- Apr 17, 2019
- 132
- 87
We just got a few more specs on these if you haven't seen them already. We can also do preorders with no money down. Check them out and let me know if you have any questions.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Got some info on Vortex's new Razor LHT scopes
- Thread starter JayseM_SportOptics
- Start date
- Apr 17, 2019
- 132
- 87
No. No we don’t. They’re impractical for most hunting applications. The only FFP hunter I’ve ever owned was a Schmidt. Sold it and went back to sfp after two hunts.
- Apr 17, 2019
- 132
- 87
Right there with you, Friend. All my hunting scopes are SFP and probably will be for the foreseeable future. FFP is fantastic, but certainly not ideal in the majority of hunting applications.
I guess that depends on where you live. FFP in WY where shots can be long is ideal, that way your wind holds remain the same no matter the magnification setting. If the farthest you shoot is 150yds, put the crosshair in the killzone and pull the trigger.
You don't speak for every hunter, there are plenty of hunters who've "seen the light" of the benefits of FFP scopes. While I agree with Jayse's comments above that "most hunters still don't prefer FFP" I believe it's in large part to tradition more than it is to reality.
I disagree with you here Jayse, there are definite advantages to hunting applications with FFP like any long range shooting. If all your shots are under 200 yards, you're probably fine with grandpappy's Redfield 3-9 scope, but the same benefits we choose a FFP for long range steel can help with hunting most any animal at longer ranges. If you choose the proper scope for your situation there should be no reason for "I missed the shot because I had a FFP reticle", there are plenty of other reasons why we miss a shot, but I have yet to see a convincing reason for SFP over FFP when the proper scope is selected and used properly. Yes, there are advantages with some SFP designs, but there are also advantages of FFP designs and personally I feel the advantages of FFP outweigh those of SFP.
All that being said, the hunting crowd are generally die-hard, stick to their guns, don't like change, and prefer to use what their dad or grandpappy used, at least this has been my experience over the years. I am the first one in my generation of my family to hunt, so I did not have the influence of my paternal side showing me the ropes, maybe that's why I have been more willing to embrace change but we are beginning to see more hunters venture out and realize the benefits of FFP scopes in long range hunting situations. Again, keep in mind we're talking long range hunting here, if your hunting situations only allow for short range situations, I would agree FFP is not going to be much benefit.
It took 10 years for most people to realize that Mils were better than MOA. I suppose it will take some time for folks to switch to ffp as well.
I would really like to see this scope in FFP.
I would really like to see this scope in FFP.
LRH constantly has guys posing beside animals they shot at a grand with an NXS or an F2 ATACR.
Acting like people are dumb or don’t shoot pst 200 yards if they prefer SFP is lying to yourself. There are plenty that can afford anything on the market and choose an SFP scope. It’s not for all, some hunters love FFP sure but it’s this assumption that anyone who prefers SFP is a dumbass or doesn’t shoot far that gets annoying.
Acting like people are dumb or don’t shoot pst 200 yards if they prefer SFP is lying to yourself. There are plenty that can afford anything on the market and choose an SFP scope. It’s not for all, some hunters love FFP sure but it’s this assumption that anyone who prefers SFP is a dumbass or doesn’t shoot far that gets annoying.
I shot a PRS style match last weekend with my SFP Leupold VX6 3-18, targets were 150-600yards.
The SFP reticle maybe held me back on one stage a little bit, but overall it was a complete non issue.
Pretty much every other online forum in the USA and around the world the majority of hunters use SFP scopes.
There may well be cases where they are better serviced by an FFP scope but they are still getting the job done just fine with SFP.
Look at it this way, if no one were buying the VX I/II/III Leupolds then they wouldn't have expanded the SFP line to the VX5 and VX6.
Vortex is one of the market leaders with bringing out scopes the shooters want that don't exist on the market yet.
If they thought that an FFP version of this scope would sell better than the SFP version then that's what they would've done.
Did I say that? No I did not, read my post again, if you still don't get it, that's okay, many don't.
I didn’t quote you
Fudd, Stone Age, stuck in the past, don’t shoot over 200 yards
Some of those are you some aren’t. I’ve never missed a shot because of an FFP reticle but I have missed an opportunity because I wasn’t comfortable shooting.
You made a blanket statement, I assumed you were referring to my remarks, my bad.
I will buy an ffp one if/when they release it. Until then, not so much....here's to hoping they will expand the line!!!
I know I don’t speak for ever hunter. The comment was “most hunters.” Sorry if you were triggered.
