Rifle Scopes New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

[jrob300]

With the advent of the new IOR 3-18x50 FFP:

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1993279#Post1993279

I thought it would be appropriate to weigh-in on a comparison to what appears to be its closest competitor, the Vortex Razor HD 5-20x50. (<span style="font-weight: bold">I'd like to keep this discussion to these two scopes. If you don't agree with the assumption, please put it in a different thread</span>.)

The IOR brings some serious competition to the Razor, with IOR optic quality, low-profile 10 mil/rev elevation knob, and that awesome MP8 Dot reticle.

But the Razor has that incredible video shot by Lowlight and the IOR has at least a question mark over its head with regard to long-term robustness and reliability.

But a scope is more than a bunch of specs. It is a complex assortment of features and compromises for each one of us. So, you guys that have or have had both, what say you? What are the pro's and con's to owning one over the other?

You guys that just bought the IOR. If you had been considering the Razor, please share with us what your thought process was and how you settled on the IOR.

If you currently own a Razor, what are your feelings about the IOR? Are you considering one? Why or why not?

Thanks in advance for your input.

John

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Oh, and while we're on the subject... does anyone have the reticle and dot subtension for the FFP MP8 Dot?

John

 

[FARGO]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Thanks for putting that up.

But wow. Really? 0.1 mil thick reticle? I thought the reticle on the Razor was thick at .06 mil.

This is the same reticle used in this picture?

For some reason it appeared smaller to me. Especially the dot. It must be an optical illusion. I could have sworn the dot was smaller than the actual reticle thickness.

John

 

[FARGO]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

More info...

http://www.sniperinfo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=415&page=3

 

[Jon A]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

The new reticle's lines are thinner than .1 mil. 0.08-ish or so I'd say.

 

[sudnit5]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

I am deciding between these two scopes. From what I have heard the down fall with the Razor is the thick reticle and tricky eye placement. The IOR has half the elevation that the Razor has. I would definitely like to hear from owners about these.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sudnit5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The IOR has half the elevation that the Razor has.</div></div>

The Razor has 36 mil. I had heard (but finding actual specifications is a little sketchy) that the IOR is 22 mil. Is this not true?

John

 

[sudnit5]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sudnit5</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The IOR has half the elevation that the Razor has.</div></div>

The Razor has 36 mil. I had heard (but finding actual specifications is a little sketchy) that the IOR is 22 mil. Is this not true?

John </div></div>

Oops, I was looking at the 6-24 model. It shows that one has only 16 mils. I don't really know about the 3-18.

http://www.valdada.com/product/a488afa3-ab66-4897-87af-a11a1b8cd558.aspx

 

[Jer]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

6-24x model = 16mils
3-18x model = 21/22 mils

 

[McLarenross]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

My opinion really means nothing but, if I were gonna drop ~$2K on a scope right now Id likely get the Razor. Seems like a little bit more scope and a little better features for the money, plus the new IOR hasnt really proven itself.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6-24x model = 16mils
3-18x model = 21/22 mils </div></div>

Thanks Jer.

Where'd you find that?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McLarenRoss</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My opinion really means nothing but, if I were gonna drop ~$2K on a scope right now Id likely get the Razor. Seems like a little bit more scope and a little better features for the money, plus the new IOR hasnt really proven itself. </div></div>

I talked about this at length with Scott at LO yesterday. Yes the Razor has a track record of sorts because it's been out in the field, but the new 3-18x50 IOR allegedly uses the same internals as the "GEN 4" 3-18x42 FFP, which have been in the field for about 9 months. In addition both the 3-18x50 FFP and 6-24x56 FFP were field-tested extensively before being released.

Having said that, I haven't handled an IOR, but the Razor is built like a Panzer tank. You could use this thing to bust the lug nuts loose on your truck and it would still hold its zero.

John

 

[Jer]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6-24x model = 16mils
3-18x model = 21/22 mils </div></div>

Thanks Jer.

Where'd you find that?
John </div></div>

Been following the IOR discussions with great attention since I'm looking to buy. In fact, I'm ordering an 18x as soon as Scott returns my call.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6-24x model = 16mils
3-18x model = 21/22 mils </div></div>

Thanks Jer.

