Vortex Razor HD Gen II 4.5-27x56mm vs Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x56mm (Non-BTR)
I’ve read a lot of conflicting reports about both scopes over the last year and how the Cronus is superior to the Razor. Quite a few people seemed interested in an unbiased comparison, so I thought I’d spend a little time doing one.
Some of you may have read some of my previous scope comparisons but they are all long gone now, forever lost in the travesty that was the snipershide scout site.
I am an optics nerd. I have loved optics since I was a boy 30 some odd years ago. So much so that I had a decade long career in commercial photography… I think mostly because I like camera lenses.
While I may be a professional with camera lens systems, I am nothing of the sort with rifle optics so please take all this with a grain of salt.
This is MY subjective comparison with a sample group of 1 of each scope (that means OPINION). This is my hobby. I love scopes and shooting behind them. I don’t do this or a living, but I do take it seriously and have played with a significant number of the best scopes on earth. (I’m a lucky guy!)
Here are the two scopes side by side. I’ve owned the Razor Gen II since it’s initial release and am very familiar with it. When I first saw a photo of the Athlon Cronus, I initially thought the scope body was exactly the same size, but as you can see, it’s actually not.
They do however have similar beginnings as I believe a large part of both scopes are both made at LOW Japan. I know the Razor is brought back to the states and has portions of it changed out and finished here. Uncertain as to the Cronus.
Now here is the review. I apologize if it seems disjointed and poorly written. Between my 6 month old kid and my wife asking me to watch her, this thing is being written on and off. It'll be a miracle if it gets done.
Diopter Adjustment
Both use European style non locking quick diopter adjustments. I prefer these over the standard type that takes half a billion turns to get right.
Turrets
Razor: These turrets are done right. They’re 10 mil per rev (I think this is perfect). The locking aspect of the turrets are very simple and effective. There is an indicator that pops out depending on what revolution you are on. It is very well done and causes no change in tension of the turret when you’re moving to a different rev. The turrets are perfectly tactile and I imagine most would be absolutely happy with the way it “feels”. There’s never any doubt where you are on the scale.
The feature that really stands out with these turrets is the zeroing mechanism. It’s different from anything else on the market. As this scope has been on the market for a considerable time I’m guessing most folks know and understand how it works but for the sake of those that don’t I will attempt to explain it.
Essentially, you remove a cover on the top of the turret and there is an interior scale that moves independently of the exterior scale printed on the turret itself. The really nifty aspect of this that i believe it allows you to make witness marks on the interior scale so you can have different zeros for different loads or cartridges. I don’t know if this was done on purpose or by mistake, but it is a nice feature. I have however never tested this specific aspect of the scope as it’s always been on a specific rifle with a specific load. Would be great if someone that actually has done this could get back to me.
Cronus: I’ve read reports that the turrets are mushy and there is a “grease fix”. When I received my Cronus, I did not notice any mushiness of the turrets. The clicks are tactile enough. Certainly less than the Razor, but perfectly usable. They are also 10 mil per rev. They don’t offer a locking aspect and use the older method of showing you what revolution you are in with lines under the turret. This works just fine, especially considering the 10 mils per rev and zero stop.
Zeroing is also pretty straight forward. There’s nothing “special” about the zeroing aspect of these turrets like the Razor, but also nothing wrong with the way the Cronus does it.
Parallax
According to the scale on the parallax knob the Razor will focus down to 32 yards, while the Cronus will focus down to 25 yards.
The Razor parallax adjustment is gradually spread out through the entire knob. It goes from 32 yards to infinity over an almost 360 degree rotation. It has what i think is a perfect amount of tension. (I like my parallax knobs on the looser side). It’s really easy to operate and get the sight picture into focus and remove parallax. It reminds me of an S&B PMII knob in its ease of operation.