No worries
I will reply to this as if we were having a conversation. I know this wasn’t to me, just figured I might as well respond to your post now
i have 3 the the 3-15x42 razor hd lh now with the g4. i love the scopes but would love the illuminated dot. im very glad they kept these scopes sfp as Im not a fan of ffp for hunting. while all my target guns have ffp i just dont like how small the reticle is on the low power so ill stick with sfp
Man, I feel you on that one. I delete 99% of my comments before I hit post.
my last comment about “triggering you” was sarcasm. Besides, it’s the internet.
People choosing a precision LR range rifle scope to take into the dark timber is not a FFP/SFP problem. It is a choosing the wrong tool problem. In the field there is a definite advantage to your reticle sub tensions always being the same. I.E a FFP hunting scope with a thick reticle for low power visibility.
What advantage are those long range hunting getting out of SFP. I always thought people did it because they sucked at stalking in timber. They think I stock timber because I suck at shooting.
People at LRH.com recommend Huskmav. Next......IOR is popular in Europe. Next......
I think Vortex missed the mark. I could be wrong because the LRHS is no longer made. I wouldn't buy one anyway because the LRHS was already made.
FFP scope christmas tree reticle, capped turrets. Thick in the center for 2 mil in every direction. Christmas tree is thin for shooting farther. Send me a check for idea.
What advantage are those long range hunting getting out of SFP. I always thought people did it because they sucked at stalking in timber. They think I stock timber because I suck at shooting.
People at LRH.com recommend Huskmav. Next......IOR is popular in Europe. Next......I think Vortex missed the mark. I could be wrong because the LRHS is no longer made. I wouldn't buy one anyway because the LRHS was already made.
FFP scope christmas tree reticle, capped turrets. Thick in the center for 2 mil in every direction. Christmas tree is thin for shooting farther. Send me a check for idea.
While I don't think I'll ever sell- or otherwise get rid of- them, I am moving away from "Grampappy's 3 by 9s" to FFP optics on all of my hunting rifle.People choosing a precision LR range rifle scope to take into the dark timber is not a FFP/SFP problem. It is a choosing the wrong tool problem. In the field there is a definite advantage to your reticle sub tensions always being the same. I.E a FFP hunting scope with a thick reticle for low power visibility.
What advantage are those long range hunting getting out of SFP. I always thought people did it because they sucked at stalking in timber. They think I stock timber because I suck at shooting.
I think Vortex missed the mark. I could be wrong because the LRHS is no longer made. I wouldn't buy one anyway because the LRHS was already made.
FFP scope christmas tree reticle, capped turrets. Thick in the center for 2 mil in every direction. Christmas tree is thin for shooting farther. Send me a check for idea.
Instead of a thick reticle in the center, which may prove to be less than ideal at max power, how about the dual line approach that Brownells took on their MPO line of optics. I think this hits a good balance for low mag visibility and high mag precision...
The above notwithstanding, if you can't get within bow range of your game you suck at hunting...
?@wjm308
Banging steel and hunting are nothing alike. Long range hunting and hunting are nothing alike for that matter. Different activities completely. The vast majority of hunters are not laying prone and slinging lead at animals at unethical distances and that’s a good thing. People hunt night as well as day. People hunt timber as well as mountains. FFP would work well in the mountains and over wide open fields, but would be almost unusable varmint hunting at night and less than ideal in the timber. Hell varmint hunting at night would be best served with a thick duplex reticle. The thicker the reticle and outside stadia to draw the eye in the better for that one. There are decent FFP reticles that are thicker such as the G3 used in the LRTS and LRHS. These are the best I have seen or used for hunting purposes. The reticles in the 3-15x44 gen 2 pst is nice and thick (ebr2c and ebr2d). Illumination is a must for any FFP scope used for hunting in most situations. Illumination isn’t warranted for SFP scopes unless one would have an unusually thin reticle.
Both FFP and SFP designers both have pros and cons. Each hunter or shooter has to make the best compromises for his unique situation and choose accordingly. No wrong choice really. Personal preferences.
This is your opinion and a perfectly acceptable one just as the guys that feel that the advantages of SFP outweigh those of FFP when used for hunting. What is not so fair is for guys to blanket SFP users as ignorant as @264win did. You insinuated that as well although I dont’ think intentionally.
