-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes New Tract Toric 4.5-30x56
- Thread starter Covertnoob5
- Start date
It kinda matches the paint job on your rifle.. i like it..
I was wondering the same thing lol. Mine is still on the delivery truck. Hope it gets here, plan on shooting tomorrow.
Some of my thoughts so far. Just my opinion..
Build quality seems outstanding. I'm impressed.. Magnification and paralax knobs are smooth from end to end. The paralax knob is pretty comparable to my XRS 2. They seem to be just right and good enough to zoom in and out easily without a throw lever but not too easily turned when bumped.
The turrets on this scope are not as crisp as I'd like them to be. They are somewhere between a PST gen 2 and a Razor Gen 1. My midas tac, Arken and Ares ETR are definitely more aggressive and crisp. I do love the ability to lock them on this toric. The zero stop was easy to set. It it very audible when you hit the stop and does not get stiff as you get closer to the zero stop like some other scopes.
The illumination of the reticle is nice and bright on max and so dim on low setting that I couldnt even tell it was on.
The glass looks very nice. I have not used it at far distances yet because I already mounted it and don't want to freak the neighbors out. Looking through the window, it is very good. I will bring it out to the range this weekend and try to give more of my input soon.
Build quality seems outstanding. I'm impressed.. Magnification and paralax knobs are smooth from end to end. The paralax knob is pretty comparable to my XRS 2. They seem to be just right and good enough to zoom in and out easily without a throw lever but not too easily turned when bumped.
The turrets on this scope are not as crisp as I'd like them to be. They are somewhere between a PST gen 2 and a Razor Gen 1. My midas tac, Arken and Ares ETR are definitely more aggressive and crisp. I do love the ability to lock them on this toric. The zero stop was easy to set. It it very audible when you hit the stop and does not get stiff as you get closer to the zero stop like some other scopes.
The illumination of the reticle is nice and bright on max and so dim on low setting that I couldnt even tell it was on.
The glass looks very nice. I have not used it at far distances yet because I already mounted it and don't want to freak the neighbors out. Looking through the window, it is very good. I will bring it out to the range this weekend and try to give more of my input soon.
It seems like a solid scope at the price point. I didn't get any instructions with the scope, so I'm not sure how the zero stop needs to be adjusted.
In the box is a zero stop ring. After you zero your rifle, remove the elevation turret and insert the ring in the elevation stem and turn it clockwise until it contacts the stop and won't turn anymore. When it stops, tighten the 4 hex screws on the zero stop ring. Install the elevation turret and you should be all set.
Took it out today, 100-600 yards. Comparison scope is my Athlon Ares ETR, which in my opinion the glass has held up very comparable in terms of clarity with decently high end scopes.
Originally spent a lot of time comparing quality at a closer distance, 35 yards in my backyard - This is at 30x.
Comparing to my Ares ETR @ 30x -
At 35 yards, the ETR is a tinge sharper/crisper. Dialing down the scope to 20-25x, the clarity on the Tract gets a lot better. This is just for 30x at 35 yards.
I spoke with Tract and they mentioned the scope was meant for longer range distances and to try it out further. Took it out to 100 around the house, and couldn't tell the difference between the Tract/ETR.
FOV @ 30x are identical between the Tract and the ETR. FOV @ 4.5x on the Tract is larger.
Went out today to 600 yards. Had a few people behind both scopes, they all liked Tract's thinner reticle. They couldn't tell the difference between the glass and didn't have a good winner. Now the ETR is very good glass - I've run it against AMG's and NF's and I think it holds well in terms of just comparing the clarity.
In terms of getting behind the glass, parallax, eyebox. Winner to Tract. It's hard to measure and judge eyebox, but I know different people found it easier to get behind the scope not hunt.
Parallax, super smooth. Can adjust it so easily and be so precise with it. I never liked the parallax on the ETR and found it way too finicky. Winner to Tract.
Turrets - locking turrets felt great. The hashmarks lined up perfectly, which is a definite pet peeve of mine and my ETR is a teensy off which annoys me. The clicks though are soft. The ETR clicks are much crisper and more pronounced. I don't think there's anything wrong with the clicks, just used to a bit harder and more aggressive. The locking mechanism is smooth. One thing though is the turrets on the Tract elevation is super tall, might get in the way of things.