The Cronus parallax knob is not as well designed as the Razor’s. While I had no problem using it, it is much more difficult to turn, and the entire adjustment occurs with only an approximately 180 degrees of rotation. Now I had no problem getting the sight picture into focus and could remove parallax error fine, it takes more time and finesse. It isn’t a big deal when you have plenty of time, but when seconds count, I’d much prefer the Razor.
Tracking
I’m sorry to say that I have not done any tracking tests with the Cronus. While I know this is one of the most important aspects of a tactical scope, with the limited time available to me lately, the fact that my local shooting range burned down and that I’ve been spending most of my time doing a comparison between TT 5-25, S&B 5-25, NF 7-35, Minox 5-25 and the Razor 4.5-27, I ask your forgiveness. No clue if it tracks true but given their warranty, I wouldn’t be overly concerned. (I got an insanely good deal on the Cronus and picked it up on a whim to see what all the noise was about)
I have used the Razor a lot and it tracks true every time. I’ve never had any reason to doubt my adjustments.
Optical Clarity
Ah yes, the glass. We all love to talk glass. However, if a scope doesn’t track and hold zero, it’s just a small spotting scope.
If I were to offer a new shooter with a limited budget some advice, it’s this: first and foremost, spend your budget on tactical turrets and on the tracking ability of the scope. Glass is of secondary concern.
Having said that, I must say I geek out on glass. I love being able to see tiny details far far away. I want and demand an amazing sight picture when I shoot.
I must say between these two scopes, I don’t see much of a difference in overall resolution. However it is easier to get the maximum resolution out of the Razor. Because of the difference in the parallax knobs, you can get a perfect sight image almost instantly with the Razor. With the Cronus, you have to fiddle a bit, but the resolution is there.
I think the Cronus may have a bit more contrast, but if it does, it’s a marginal difference to my eyes. This is impressive given the Cronus price point. I think it easily places it amongst the best glass in its price range.
If you’re looking at either of these for the sole purpose of the glass, they should both impress.
They do exhibit some CA in high contrast situations, but nothing bothersome.
Neither scope tunnels at 4.5x. The Razor does this strange thing at the edge of the sight picture from 4.5 to 5x, however it isn’t tunneling.
One interesting thing of note, my tests showed me they have a similar Field of View, however the Razor image appears to be a bit larger? I thought I was crazy for a while so I kept going back and forth between scopes and then tried to put one in front of each eye and it indeed appears the Razor image is larger despite both diopters being set to my eyes. I'd say something along the lines of 10-20% larger?
I just found it an interesting difference given how similar the scopes are in dimension and design.
I also feel like the Razor is easier to get behind. The eye box gives me a bit more flexibility. That’s not to say the Cronus is bad by any means, especially considering it goes to 29x, it’s just not as flexible as the Razor.
Reticles
On the Vortex, I opted for the EBR-2C reticle. My Athlon came with the APLR reticle. The Athlon reticle looks mighty similar to the Vortex reticle. They are both amongst my favorite reticles. Some folks love the open center on the EBR-2C and some folks love the floating cross hair on the APLR.
The Vortex reticle has finer gradations near the edges of the reticle which can be used for ranging, while the Athlon reticle has hash marks at every .2 mils. There’s not much to say about the differences except the reticle on the Cronus has thicker subtensions. The Vortex reticle thickness is ideal for this magnification range in my opinion.
Final Thoughts
The Vortex Razor Gen II 4.5-27x56mm belongs squarely in the same tier as the likes of an S&B PMII, Nightforce ATACR F1, Kahles K624i etc. It is definitely an “Alpha” level scope and amongst the best scopes made in the world. There is nothing it does not deliver. While more expensive scopes might deliver a slightly better picture and perhaps more tactile turrets, I can’t imagine someone not being happy with the Razor. There’s just nothing wrong with it except for one thing… weight. Compared to other scopes of this magnification, it’s hefty. From what I know, it’s because Vortex uses a lot of steel where it matters. I’m ok with that. I rather have reliability and repeatability than weight savings. On the average tactical style rifle, once mounted, you’re not going to feel the difference in total weight between this and say an S&B PMII.