Banging steel and hunting are nothing alike. Long range hunting and hunting are nothing alike for that matter. Different activities completely. The vast majority of hunters are not laying prone and slinging lead at animals at unethical distances and that’s a good thing. People hunt night as well as day. People hunt timber as well as mountains. FFP would work well in the mountains and over wide open fields, but would be almost unusable varmint hunting at night and less than ideal in the timber. Hell varmint hunting at night would be best served with a thick duplex reticle. The thicker the reticle and outside stadia to draw the eye in the better for that one. There are decent FFP reticles that are thicker such as the G3 used in the LRTS and LRHS. These are the best I have seen or used for hunting purposes. The reticles in the 3-15x44 gen 2 pst is nice and thick (ebr2c and ebr2d). Illumination is a must for any FFP scope used for hunting in most situations. Illumination isn’t warranted for SFP scopes unless one would have an unusually thin reticle.
Both FFP and SFP designers both have pros and cons. Each hunter or shooter has to make the best compromises for his unique situation and choose accordingly. No wrong choice really. Personal preferences.
Last edited:
An expanding line (which Vortex is doing) is a good thing. I hope they make a mid power AMG for the ffp hunting crowd like yourself.
How far can a guy ethically send one with a 6.5 SAUM (130 JLKs @3200)? Asking for a friend.
I have missed out on several animals, because my knowledge and gear wasn’t up to the shot. Didn’t get a second chance either. In fact, that’s what led me here, and to FFP. These days, when I’m hunting, I’m any range hunting. I sure don’t back up when the animal is close, but I don’t fret if it moves to the next ridge before it stops either.
We bumped heads before but i agree with most of what you said here. The shooter and gear need to be up to the task for sure. You did a good thing passing up unethical shots in the past and I hope you continue to do so in the future. This still needs to be done regardless of the gear and/or knowledge. This decision has nothing to do with FFP or SFP though. Both designs in the right scope with a good shooter are more than capable.
I can’t answer your first question. An ethical shot is not just distance related of course that is a large factor. The shooters skill set, equipment, wind, lighting conditions, and the rifle support the shooter has available for the shot are also huge factors to consider. A 500 yard shot can be a cake walk or a hard pass depending.
You can always tell a good hunter from a good shooter. A good shooter brags on how far a shot he made. A skilled hunter brags about how close he got before he shot. This isn’t a jab at wither side. Just an observation. I’m somewhere in the middle myself.
I got to briefly handle one. Currently running a 3-18x Mk6 on my hunting rifle, it'll be getting swapped out with one of these Vortex's.
On 3-8x, the 2fp is so much easier on the eyes, faster, more comfortable. Great reticle design, good turrets. My take is that as long as you keep the top end around 10-15x, 2fp is great in a hunting scope. It allows the bold easy reticle in the lower zoom range, and if you need to dial elevation or hold wind, odds are the situation is fine for you to be at top power. I'm just happy there's finally a mil/mil hunting scope with decent turrets and glass.
On 3-8x, the 2fp is so much easier on the eyes, faster, more comfortable. Great reticle design, good turrets. My take is that as long as you keep the top end around 10-15x, 2fp is great in a hunting scope. It allows the bold easy reticle in the lower zoom range, and if you need to dial elevation or hold wind, odds are the situation is fine for you to be at top power. I'm just happy there's finally a mil/mil hunting scope with decent turrets and glass.
I’m torn on buying one of these. I recently made the switch to FFP and MRAD on all of my scopes, but my wife and kids hunting rifles are SFP, by my decision. I struggle a little because I feel SFP is kinda the same as the red dot argument for speed on close shots. I have taken every animal by stalking them. So I’m always on low power with my parallax set as low as it goes(50). If it’s early, late, or I feel it could possibly be too dark I turn the illumination on. Point being the SFP crew does have me concerned I could take a split second worrying about my thin crosshairs and miss an opportunity. I have actually not taken an animal with any of my new scopes as I have only been out with the goal of my wife or daughter shooting something. I have had a bull elk in my cross hairs and didn’t feel my gen2 xr was lacking, but it was early evening and not heavily treed. I decided to go FFP for commonality and because I was always worried about trying to use the holds on my SFP scopes on the wrong magnification if I was rushed. I’m probably one of those old school backwards ass rednecks, but if they offered one of these in FFP with a reticle similar to the MR2 in my Minox I’d have one inbound. You could even add a Xmas tree as long as the heavy stadia lines stayed even and it almost disappeared at 3x. I think most SFP fans would be accepting of this style reticle as well. It looks just like a fine duplex on low power. Possibly ultra fine duplex, but the heavy stadia lines draw your eye. So you can’t help but center your target with them. I can’t figure out why more people aren’t asking for a reticle like this in a scope like this.