Overall build quality is really nice. I do like from aesthetics the shorter body of the Tract. The craftsmanship is pretty top notch. Packaging materials were great - minus no instruction manual. I did find the same YouTube video above to set zero stop so no big deal.
I have this on my Terminus Zeus right now. Not sure yet what to do with my NRL22/NRL22X rig.
Originally spent a lot of time comparing quality at a closer distance, 35 yards in my backyard - This is at 30x.
Comparing to my Ares ETR @ 30x -
At 35 yards, the ETR is a tinge sharper/crisper. Dialing down the scope to 20-25x, the clarity on the Tract gets a lot better. This is just for 30x at 35 yards.
I spoke with Tract and they mentioned the scope was meant for longer range distances and to try it out further. Took it out to 100 around the house, and couldn't tell the difference between the Tract/ETR.
FOV @ 30x are identical between the Tract and the ETR. FOV @ 4.5x on the Tract is larger.
Went out today to 600 yards. Had a few people behind both scopes, they all liked Tract's thinner reticle. They couldn't tell the difference between the glass and didn't have a good winner. Now the ETR is very good glass - I've run it against AMG's and NF's and I think it holds well in terms of just comparing the clarity.
In terms of getting behind the glass, parallax, eyebox. Winner to Tract. It's hard to measure and judge eyebox, but I know different people found it easier to get behind the scope not hunt.
Parallax, super smooth. Can adjust it so easily and be so precise with it. I never liked the parallax on the ETR and found it way too finicky. Winner to Tract.
Turrets - locking turrets felt great. The hashmarks lined up perfectly, which is a definite pet peeve of mine and my ETR is a teensy off which annoys me. The clicks though are soft. The ETR clicks are much crisper and more pronounced. I don't think there's anything wrong with the clicks, just used to a bit harder and more aggressive. The locking mechanism is smooth. One thing though is the turrets on the Tract elevation is super tall, might get in the way of things.
Overall build quality is really nice. I do like from aesthetics the shorter body of the Tract. The craftsmanship is pretty top notch. Packaging materials were great - minus no instruction manual. I did find the same YouTube video above to set zero stop so no big deal.
I have this on my Terminus Zeus right now. Not sure yet what to do with my NRL22/NRL22X rig.
First impressions. Parallax and magnification ring is smooth with that perfect resistance. Machining looks and feels amazing.
The locking turrets feel like the doors sound in Star Trek. It's hard to explain, almost pneumatic like. The previous mentions on turret clicks to elaborate, they aren't harsh, but not mushy either. They are very identifiable and smooth. I have zero complaints on them.
The eyebox on 30 was not crazy tight, real easy to get behind.
Thoughts on it while shooting to come tomorrow.
My only issue so far, with comparison is 30x, @ 35 yards as shown in the reticle pictures above. The text is visibly clearer on my ETR @ 30x @ 35 yards. When I zoom out the Tract down to 20-25x, the clarity becomes better.
When comparing out to distance though I see no discernible difference at 30x. I shot 30x at 100, 200, and 600 yards yesterday and did not notice that the Tract was lacking. I also didn't notice that it was significantly better than the ETR either. Maybe I just have a really fantastic piece of ETR. Now seeing 30cal holes on paper at 100/200 isn't that hard. I'll shoot my rimfire today or tomorrow at 100/200 which I know is the edge of me seeing my groups with my ETR. It's a bit overcast and rainy today, so I'll compare it with the Tract. I'll try to snap some photo comparisons of 30x at 100/200y if I get it all setup.
I will see if my friends with an ATACR and S&B will be around this weekend to also do some comparisons.
Alright more testing today, unfired rifles, went purely to look at image clarity, ran them at 30x. 100y, 200y.
100 yards - Athlon Ares @ 30x
100y, Tract @ 30x
200y, Ares ETR @ 30x
200y, Tract @ 30x
That's about as much optical clarity testing as I'm going to do.
100 yards - Athlon Ares @ 30x
100y, Tract @ 30x
200y, Ares ETR @ 30x
200y, Tract @ 30x
That's about as much optical clarity testing as I'm going to do.
I also like the Gray. It works with the Gray on my MDT 
Regarding the scope shadow type look between the two scopes in my pictures, it's due to the tenebraex caps on the Tract that sits out further from the ocular lens. My cheap butler creep caps are much thinner and sit pretty flush against the ocular whereas the Tenebraex extend out a good 2/3cm or so. That adds that black ring. Though in actually shooting the scopes I see no difference in practical sense.