Where'd you find that?
John </div></div>

Been following the IOR discussions with great attention since I'm looking to buy. In fact, I'm ordering an 18x as soon as Scott returns my call. </div></div>

I was guilty of watching the IOR FFP rollout with one eye barely cracked as I assumed they'd have too little travel to interest me, but with 22 mil, I could make it work. 16 nil... not so much.

Congratulations. I'm sure you'll be very happy with it.

John

 

[Jer]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">6-24x model = 16mils
3-18x model = 21/22 mils </div></div>

Thanks Jer.

Where'd you find that?
John </div></div>

Been following the IOR discussions with great attention since I'm looking to buy. In fact, I'm ordering an 18x as soon as Scott returns my call. </div></div>

I was guilty of watching the IOR FFP rollout with one eye barely cracked as I assumed they'd have too little travel to interest me, but with 22 mil, I could make it work. 16 nil... not so much.

Congratulations. I'm sure you'll be very happy with it.

John </div></div>

I was actually going to order one of the 24x IORs because I like the 24x & 25x scopes for spotting my buddies with but I don't shoot them at that magnification so it seemed like I was sacrificing a lot to get that extra little bit of power. I was leery about ordering once I saw the total elevation and am glad I waited now. Sounds like the 18x has better FOV as well as elevation and a few other things so I'm thinking this is the right scope for me.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greywolf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My biggest issue is the critical eye relief and forgiving eye placement. That is HUGE in my book and outweighs a lot of other considerations. If I hadn't had Zeiss scopes with me in Africa I would have probably not been as successful as I was - lucky for me the Zeiss delivered with regards to non-tricky eye placement.

I've heard that the IOR outshines the Vortex in this regards. </div></div>

I think this *might* be my biggest gripe about the Razor. Even in low stress situations, it can be difficult to get a decent sight picture. The good news is... parallax is NOT an issue with this scope. There is NO WAY to get your eye off center and see anything!

John

 

[BCP]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

I've heard that both the 3-18 and razor hd have critical eyeboxes at max magnification. Doesn't really bother me since it's going on a range gun and they are FFP you can just dial them back.

As far as which one to get the both look really nice to me. The only thing I would say is that the 3-18 I looked at had shorter eye relief - perfect for me since it's going on top of a flattop 308 AR but if it were on a magnum I'm not sure it would work.

 

[C Snyder]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for putting that up.

But wow. Really? 0.1 mil thick reticle? I thought the reticle on the Razor was thick at .06 mil.

This is the same reticle used in this picture?

For some reason it appeared smaller to me. Especially the dot. It must be an optical illusion. I could have sworn the dot was smaller than the actual reticle thickness.

John</div></div>

The dot on the IOR is the same dia as the reticle, but is appers smaller because it is "floating". Very nice feature. Just a little larger than the size of a 30 cal bullet hole in your target.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Maybe it works better in reality than it sounds with numbers. .1 mil sounds huge to me. The reticle on the Razor is .06 and it's fat to my eye. BUT... and this is a BIG but... where reticles cross they are almost never super sharply defined as a "cross". In other words, they're a little fuzzy in the corners, so they actually "appear" to take up more room than the actual thickness of either line. The sum is greater than the parts. The "dot", even though it's big, may solve this, because it is what it is. There's no intersection, so no "fuzz".

I'll have to check out my scope at the range and see just how big of a spot it *actually* covers at 100 yds. It may be substantially larger than the advertised .06 mil. I know that it *easily* covers a spray can cap-sized spot at 1000 yds. on steel.

John

 

[C Snyder]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Here are both a floating dot and a cross hair center side by side that have the same sectional diameter. The dot will appear smaller because there is not as much "surface area" covering the target. So in some ways it is an optical illusion. A .06 Mil Cross hair may "appear" to be larger than it actually is.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Okiecop</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Here are both a floating dot and a cross hair center side by side that have the same sectional diameter. The dot will appear smaller because there is not as much "surface area" covering the target. So in some ways it is an optical illusion. A .06 Mil Cross hair may "appear" to be larger than it actually is. </div></div>

You said it much more eloquently than I did.

In addition, now looking at your illustration, the area we can actually see "around" in the crosshair is measured diagonally, so the actual subtension of the interection is 1.414 x reticle thickness or .085 mil in the case of the Razor.

John

 

[mouse07410]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

I haven't handled IOR scope(s). Based on my experience with Razor EBR-2 reticle and the pictures posted here of IOR - I strongly prefer Razor reticle design.