You touched on something I think some don’t think about.
If the animal is so far that you’re needing your reticle for specific wind holds, but moving fast enough that you can’t whip the mag up to max and use it, then maybe it’s moving too fast at that distance for an ethical shot.
That’s my take on a sfp hunting scope that maxes out at 10-15x
I forget that some are referring to not being able to easily use the sub tensions at low power. I have never held for wind or elevation on low power. So I haven’t given it any thought.
if you want to continue with the FFP check out the tangent hunter. Oddly enough I’m also heavily considering that. I think that reticle would be very usable
I’m currently running a tt315m gen2 xr. I thought about buying the mil-dot version when I purchased it, but decided I would likely take less of a hit if I didn’t like it and decided to sell it. With the scopes being so similar I don’t think the “h” would be worth the hit I would take on the “m”
Its not the subtensions. Its the reticle itself. I posted through scope pictures of my 3-9 Leupold on 3x and my Razor gen 2 3-18 on 3x at 10 minutes until legal shooting time ends and at the end of legal shooting hours for comparison. The 3x reticle in the gen 2 reticle is invisible well before the end of legal shooting hours while the Leupold was nice and bold. If I can find them I will post them. These were without illumination. The gen2 razor was visible with illumination while the leupold didnt need it. The $200 Leupold blew the $1800 Razor away in light transmission as well and the Leupold has a 40mm objective. Its all about compromise.
no, he’s right people are also complaining about the subtensions, as they cant hold the same wind in the reticle at 12 as15
earlier in the post that you quoted he mentioned the thin reticle issue.
I saw your pics. Thought about posting some of my MR2, but they are similar looking to yours. They don’t do justice to how they look to me in person. I admit they are fine and in a “hunting” scope I would prefer them slightly thicker if illumination is not turned on. But it is my favorite reticle for a FFP hunting scope
I decided to attach one of my MR2 on 3x and 15x. When I look at it on my phone if I zoom in on the pic it is closer to what I actually see when looking through the scope I could easily see the fine center crosshairs when looking through the scope. I purposely put it on a background that would make it harder to pick up.
I decided to attach one of my MR2 on 3x and 15x. When I look at it on my phone if I zoom in on the pic it is closer to what I actually see when looking through the scope I could easily see the fine center crosshairs when looking through the scope. I purposely put it on a background that would make it harder to pick up.
Attachments
Last edited:
Thats user error. Lol
I just posted them for the guys that may not have both to look through. Just comparison purposes. I have been successful using both types. The only time I have been burned was using a FFP scope with no illumination. I had made several kills on a meat hunt prior. I had some pigs come out and couldnt make out the reticle on low power and couldn’t see the pigs on high power. Illumination would have saved the day. Non illuminated ffp is range duty only.
I have taken many animals with the lrtsi scopes.
I would have bought one of these if it was FFP. I have been using only FFP scopes for hunting for about 10 years, and strongly prefer them to SFP as once you are accustomed to the thinner reticle on low magnification there are no downsides in my experience. I now find SFP unnatural to use. I also like shooting animals on less than max power generally to maintain FOV for self-spotting, and for watching the animal through the shot; being able to use wind holds etc with the reticle on these lower powers without thinking is one less thing to worry about.
Last edited:
Mirage makes me unwilling to be married to top power. I dial it down below 10 a lot to help see through the mirage. I use the reticle all the time at less than max power, for wind, elevation, and quick ranging. I.E If the animal is X mils, its within 300y, which is normally already dialed in PB zero when I am hunting. Many started out shooting LR in a quest to become better shooters in the field, and found FFP o be a very useful carryover vs old hat.
I like that reticle the thicker outside stadia bars come will into the center of the scope when dialed down. That will help a lot. Many FFP scopes are designed with really wide reticle for max wind age and holdovers which is another compromise in itself at the expense of the bottom end. Max out holdovers when designing the reticle and the thicker stadia is still too far away from the center of the scope when on low power. Makes the large stadia useless. Yours does the opposite. It minimizes holdovers which takes away some benefits on the top end but adds much needed usability on the lower end by allowing the thick stadia to come in tight. I like this better myself.
My photos weren’t taken in good light like yours. That’s why my razor faired so poorly compared to your photos. In good lighting the reticle can be seen. Out in the open the crosshairs are gone well before legal light. If inside timber or on cloudy overcast days then the reticle could be gone by sunset. Take yours out 30 minute after sunset and look around. Even then I do think your reticle is suited better on that low mag as well. It would make a good option for a hunter that uses FFP scopes. Thanks for the photos.
