Just purchased a 6.5 Creedmoor and trying to figure what glass to top it with. This will be my first long range setup so all assistance will be appreciated. I originally was planning on spending around $1,000 but after reading a number of reviews I’m now looking around the $1,500-1,700 range. I think I’ve narrowed it down between the Razor and Cronus, both Gen 1’s. I’m leaning more towards the Vortex Viper Gen 1 5-20x50 FFP MOA. Let me know what you guys think and if I should be looking at something else too. I really don’t want to go any higher then $1,700, and want FFP, MOA, and zero stop.
Rifle Scopes Vortex Razor Gen 1 or Athlon Cronus Gen 1
- Thread starter Duckdogs
- Start date
If FFP an absolute must? I think the Nightforce NXS is still a better scope than either of those for about the same money.
At $1700 you are pretty close to being able to pick up a used Gen 2 Razor 4.5-27. I've seen several MOA versions recently going for around 1900 like new. The Gen 2 is a much better scope than the Gen 1 and 100% worth saving a few hundred extra.
At $1700 you are pretty close to being able to pick up a used Gen 2 Razor 4.5-27. I've seen several MOA versions recently going for around 1900 like new. The Gen 2 is a much better scope than the Gen 1 and 100% worth saving a few hundred extra.
I owned the Gen1 Razor and sold it shortly afterwards, the reasons were it had 50Y minimum parallax and I wanted a closer focus, the reticle had mil line numbers just off the vertical crosshair in the way of holding over and off and it only had 5 mil knobs, also I wanted more than 20x on top. Afterwards I didn't consider getting another.
I reviewed a Cronus for about 4 months last year when only the preproduction scopes were out. I liked 29x on the top end, the 25Y close focus, the reticle in .2's, how compact it is and the superior glass. As of few months ago a Cronus BTR has been on my main rifle and I plan on keeping it there. I'm really happy with it and the S&B is sitting in the safe.
I reviewed a Cronus for about 4 months last year when only the preproduction scopes were out. I liked 29x on the top end, the 25Y close focus, the reticle in .2's, how compact it is and the superior glass. As of few months ago a Cronus BTR has been on my main rifle and I plan on keeping it there. I'm really happy with it and the S&B is sitting in the safe.
I've been running three of the Cronus 4.5-29x56 mil scopes on two 40X 22RF repeaters & a 223AI built on a Bighorn TL2-SA. Have shot tall target & box tests with these scopes, and am fully satisfied with their tracking & return to zero. Optical quality is very good, I can live with the original reticle (though I'd gladly trade for the newer BTR), and I like the ease of setting the zero stop.
I'd been shooting comps with Kahles K624i AMR scopes for a couple of years before ever handling or looking through a Cronus, so was fully prepared to be somewhat disappointed with the first Cronus I bought. However, that didn't happen, which lead to the purchases of two more of the Athlon scopes.
Do I think a Gen II Razor is worth the extra $700 in MAP? Depends on how important locking turrets are to you...I don't care for locking turrets, as long as the detents are positive enough to prevent unintended knob movement in most situations. Then there's the weight issue - Cronus weighs 35.8oz, Gen II Razor 48oz. Holding a Cronus in my hands, the weight is substantial enough so the scope feels anything but cheap IMHO; my Kahles scopes are 1.8oz lighter still, and have never given me a problem, so I don't feel weight alone is a reliable indication of quality nor durability.
Full disclosure - I'm a dealer for Athlon products.
I'd been shooting comps with Kahles K624i AMR scopes for a couple of years before ever handling or looking through a Cronus, so was fully prepared to be somewhat disappointed with the first Cronus I bought. However, that didn't happen, which lead to the purchases of two more of the Athlon scopes.
Do I think a Gen II Razor is worth the extra $700 in MAP? Depends on how important locking turrets are to you...I don't care for locking turrets, as long as the detents are positive enough to prevent unintended knob movement in most situations. Then there's the weight issue - Cronus weighs 35.8oz, Gen II Razor 48oz. Holding a Cronus in my hands, the weight is substantial enough so the scope feels anything but cheap IMHO; my Kahles scopes are 1.8oz lighter still, and have never given me a problem, so I don't feel weight alone is a reliable indication of quality nor durability.
Full disclosure - I'm a dealer for Athlon products.
