Im currently strongly considering a vortex razor gen II 3-18x50 for my new tikka ctr 6.5 creedmoor. I've researched the razor line quite quite extensively and I like what I've found. It really seems like the most scope for the money. Anyhow, it seems like everything I find is on the 4-27 model and not very much on the 3-18. Is the 3-18 glass quality the same? Any owners have the 3-18? Are you as happy with it as far as tracking, repeatability, quality as everyone else seems to be with the 4-27x56? My longest shots as of now would be around 600 yards where I live and the majority of time used to punch paper and ring steel at 100 to 300 yards. This scope will also be used to deer hunt and eventually coyote hunting, hence the reason why I'm looking at the lower power of the two higher power razor models. Nevertheless, this will be a HUGE purchase for me and what I consider my first ever "upper" tier scope. Thank you for any information and/or advice anyone can provide!
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Vortex razor gen II 3-18x50 feedback?
- Thread starter Walker6.5
- Start date
the 3-18 is an awesome piece of kit.
Yes, the glass is very, very good. yes, they track very well, they are repeatable, they are robust, they have a very good reticle.
The only "negative" is that the reticle is a bit on the thin side, making it hard to pick up on dark backgrounds in low light. it does, however, have excellent illumination.
Yes, the glass is very, very good. yes, they track very well, they are repeatable, they are robust, they have a very good reticle.
The only "negative" is that the reticle is a bit on the thin side, making it hard to pick up on dark backgrounds in low light. it does, however, have excellent illumination.
I have the 3-18 on my AIAT and it is an awesome optic.
With that being said it wouldn't be my choice for a hunting optic as it (along with the 4.5-27) is a heavy beast. For a possible hunting optic I would look at the Bushnell DMR IIi or the LRTSi series.
With that being said it wouldn't be my choice for a hunting optic as it (along with the 4.5-27) is a heavy beast. For a possible hunting optic I would look at the Bushnell DMR IIi or the LRTSi series.
The 3-18x Razor II is a great scope. I have one on my match rifle and have used it at matches to take shots to 1250 yards. Great glass, a lot of elevation, great 2C reticle and all the great features of the Razor II line. Nothing not to like.
Thank you for the Bushnell suggestions, I'm open to all options , I'll give them a look as well.
The 3-18 is definitely an amazing scope. You won't really be able to see the reticle at low power, but it'll be good for a great FOV. I used my 3-18 for hunting. That said, it was heavy so be aware of that.
Covert is as Covert does.
Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.
Covert is as Covert does.
Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.
I think the issue with it is it's eclipsed by its big brother and beat on the low end by its little cousin.
The 4.5-27 is basically the same weight, size and price. You lose 1.5 mag on the bottom, but 3 power is a bit useless anyway because of reticle thickness. plus you gain 27 power on top and a 56mm Objective. On the other end, the AMG nicely fills the lightweight role. Although to be a more effective hunting cross over it should have been 5-20 I think.
So all in all, the 3-18 needs to slim down to really find its niche. Imagine if it was a 4-20 Ultra Short model under 12 inches? That would be a game changer!!
The 4.5-27 is basically the same weight, size and price. You lose 1.5 mag on the bottom, but 3 power is a bit useless anyway because of reticle thickness. plus you gain 27 power on top and a 56mm Objective. On the other end, the AMG nicely fills the lightweight role. Although to be a more effective hunting cross over it should have been 5-20 I think.
So all in all, the 3-18 needs to slim down to really find its niche. Imagine if it was a 4-20 Ultra Short model under 12 inches? That would be a game changer!!
I'm ok with the fine reticle as long as the illumination is pretty clean and effective. That's the only stated issue that has me a little concerned. I'm well aware what I'm getting into as far as weight, it's not as big of a issue for me as some. I'm a mobile bow hunter and used to carrying a heavy pack(more than I need) with a hang on stand strapped to me as well... Needless to say that extra three pounds isn't going to hinder me. Thank you for your feedback!
I put a Bushnell 3-12 LRTSi on my 308 CTR and really like it. The reticle is very nice and it doesn't get too small or large in my opinion. The illumination works very well too.
