Is 2025 Year of the MPVO? Two New 2-12s!

#3
While I do not own it yet, I submit the Maven RS1.2 - 2.5-15X44 FFP with the SHR-MIL reticle has a ton of potential.

I have become more confident of this lately as when I asked, Maven advised me that with this reticle the center dot is .1 mil thick; every hash mark is .04mil thickness; the inner reticle (thinner) is .1mil; and the outer (thicker reticle) is .4mil.

This is essentially the 2.0 version of Leupold's .1 MRAD thick Illuminated TMR.

As such, I suspect this scope is VERY usable as a duplex at 2.5x; the hash marks are usable prone / static unlimited time / low stress at 7x; and the hash marks are usable positionally / timed / high stress at 9x.

-Stan

cc: @C_Does
 
  • Like
Reactions: enginerd, GrandeJake, st1650 and 2 others
#11
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Charmingmander, TF626 and FRESHPRINCE556
#12
stanley_white said:
While I do not own it yet, I submit the Maven RS1.2 - 2.5-15X44 FFP with the SHR-MIL reticle has a ton of potential.

I have become more confident of this lately as when I asked, Maven advised me that with this reticle the center dot is .1 mil thick; every hash mark is .04mil thickness; the inner reticle (thinner) is .1mil; and the outer (thicker reticle) is .4mil.

This is essentially the 2.0 version of Leupold's .1 MRAD thick Illuminated TMR.

As such, I suspect this scope is VERY usable as a duplex at 2.5x; the hash marks are usable prone / static unlimited time / low stress at 7x; and the hash marks are usable positionally / timed / high stress at 9x.

-Stan

cc: @C_Does
Click to expand...
I think the Maven has more potential as a crossover scope than an MPVO. One of the criteria for an MPVO is that it be shorter in length and the RS 1.2 2.5-15 is quite long at 14". Also, the FOV is pretty narrow and some have said the Maven tunnels, compare these numbers to the Vortex PST II 3-15x44. I do like the SHR-MIL reticle, but did they really leave numbers off the left side of the horizontal... strange decision.
1736695630084.png


1736695828044.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: GrandeJake, beetroot and stanley_white
#15
@Glassaholic Thats a distinct possibility. Lots of similarities.
The ts12 definitely has its limitations, as any ultra short scope does. But none of that has altered a single shot from my 18” AR 308 out to 600yrds.
It’s not ideal as you mention, but for the moment, without being able to do side by side testing, it tics my boxes. What’s interesting about the TS-12 is, at this time it’s an old design and no one to this point in my opinion, has been able to just completely wipe the floor with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
#16
Kickin45 said:
@Glassaholic Thats a distinct possibility. Lots of similarities.
The ts12 definitely has its limitations, as any ultra short scope does. But none of that has altered a single shot from my 18” AR 308 out to 600yrds.
It’s not ideal as you mention, but for the moment, without being able to do side by side testing, it tics my boxes. What’s interesting about the TS-12 is, at this time it’s an old design and no one to this point in my opinion, has been able to just completely wipe the floor with it.
Click to expand...
That's what matters most, that you're able to accomplish how you intend to use the rifle!
 
#18
st1650 said:
Swing and a miss again.

I’ll stick with the Helos 2-12 although I’d like a compact 3-18 for a 22ARC Dasher eventually.
Click to expand...
GPO CENTURI 3-12x44i Super Compact G4i #RC420
  • Super Compact Technology at 9.9" long
  • SFP Capped ¼ MOA reset turrets
  • G4i illuminated I-Control reticle
  • GPObright lens coating technology
  • PASSIONdrop hydrophobic lens coatings
  • DOUBLE HD objective lens technology
  • Magnification throw lever
 
#19
stanley_white said:
While I do not own it yet, I submit the Maven RS1.2 - 2.5-15X44 FFP with the SHR-MIL reticle has a ton of potential.

I have become more confident of this lately as when I asked, Maven advised me that with this reticle the center dot is .1 mil thick; every hash mark is .04mil thickness; the inner reticle (thinner) is .1mil; and the outer (thicker reticle) is .4mil.

This is essentially the 2.0 version of Leupold's .1 MRAD thick Illuminated TMR.

As such, I suspect this scope is VERY usable as a duplex at 2.5x; the hash marks are usable prone / static unlimited time / low stress at 7x; and the hash marks are usable positionally / timed / high stress at 9x.