Aside from this, the scope is just awesome. Ironically, I recently picked up a 22” 6.5cm gasser and it’s being moved to that rifle so we’ll see how well it balances on a lighter rifle.
Athlon is the new kid on the block. Remember when we could say the same about Vortex? For Athlon’s first attempt at a top tier optic, the Cronus is pretty amazing. I do think it has too many short-comings to sit in the company of some of the “Alpha” scopes I’ve mentioned. However I think we’re going to see amazing things from Athlon in the future.
While I think the Razor is a more refined scope and does everything better, keep in mind, there is a significant difference in price between the two scopes.
I know Athlon has probably addressed many short comings that I’ve written about with the new Cronus BTR, but I don’t have a BTR so I can’t comment on it so this is almost an unfair comparison. However it is the comparison many people made when the Cronus first arrived so here I am… a little late to the party but why not?
If Athlon indeed addressed everything I mentioned with the new BTR (and according to some, they have), then at $1799 for a Cronus BTR vs $2500 for a Razor Gen II, I see Athlon taking a large chunk of the market.
I had very little interest in this new fledgling company named Athlon, but after playing with the Cronus, I have no doubt I’ll be watching what they produce. I expect amazing things from them in the future.
So in closing, if you can’t gather up enough scratch for the Razor (and it’s worth every penny), I think the Cronus is worth a look.
I’ve read a lot of conflicting reports about both scopes over the last year and how the Cronus is superior to the Razor. Quite a few people seemed interested in an unbiased comparison, so I thought I’d spend a little time doing one.
Some of you may have read some of my previous scope comparisons but they are all long gone now, forever lost in the travesty that was the snipershide scout site.
I am an optics nerd. I have loved optics since I was a boy 30 some odd years ago. So much so that I had a decade long career in commercial photography… I think mostly because I like camera lenses.
While I may be a professional with camera lens systems, I am nothing of the sort with rifle optics so please take all this with a grain of salt.
This is MY subjective comparison with a sample group of 1 of each scope (that means OPINION). This is my hobby. I love scopes and shooting behind them. I don’t do this or a living, but I do take it seriously and have played with a significant number of the best scopes on earth. (I’m a lucky guy!)Here are the two scopes side by side. I’ve owned the Razor Gen II since it’s initial release and am very familiar with it. When I first saw a photo of the Athlon Cronus, I initially thought the scope body was exactly the same size, but as you can see, it’s actually not.
They do however have similar beginnings as I believe a large part of both scopes are both made at LOW Japan. I know the Razor is brought back to the states and has portions of it changed out and finished here. Uncertain as to the Cronus.
Now here is the review. I apologize if it seems disjointed and poorly written. Between my 6 month old kid and my wife asking me to watch her, this thing is being written on and off. It'll be a miracle if it gets done.
Diopter Adjustment
Both use European style non locking quick diopter adjustments. I prefer these over the standard type that takes half a billion turns to get right.
Turrets
Razor: These turrets are done right. They’re 10 mil per rev (I think this is perfect). The locking aspect of the turrets are very simple and effective. There is an indicator that pops out depending on what revolution you are on. It is very well done and causes no change in tension of the turret when you’re moving to a different rev. The turrets are perfectly tactile and I imagine most would be absolutely happy with the way it “feels”. There’s never any doubt where you are on the scale.
The feature that really stands out with these turrets is the zeroing mechanism. It’s different from anything else on the market. As this scope has been on the market for a considerable time I’m guessing most folks know and understand how it works but for the sake of those that don’t I will attempt to explain it.
Essentially, you remove a cover on the top of the turret and there is an interior scale that moves independently of the exterior scale printed on the turret itself. The really nifty aspect of this that i believe it allows you to make witness marks on the interior scale so you can have different zeros for different loads or cartridges. I don’t know if this was done on purpose or by mistake, but it is a nice feature. I have however never tested this specific aspect of the scope as it’s always been on a specific rifle with a specific load. Would be great if someone that actually has done this could get back to me.
