-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Vortex Razor for my Vudoo.
- Thread starter dupe34
- Start date
It's heavy.
I would prefer to go with the
Vortex Razor HD AMG 6-24.
NF NX8 4-32 Mil-XT
Athlon Cronus BTR / Athlon Ares ETR.
I would prefer to go with the
Vortex Razor HD AMG 6-24.
NF NX8 4-32 Mil-XT
Athlon Cronus BTR / Athlon Ares ETR.
Depends on your budget of course,but i put a strike eagle 5-25x56 on my vudoo it parralax down to 15 if i remember right.
Nothing wrong with the Razor II on the Vudoo. Yes it's heavier than others but then you have people adding weights to their rifles as well so more weight isn't usually an issue. It does parallax down to 32 yards but you can dial power down and get below that. At about 20x you can get to 25 yards.
I have run a AMG, Strike Eagle, Razor II 3-18 and 4.5-27x on my Vudoo and never had any issues with balance with any of them.
48.5 ounce Razor II 4.5-27
30.4 ounce Strike Eagle 5-25x56
I have run a AMG, Strike Eagle, Razor II 3-18 and 4.5-27x on my Vudoo and never had any issues with balance with any of them.
48.5 ounce Razor II 4.5-27
30.4 ounce Strike Eagle 5-25x56
Razor is not the best choice for NRL22. I already have a few so I will most likely be running one on the vudoo when it comes in.
A strike eagle or Bushnell HDMR CR would be better suited for the task.
A strike eagle or Bushnell HDMR CR would be better suited for the task.
Mostly parallax.
Strike eagle is nearly as clear and has very useable turrets.
Op also mentioned “dropping the money”SE is a better value for the .22 game.
You already know this though.
Strike eagle is nearly as clear and has very useable turrets.
Op also mentioned “dropping the money”SE is a better value for the .22 game.
You already know this though.
There is nothing wrong with the parallax on the Razor. You can adjust down just fine by dropping power. That is fine for NRL ranges. Have shot many NRL matches with the Razor.
And price has nothing to do with being a good choice. It has to do with being a good value and I agree the SE is a good value for a .22 but it is not a Razor. If he wants a Razor then it will do fine for him. There are people running $4000 optics on their NRL22 rifles so doesn’t make them a bad choice.
I went with an Athlon Cronus BTR Gen 2 APRS6, still waiting on my Vudoo should be here in a month.
I have 2 razors and 6 s.e. and they are a good value esp.if you get them on a military or l.e. duscount.... I also have a nf atacr and a kahles but wish I didnt buy them due to what i do with them. I have a scope addiction... I don't think its noticable,,,is it??
I run the 3-18 razor gen 2 and love it. Didn’t want to spend the extra cash considering on most stages I don’t bring my magnification above 14, only use all of it sighting in. A little heavy but I find it to be a good thing for the style of shooting. Great glass, turrets, and overall ease of use under pressure. My personal favorite in the price range from what I’ve been able to try.
Funny. Guys buy pricey Eley, SK, RWS, and Lapua match ammo for 22lr comps. They buy a Vudoo rifle- in the same ballpark as a customCF rifle. But they want a "value" optic for shooting 1/2 MOA targets- because "it's just a 22..."
If you want to go out any play on the weekend, go for it. But, if you want to compete and be competitive, expect to pay for it- like as much as you would for your CF rifle setup.
And re weight. If you are considering adding weights to your rifle, then a "heavy" scope isn't a problem. You're not humping it 20 miles over mountains. You're moving a few inches/feet from obstacle to obstacle, and then a few feet/yards from stage to stage.
If you want to go out any play on the weekend, go for it. But, if you want to compete and be competitive, expect to pay for it- like as much as you would for your CF rifle setup.
And re weight. If you are considering adding weights to your rifle, then a "heavy" scope isn't a problem. You're not humping it 20 miles over mountains. You're moving a few inches/feet from obstacle to obstacle, and then a few feet/yards from stage to stage.
Will definitely work, had it on mine before i switched. It's a monster tho, heavy and i had to run full weights on my XLR. Turrets are amazing and no issues with parallax.
I switched because I found a reticle i really liked. Let go the razor. I'll be looking for NX8 mil-xt for my wife's build in near future
I switched because I found a reticle i really liked. Let go the razor. I'll be looking for NX8 mil-xt for my wife's build in near future
I have a ZCO after shooting heavy mirage on my 6GT and noticing that my Razor was not anywhere near the optical clarity of the S&B, Kahles, and ZCO when looking at targets at 800+ yards on mirage days. So then I grabbed a ZCO, but stopped centerfire shooting so I put it on my rimfire.
I'd say it's pretty overkill. I rarely shoot anything over 200 yards on the rimfire due to local range distances. In terms of light gathering, etc, again don't need that much for rimfire as I'm not shooting at dusk/dawn.
Optical clarity at close distances I think any scope in Strike Eagle and above works fine.
I don't think i said anything about wanting a cheap scope. I was asking for advice. If you don't like the question don't answer it. There is plenty of people here that are helpful. I don't need you being pissy about it. For clarity i was asking because i want a quality scope not a cheap scope. I CAN AFFORD ANYTHING THING I WANT. So thanks to all the helpful people here. Why does there there always have to be one person like this.
I don't think he was talking to you but to some others who made it sound like the Razor was too much for the rifle. I could be wrong but that was the way I took it. Not directed at OP.
