I have one on my bolt gun. Short version:
The great: optical quality, eyebox, and reticle
The good: price, turrets, and parallax
The bad: nothing so far that I can see
Long version:
I've tried tons of different options in the $700-$2500 market and I think this is the best bang for the buck. Optically, it's in line with the Razor Gen 2, slightly (but noticeably) above the Cronus and SWFA HD level, and quite a bit above the XTRII/LRHS/etc. level. It holds excellent resolution all the way from 4.5-30x, which is nice, and very little CA.
Lots of adjustment range. With a 0 MOA mount, I have 16 mils of adjustment remaining.
Turrets are good, but not Kahles or TT level IMHO. The parallax is easy to use, but has a small range between 200 and infinity. The depth of field is small-ish at 30x which means you do have to use the knob a good bit (optically, that's just the nature of high magnification). But by the time you back down to around 22x-25x, the depth of field gets much, much larger, and adjustment is really easy. By the time you're at 15x, you hardly need the knob at all. The eye box is forgiving enough the knob easy enough to use that even at 30x, it's no problem to stay on the scope and adjust while looking through it. As for the >600 yards, it's fine. I've only shot mine to 800 yards so far, but played around with it out to about 1,200, and I maintain that it's right on par with the Razor Gen 2 for that whole range, at least IMHO.
As good as the optics are, the real treat with this scope is the LRD-1T reticle. Looking at it on the computer before I bought the scope, I was just kind of so-so on it. It's fine - not great but kind of confusing on all the marks less than 1 mil. But in real-world use, I've never seen a reticle that was so perfect in terms of being open around the center and drawing your focus to the target and having the perfect weight of dot to be use-able at 15x but still not too big at 30x. I spend most of my time with the gun at 22x-25x, and the dot and reticle as a whole are just amazing in that range. All this is coming from someone who loves the Razor Gen 2 optics and build quality, but can't really fall in love with any of their reticles.
Only had one match with it so far, but finished tied for 6th out of 30 shooters and was pretty happy with that. Cleaned the prone/bench stages, but the positional stuff always costs me some points. Speaking of positional, eye relief and eye box are similar to depth of field - a bit tight at 30x, but really forgiving by the time you drop down to 25x.
All in all, after having run an SWFA HD and Cronus for a long time and enjoying both of them, I tried hard to convince myself to spend $2500 on an ATACR or Minox, but just couldn't do it. After having bought the Stryker, I really don't even look at those as an upgrade anymore. I know they might be 1% better, but not worth anywhere near the price difference for a dad with kids who mostly just shoots as a hobby and enters a couple matches a year. As for the Cronus and SWFA HD, I sold them both pretty quickly after using the Stryker. It's just the perfect combination of reticle, optics, and price to suit what I do.
One last thing - the only scopes I can see competing well with this are the Razor Gen 2 (if you like the reticles) or the XTR3, if the optics are a major upgrade over the XTR2 (very interested to see). Otherwise, from a value standpoint, this scope is somewhat in a league of its own.
