I've been going back and forth between the Arken SH4G2 and Razor HDG2 for a while now trying to decide what to run, just finding it really interesting and a little crazy how close they are when you forget about their price tags. Honestly comparing them against each other head to head, again, without considering price, and based off the particular Arken example I have, if the other ones out there are as good as mine, I think comparing them against any other scopes below the Razor's tier (less than $2000 MSRP) is pointless, it's better than all of them, full stop (and it isn't even close really).
IMO the SH4G2 is almost equal to the Razor HDG2. But, really though, for maybe 80-90% of the shooters out there who don't shoot out to 1000 yards regularly, they might as well be be the same scope.
I can only find 2 areas where the Razor HDG2 really distinguishes itself, and I couldn't really figure it out or notice see it until I mounted the Razor up right after the Arken back to back, on the same gun: depth of field and mirage/trace. *(Well, really 3 things...)
Looking at them static next to each other, and not running them for real, there are some things I actually do prefer about the Arken that may be better for modern PRS/NRL-type shooting like: (just my tastes here maybe) the Arken's VPR reticle is way more "open" and less fatiguing to look through then the Razor's (though in-general the EBR-7C is as good or better than anything out there), I feel like it makes it easier to spot impacts/splash, and I feel like most shooters receive more benefit from less clutter than they do from those rare occasions where you really use all those extra lines. IMHO there's no reason to always be looking through a "screen door" if we don't need to, but then I'd prefer to run a German #4 over a Horus or a Tremor, so that's just my taste I guess. I also have grown to prefer the Arken's turrets with the big wide clunks instead of "tick-tick-tick" and 8mils per revolution: I'm getting older and my eyes aren't getting any better and the Arken is just plain easier to read, big numbers are good.
On the gun, the Razor does show its pedigree, not saying one can't shoot the Arken and get the same results, because I've done it, in my experience the Arken's glass is good out to 1250+ yards, and really the glass between the two looks real similar. But, with the Razor it just feels like the difference between an SD and HD TV (if there are any SD TV's still out there for guys to know what I mean), it just seems more 3D and HiFi, the difference isn't huge, IMO it's closer to "Princess and the Pea" territory than real capability, but yeah, it's there, and it does look better. Mirage and trace is a different deal entirely with the Razor vs the Arken: the Arken cuts through close-in mirage better than most, and does allow one to read a fair amount of it downrange too through the glass, but you only have too look through the Razor for few seconds before your eyes relax and reveal what's really happening downrange, it "sees" through close-in mirage (like coming off a hot barrel) better and longer, yet downrange it allows one to see multiple layers of mirage which really does help with wind calls IMO. Also, bullet trace pops out compared to the Arken, it can almost look like a smoke trail for a second with the Razor sometimes when its really humid.That's pretty much the "it" right there that the Razor does better: it allows one to see the stuff that's mostly invisible better.
Is that worth the extra loot? IDK, depends on one's tastes I guess, I'm starting to think it is for me, but if I couldn't afford the more expensive scope I wouldn't feel bad or under equipped at all.
* The #3 the Razor has is its track-record/piece of mind: the Razor has been out for years and there are a lot of them out there that have been run hard, and had multiple owners, on all kinds of different guns, and in all kinds of different weather., and you almost never hear of them taking a dump. And if they do, I've heard Vortex will go as far as to overnight you a loaner if you've got a match or are in a jam where you need a scope.
Like it or not, all of us on the Arken train are beta testers to a certain degree, just are, there aren't enough of them that have been put through the shit out there... so far so good, so for most it's no big deal considering the performance per dollar.
But, as one gets deeper into the game to where they're dropping ~$300 in entry fees, and then another ~$500-600 for gas/hotel/food/supplies, ~$??? ammo, to shoot one of the bigger 2-day matches... that track-record/piece of mind thing becomes a bigger deal, and considering how expensive this hobby can get, there is a point where spending a little more for stuff that's proven makes real sense.
For 99.9999% of those just getting into long range the Arken is a no brainer.
For someone going on to their 3rd barrel in less than a year, IDK?... one of these is going in the PX soon, still not sure which, and it might come down to a coin-flip, they're that
