vortex? I sincerely appreciate your expertise. Thank you!
I do. S&B better glass and no CA. Eye box equal’ish. Ocular does not disappear on the S&B as much as the Vortex or Eotech. Illumination is best on the Vortex. ATACR is my least favorite of the 3 but then again I like the Eotech 1-10 as much as the Vortex if not slight better, so I’m weird.
I’ll end of with a March G2 at some point, if I can find a deal. Could be the ticket.
Ive heard good things about the March, i believe they're discontinued, and you are very limited on rings since the front tube diameter is 33mm
They replaced it with a model that uses a straight 34mm tube. Everything else is the same.
Of all of the high end LPVOs I have tried, the best was the S&B CC 1-8x24 in terms of image quality. ATACR is great except on 1x. Tunneling annoys me. The new Dual Focal Plane Steiner M8Xi is spectacular optically (almost as good as S&B), but the Plumb reticle is a deal breaker for me. After all the experimentation, I ended up keeping Razor Gen3 although it was a very close call with March 1-10x24 Shorty. I finally decided i like the wider FOV of the Razor. In lower price ranges, I also have PA PLxC 1-8x24, SAI6 1-6x24 and now Delta Stryker 1-10x24. I think all of these are staying here.
ILya