 

[Jer]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mouse07410</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I haven't handled IOR scope(s). Based on my experience with Razor EBR-2 reticle and the pictures posted here of IOR - I strongly prefer Razor reticle design. </div></div>

Really? I much prefer this IOR reticle to most all reticles available out there. That was one of the big considerations I had when ordering an optic. Out of everything out there I think this modified MP-8 A-5 reticle is one of the best on the market and the only question really is the scope around it. Personally, I put this reticle right up there with S&B's P4F and prefer the floating dot in theory. Can't wait for mine to show up so I can actually compare side by side to see if that's the case. I was interested in the Razor HD a while back but went away from it when I saw the reticle choices and I personally am not a fan of them at all. If you like it better that's your <span style="font-style: italic">opinion</span> and that's fine but I really don't see anything that makes the Razor reticle <span style="font-style: italic">better</span> than the IOR reticle.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

There are those that *really* like the open center of the TMR and the EBR2 reticles. I am not among them.

I really like the EBR3. I just don't understand why it's .04 mil on the PST and .06 on the Razor. I wish it was thinner.

John

 

[Jon A]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Again guys, the reticles in the new scopes are thinner. Compare the pic above full size: http://i34.tinypic.com/29o4ltk.jpg to this one: http://www.jonaadland.com/Hunting/IOR/3_18_ReticlePics/3-18_18XSmall.jpg .

Switch back and forth between the two. You'll see the new reticle is noticably thinner.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Again guys...</div></div>

C'mon Jon, be patient with an old guy, huh?

Thanks for the A/B. It does seem somewhat thinner. I would say your gustimate of .8 mils is close. Seen a specification yet?

I think I could live with it.

John

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

OK. So I think we've beaten the reticle to death...

Have any of you guys actually used both? Or at least gotten to handle them?

Impressions about turret feel, magnification ring, glass clarity, brightness... yada, yada...

You know, all the stuff we normally argue about when comparing scopes.

I'm thinking the IOR is looking more and more attractive to me, but I'd like to get a liitle feedback from guys that have experience with them and are at least knowlegeable with regards to the Razor.

John

 

[noname]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Have/use both the ior 3x18 and the razor, and the ior's eye placement on high is a lot more critical (worse-whatever). Haven't tried the new ior, and doubt if I will after going back and forth on 4 different scopes. It depends on what you like as far as reticles, personally I don't like the thick bars, preferring reticle types like the nf np-r2. As with variables in general the "distance" in turning the power ring gets shorter with increases in power, and the razor at 15 the heavy bars just skirt the field of view, and at 20 snap out of view, in the ebr-2. Also the windage dots are don't grab you as much at 15 until you go to 20. The power ring is much smoother than any of the 4 iors I've been thru, and has a rubberized grip texture which makes adjustments without looking up easy. The illumination is great and has an off in-between each power. The ior digital may be the new trend, but I'm not going to find out if its worth the trouble. The AO is calibrated somewhat and the numbers actually come out on the distance. (so did the iors to be fair). Only a sport shooter here, and just giving observations, but on days when I'm really lazy I can throw a shot out, note the strike and have it dialed back in from the windage hold offs on the ebr-2 faster most methods I've tried. Scope is currently used on a TRG 42 300, 155 Amx with 6.5 mils to 1000 yds.

 

[mouse07410]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mouse07410</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I haven't handled IOR scope(s). Based on my experience with Razor EBR-2 reticle and the pictures posted here of IOR - I strongly prefer Razor reticle design. </div></div>
Really? I much prefer this IOR reticle to most all reticles available out there.</div></div>
Yes, really. I chose it over reticles available on USO and PH (granted, the price also factored in - but for the same money I'd take EBR). Luckily I do my procurement, and you do yours - so our difference in preferences shouldn't impact either one of us.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Personally, I put this reticle right up there with S&B's P4F and prefer the floating dot in theory.</div></div>
I personally don't like P4F reticle.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you like it better that's your <span style="font-style: italic">opinion</span> and that's fine but I really don't see anything that makes the Razor reticle <span style="font-style: italic">better</span> than the IOR reticle. </div></div>
First, stating my <span style="text-decoration: underline">preference</span> and <span style="text-decoration: underline">liking</span> I never expressed anything but <span style="text-decoration: underline">opinions</span> (and those being mine, not yours or somebody else's). Second - if <span style="text-decoration: underline">you</span> don't see something as better - it's <span style="text-decoration: underline">your opinion</span>. To me Razor design (empty center, 0.2 subtents, overall view - including the thickness and the elusive "feel") is <span style="font-style: italic">better</span> on Razor than on other scopes. My initial comparison was "on paper". Handling EBR-2 "in real" confirmed to me what the "paper" told me, so I expect that I'd feel about other reticles "in real" the same way I felt about them "on paper". At least some others in this thread seem to also prefer EBR, based on their experience.