If using the factory stock I think the 45oz+ Gen II Razor would make it very top heavy. It is fine on my AT but I wouldn't want it on my CTR. They make a 4.5-18 LRTSi that is available now and for $1500 it is a great deal.
http://www.eurooptic.com/BU-ET45184G...-G3-ILLUM.aspx
You may be able to get a better price by calling them.
The rifle weighs 10lbs 2oz as pictured below and is my utility rifle. I feel the weight is about perfect in that role and I can drop a pound by removing the bipod. If I could only keep this rifle or my AIAT I would keep the CTR.
[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/photos-2.dropbox.com\/t\/2\/AAB7p4HM7ooo2gWHvSYgj128M8ub3GLdlX3dKrrqJlXg0g\/12\/70611913\/jpeg\/32x32\/1\/_\/1\/2\/Tikka_T3xH_CTR_1.jpg\/EMOu9jYYnZoDIAcoBw\/YHZPb_LxV0KQ1uKWYIQT8v8YFKp9xDqgI_kriAUYlJA?size=800x600&size_mode=3"}[/IMG2]
If using the factory stock I think the 45oz+ Gen II Razor would make it very top heavy. It is fine on my AT but I wouldn't want it on my CTR. They make a 4.5-18 LRTSi that is available now and for $1500 it is a great deal.
http://www.eurooptic.com/BU-ET45184G...-G3-ILLUM.aspx
You may be able to get a better price by calling them.
The rifle weighs 10lbs 2oz as pictured below and is my utility rifle. I feel the weight is about perfect in that role and I can drop a pound by removing the bipod. If I could only keep this rifle or my AIAT I would keep the CTR.
[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/photos-2.dropbox.com\/t\/2\/AAB7p4HM7ooo2gWHvSYgj128M8ub3GLdlX3dKrrqJlXg0g\/12\/70611913\/jpeg\/32x32\/1\/_\/1\/2\/Tikka_T3xH_CTR_1.jpg\/EMOu9jYYnZoDIAcoBw\/YHZPb_LxV0KQ1uKWYIQT8v8YFKp9xDqgI_kriAUYlJA?size=800x600&size_mode=3"}[/IMG2]
I think that the Razor II series rifle scopes are some of the most feature packed scopes on the market, and the best bang for the buck money can buy. Sure, if you go up in price you can get marginally better glass and shave some weight, but that's about where the upside ends... The Razor has excellent glass and I am a huge fan of the turrets and EBR2-C reticle, and if ANYTHING HAPPENS, you have the best warranty the scope industry has to offer..
Hey thanks a lot for your help. I was wondering, how close is the quality of glass of the two? I really like the price point of the bushnell
I have a bushy 4.5-18 LRTSi.
The glass is quite good and won't prevent you from identifying the target or making the shot, but it is not the same level as the Vortex, that is primarily where your extra 800 bucks comes in to play. The Bushnell is a very good scope, the Vortex is better, as it should be.
The LRTSi and the Gen 1 vortex are a better comparison, and they are generally equal,in regards to quality and glass, though the design and concept is very different, they are also priced similarly since the price reduction of the Gen 1.
The glass is quite good and won't prevent you from identifying the target or making the shot, but it is not the same level as the Vortex, that is primarily where your extra 800 bucks comes in to play. The Bushnell is a very good scope, the Vortex is better, as it should be.
The LRTSi and the Gen 1 vortex are a better comparison, and they are generally equal,in regards to quality and glass, though the design and concept is very different, they are also priced similarly since the price reduction of the Gen 1.
Since you stated you're ok with the weight, I think there's not other con really to the Razor 2. The turrets are great, second best turrets I've ever used. And as mentioned before, the warranty should make you feel great about hunting with it because if anything happens you're taken care of.
Covert is as Covert does.
Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.
Covert is as Covert does.
Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.
I REALLY hope Vortex takes this into consideration. A 4-20 ultra short model under 12 inches could be a show stopper for them!
Just as others have said, the 3-18 is flat out amazing. Features per dollar with their warranty are impossible to beat in my opinion. It is built like a tank and is a little on the heavy side but not bad at all. Glass is exceptional. Turrets are very positive, audible, and tracks perfectly. Rev indicator is awesome. Zero adjustment is paramount. Zero stop is firm. Eye box is forgiving and very easy to acquire a clear sight picture. FOV is great. I have the 3-18 EBR-2C Mrad on my 300 Win Mag and shoot 12"x12" steel at 1,660 yards with no problem spotting impacts or misses. Yes the reticle becomes small at minimum power but finding the center crosshairs for a quick, short range shot is of no issue. The illumination is crisp with no washout that I can detect at dawn and dusk compared to my 6-24 FFP EBR-2C Viper PST. I have not used this scope on my night coyote rig so I cannot attest to the illumination under complete darkness with the use of a red or white light. I imagine it would be just fine. If I were planning to use this scope at night a lot or mainly for tiny groups on paper at distance then I would chose the 4.5-27 EBR-1C.
+1
for hunting & carrying around, consider the AMG or for 1/2 the price (glass can't compare) the PST gen 2
Hey thanks a lot for the detailed information on this scope. I really like all of the strong qualities it offers and even really like the scope color. Another really awesome detail you covered and one I've read on multiple reviews is the awesome eye relief and eyebox. That's a major plus to me to complete a solid scope. I think I'm ready to seal the deal on this optic! Like I said earlier, I'm well aware of the weight, to me it's a sign of great build quality and durability. The weight isn't a deal breaker for me. Thanks for your help!
I was going to ask for some advice on one more area. I'm just now getting into wanting to shoot "longer" ranges. This scope will be my first upper tier, high quality scope. As a beginner just starting out, would you recommend the mrad or moa reticle? I definitely want the EBR-2c and had my sights set on the MOA version per advice from a few experienced shooters. Would you say the moa format is easier to pick up versus mil? Thanks for any advice or help.
I was going to ask for some advice on one more area. I'm just now getting into wanting to shoot "longer" ranges. This scope will be my first upper tier, high quality scope. As a beginner just starting out, would you recommend the mrad or moa reticle? I definitely want the EBR-2c and had my sights set on the MOA version per advice from a few experienced shooters. Would you say the moa format is easier to pick up versus mil? Thanks for any advice or help.
I was going to ask for some advice on one more area. I'm just now getting into wanting to shoot "longer" ranges. This scope will be my first upper tier, high quality scope. As a beginner just starting out, would you recommend the mrad or moa reticle? I definitely want the EBR-2c and had my sights set on the MOA version per advice from a few experienced shooters. Would you say the moa format is easier to pick up versus mil? Thanks for any advice or help.
1. get the 4.5-27x if you're mostly punching paper/banging steel.
2. get it in MRAD/mil over MOA; either is easy to use/learn; same learning curve; most competitors/courses use mils/MRAD; resale will be easier with MRAD
2. get it in MRAD/mil over MOA; either is easy to use/learn; same learning curve; most competitors/courses use mils/MRAD; resale will be easier with MRAD
I definitely wasn't complaining about the weight either. Only time I noticed it was when I first pulled it out of the box but after it was on the rifle I haven't noticed it at all. I prefer a heavier optic most of the time.
I recommend for you to go with whichever system you are most comfortable with. To me, milradian is a more simple system and what I prefer. All of my scopes are Mrad. The adjustments are more course which can be either good or bad depending on how you look it or what you plan to use it for. Course adjustments vs finer adjustments. Less dialing vs more dialing. Metric vs US Standard. I have never been limited by any of these differences. I got away from MOA many years ago and haven't looked back. If you are already leaning toward MOA and are familiar and more comfortable with it, take that route because there is nothing wrong with MOA. Best part about the Gen 2 Razor is that you can get the perfect zero no matter which route you choose.
MOA is an imperfect system, hence why Mil is gaining more favour. Additionally, Mil is decimal based which is more logical. But being in the States, you're all backwards anyway ;-)
As I said earlier, the 4.5-27 is the better choice with no tangible drawbacks.
As I said earlier, the 4.5-27 is the better choice with no tangible drawbacks.
Lol, thanks for the advice! The minimal difference in cost between the 3-18 versus the 4.5 - 27 has me leaning towards the 4.5-27 anyway. I guess it's better to have a little more magnification than you need than not enough.
Took mine out for the first time last week. It's pretty awesome. I hardly ever shoot over 15x so I went with the 18x. Spent the first day confirming data book info on 10" plates at 600, 700, 770 meters (12x ) The other shooters had a PST and a Gen 1, this is a significant upgrade in glass from what I could tell. More important tracking was spot on.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just another form of measurement, not better or worst. Just different but that's all ready on another thread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Congrats on your new scope! My big Dilemma now is which razor to pick? The 3-18 or the 4-27... It really appears I can't go wrong with either.
Nope you can't go wrong. Just figure which is in your price range and power range needed and buy it.
I'm really back and forth at this point, I know the 3-18 will be more scope than I will ever need considering I really don't have access to shoot past about 600 yards. Also, the two ranges nearest to me are 200 yard ranges(which is where I'll shoot most often) shooting for groups and some steel. Decisions, decisions, lol.
I totally agree because I'm one of those people. This will be the most expensive scope I've ever purchased and maybe ever will. It's a huge purchase and I just want to make sure I'm getting the most scope for the money. I'm 90 % sure I'm going with the 3-18, now I'm wrestling with going mrad or moa...
If it helps any, I had a 3-18 in MOA, but soon wished I had just got the 4.5-27 from the get go. I now have the 4.5-27 in mrad. My local range only goes to 600 yards so I'm not shooting past that a decent amount of the time, but when I do shoot farther it's nice to have a little extra mag. Plus when you shoot by yourself it's nice to have the extra to spot for yourself.
And in regards to the MOA mrad, get what you're comfortable with. However if you're up to learning mrad get that instead. The adjustment numbers will be smaller and it'll be easier to deal with on a dope chart. Plus as mentioned before, re-sale is better on the mrad scopes.
Covert is as Covert does.
Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.
And in regards to the MOA mrad, get what you're comfortable with. However if you're up to learning mrad get that instead. The adjustment numbers will be smaller and it'll be easier to deal with on a dope chart. Plus as mentioned before, re-sale is better on the mrad scopes.
Covert is as Covert does.
Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.
If it helps any, I had a 3-18 in MOA, but soon wished I had just got the 4.5-27 from the get go. I now have the 4.5-27 in mrad. My local range only goes to 600 yards so I'm not shooting past that a decent amount of the time, but when I do shoot farther it's nice to have a little extra mag. Plus when you shoot by yourself it's nice to have the extra to spot for yourself.
And in regards to the MOA mrad, get what you're comfortable with. However if you're up to learning mrad get that instead. The adjustment numbers will be smaller and it'll be easier to deal with on a dope chart. Plus as mentioned before, re-sale is better on the mrad scopes.
Thank you very much for the advice and the comparison chart. That's a good point you raise about shooting alone and needing to spot your impacts and groups. The extra magnification will really be useful then!
Covert is as Covert does.
Plenty of good feedback on the scout site.
That whole "thinking in meters or Cm" is BS. Disregard it. I know a lot of people who use mils, including myself, and none of them use meters or CM. All use yards and inches. It's links like that that keep that BS going on because people read it and repeat it around the internet.
Thanks.
I used the saved $200 to get an LRF. Like I said I don't like lots of power. I've shot to a mile on 15x to 1k at 6x to prove a point to some shooting buddies. My eyesight is good so needless to say I'd recommend the 18x
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks.
I used the saved $200 to get an LRF. Like I said I don't like lots of power. I've shot to a mile on 15x to 1k at 6x to prove a point to some shooting buddies. My eyesight is good so needless to say I'd recommend the 18xthis while zeroing, somewhere around 12-13x
You have a real nice set up there, great looking rifle!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you ever spot for others using your riflescope (I don't use a spotting scope anymore... more stuff to carry), higher magnification is important. Some people prefer to shoot from the highest magnifications as well. I use 20x, sometimes 22x at 1000, 27x when spotting. Can I do it with 18x? Yes. 10x? Yes. But I might not see WHERE I'm missing.
I'm glad I went 27x for working up loads. I'm also an MOA fan, having grown up building houses (and still work in construction) reading a tape measure all day makes it way easier to remember dope in fractions instead of decimal places. Takes up no more room on the card either. But if you're gonna ever shoot with others, stick with one or the other for the group, makes spotting for others and calling hits or misses a lot less of a headache.
Similar threads