-Stan

cc: @C_Does
Click to expand...
Howwwdyyyy. There is a gentleman here with one who has offered it to me to review. But Maven finally got back to me last week about sending me one to test out. Of course I went for the MIL's, and I also opted for the add on package so I can play with the rings and caps.

It is on the longer and heavier side, but I am not a stickler for length as long as it clears everything else on the rifle. I much more care about optical performance and tracking performance over some of the physical properties. But everyone is different, and some people like things that others dont. Simple as that.

The RS1.2 as a whole looks extremely promising. All it could really use is a locking elevation turret. If thats a deal breaker then check out the Tract Toric 2.5-15. On paper that and the RS look very similar. I would even hazard a guess that they share some DNA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bravo6, stanley_white and st1650
#21
BJames said:
How does the helos track? It’s on my short list for a shorty 6.5 Grendel build in the works.
Click to expand...
They track really well in my case. I’ve tested it to 20mils multiple times on my subsonic 300blk. Tracks true and return to zero fine. That said, apparently on rokslide the dude who does the drop test says the zero shifts on impacts. You’d have to ask him is his last one still does it, he hasn’t updated his post. I haven’t seen any one complain about those but I doubt most people run their gear as hard as he does. He did say the triji Tenmile 3-18 had no issues with the drop test so I’m tempted to try one if I find one at the right price, I’m usually not a Trijicon fan except for the Acog and the Sro.

Athlon Helos BTR Gen2, 2-12x42mm Field Eval

This is a field evaluation of the Athlon Helos BTR Gen 2, 2-12x42mm scope. This scope was handed to me from from Ryan Avery for evaluation. It was sent to him from a forum member. The ammunition used was Hornady Black 168gr AMAX that was purchased by Ryan. The 20 round proof group was just over...
rokslide.com rokslide.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: BJames
#22
C_Does said:
Howwwdyyyy. There is a gentleman here with one who has offered it to me to review. But Maven finally got back to me last week about sending me one to test out. Of course I went for the MIL's, and I also opted for the add on package so I can play with the rings and caps.

It is on the longer and heavier side, but I am not a stickler for length as long as it clears everything else on the rifle. I much more care about optical performance and tracking performance over some of the physical properties. But everyone is different, and some people like things that others dont. Simple as that.

The RS1.2 as a whole looks extremely promising. All it could really use is a locking elevation turret. If thats a deal breaker then check out the Tract Toric 2.5-15. On paper that and the RS look very similar. I would even hazard a guess that they share some DNA.
Click to expand...
Great news!

I am very interested to see the reticle at 2.5x against a woodland background if are able to do so.

-Stan
 
#23
C_Does said:
Howwwdyyyy. There is a gentleman here with one who has offered it to me to review. But Maven finally got back to me last week about sending me one to test out. Of course I went for the MIL's, and I also opted for the add on package so I can play with the rings and caps.

It is on the longer and heavier side, but I am not a stickler for length as long as it clears everything else on the rifle. I much more care about optical performance and tracking performance over some of the physical properties. But everyone is different, and some people like things that others dont. Simple as that.

The RS1.2 as a whole looks extremely promising. All it could really use is a locking elevation turret. If thats a deal breaker then check out the Tract Toric 2.5-15. On paper that and the RS look very similar. I would even hazard a guess that they share some DNA.
Click to expand...
I have the tract 2.5-15, I belive they are basically the same scope. It’s a nice little scope, it was on a spr type 556 but it ended up being a little long so I put it on a 22 build instead. Great glass, build quality and eye box. Just a little small in the image department for what I needed on a spr. Doesn’t weigh too much either. Reticle is nice and clean and at 2.5 there is no problem finding the ret. 20 mils on a 40 moa base for my 22 lr. Could use a little more travel but it’s a 30mm tube after all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C_Does
#25
Tikkaguy said:
The weight makes it near useless on any rig that’s mobile. Same as any non lvpo razor
Click to expand...
I agree, the biggest issue with the RG2 3-18 was not the glass (as even today it is pretty amazing), but the weight was more than anyone wanted for either a gas gun or crossover platform. This is most likely why Vortex has not yet introduced an RG3 version of this scope which is unfortunate. Would love to see an RG3 3-18x50 that is around the 30oz mark, I know a lot would want less weight but that's not really the RG3 line so something competitive with the ATACR 4-16 is within reason. What would be even better is a new AMG somewhere around 3-18 that was under 30oz... been waiting for that scope for about a decade (when the AMG 6-24 was announced I really hoped a mid-power optic would follow as I felt 6x at the bottom was a wee bit too much for crossover use even for western hunters, but that didn't stop me from putting it on my 7mm SAUM rig for elk and long range steel).
 