But enjoy your IOR reticle, or P4F, or whatever. They all - including the no-frills MilDot - do the job, especially when the shooter is up to it.

 

[animalmother85]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

would putting a 3-18x50 IOR on an 18" LWRC REPR be considered silly/stupid/wasteful?

I too am interested in an IOR optic with that power range. I hope I'm not hijacking.

 

[BCP]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

I'm putting a 3-18 on a 18" 308, I don't think it's too much. If you want a smaller optic consider a straight 10X like the USO. The 3-18 really isn't THAT big but it is a bit heavy.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

OK, I pissed off the Hensoldt boys in the Viper PST thread, and I'm probably not going to make any friends in the IOR camp, but here goes...

I got the opportunity to size up the new 3.5-18x50 IOR next to my 5-20x50 EBR3 Razor HD. I was seriously thinking about moving to the IOR, so this is DEFINITELY not a troll post.

The things that intrigued me about the IOR were the smaller size, lower profile, 10 mil turn, better glass and more forgiving eyebox. Based on these features, I was ready to sell my Razor and buy the IOR.

All of those things are there in real life. But what I also found was:

The reticle is WAY to thick for MY needs holding wind at long range. I thought the reticle on the Razor was too thick, but really appreciated it's feel after looking through the IOR for some time. Most of my shooting is at maximum magnification, so the thinner reticle is not a big deal to me, in fact it's a benefit when shooting for precision.

The IOR glass IS phenomenal. Almost NO CA which IS apparent in my Razor. Brightness was similar, as was definition. Eyebox on the IOR was twice as forgiving.

The fit and finish of the IOR reminded me of a 1975 Lamborghini Countach I sat in. The car had legendary performance, but the cardboard dash and funky controls in the cockpit made me worry about the rest of the car. To me, the IOR is similar after handling the Razor.

The clicks feel similar to the Razor, but everything else about the Razor just feels more like a Mercedes or a Rolex. Solid. Rugged. Quality. Confidence inspiring.

The IOR elevation knob had a irregular feel as it turned through it's rotation. Everything about the Razor is precise and consistent.

The magnification ring on the IOR was almost unusable without the little lever they added. The Razor's is perfect... not to hard, not to easy.

I fondled the two scopes for an extended period, but after a good night's sleep... it was VERY clear to me that for ME and MY needs, the Razor is by far the better scope.

Others may have different priorities, so the outcome may be different. But I encourage you to really know what's important to you when you shop for a scope. Don't get fooled by features and hype. What works for another may not work for you.

It turned out to be a good exercise for me. Going in, I was dissatisfied with my Razor. Coming out, I had a greater appreciation for the finer details that had escaped my attention or that I took for granted. For Vortex's first Tactical style scope, the Razor is an excellent effort.

John

 

[springer01]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Did the IOR knob seem stiff in some spots throughout the rotation. I am noticing that with mine, but no major problem.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: springer01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did the IOR knob seem stiff in some spots throughout the rotation. I am noticing that with mine, but no major problem. </div></div>

I think that would describe what I felt. Stiff, easy, stiff, easy.

If I had bought an IOR without playing with the Razor, it probably would have escaped my notice. But everything about the Razor is SO precise and symmetrical.

John

 

[steve123]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The IOR elevation knob had a irregular feel as it turned through it's rotation.</div></div>

After reading your post about the IOR 3.5-18x50 I remembered when I was adjusting the zero stop on my IOR 6-24x56,that I had a similar problem with the irregular feel on the elevation knob.

I can't remember exactly how I adjusted the zero stop,turret depth and whatever else I did but I got rid of the dragging you felt.Tell your friend to fiddle around with it a little more.

Edit.. The turrets "feel" on my IOR are some of the best I've felt.