Just put the order in for my buddy. Putting it on a MPA 6.5cm. I’m hoping we can stretch out past 1500 yards.
Does the new 34 mm have the real small FOV like the 4-20 does?
That is my only complaint, the eyebox, when looking through it, just seems small compared to other scopes.
That is my only complaint, the eyebox, when looking through it, just seems small compared to other scopes.
The FOV is fine. The image being small, I would say yes, the 34mm feels like it has a small image, but I don't know what that means mathematically. It feels like the image is further away from the eyes, compared to other scopes. So it's like say you're watching a movie on a 32inch TV vs a 36 inch TV. The 36 inch TV doesn't show more movie, but the movie looks bigger. But then again in terms of reading text, I put a sheet where words got smaller and smaller and I could read no more lines on the Tract than my Ares ETR. I'll compare it to an S&B 5-25 and NF 7-35 next weekend.
I put another Tract on my Vudoo V22 and ran it through the NRL22X match dialing from 0 to 20.8mils. It performed great. I don't think I touched the parallax at all during the match, it was left at 150 and worked for all my targets from 25 to 400 yards. Never had an issue getting behind it or getting a crisp sight picture in all the different positions I was in. Hard to make any of those things scientific, but in usage, it felt great.
Tract has their elevation listed at 30mils, but mine has 35 mils. On a 40moa rail, my Vudoo has 27mils up on the 50yd zero, and 8 mils down left.
The one downside I would say that after running it in a match and doing holdovers, the #'s are every other on the right hand side. I was holding over 7 mils and I spent a little more time than I wanted just being safe that I was properly holding over on the line between the 6 and the 8. The more I'm using holdovers in matches, the more I think I might appreciate the mil #'s down the centerline (replacing the .2 hash). I'd give up the .2 mil wind precision for the #'s which I'd use more frequently for quick holdovers.
The reticle lines are really small and crisp. My eyes are luckily still good but I could see aging eyes having issues with it. But then having the really fine lines made me not feel like the reticle was too busy when I was trying to spot for impacts.
I had a few wind calls that were in the .5's and even though anyone can hold over between a .4 and a .6 hash, I found myself using the .5's really quickly. I felt I was able to index exactly where I wanted without counting, .2, .4 ,.6. Didn't have any hitches with the locking turrets, they worked great, easy lift and smooth move. Never had any issues where I clicked too far/too little. The magnification ring is really smooth, I put a throw lever on it, but I'm thinking of removing it as it's not necessary.
Tract has their elevation listed at 30mils, but mine has 35 mils. On a 40moa rail, my Vudoo has 27mils up on the 50yd zero, and 8 mils down left.
The one downside I would say that after running it in a match and doing holdovers, the #'s are every other on the right hand side. I was holding over 7 mils and I spent a little more time than I wanted just being safe that I was properly holding over on the line between the 6 and the 8. The more I'm using holdovers in matches, the more I think I might appreciate the mil #'s down the centerline (replacing the .2 hash). I'd give up the .2 mil wind precision for the #'s which I'd use more frequently for quick holdovers.
The reticle lines are really small and crisp. My eyes are luckily still good but I could see aging eyes having issues with it. But then having the really fine lines made me not feel like the reticle was too busy when I was trying to spot for impacts.
I had a few wind calls that were in the .5's and even though anyone can hold over between a .4 and a .6 hash, I found myself using the .5's really quickly. I felt I was able to index exactly where I wanted without counting, .2, .4 ,.6. Didn't have any hitches with the locking turrets, they worked great, easy lift and smooth move. Never had any issues where I clicked too far/too little. The magnification ring is really smooth, I put a throw lever on it, but I'm thinking of removing it as it's not necessary.
I listened to lowlight's podcast with Jeff Huber which was super insightful... different glass, Japanese vs European, and the different metrics. I don't remember all the details but it was like
Contrast
Resolution/Clarity
Light Emission
CA / Effects of Mirage
As the 3 main things, and you can't have it all and different mfg's will do different things on what they want to prioritize.
