I had a guy tell me he used to shoot with SB but the razor was as good or better and that he would bet his life on it! I am having a hard time believing this soooo please, inform me. I wont spend the extra cabbage if I don't need to.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes SB vs. vortex razor
- Thread starter nobody13
- Start date
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
Vortex makes an excellent scope in the Razor and if I was looking to keep costs below $2000 they would be the best choice. Good features and reticle choices. I have owned 3.
That said I wouldn't swap out my S&Bs for one.
Vortex makes an excellent scope in the Razor and if I was looking to keep costs below $2000 they would be the best choice. Good features and reticle choices. I have owned 3.
That said I wouldn't swap out my S&Bs for one.
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
bet his life on it? let me guess another wannabe operator? what part of montana are you from?
bet his life on it? let me guess another wannabe operator? what part of montana are you from?
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
i have both, and while i like my vortex razor, i love my S&B, it`s worth spending the extra $, to get the top of the line performance you get
i have both, and while i like my vortex razor, i love my S&B, it`s worth spending the extra $, to get the top of the line performance you get
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
Maybe the 1200 left in the pocket left over from buying the razor vs Schmidt . I have never been behind a razor but I use nightforce scopes on my rigs and have been able to shoot a few rifles with the schmidts on them and could definitely see a difference between them and the nightforce
Maybe the 1200 left in the pocket left over from buying the razor vs Schmidt . I have never been behind a razor but I use nightforce scopes on my rigs and have been able to shoot a few rifles with the schmidts on them and could definitely see a difference between them and the nightforce
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
I shoot a Razor HD. I have shot S&B, Zeiss, Hensoldt, NXS, etc.
You get what you pay for. However...at 12 o'clock when the mirage is up it all looks like shit.
If you have the extra dough to spend on a S&B, then it's money well spent. If you don't then don't worry. I have yet to miss a shot that I would have been able to make if I had $4K worth of glass on top.
The margin between $2k scopes and $4k scopes is VERY narrow. It's there, it's just very small for the price jump.
I shoot a Razor HD. I have shot S&B, Zeiss, Hensoldt, NXS, etc.
You get what you pay for. However...at 12 o'clock when the mirage is up it all looks like shit.
If you have the extra dough to spend on a S&B, then it's money well spent. If you don't then don't worry. I have yet to miss a shot that I would have been able to make if I had $4K worth of glass on top.
The margin between $2k scopes and $4k scopes is VERY narrow. It's there, it's just very small for the price jump.
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
What a lot of people don't understand about this whole scope thing is that it comes down to a LOT of subjective, personal opinion. What works for one guy is "garbage" to another.
Just getting the features that you really need/want in any one package is hard enough, but then throw in subjective criteria such as quality of glass, low light performance, quality of clicks on the turrets, zeroes line up, durability of the paint, etc., ad nauseum...
That said, I think the Vortex Razor is an extremely impressive scope for the money and if all I were doing is shooting tactical steel matches with it, it would be just about perfect for my needs. But there's always that one other thing I want my scope to do...
I did get to lie behind a fellow competitors S-B at the Potomac Match (you should join us sometime... you could get a gander through quite a few different scopes)and was immediately impressed. The glass was noticeably crisper and a little brighter (which is saying a lot... I think the Razor has outstanding glass) and I like the elevation on the turrets and the P4F reticle would be perfect for the all around shooting I do. But cost is a serious issue for me, so at this point I went the opposite direction and currently am sporting the DMR with G2 reticle. With the exception of lack of zero stop and a definite downgrade in glass, it accomplishes the tasks I demand from it for nearly 1/3 the cost of the S-B. Right now, that is the overriding factor for me.
You cannot let someone else tell you what scope is right for you. Figure out what you want to do with it. Ask for advice on which scopes might fulfill that role, try to get behind them and then if you still even have a choice, pick the one that you feel better about. Otherwise, you're going to be spending as much time in the For Sale section as I do... I'm never happy.
John
What a lot of people don't understand about this whole scope thing is that it comes down to a LOT of subjective, personal opinion. What works for one guy is "garbage" to another.
Just getting the features that you really need/want in any one package is hard enough, but then throw in subjective criteria such as quality of glass, low light performance, quality of clicks on the turrets, zeroes line up, durability of the paint, etc., ad nauseum...
That said, I think the Vortex Razor is an extremely impressive scope for the money and if all I were doing is shooting tactical steel matches with it, it would be just about perfect for my needs. But there's always that one other thing I want my scope to do...
You cannot let someone else tell you what scope is right for you. Figure out what you want to do with it. Ask for advice on which scopes might fulfill that role, try to get behind them and then if you still even have a choice, pick the one that you feel better about. Otherwise, you're going to be spending as much time in the For Sale section as I do... I'm never happy.
John
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What a lot of people don't understand about this whole scope thing is that it comes down to a LOT of subjective, personal opinion. What works for one guy is "garbage" to another.
Just getting the features that you really need/want in any one package is hard enough, but then throw in subjective criteria such as quality of glass, low light performance, quality of clicks on the turrets, zeroes line up, durability of the paint, etc., ad nauseum...
That said, I think the Vortex Razor is an extremely impressive scope for the money and if all I were doing is shooting tactical steel matches with it, it would be just about perfect for my needs. But there's always that one other thing I want my scope to do...
I did get to lie behind a fellow competitors S-B at the Potomac Match (you should join us sometime... you could get a gander through quite a few different scopes)and was immediately impressed. The glass was noticeably crisper and a little brighter (which is saying a lot... I think the Razor has outstanding glass) and I like the elevation on the turrets and the P4F reticle would be perfect for the all around shooting I do. But cost is a serious issue for me, so at this point I went the opposite direction and currently am sporting the DMR with G2 reticle. With the exception of lack of zero stop and a definite downgrade in glass, it accomplishes the tasks I demand from it for nearly 1/3 the cost of the S-B. Right now, that is the overriding factor for me.
You cannot let someone else tell you what scope is right for you. Figure out what you want to do with it. Ask for advice on which scopes might fulfill that role, try to get behind them and then if you still even have a choice, pick the one that you feel better about. Otherwise, you're going to be spending as much time in the For Sale section as I do... I'm never happy.
John </div></div>
John, although I agree with a lot of what you say, there are certain points where I believe you are off the mark. Quality of glass and the quality of low light performance, i.e. coatings, are not "subjective". These are elements that can be measured and quantified, albeit it not be the average Joe, but I guarantee you it's there.
Other than that I think you're spot on. Personal preferences do play a role as far as things such as clicks go. (Personally, I don't care for the S&B clicks and find the Bushnell and Vortex 100x better).
The best advice is get behind everything you're interested in and buy once, cry once.
You get what you pay for with scopes.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What a lot of people don't understand about this whole scope thing is that it comes down to a LOT of subjective, personal opinion. What works for one guy is "garbage" to another.
Just getting the features that you really need/want in any one package is hard enough, but then throw in subjective criteria such as quality of glass, low light performance, quality of clicks on the turrets, zeroes line up, durability of the paint, etc., ad nauseum...
That said, I think the Vortex Razor is an extremely impressive scope for the money and if all I were doing is shooting tactical steel matches with it, it would be just about perfect for my needs. But there's always that one other thing I want my scope to do...
You cannot let someone else tell you what scope is right for you. Figure out what you want to do with it. Ask for advice on which scopes might fulfill that role, try to get behind them and then if you still even have a choice, pick the one that you feel better about. Otherwise, you're going to be spending as much time in the For Sale section as I do... I'm never happy.
John </div></div>
John, although I agree with a lot of what you say, there are certain points where I believe you are off the mark. Quality of glass and the quality of low light performance, i.e. coatings, are not "subjective". These are elements that can be measured and quantified, albeit it not be the average Joe, but I guarantee you it's there.
Other than that I think you're spot on. Personal preferences do play a role as far as things such as clicks go. (Personally, I don't care for the S&B clicks and find the Bushnell and Vortex 100x better).
The best advice is get behind everything you're interested in and buy once, cry once.
You get what you pay for with scopes.
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
I have the Razor and have looked thru the S&B while on the line from a competitors rig and the first thing that came to mind was how the hell can anybody say the Razor is just as good? The S&B's glass is far superior. I didn't turn the turrets because in a match it would have gotten my ass kicked!!
I have the Razor and have looked thru the S&B while on the line from a competitors rig and the first thing that came to mind was how the hell can anybody say the Razor is just as good? The S&B's glass is far superior. I didn't turn the turrets because in a match it would have gotten my ass kicked!!
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">John, although I agree with a lot of what you say, there are certain points where I believe you are off the mark. Quality of glass and the quality of low light performance, i.e. coatings, are not "subjective". These are elements that can be measured and quantified, albeit it not be the average Joe, but I guarantee you it's there.
Other than that I think you're spot on. Personal preferences do play a role as far as things such as clicks go. (Personally, I don't care for the S&B clicks and find the Bushnell and Vortex 100x better).
The best advice is get behind everything you're interested in and buy once, cry once.
You get what you pay for with scopes. </div></div>
Mike,
You are absolutely right. I worded that poorly and that is one of the reasons I try to do some sort of objective testing when I review scopes.
What I should have said is that those things are almost like a feature in many ways. One person values lowlight performance, another could care less. Sharp glass is a showstopper for one and not another. Personal preference is a lot of what works for us and what doesn't and spending a lot of money doesn't necessarily guarantee that I'll be happy with a scope. There are a lot of factors that come into play. Not just price.
Not picking on your wording here, it's just a lot of threads on the Hide would seem to the novice that if he spends a lot of money on a scope he will get a good one. And he probably will get a good one, but not necessarily one that will make him happy or fit his need and that is what I unsuccessfully tried to communicate in my first post.
John
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">John, although I agree with a lot of what you say, there are certain points where I believe you are off the mark. Quality of glass and the quality of low light performance, i.e. coatings, are not "subjective". These are elements that can be measured and quantified, albeit it not be the average Joe, but I guarantee you it's there.
Other than that I think you're spot on. Personal preferences do play a role as far as things such as clicks go. (Personally, I don't care for the S&B clicks and find the Bushnell and Vortex 100x better).
The best advice is get behind everything you're interested in and buy once, cry once.
You get what you pay for with scopes. </div></div>
Mike,
You are absolutely right. I worded that poorly and that is one of the reasons I try to do some sort of objective testing when I review scopes.
What I should have said is that those things are almost like a feature in many ways. One person values lowlight performance, another could care less. Sharp glass is a showstopper for one and not another. Personal preference is a lot of what works for us and what doesn't and spending a lot of money doesn't necessarily guarantee that I'll be happy with a scope. There are a lot of factors that come into play. Not just price.
Not picking on your wording here, it's just a lot of threads on the Hide would seem to the novice that if he spends a lot of money on a scope he will get a good one. And he probably will get a good one, but not necessarily one that will make him happy or fit his need and that is what I unsuccessfully tried to communicate in my first post.
John
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
Hey Jon sorry for butting in off topic but I shoot the Potomac matches also, arctic camo rifle hope to shoot there again in september. Very good mid range course you guys have out there.
Hey Jon sorry for butting in off topic but I shoot the Potomac matches also, arctic camo rifle hope to shoot there again in september. Very good mid range course you guys have out there.
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
Two of the biggest things that determine top of the pack vs very good are:
Low light performance
Image resolving clarity
These two are where you pay the big money, because top grade perfect glass and top of the line coatings just don't come cheap. If you take a mid range good scope and put it up against one of the top tier scopes and then try to see how far away you can see your bullet holes crisp and clear in the target, you'll see what I mean.
Two of the biggest things that determine top of the pack vs very good are:
Low light performance
Image resolving clarity
These two are where you pay the big money, because top grade perfect glass and top of the line coatings just don't come cheap. If you take a mid range good scope and put it up against one of the top tier scopes and then try to see how far away you can see your bullet holes crisp and clear in the target, you'll see what I mean.
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
I have the distinct advantage of being very close to a large optics dealer. I have had the opportunity to set up and closely compare many optics.
That said I am certainly no expert. I own S&B's, Hensoldt, NF, and others. I do not own the Razor but have been able to look thru them enough to know that they are a very fine optic for the price. I would not hesitate to buy one if I were looking to stay in that price range.
I am convinced that Vortex is doing a great job, and they are determined to continue to improve and offer great quality optics.
I have the distinct advantage of being very close to a large optics dealer. I have had the opportunity to set up and closely compare many optics.
That said I am certainly no expert. I own S&B's, Hensoldt, NF, and others. I do not own the Razor but have been able to look thru them enough to know that they are a very fine optic for the price. I would not hesitate to buy one if I were looking to stay in that price range.
I am convinced that Vortex is doing a great job, and they are determined to continue to improve and offer great quality optics.
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
The Razors glass is certainly 100% adequate, but the S&B glass "pops", it is noticeably crisper. Is that crispness necessary; no it is not, but it does make it a nicer place to work. It's up to you to decide if it's worth the price difference.
The Razors glass is certainly 100% adequate, but the S&B glass "pops", it is noticeably crisper. Is that crispness necessary; no it is not, but it does make it a nicer place to work. It's up to you to decide if it's worth the price difference.
Re: SB vs. vortex razor
Scope quality is similar to horsepower. There's always more available for money, and the more you add, the more cost per increment of improvement. Difference being that with scopes, since most of us don't make our own, we're limited by what the various manufacturers turn out for us. S & B is right up there at the top.
If you're going to compare two scopes at the same price, that would be an objective exercise on a fairly cut and dried basis. Compare the clarity, light gathering ability, features, and so forth, then debate which one excels in the categories that best fit your requirements.
Comparing scopes with hugely different price points, such as the Razor HD and the S & B, is pretty subjective with the core issue being whether spending the extra money is more important than having the additional performance. Then you get into the amount of additional performance each scope offers, and so on down the road into a generalized debate over whether low-light is a big deal or not for your shooting requirements as opposed to clarity or whether the zero stop is critical. This is usually the bookend consideration for me - 1. how much do I want to spend? 2. what do I get for that money? 3. do I want to sell my grandmother for medical experiments to ratchet up the performance?
As to the OP's original question, the S & B is the gold standard out there. The Razor is a really fine scope that's built like a tank and more than adequate for any shooter I've ever had the pleasure of meeting.
And the other thing - good glass won't make a good shooter but a good shooter can shoot amazingly well with some pretty God-awful equipment. Champion shooters can pick up a crap rifle with a crap scope and embarrass everybody on the range except other champion shooters. Those guys have their fundamentals down so pat that they truly have no room for improvement, and almost all of them have physiological abilities that the rest of us weren't born with. When they compete against each other the equipment does matter, but for the rest of us not so much. Barring the Zombie Apocalypse, I'll never have to make a life or death shot with a long gun, and given the quality of just about every modern scope manufacture I'll never be equipment limited, either. So I'd say that the S & B is "better" than the Vortex in every measurable quality, but not by differences that are going to matter to anybody but shooters with unusual ability and years of training and practice.
Scope quality is similar to horsepower. There's always more available for money, and the more you add, the more cost per increment of improvement. Difference being that with scopes, since most of us don't make our own, we're limited by what the various manufacturers turn out for us. S & B is right up there at the top.
If you're going to compare two scopes at the same price, that would be an objective exercise on a fairly cut and dried basis. Compare the clarity, light gathering ability, features, and so forth, then debate which one excels in the categories that best fit your requirements.
Comparing scopes with hugely different price points, such as the Razor HD and the S & B, is pretty subjective with the core issue being whether spending the extra money is more important than having the additional performance. Then you get into the amount of additional performance each scope offers, and so on down the road into a generalized debate over whether low-light is a big deal or not for your shooting requirements as opposed to clarity or whether the zero stop is critical. This is usually the bookend consideration for me - 1. how much do I want to spend? 2. what do I get for that money? 3. do I want to sell my grandmother for medical experiments to ratchet up the performance?
As to the OP's original question, the S & B is the gold standard out there. The Razor is a really fine scope that's built like a tank and more than adequate for any shooter I've ever had the pleasure of meeting.
And the other thing - good glass won't make a good shooter but a good shooter can shoot amazingly well with some pretty God-awful equipment. Champion shooters can pick up a crap rifle with a crap scope and embarrass everybody on the range except other champion shooters. Those guys have their fundamentals down so pat that they truly have no room for improvement, and almost all of them have physiological abilities that the rest of us weren't born with. When they compete against each other the equipment does matter, but for the rest of us not so much. Barring the Zombie Apocalypse, I'll never have to make a life or death shot with a long gun, and given the quality of just about every modern scope manufacture I'll never be equipment limited, either. So I'd say that the S & B is "better" than the Vortex in every measurable quality, but not by differences that are going to matter to anybody but shooters with unusual ability and years of training and practice.