Seems to me all scopes have some likes and dislikes or shall I say prefered features.

 

[jrob300]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: steve123</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Seems to me all scopes have some likes and dislikes or shall I say prefered features. </div></div>

This is a very important truth... there is no perfect scope. Each one is a series of compromises, pros and cons for each of us as our needs and wants are VERY different.

John

 

[oneshot.onehit]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

The Razor HD

I will say I have not had the chance to look thru the IOR but I can state briefly my opinion of the Razor HD 5x20 with the EBR-3

For the most part I have been using the high end of the magnification range, even when setting up on extended distance targets I have not noticed any issues as far as the cross hairs being to thick, may it be my eyes or not but I think that the balance of magnification in relation to thickness is very desirable. Be it a bright day or in low light situations or heavy overcast it seems easy to get on and send it off.

The turrets are true and crisp as far as dialing up or down with a good report while running the scope and trusting the change versus glancing up to see when the moment doesn’t allow on short corrections.

The general appearance may look heavy and large but it’s made to handle almost anything that one would put it against and then some. All of the turrets are easy to reach and adjust without pissing around and the quality of the glass for the most part is right up there with some of the other high end scopes, in low light conditions the Razor still pulls a clear view and if ever needed, it is setup with a multitude of illuminated variations the can be picked from and then turned off by rotating back one click from what works for the given job.

I haven’t really noticed any CA issues, the scope tracks perfect, the clarity is very effective at getting the job done, in my opinion a well built piece. All in all I would say Vortex did well with this, having a scope that has the mechanics to serve the purpose and serve it well and at a fair price.

My only comment for improvement would be the eye box; a little more eye relief would be cool, not necessary because it works now, but just a little bit more would be a plus.

Yes, I like what I use

Just my opinion on my Razor set up with the EBR-3

 

[springer01]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

Yeah that's exactly how I would describe it. Plan to write up a review after a little more time behind it.

 

[oneshot.onehit]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: springer01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah that's exactly how I would describe it. Plan to write up a review after a little more time behind it. </div></div>


I’m not sure I understand the meaning behind your statement, but not a problem.

What would you justify as enough time allowed in order to give a hands on real time operation review of a gun or scope versus just someone thoughts or opinions on something they saw or picked up to look at, as well as used in the field?

There’s a lot of good equipment for the shooter these days, find something and put it to work.


I can do a review again later, works for me

 

[fdkay]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oneshot.onehit</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: springer01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah that's exactly how I would describe it. Plan to write up a review after a little more time behind it. </div></div>


I’m not sure I understand the meaning behind your statement, but not a problem.

What would you justify as enough time allowed in order to give a hands on real time operation review of a gun or scope versus just someone thoughts or opinions on something they saw or picked up to look at, as well as used in the field?

There’s a lot of good equipment for the shooter these days, find something and put it to work.


I can do a review again later, works for me

</div></div>
I'm sure he means to give it a more thorough and fair evaluation.
First impressions are long lasting, but sometimes don't tell the whole story.

When I first got my Faclon, I wasn't that impressed. I knew it was a budget scope but I had heard many glowing reports and I was honestly a bit disappointed.
After I spent some quality time behind it, I began to like it more and more. I now am very happy with it, though I did upgrade to an IOR 3-18x42.

 

[oneshot.onehit]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50



I have been using the scope since March, and in many different conditions as well, we will see what happens whenever the new thing is over, I agree – you are right about the new thing, some folks get all warm and happy about their toys and equipment and that’s ok, but some folks use what they have to get a job done without all the exaggerated pride.

I’ll run it for a while and maybe do a review down the road

 

[springer01]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oneshot.onehit</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: springer01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah that's exactly how I would describe it. Plan to write up a review after a little more time behind it. </div></div>


I’m not sure I understand the meaning behind your statement, but not a problem.

What would you justify as enough time allowed in order to give a hands on real time operation review of a gun or scope versus just someone thoughts or opinions on something they saw or picked up to look at, as well as used in the field?

There’s a lot of good equipment for the shooter these days, find something and put it to work.


I can do a review again later, works for me

</div></div>

I was referring to the knob adjustment that me and jrob were talking about. It was a reply to jrob not your post...

 

[FARGO]

Re: New IOR 3-18x50 vs.Vortex Razor 5-20x50

.