Doesn't answer your question sorry, as I don't scientifically have a way on all these attributes to do it justice. On Resolution/Clarity the scope right now performs equal to my Ares ETR, which performs better than Razor AMG, NF NXS, and couldn't spend enough time comparing the NF 7-35 yet. I haven't tested Light Emission, CA, or Mirage though.
Contrast
Resolution/Clarity
Light Emission
CA / Effects of Mirage
As the 3 main things, and you can't have it all and different mfg's will do different things on what they want to prioritize.
Doesn't answer your question sorry, as I don't scientifically have a way on all these attributes to do it justice. On Resolution/Clarity the scope right now performs equal to my Ares ETR, which performs better than Razor AMG, NF NXS, and couldn't spend enough time comparing the NF 7-35 yet. I haven't tested Light Emission, CA, or Mirage though.
Here's some low light shots, 30-40minute after sunset. Started at 30x, and then went down to 4.5x
30x Tract
30x ETR
4.5x Tract
4.5x ETR
Both perform pretty darn well at this low of light.
30x Tract
30x ETR
4.5x Tract
4.5x ETR
Both perform pretty darn well at this low of light.
I’m wondering what’s best for my MPA PMR Pro I ordered, the 4-20 or 4.5-30? I’m planning on trying PRS and also doing a little bit of longer range hunting back home in WY.
I got the 4.5-30 and love it. I doubt you'll regret the extra mag range
The other nice feature is the 34mm tube. I have mine on my 22 prs gun so having the extra adjustment range is nice
If you get the extra magnification you may not need a spotting scope. Just a thought
I don't see a purple line in the picture. I haven't noticed much CA.
I did spend these last 4 days shooting behind a Schmidt, Kahles, ZCO, and they all eat up mirage a decent better.
I'd say the closest glass I could compare to is the Razor AMG which is really close to the Tract.
After shooting in heavy mirage, I'm really considering now getting a Schmidt - if they put the Exos glass in an updated PM II that would be really really nice.
How does this compare to an ATACR 7-35. Looking for a long range optic for a 300prc I’m building and like all the elevation adjustment in the tract. Is there a 1200 dollar difference moving up to the Nightforce?
Glass is pretty good in the toric, I feel the 7-35 has better glass (subjective to my eyes) The turrets aren't in the same league. The eye box in the Nightforce is a little more forgiving. I am not a fan of the locking top turret mechanism in the toric. The atacr will focus down closer. If you could handle both I would try that.
The $1200+ scopes cut through mirage a little better. I'd say the Tract is a solid $2200 scope, but pushing into the $2500-3500 territory of the Schmidt's Kahles, NF, and ZCO, they cut through mirage better.
I personally like the locking turrets, got used to them pretty well, but I don't like how tall they are. I wish they were more lowkey like ZCO.
Tract focuses down to about 20y, but I never use it < 25y.
So I've skimmed back and forth through this thread and it seems as if there is some arguing regarding FOV numbers. Has anyone been able to get confirmed numbers for these scopes on low power? I'm asking about the 4-20 & 4.5-30 but more interested in the 34mm version.
The reason why I'm curious about this is because all my guns/scopes go hunting with me regardless of weight. I also go out night hunting with nothing but ambient light on days where the moon shines nice and bright. For that, I need low power.
I'm only considering it because I keep hearing how great this scope is. Some say it's in the league with vortex AMG, etc. However, if I were to get it, it would be replacing a tango6 4-24. That Sig scope has been one of my all time favorites. It is extremely bright, I find it very clear, and I love the mag range with its 6x erector.
Maybe I shouldn't be looking to replace or fix what's not broken. But a lot of people talk so highly of the Toric. If it is in fact an upgrade to my Sig, I'd like to consider it.
So, my main questions or concerns are below...
Is there only one reticle offered in the 34mm version?
Can we get confirmed FOV numbers? When I go to their website, I cannot find those numbers.
Is illumination day time bright and night time dim?
Is there any tunneling?
@Eoddave27, I believe you have owned both if I'm not mistaken. Would you be able to say if I'd be making an upgrade?
Thanks...
S
The reason why I'm curious about this is because all my guns/scopes go hunting with me regardless of weight. I also go out night hunting with nothing but ambient light on days where the moon shines nice and bright. For that, I need low power.
I'm only considering it because I keep hearing how great this scope is. Some say it's in the league with vortex AMG, etc. However, if I were to get it, it would be replacing a tango6 4-24. That Sig scope has been one of my all time favorites. It is extremely bright, I find it very clear, and I love the mag range with its 6x erector.
Maybe I shouldn't be looking to replace or fix what's not broken. But a lot of people talk so highly of the Toric. If it is in fact an upgrade to my Sig, I'd like to consider it.
So, my main questions or concerns are below...
Is there only one reticle offered in the 34mm version?
Can we get confirmed FOV numbers? When I go to their website, I cannot find those numbers.
Is illumination day time bright and night time dim?
Is there any tunneling?
@Eoddave27, I believe you have owned both if I'm not mistaken. Would you be able to say if I'd be making an upgrade?
Thanks...
S
Last edited:
1. Only 1 reticle available for the 34mm version.
2. I don't know how to calculate the FoV, but the #'s published on the site are known to be accurate. It has the same FoV as the Athlon Ares ETR / Athlon Cronus BTR and Leupold MK5 from my calculations.
3. Illumination is daytime bright on the highest setting (#11) and all the other settings let you have a variety of brightness depending on your lighting condition.
4. I don't really know what tunneling is, let me know how I could test for it.
Also 30 day return policy if you don't like it. So take advantage of it!
This is 4.5x @ 35 yards. That little piece of paper is a standard 8.5x11
Thank you for the reply. I'll look up the FOV numbers for Cronus then. I edited my post to show that I am actually not able to read the specs from Tract's website. It seems I am able to navigate to the page for that particular scope, but i get a huge area that is blank. Maybe my browser cannot load the information there, or their site is undergoing maintenance.
Anyhow, as I said, I'll go to Athlon's web page and look at the Cronus for FOV.
While the 30 day trial period is amazing, if I end up buying the Tract, it'll be because I have already sold the Sig it's replacing. I may be able to return the Tract within 30 days, but probably not buy back my Sig lol.
Anyhow, it does seem as if the arrows are all pointing to the Tract.
Yeh I went through a lot of back and forth... ultimately got a Tract. The other scopes that I found that beat it were all in the $2400-3300 price range.
this should show you what tunneling looks like
Thanks for the video. I notice no tunneling.
Impulse ordered one of these Monday night, shipped yesterday. Curious to see how it performs, but it's only going on a 22 so I may be overthinking things.
Yes. A lot of scopes made in the LOW factory in the past decade that have been very durable. Koshkin talks about this in his video review of the Cronus BTR.
I have two of the 4-20’s but I don’t have a 4.5-30. The turrets on the Tract are better than the Tango 6 turrets. That is really my only complaint with my Tango 6. For the glass I think the Tango 6 glass is a little better than my 4-20’s. I have used a friends 4.5-30 briefly but not enough to really compare the glass to my Tango 6. The Tango 6 I have handles CA better and I think is a little brighter and crisper than the 4-20 but I think the Tango 6 is a way underrated optic. Going from a 4-24 tango 6 to the 4.5-30 you are going to get better turrets and a little more magnification but that will be about it. For the glass I can’t say for sure but I would guess it would be close. If you can break even on the upgrade it would be worth it but if you have to come out of pocket with a significant amount of money It probably isn’t worth it.
That was my thought process exactly. That'd I'd be gaining very little on the "upgrade" if I did move forward with the switch.
I looked up the FOV @ 4X for the Athlon Cronus BTR since I was told the Cronus and Toric have the exact same FOV specs. To my surprise, it was just a tad bit larger than the FOV for the tango6. That's one gain so far. The other gain, is like you mentioned, in magnification.
Maybe i will also gain in the glass department but the only way to determine that is for me to have both side by side and come to that conclusion after looking through them.
I guess for now I may just as well decide to keep my tango6. It has served me very very well and I believe the image I get with it is pretty damn good.
Yeh if it's not a huge upgrade then don't bother. My main reasons for upgrading were -
Better parallax. The Tract had a much better parallax than my Ares ETR.
More forgiving eye box.
Shorter scope.
Slightly nicer reticle.
I also really like the turrets on the Tract.
Glass I didn't notice any improvement.
I have one on the way. I got it because I like nice glass on my guns. And I like my guns. The Thor I just bought to go on a Texas Hog hunt looks like it's on hold so looks like just the normal shooting and hunting for this year. I'm a little old for the PRS shooting at 57 years. But PRS has done a lot in the way I look at guns and gear.