Here's pretty good deal. https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...sale/6469875-wts-used-cronus-btr-1450-shipped
A while back I saw regular Cronus scopes go on sale in the $1400's. I
I forgot to mention that daylight bright illume is a neat feature in the Cronus vs the R1.
A while back I saw regular Cronus scopes go on sale in the $1400's. I
I forgot to mention that daylight bright illume is a neat feature in the Cronus vs the R1.
I'd say go with the Cronus BTR, you can get it from sellers here in the hide for a price that fits your budget.
I used to have a Gen 1, decent scope for the money the only things bad I have to say about it are pretty nitpicky. I currently have a Gen2 Razor, a Cronus, and a Cronus BTR (among others). The Cronus has every bit as good of glass as a Gen 2, in fact I'd dare say the Cronus does better in shadows, and has a larger depth of focus. If you are focused on a target at 1200yds then 400yds is still crisp, I can't say the same about the Razor. The gen 2 Razor is obnoxiously heavy, and I do not care for the turrets much at all. The Cronus has way better illumination too.The gen 1 Cronus is on my match gun still (and has been all season) because I am part of the minority that prefers the APLR reticle, but I have to admit the BTR has a little better turret. The Razor still has plenty of merits, hence the reason I have yet to sell it. If you put a gun to my head and made me choose one for my purposes I would take the Cronus all day.
If I were you I'd skip the Gen 1 Razor and decide between the Gen 2 Razor or a Cronus (BTR or not).
If I were you I'd skip the Gen 1 Razor and decide between the Gen 2 Razor or a Cronus (BTR or not).
The only thing I can guess is the diopter wasn't set to your eye??? Because the R1's I've been behind were neck and neck with the old NF NXS which has not been known for great glass.
Dead serious. I can't understand what the hell people like about the Gen 2 turrets. I find them very mediocre. I rate them about the same (in usability, not feel) as the Gen 1 Cronus, and worse than the BTR, which to me feels pretty much like a NF (usable). So, they aren't giant pieces of shit, but they aren't anything to talk about.
Edit: It is worth noting that the Gen 1 Cronus has a little bit of backlash which is not present in the Gen2 Razor, so I suppose I'd tip the scale to the Razor, but still...meh.
Could you please tell me your definition of usable? The Razor Gen 2 has zero stop, Infinite zero adjustment, locking turrets and second revolution indicator. What else you can add to make it more usable?
I don't feel like diopter has anything to do with brightness and being able to pick up targets in the shadows. Now don't get me wrong the gen 1 isn't light years better but at tge price point it typically is they are nice. Then again vortex qc is a bit sketchy. One of the last club matches I shot had 3 gen 2 razors in it and none were of the same quality.
Or maybe the Cronus was set on 29x and the Razor/s was on a lower magnification??? Just trying to think this out. Or it could be one that had something wrong with it causing the lack of brightness??? Personally when the diopter and parallax focus aren't adjusted just right for my eye, like in most of my friends scopes which are adjusted to their eye, the whole image through whatever scope, is off enough to look like the scope is broke, lol.
The one thing I've noticed when comparing to S&B at 25x is the colors are warmer in the S&B so image quality appears more natural. I can definitely resolve better with the Cronus at 29x.
I don't get behind enough R2's to even comment on them.
Thanks for clarifying. I thought you were serious for a second, but after reading your other comments, I can see that you're too tied to a specific brand to be unbiased.
Having used the gen 1 Cronus turrets and watching video of the Cronus BTR, the turrets are in no way shape or form as tactile as the Razor Gen 2. I would save the useable comment for the Cronus, as ppl don't tend to complain about the Razor Gen 2 or NF ATACR turrets, although I prefer the Razor Gen 2 over my ATACR's turrets.
I never complained about the ATACR turrets, I said that I like them and the BTR is similar. Gen 2 turrets are mediocre.
I'll admit to being "tied to a brand", but it's not Athlon or Vortex. But, *you* might be if you find yourself upset when someone talks bad about Vortex. In fact, I didn't even say anything that bad about them, it's just that I didn't herald the Gen 2 as God's gift to optics because it isn't. That upsets you.
And did you seriously just tell me that you determined the Razor turrets to be better than the BTR turrets by watching a video? GTFO.
Last edited:
So....you have Athlon optics on your match rifles, but that's not the brand that you're tied to?
The video was provided by someone that had both the Cronus and the Cronus BTR. They stated that there wasn't a huge difference, if any in their perceived feel. He had changed out the grease on the original Cronus, and is an Athlon dealer, so he had access to both. I was considering getting a Cronus BTR, or 2 vs. an ATACR F1. After he indicated that there wasn't much difference between the two, I felt I knew all I needed to know, based on what I was looking for.
There are scopes that are better than the vortex, no doubt, but when some ppl come on and really pump something up, it makes you start to think. Look at it this way; all of the initial posters said a short or quick post on why they thought the op should go a certain way. Very brief. You and some other guy posted fairly long posts about the Cronus. From an outsiders perspective, it comes off as too brash of a sales tactic, and yet, its present in thread after thread.
The fact than you don't like it does not make it less usable at all, as a matter of fact it's one (between others) characteristic that make it more usable. Many shooters will agree with that.
Correct. I pledged to run a Cronus for the season to test them out, so I am.
I have been pleasantly surprised, and would not hesitate to recommend them (just the Cronus and Cronus BTR, I cannot speak to their other models).
I've replaced the grease and the o-ring in the original Cronus, which definitely helps them, but the BTR is still a better turret. No backlash, seems like the spacing is just about perfect, and they are more positive. There is a definite difference.
Both my Cronus and Cronus BTR track dead on up to 16 mils from 100yd zero (as far up as I've verified them on a tall target). So does my Gen 2. I don't know the details, but IIRC the scope Killswitch tested was returned to Athlon and tested to be tracking perfectly on their equipment. I never saw any follow up to that.
I tend not to get caught up in that anyway, you should test every single scope you buy regardless of manufacture, and if it won't track send it back. I've had far more expensive scopes than the Gen2 or the Cronus not track.
And finally, I'm not selling Athlon. I provided my opinion and the reasons why, and ever since then I've done nothing but reply to questions about my opinions. 1 liners from someone who just wants the OP to buy the same scope they have as some kind of validation are not helpful. A paragraph explaining why you would suggest one scope over another is helpful. I couldn't care less what the OP buys, I was trying to be helpful. The question was Gen1 Razor or Cronus. The Cronus is the clear winner there (even though I think the gen1 Razor is a decent scope). So of course the discussion moves on to Gen2 vs Cronus, and that is a harder decision. I provided my feedback.
Will I run a Cronus next year? Probably not. Will I run a Gen2 next year? No. Will I sell either of them? Possibly, but not because I don't like them.
Last edited:
No shit, did you expect to find something other than opinions in a thread asking for opinions on extremely subjective matters? Just as many shooters will disagree with that. And yes, to me it does make it less usable. Just one more thing to get in my way at an inopportune moment.
Last edited:
As someone who doesn't know much about Athlon that seems a bit of a stretch. Killswitch has tested a large amount of optics very fairly. I don't think he coincidentally screwed up on the Athlon or was dishonest about it. If anything that makes me question Athlon's setup. When it comes to a he said / she said scenario, I'm going to favor the guy who has tested a bunch of scopes and is impartial as opposed to the company who has a vested interest in their product's reputation.
It's only tangentially related but didn't Frank have the Athlon Cronus he was testing break during the testing period?
Last edited:
I saw the video, I saw the error. I saw Athlon's video testing the same scope. IIRC Killswitch didn't know what happened. You'll have to ask him. I don't know anything about Franks Cronus. What about Ron's Gen2 that stopped tracking last Saturday?
FYI the Gen 1 Razors have 10 mil turrets, and have for a while.
I really like the Gen 1 Razor. I'm not a fan of the PSTs due to their very poor glass, but the Razor is good. It is noticeably better than an SWFA 10x42, whereas the PSTs are far worse. They can be had, new, for less than every number thrown out in this thread.
I really like the Gen 1 Razor. I'm not a fan of the PSTs due to their very poor glass, but the Razor is good. It is noticeably better than an SWFA 10x42, whereas the PSTs are far worse. They can be had, new, for less than every number thrown out in this thread.
That is kind of a tough call, I think. Both are pretty nice scopes. I have more mileage with the Razor, but Cronus seems like a nice design as well.
Choose the one that has a reticle that works best for you.
There are several scopes marketed by different people that are very similar designs made by the same OEM: Cronus, PA Platinum, etc.
If you are particular about reticles, you should be looking at several of these. Basic Razor design is sorta unique to Vortex, but the whole family of 5-30x56 and similar scopes that are on the market now under different brand names are all variations of the same basic design. I think Cronus is in that family, Primary Arm Platinum 6-30x56, Weaver Tactical 6-30x56 (not my favourite reticle), Sig Tango6 Gen 1, etc.
Sightmark Pinnacle is a little different, but is also from the same basic family, I think, and it seems that Frank liked it well enough.
These are all Japanese scopes from a well-respected OEM, of a similar magnification range and supported by reasonably reputable brands.
Start with defining the price range, then look for the reticle that works for you.
To be honest, I test a lot of scopes and as far as selection goes, we live in good times. There are a lot of options and mostly these are all good option, from good brands that stand behind their products.
Every once in a while I do a reality check: yank everything out of my safe and look at what I am actually using aside from testing scopes and there is a pattern of sorts: I tend to prefer scopes of moderate magnification and I am very picky about reticles. I use Tangent Theta TT315M, SWFA SS 5-20x50, 3-9x42 and 10x42HD, a couple of Elcans on my ARs (Spectre OS and Spectre TR), a couple of Shield RDSs, Leica, Kahles and Vortex Razor HD LH on my hunting rifles.
That's the interesting thing: a lot of shooting I do involves testing scopes and I enjoy that a fair bit. However, when I go shooting for my personal enjoyment, I usually grab something from the list above, partly because I am used to them and partly because of the faith I have in them.
I have to admit that of the products in the sub-$1500 range, I still use SWFA SS 5-20x50 a lot, partly because I have a lot of faith in the product and partly because the reticle works well for me. I understand that the market moved on to higher magnification design, but I am not a magnification hog, so this works for me. If SWFA ever updates this scope with a zerostop, I'll buy a couple more. The scope has its flaws, but in this price range I am wiling to overlook a few of them.
ILya
Choose the one that has a reticle that works best for you.
There are several scopes marketed by different people that are very similar designs made by the same OEM: Cronus, PA Platinum, etc.
If you are particular about reticles, you should be looking at several of these. Basic Razor design is sorta unique to Vortex, but the whole family of 5-30x56 and similar scopes that are on the market now under different brand names are all variations of the same basic design. I think Cronus is in that family, Primary Arm Platinum 6-30x56, Weaver Tactical 6-30x56 (not my favourite reticle), Sig Tango6 Gen 1, etc.
Sightmark Pinnacle is a little different, but is also from the same basic family, I think, and it seems that Frank liked it well enough.
These are all Japanese scopes from a well-respected OEM, of a similar magnification range and supported by reasonably reputable brands.
Start with defining the price range, then look for the reticle that works for you.
To be honest, I test a lot of scopes and as far as selection goes, we live in good times. There are a lot of options and mostly these are all good option, from good brands that stand behind their products.
Every once in a while I do a reality check: yank everything out of my safe and look at what I am actually using aside from testing scopes and there is a pattern of sorts: I tend to prefer scopes of moderate magnification and I am very picky about reticles. I use Tangent Theta TT315M, SWFA SS 5-20x50, 3-9x42 and 10x42HD, a couple of Elcans on my ARs (Spectre OS and Spectre TR), a couple of Shield RDSs, Leica, Kahles and Vortex Razor HD LH on my hunting rifles.
That's the interesting thing: a lot of shooting I do involves testing scopes and I enjoy that a fair bit. However, when I go shooting for my personal enjoyment, I usually grab something from the list above, partly because I am used to them and partly because of the faith I have in them.
I have to admit that of the products in the sub-$1500 range, I still use SWFA SS 5-20x50 a lot, partly because I have a lot of faith in the product and partly because the reticle works well for me. I understand that the market moved on to higher magnification design, but I am not a magnification hog, so this works for me. If SWFA ever updates this scope with a zerostop, I'll buy a couple more. The scope has its flaws, but in this price range I am wiling to overlook a few of them.
ILya
I was hesitant to revive a thread, but I just shot another Gen2 Razor today (not mine) and I have to take back what I said about the Gen2 turrets I guess. They were far more tactile than my Gen2 turrets. I don't know if Vortex made updates at some point, or if I've just worn my turrets out, or if I just got a bad one...but his Gen2 turrets are easily twice the feel of mine. If that is what Gen2 turrets are supposed to feel like, then I have zero complaints with them in general. I might have to send my scope in.