I had an SE on my vudoo and decided to move up to the XTR3..I am not fully sold on the XTR3..There is nothing wrong with it, I have shot really great with it but something is missing..Kinda of like and Ex Girlfriend, something is not exactly right and you not in love, but the sex is good so you keep going back..
i can the manners stock, what else are you using to cut weight? ive only been able to get down to ~13lbs ish even with a razor amg to save weight. im running an 18" kukri/XLR element/seekins rings on mine.
I'm running an AMG, obviously lighter, glass superb and I like the reticle. Eye box can be a little finicky probably due to the 30mm tube.
I run the Viper PST Gen II because it’ll go down to 25 yards. With how often there are targets at 25 yards (and usually a TYL rack), you need to have a scope that will adjust to that distance.
Parallax free and things being sharp are not the same. Yes you can have a clear image by adjusting your magnification down, but it doesn't mean that it's parallax free.
And at those short ranges it doesn’t matter if there is a tiny amount of parallax. It’s more of an arguing point than actual shooting issue.
When I was a newer shooter I wasn't always perfectly behind my scope, and at 25 yards the parallax error was significant, while I could zoom out to 8x and see it sharply, I noticed if I moved my head at all, the reticle moved quite a bit. I would miss the 1/4" KYL at 25 yards. I switched to a 25yd parallax rifle so I haven't really paid attn if I've gotten better or not. I do know that when I am on the clock and get lazy, sometimes I don't adjust the parallax, and I go for it because it looks sharp enough and I've definitely missed because of that. So I guess I still have some getting behind the rifle perfectly practice to do still.
I have a Razor, ATACR, and ZCO....I ended up ordering a second ATACR for my voodoo when Optics Planet ran a huge sale on them for ~$2800 ...at that price I couldn’t beat it. That said my rig is setup to match my Dasher in a weighted MDT chassis and originally had the Razor on it but I swapped it to a ZCO. Razor comes in at a distant 3rd and now sits on a custom 6.5 AR10.
Just curious, how many of you guys believe you could pick out which scopes you were looking thru on a clear day between a Razor, S&B, NF, ZC, or TT etc if each scope were camouflaged enough to not know the brand?
Any of you believe you could pick out what you believe to be the best from the worst?
Any of you believe you could pick out what you believe to be the best from the worst?
Yes. When I first took my class in Alaska with lowlight, I had no idea all these different brands of scopes. I just looked behind all of them at a table at the target at 900 yards that had a orange horizontal truing line, and only a few could see the line through the mirage.
At that top tier, then it became which reticle I liked the most.
The OP asked the about the Razor directly so just weaving the web for him.
There is so much more to a scope than optical clarity. Covered or exposed turrets? Zero Stop? How does it function? How many Mil/MOA per revolution? Why 10.5 on the Leupold Mark V? Reticles are like women. Illuminated or not? You like your tubes thick or ThiCC? Are the clicks crisp and audible? Are they a mere suggestion? Loose, mushy, and indistinct? Does it track? And, then there is the real question of wheter or not the scope is right for what you are doing. The local 22lr match around here has a minimum range of 50 yards. That opens the arena up for a lot of scopes that won't parallax/focus down below that. Some people like the scope to "look right" on the rifle. It's a little rifle, it needs a little scope. I saw a guy hang a Mark V in a Spuhr mount from a Savage rascal at a match. Worked well enough for his 6yo daughter's first match.
While it often pulls double duty, a rifle scope is not an observation device. It is not for bird watching. It is not made for photography. It's sole reason for existing is to align the rifle and the target so that the bullet hits where the shooter intends. Full stop.
I may not be able to tell you what scope was made by who, but I could surely tell you which one I liked the best, and the one that worked the best for me. Most functional zero stop. Turrets with clicks that are positive but not difficult to move. The reticle that works for how I shoot. Let's shoot a tall target test, just to make sure they're good to go. The image that is the most "pleasing to MY eye..." And, the one I thought was best may not be the one that you thought was best. "Best" is subjective. There are a bunch of parameters that go into what you see as an image. Chromatic aberration, fisheye, shadowing, hew, color saturation, focus, etc. If I'm color blind, does color saturation mean the same to me as some one with full color vision? Then pile on all of the other stuff that actually matters for a rifle scope and you have a recipe for arguments that don't have a resolution. Most of us don't have the money to buy and sell scopes so we take there recommendation of others. Once you are sifting through the few scopes at the top of the heap, it probably doesn't matter- really. When you are talking ZCO and TT and S&B and NF, you are talking as much about brand loyalty as anything- and feature sets. I trust that they are all really good- optically.
@hlee nailed it!
I like top tier optics for NRL22x type matches as it allows me to easier see plate reactions and bullet flight especially in poor conditions. Depending on your rifle the Razor could cause difficulty balancing. But the Razor is a very good value optic. It is to tier 1 what the strike eagle is to mid tier. Not the best at anything but close enough at a good price.
Consider also the Minox LR. I have one and prefer it over the Razor for most things. My only "complaint" is they have a tighter eyebox. Depends on what reticle you prefer of course.
I like top tier optics for NRL22x type matches as it allows me to easier see plate reactions and bullet flight especially in poor conditions. Depending on your rifle the Razor could cause difficulty balancing. But the Razor is a very good value optic. It is to tier 1 what the strike eagle is to mid tier. Not the best at anything but close enough at a good price.
Consider also the Minox LR. I have one and prefer it over the Razor for most things. My only "complaint" is they have a tighter eyebox. Depends on what reticle you prefer of course.
How do you find the parallax at closer distances on the Minox LR? I tried mine yesterday for the first time and it seemed quite bad even at lower magnification inside of 50m.
I seldom if ever shoot less then 50m so I'm not sure. I do know the ZP5 will parallax closer then the LR but sample to sample can have variation depending on how it is set.