Personally, I prefer ffp for target and hunting whenever possible.
That being said anything 1-6x 1-8, 2-10, and 3-15x range I really don’t mind sfp for hunting purposes.
Anything beyond 15x I really Prefer to have ffp. On the high end I find mirage tends to be more of an issue where I need to dial down. Usually, dialing back down to 12-15x is where I end up. Fortunately, where I hunt I rarely need to dial the mag down any less.
That being said anything 1-6x 1-8, 2-10, and 3-15x range I really don’t mind sfp for hunting purposes.
Anything beyond 15x I really Prefer to have ffp. On the high end I find mirage tends to be more of an issue where I need to dial down. Usually, dialing back down to 12-15x is where I end up. Fortunately, where I hunt I rarely need to dial the mag down any less.
Last edited:
- Apr 17, 2019
- 132
- 87
No problem at all. I think you may be misconstruing what I'm getting at slightly, but that's quite alright. One of the most wonderful things about this country is that we all get our own opinion haha.
I actually agree for the most part. My first choice in optic is ffp. Regardless less of the application except lpvo. Anything where the top end is 10x I find it is not necessary. Especially on combat carbine weapons. If I’m actually using subtensions to mil a target anything less than 10x is extremely hard to do for me. I have also found personally I’m either at 1x/2x or the max mag 6,8x,or 10x. Very rarely do I find myself in between.
3-15, 4-16 is where it starts to get into that range where I prefer FFP. The only caveat and the reason I don’t mind sfp in this mag range is That my scope tends to stay on the very bottom of the mag range when I hunt and then I turn it up to max magnification for longer distance engagements.
In the vast majority of shots that I find myself hunting, it also holds true for me that I’m either on the low end 3 or 4x up close or I have ample time, distance, or necessity that I would dial up to max mag at 15 Or 16x in this case if conditions allow.
If the shot is that far and mirage is bad enough I need to dial down to 10x, or the wind is blowing hard enough I really need My reticle to be exact in my wind call, or both I either make a decision to get closer to the animal or pass on the shot.
Any of my optics that max the mag range around 25-30x ffp is a must for me. That’s where things get a bit more touchy in the mirage and image quality area depending on the optic. On those optics I often find myself between 15-25x ish and higher if conditions allow. I haven’t owned/kept a optic yet where the image quality at 15x started to degrade as much as say an optic at 25-30x. Even then it still might be usuable in the right conditions but for me it has a higher chance of variability then an optic that tops out at 15-16x.
All that to say 9 times out of ten I would prefer a FFP optic. I don’t mind sfp in some instances.
I will also be getting one of the new razor LHT’s 3-15x42 to put through its paces.
I looks like I will have the 3-15x42 LHT here by Friday. 3-15x50 is coming a little later.
Both SFP and FFP have their place for different usages.
ILya
Both SFP and FFP have their place for different usages.
ILya
I have some of the 3-15x44 G4 reticle scopes. Everything works like it should and I love it. I just varmint and hunt small game. I just preordered the 3-15x50 G4i. It is about time somebody got it right and made a simple reticle that will work perfect for my needs. After I get my hands on it and checking it out I have a feeling I am going to hoard quite a few of them.
It was me having a disgruntled day is all. While I believe FFP offers a better overall package for long range shooting and hunting, I realize it is not the end all be all.
- Apr 17, 2019
- 132
- 87
No worries at all, my friend. We all have those days. Just glad to have everyone here discussing optics and our thoughts and opinions.
SFP or FFP matters not to me, but my shots are generally at 100yds in my AO. This year though that is changing to 400yds.
Personally, rather have a VX6-HD 4-24x52 with the firedot duplex. Or anything else with that reticle in either VX5 or VX6 line for SFP. Currently between that and a Mark 5HD 5-25x56 with the illuminated TMR reticle for FFP to go on my current 300WSM build.
I personally just want a duplex on a SFP, that way there can be no mistakes in the heat of the moment.
Personally, rather have a VX6-HD 4-24x52 with the firedot duplex. Or anything else with that reticle in either VX5 or VX6 line for SFP. Currently between that and a Mark 5HD 5-25x56 with the illuminated TMR reticle for FFP to go on my current 300WSM build.
I personally just want a duplex on a SFP, that way there can be no mistakes in the heat of the moment.
Last edited:
