Rifle Scopes Going from Razor gen 6-36x to LHT 4.5-22x

[Rodney65]

Question for anyone who has used these scopes side by side.

I am thinking of downgrading my gen 3 6-36x to an LHT 4.5-22x, mainly to save weight. The 6-36x has features I don't really need such as a quick rezeroing, loads of magnification, loads of elevation travel, and an exposed windage adjustment. I appreciate these features it's just that I can live without them.

Things I don't want to lose out much on are optical clarity, low light performance, easy to use illumination and elevation adjustments, and an easy to see reticle.

I find on 6x the gen 3 reticle is a bit difficult to see unless it is illuminated especially in bushes and what not. I had thought the LHT had a thicker reticle but it seems to be identical which I find a bit concerning for a scope that goes down to 4.5x. Also the illumination control sounds weird to me and I haven't seen what the rev indicator looks like if you go above one rev/6 mrad.

Would I be disappointed in making this transition based on my criteria?

 

[dgheriani]

I have both and they fill very different niches. IMO the only reason to go from a Gen 3 to the LHT is because you want/need to drop weight (as it weights half what a Gen 3 does). So if dropping that weight is really critical to you, then go for it, otherwise there is no reason to do so. The turrets are far nicer on the Gen 3, the glass is better, illumination control is better and maybe most importantly field of view is way better as well. The LHT makes design compromises to hit a target weight whereas the Gen 3 maximizes features regardless of weight. I don't think there is a readily available scope that weighs as little as the LHT does and has the same features but if you don't need to drop 20oz+ you might be better served with something in between the 2 in the 30oz+ weight range that a lot of higher end tactical scopes exist in. Vortex doesn't have anything like that, sadly, in its Razor line.

 

[stanley_white]

If you want to lose weight and have a reticle you can see in bushes the Leupold MK5 5-25x56mm with the .1 MRAD thick Illuminated TMR will work.

-Stan

 

[Rodney65]

I have both and they fill very different niches. IMO the only reason to go from a Gen 3 to the LHT is because you want/need to drop weight (as it weights half what a Gen 3 does). So if dropping that weight is really critical to you, then go for it, otherwise there is no reason to do so. The turrets are far nicer on the Gen 3, the glass is better, illumination control is better and maybe most importantly field of view is way better as well. The LHT makes design compromises to hit a target weight whereas the Gen 3 maximizes features regardless of weight. I don't think there is a readily available scope that weighs as little as the LHT does and has the same features but if you don't need to drop 20oz+ you might be better served with something in between the 2 in the 30oz+ weight range that a lot of higher end tactical scopes exist in. Vortex doesn't have anything like that, sadly, in its Razor line.

Thank you very much for the reply. It's exactly the information I was looking for. I wasn't sure if the LHT was 90% of the gen 3 at half the weight and a better price or as you said just a lot less scope.

 

[Rodney65]

If you want to lose weight and have a reticle you can see in bushes the Leupold MK5 5-25x56mm with the .1 MRAD thick Illuminated TMR will work.

-Stan

Those seem worth considering. I'm not a huge fan of the 35 mm tubes or that exact style of reticle but they check a lot of boxes.

I like all the features of my Bushnell DMRII-i but the optical clarity is quite poor.