  • Like
Reactions: YotaEer, HaydenLane, FRESHPRINCE556 and 1 other person
#26
Glassaholic said:
I agree, the biggest issue with the RG2 3-18 was not the glass (as even today it is pretty amazing), but the weight was more than anyone wanted for either a gas gun or crossover platform. This is most likely why Vortex has not yet introduced an RG3 version of this scope which is unfortunate. Would love to see an RG3 3-18x50 that is around the 30oz mark, I know a lot would want less weight but that's not really the RG3 line so something competitive with the ATACR 4-16 is within reason. What would be even better is a new AMG somewhere around 3-18 that was under 30oz... been waiting for that scope for about a decade (when the AMG 6-24 was announced I really hoped a mid-power optic would follow as I felt 6x at the bottom was a wee bit too much for crossover use even for western hunters, but that didn't stop me from putting it on my 7mm SAUM rig for elk and long range steel).
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree 100% the razors are good scopes but the weight is a no go for all of them for me personally . And the lht version isn’t very attractive to me either. I feel like they made the razor line heavy on purpose for prs type comps. The Germans manage to build scope in that quality bracket in a sensible weight most of the time! Come on vortex!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
#27
Tikkaguy said:
I have the tract 2.5-15, I belive they are basically the same scope. It’s a nice little scope, it was on a spr type 556 but it ended up being a little long so I put it on a 22 build instead. Great glass, build quality and eye box. Just a little small in the image department for what I needed on a spr. Doesn’t weigh too much either. Reticle is nice and clean and at 2.5 there is no problem finding the ret. 20 mils on a 40 moa base for my 22 lr. Could use a little more travel but it’s a 30mm tube after all.
Click to expand...
That sounds just like the maven rs1.2 I just got. My limited experience with is is mostly positive. The fov and view through it seem to be on the tighter side but boy does the glass look stellar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tikkaguy
#28
C_Does said:
That sounds just like the maven rs1.2 I just got. My limited experience with is is mostly positive. The fov and view through it seem to be on the tighter side but boy does the glass look stellar.
Click to expand...
Yeah it’s an impressive scope, would make a great crossover scope for a lighter bolt action. They seemed to really do about everything right. For the price it’s really doesn’t get enough attention
 
  • Like
Reactions: C_Does and st1650
#33
Glassaholic said:
I think the Maven has more potential as a crossover scope than an MPVO. One of the criteria for an MPVO is that it be shorter in length and the RS 1.2 2.5-15 is quite long at 14". Also, the FOV is pretty narrow and some have said the Maven tunnels, compare these numbers to the Vortex PST II 3-15x44. I do like the SHR-MIL reticle, but did they really leave numbers off the left side of the horizontal... strange decision.
View attachment 8589981

View attachment 8589982
Click to expand...
I have both of these. The maven in some ways feels cheaper. Maybe its the zero stop or the turrets. Cant quite put my finger on it. I actually have all 3 vipers, one in the LPVO, and the other in the higher zoom option. I have a feeling the reason vortex introduced the newer Viper HD is to compete more in the "hunting" category as it has always been an for that use, but never quite the perfect fit.

I have the mil reticle on the maven. On low power it sucks. hard to read. Outside of that its a pretty decent scope. Oddly feels heavy despite the published weight. Might have to weigh mine to see if their 26 oz is accurate. I could have sworn mine was closer to 28 when I checked it.

The vortex Razor HD LHT, while being only SFP, I think has a better mil reticle, beats it reasonably on weight, and has better daylight and low-light image quality than any of the of the others compared here, which combined with the weight and reticle, makes it subjectively a better hunting scope..sucks they only make a FFP version of it in 4.5-22x. It would be a knockout in the lower power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C_Does
#34
The lht 3-15 is a Superb hunting optic.i bought one to review and leant it to a friend to throw on his 308 hunting rifle. He absolutely loves it. Very simple controls,very good glass.

I just got a maven rs1.2 in. On the outside it's very nice.and on my scale @AleksanderSuave it is 26oz almost exactly. But it does feel a bit heavier. I think it'll fit the bill as a crossover scope moreso than anything else. I haven't done anything more than play around with it however.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AleksanderSuave
#35
C_Does said:
The lht 3-15 is a Superb hunting optic.i bought one to review and leant it to a friend to throw on his 308 hunting rifle. He absolutely loves it. Very simple controls,very good glass.

I just got a maven rs1.2 in. On the outside it's very nice.and on my scale @AleksanderSuave it is 26oz almost exactly. But it does feel a bit heavier. I think it'll fit the bill as a crossover scope moreso than anything else. I haven't done anything more than play around with it however.
Click to expand...
What do you think of the reticle in the lowest magnification setting?
 
#37
Tikkaguy said:
Click to expand...

If price is close to NX8 not sure how well it will compete, most would prefer NF on the side vs PA even if the PA is "better". PA could have done themselves a favor and designed a reticle that works at 2.5x, unless this is selling for significantly less than the NX8 not sure how excited the community will be. At least they dropped the chevron for a dot but those tree reticles are way too busy IMO, might as well get a Horus at that point. Buy I do like the DECA reticle so that could be decent. Cartridge turret sounds interesting but wish they would have gone with lower profile for piggyback RDS. Was going to do a sample variance test with several NX8's later this year so might be good to include this in the mix.

I do wish PA would have stayed with 6x erector and refined optical performance, these scopes are short and I'm betting they're finicky, why push 8x and short these days??? 🤷🏻‍♂️ but I get it, they want something that sells so why not mimic NF... Most of the world has no clue what makes a good optic and like DSLR'S simply think more megapixels is better so bigger erector must be better... Ugh! :step off soapbox:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tictacticaltimmy, gopherslayer, HaydenLane and 4 others
#38
Glassaholic said:
If price is close to NX8 not sure how well it will compete, most would prefer NF on the side vs PA even if the PA is "better". PA could have done themselves a favor and designed a reticle that works at 2.5x, unless this is selling for significantly less than the NX8 not sure how excited the community will be. At least they dropped the chevron for a dot but those tree reticles are way too busy IMO, might as well get a Horus at that point. Buy I do like the DECA reticle so that could be decent. Cartridge turret sounds interesting but wish they would have gone with lower profile for piggyback RDS. Was going to do a sample variance test with several NX8's later this year so might be good to include this in the mix.

I do wish PA would have stayed with 6x erector and refined optical performance, these scopes are short and I'm betting they're finicky, why push 8x and short these days??? 🤷🏻‍♂️ but I get it, they want something that sells so why not mimic NF... Most of the world has no clue what makes a good optic and like DSLR'S simply think more megapixels is better so bigger erector must be better... Ugh! :step off soapbox:
Click to expand...
I agree, curious how it all works out. If I were to buy one I would get the simple mil ret and I dont know how useable it would be on the bottom. Time will tell how bad the exit pupil and glass gets at 20x. Hope it’s at least on par with the nx8
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
#39
AleksanderSuave said:
Glassaholic said:
If price is close to NX8 not sure how well it will compete, most would prefer NF on the side vs PA even if the PA is "better". PA could have done themselves a favor and designed a reticle that works at 2.5x, unless this is selling for significantly less than the NX8 not sure how excited the community will be. At least they dropped the chevron for a dot but those tree reticles are way too busy IMO, might as well get a Horus at that point. Buy I do like the DECA reticle so that could be decent. Cartridge turret sounds interesting but wish they would have gone with lower profile for piggyback RDS. Was going to do a sample variance test with several NX8's later this year so might be good to include this in the mix.

I do wish PA would have stayed with 6x erector and refined optical performance, these scopes are short and I'm betting they're finicky, why push 8x and short these days??? 🤷🏻‍♂️ but I get it, they want something that sells so why not mimic NF... Most of the world has no clue what makes a good optic and like DSLR'S simply think more megapixels is better so bigger erector must be better... Ugh! :step off soapbox:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Man those are words after my own heart. PA Should of stuck with a 6x multiplier. But unfortunately, horsepower sells cars like WIDE magnification ranges in far too small of a scope sells for scope companies...
AleksanderSuave said:
What do you think of the reticle in the lowest magnification setting?
Click to expand...
So far Im really liking it. The scaling is really good. I can see why someone earlier was upset about the left hand side windage holds not having numbers over the stadia lines. It isnt the end of the world. For a simple yet usable reticle, its far better than much of the competition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: white_rushin and AleksanderSuave
#40
Crazy, I had the same thoughts as you all after watching their overview video. I don’t really see how PA is differentiating themselves in any meaningful way from the NF NX8 with this PLXC 2.5-20. I would guess they’re likely going to price it around $1500-$1600, but people can still find used NX8s for around that cost.

The type of person that will buy this PA model also likely knows the NX8 2.5-20 also exists. It seems to be just as compact and the same weight. Really their marketing will need to be that you get a 34mm tube for no extra weight penalty and locking turrets.

Will that be enough for people to not pick NF’s proven reputation and perceived durability? I’m not sure.

I really think PA had a chance to do something special with a killer PLXc 2-12x or 2-16x if they really wanted to differentiate themselves and stick with an 8x erector. Or they could’ve done a more budget friendly GLX 2.5-20x for sub $1K to get an entire new buying demographic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shoreglide, Tictacticaltimmy, Glassaholic and 3 others
#41
white_rushin said:
Crazy, I had the same thoughts as you all after watching their overview video. I don’t really see how PA is differentiating themselves in any meaningful way from the NF NX8 with this PLXC 2.5-20. I would guess they’re likely going to price it around $1500-$1600, but people can still find used NX8s for around that cost.

The type of person that will buy this PA model also likely knows the NX8 2.5-20 also exists. It seems to be just as compact and the same weight. Really their marketing will need to be that you get a 34mm tube for no extra weight penalty and locking turrets.

Will that be enough for people to not pick NF’s proven reputation and perceived durability? I’m not sure.

I really think PA had a chance to do something special with a killer PLXc 2-12x or 2-16x if they really wanted to differentiate themselves and stick with an 8x erector. Or they could’ve done a more budget friendly GLX 2.5-20x for sub $1K to get an entire new buying demographic.
Click to expand...
I could not agree more. I talked to the CEO of PA when I first reviewed the plxc. I asked "do you have any plans to make a 1m5-12 or a 2-18 using this architecture?" The response, "we don't see the market."

I think it's yet another big swing and a miss. At least companies like Vector are listening. Their Continental 2-12 is what this plxc should be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tictacticaltimmy, PappyM3 and white_rushin
#42
st1650 said:
Swing and a miss again.

I’ll stick with the Helos 2-12 although I’d like a compact 3-18 for a 22ARC Dasher eventually.
Click to expand...
I just ordered a Helos 2-12 for my 8.6 Blk. $399 out the door from Doug. I have the 4-20 and 6-24. Both are very impressive at their price point. Besides being Chinesium, I haven’t found other fault with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C_Does
#44
C_Does said:
I could not agree more. I talked to the CEO of PA when I first reviewed the plxc. I asked "do you have any plans to make a 1m5-12 or a 2-18 using this architecture?" The response, "we don't see the market."
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I think that's how most manufacturers see it, too much risk, they want the low hanging fruit so they copy what's already popular.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C_Does
#45
Bart said:
I am just waiting for the 2-12 to be released!
Has anyone seen the new Contentintal 3-18 in the wild? If so, how does it stack up against the Mark 5?
Click to expand...
Vector SAYS itll become available tomorrow. If so Ill be dropping my review on it. There will be a code in the description and top comment for 10% off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bevo
#47
white_rushin said:
…The type of person that will buy this PA model also likely knows the NX8 2.5-20 also exists. It seems to be just as compact and the same weight. Really their marketing will need to be that you get a 34mm tube for no extra weight penalty and locking turrets.
…
Click to expand...
It’s a quarter pound heavier than the NX8. 32.4oz vs 28.3oz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
2025 Primary Arms Optics - PLx Compact 1-8x24 FFP RDB - SLx 2-12 ACSS NOVA
Replies
3
Views
1K
Realwar
R
Glassaholic
2025 SHOT Show Optics
Replies
80
Views
6K
Glassaholic
Glassaholic
gr8fuldoug
Rifle Scopes New GPO Centuri Riflescopes
Replies
0
Views
378
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 2
Replies
4
Views
399
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
Optics Element HD & HDLR 2-16x50 Riflescopes
Replies
3
Views
739
Benfield_Precision
Benfield_Precision
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts