I'm looking for a riflescope, I came across the Viper PST Gen 2 and the Razor Gen 2, one of which I'm going to buy, just not sure which one. I just don't know if spending the extra for the Razor is worth it. I'm just looking for some input on the differences between the two, and what you do or don't like about them. I should throw in that I am stationed overseas, so I can't just go down to the gunstore and try them out. Any and all feedback would be greatly appreciated.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Viper vs Razor
- Thread starter shedhead22
- Start date
I don't have any experience with the Razor but have four of the Vipers. I also wondered whether or not the extra expense for the Razor was worth it.
Given the limited range I have with the rifles that the scopes are on, I decided that the Razor would be overkill. The rifles are all chambered for .308, .22-250, .5.56mm and .22LR. With that said, I couldn't see myself shooting past 1000 yards with the center fire rifles. So, again, the Razor would have been overkill.
I'm saving for an MPA rifle in 6.5CM. I'll be able to shoot to 1000 yards and a little beyond with that cartridge. So, I will probably top it with the Razor as it makes more sense for the increased range capability.
I liked the Viper so much that I got four of them and haven't looked back.
Given the limited range I have with the rifles that the scopes are on, I decided that the Razor would be overkill. The rifles are all chambered for .308, .22-250, .5.56mm and .22LR. With that said, I couldn't see myself shooting past 1000 yards with the center fire rifles. So, again, the Razor would have been overkill.
I'm saving for an MPA rifle in 6.5CM. I'll be able to shoot to 1000 yards and a little beyond with that cartridge. So, I will probably top it with the Razor as it makes more sense for the increased range capability.
I liked the Viper so much that I got four of them and haven't looked back.
From what I've heard there's definitely a difference between the two in terms of overall image quality. I think it comes down to weight and distance. How much weight are you comfortable putting on your stick and how far do you plan on shooting. If your answer to either of those questions was "not much" i'd go with a viper.
Also, @Longshot231 I'd see if shortshot231 is available until you get that 6.5
The two key discriminators between the two (IMHO) are ruggedness and glass quality. The Razors are tanks; track well and has a very robust design. The Vipers are good glass for the money, but (obviously) are not nearly as robust or clear.
That being said, the Razors are heavy (mainly due to the robust design; they are overbuilt).
That being said, the Razors are heavy (mainly due to the robust design; they are overbuilt).
I know I'm going to be accused of blasphemy but to my tired old eyes, there's little or no difference in the glass between the Gen 2 PST and the Gen 2 Razor. Certainly not $2,000 worth. Especially the 3-15 PST. That said, I'm not a professional optics evaluator but I have looked thru the scopes in question.
I haven’t played with the Gen 2 PST. I owned a gen 1 pst 6-24x50 ffp and now own a Razor Gen 2 4.5-27. The Razor is a much better scope optically. One thing I hated about the PST was how blurry it started to get in the 18-20x range. The Razor presents a much cleaner image throughout the mag range and is a more robust scope.
The difference between the gen 1 pst and gen 2 razor was well worth the cost to me, though by all accounts the gen 2 pst glass is improved over the one I had.
The price difference between the two is more like $1000 if you shop around.
The difference between the gen 1 pst and gen 2 razor was well worth the cost to me, though by all accounts the gen 2 pst glass is improved over the one I had.
The price difference between the two is more like $1000 if you shop around.
I have both and I can tell you there is a huge overall difference between the two. The Razor Gen 2 is a far superior scope and well worth the the $1000 difference in price. Optically better, mechanically better. Only thing the PST Gen 2 beats it on is weight, but there was a time when American men wouldn't even think twice about a few ounces if it meant getting something better. I get if you are trekking through the mountains on a hunt shaving every ounce, but for PRS or just prone shooting.....come on girls man up.
I haven’t owned any Gen2 PST scopes, but I’ve owned at least 8 of the Gen1 PST’s, 2 of the Gen1 Razors, and currently own a couple of Gen2 Razors and AMG’s. IMO, if it’s not gonna be used for hunting where you’d be hiking a lot of miles, then go with the Gen2 Razor. Or, if you don’t mind the extra weight, then you could. I’d totally lug mine around when out hunting but I did get the AMG for that reason just to shave a little weight. Anyways, I felt that the Gen2 Razor is a nice step up from the Gen1 Razors and a huge step up from the PST’s. Just depends on how much $ you’re willing to throw at this. For me, I’m all for ponying up the coin for quality products. If I do need to sell something though, I’ve found that I can get more $ back with the higher end gear compared to what I could get for the lower tier gear. Anyways, good luck with your choice sir!
The PST Gen II is a good scope but not in the same league as the Razor II. Razor has betetr glass and overall is a tougher optic. If you can swing the Razor II then you will never have to worry about upgrading the scope in the future. If not then get the Gen II PST and have fun.
Also there is not a $2000 difference between the two. Depending on where you buy it can be as low as $900.
Also there is not a $2000 difference between the two. Depending on where you buy it can be as low as $900.
This shop around. Gen II razors can be had much lower than retail.
FWIW the pst gen IIs are nice for the money. A large improvement over the Gen I and the failure rate is less than 5% last i heard.
Off topic but I’m curious to see if the XTR III tries to wedge itself in the 1500 gap.
I have both and they are great optics from a great company. The Razor feels like you could break up concrete with it.
On another note, I send my Razor back to vortex recently (had a small black spot internally on the glass), they thoroughly went through the scope and fixed any issues, changed my beat up battery cap, paid for shipping, turned it around in 2 days, and threw in a very nice hat. Incredible customer service.
The Razor is in a different class of scope, but they are both very good.
On another note, I send my Razor back to vortex recently (had a small black spot internally on the glass), they thoroughly went through the scope and fixed any issues, changed my beat up battery cap, paid for shipping, turned it around in 2 days, and threw in a very nice hat. Incredible customer service.
The Razor is in a different class of scope, but they are both very good.
I own both and agree with most everything already stated. I would add that optically, the PST Gen2 under 18X - 20X magnification does a great job pretending to be more expensive than it cost. The Razor gets you a VERY forgiving eye-box and a bright vivid image at all magnification and will show you everything you did not know you were missing. To me the PST Gen2 is perfectly serviceable and would not hold anyone back. The Razor adds a level of enjoyment when looking through it.
I also have both. I started with a Gen PST 6X24. Sold it right before the GENII PST dropped and bought a Gen II razor 4.5x27. It is all the scope I will ever need. It’s a tank and has very nice turrets.
I then got a Vudoo .22 and decided to try a Gen II PST 5X25 and I am impressed with it as well.
No it’s not as clear and the turrets are not as nice but that’s only because I can compare them side by side. If I wasn’t able to do that I would have a hard time justifying the money the razor cost.
When you can get the PST for sub $1000 and the razor for $1800 on here I would take either you could afford.
I then got a Vudoo .22 and decided to try a Gen II PST 5X25 and I am impressed with it as well.
No it’s not as clear and the turrets are not as nice but that’s only because I can compare them side by side. If I wasn’t able to do that I would have a hard time justifying the money the razor cost.
When you can get the PST for sub $1000 and the razor for $1800 on here I would take either you could afford.
I had pst2 5-25 and still have the razor 2. To me, the pst2 was useless above 18-20, below that it wasn't bad and could almost hang with the razor2. But my eyes got tired looking thru the pst2 for long periods of time. If it's for nothing too serious, then the pst2 will be fine.
Other than the glass quality and overall build quality, don't forget the razor has significantly more elevation adjustment than the pst by using a 34mm main tube vs the 30mm on the pst. This could prove a big issue when dialing for distance depending on how far you shoot. I own several vortex razors among other scopes including Nightforce and S&B and feel the razor gives up nothing them except weight. Also Razor gen2s can be had for very cheap here on the Optics PX, regularly going for $1650-$1900. Get the razor and be done with it!
Similar threads