Cronus: I’ve read reports that the turrets are mushy and there is a “grease fix”. When I received my Cronus, I did not notice any mushiness of the turrets. The clicks are tactile enough. Certainly less than the Razor, but perfectly usable. They are also 10 mil per rev. They don’t offer a locking aspect and use the older method of showing you what revolution you are in with lines under the turret. This works just fine, especially considering the 10 mils per rev and zero stop.
Zeroing is also pretty straight forward. There’s nothing “special” about the zeroing aspect of these turrets like the Razor, but also nothing wrong with the way the Cronus does it.
Parallax
According to the scale on the parallax knob the Razor will focus down to 32 yards, while the Cronus will focus down to 25 yards.
The Razor parallax adjustment is gradually spread out through the entire knob. It goes from 32 yards to infinity over an almost 360 degree rotation. It has what i think is a perfect amount of tension. (I like my parallax knobs on the looser side). It’s really easy to operate and get the sight picture into focus and remove parallax. It reminds me of an S&B PMII knob in its ease of operation.
The Cronus parallax knob is not as well designed as the Razor’s. While I had no problem using it, it is much more difficult to turn, and the entire adjustment occurs with only an approximately 180 degrees of rotation. Now I had no problem getting the sight picture into focus and could remove parallax error fine, it takes more time and finesse. It isn’t a big deal when you have plenty of time, but when seconds count, I’d much prefer the Razor.
Tracking
I’m sorry to say that I have not done any tracking tests with the Cronus. While I know this is one of the most important aspects of a tactical scope, with the limited time available to me lately, the fact that my local shooting range burned down and that I’ve been spending most of my time doing a comparison between TT 5-25, S&B 5-25, NF 7-35, Minox 5-25 and the Razor 4.5-27, I ask your forgiveness. No clue if it tracks true but given their warranty, I wouldn’t be overly concerned. (I got an insanely good deal on the Cronus and picked it up on a whim to see what all the noise was about)
I have used the Razor a lot and it tracks true every time. I’ve never had any reason to doubt my adjustments.
Optical Clarity
Ah yes, the glass. We all love to talk glass. However, if a scope doesn’t track and hold zero, it’s just a small spotting scope.
If I were to offer a new shooter with a limited budget some advice, it’s this: first and foremost, spend your budget on tactical turrets and on the tracking ability of the scope. Glass is of secondary concern.
Having said that, I must say I geek out on glass. I love being able to see tiny details far far away. I want and demand an amazing sight picture when I shoot.
I must say between these two scopes, I don’t see much of a difference in overall resolution. However it is easier to get the maximum resolution out of the Razor. Because of the difference in the parallax knobs, you can get a perfect sight image almost instantly with the Razor. With the Cronus, you have to fiddle a bit, but the resolution is there.
I think the Cronus may have a bit more contrast, but if it does, it’s a marginal difference to my eyes. This is impressive given the Cronus price point. I think it easily places it amongst the best glass in its price range.
If you’re looking at either of these for the sole purpose of the glass, they should both impress.
They do exhibit some CA in high contrast situations, but nothing bothersome.
Neither scope tunnels at 4.5x. The Razor does this strange thing at the edge of the sight picture from 4.5 to 5x, however it isn’t tunneling.
One interesting thing of note, my tests showed me they have a similar Field of View, however the Razor image appears to be a bit larger? I thought I was crazy for a while so I kept going back and forth between scopes and then tried to put one in front of each eye and it indeed appears the Razor image is larger despite both diopters being set to my eyes. I'd say something along the lines of 10-20% larger?
I just found it an interesting difference given how similar the scopes are in dimension and design.
I also feel like the Razor is easier to get behind. The eye box gives me a bit more flexibility. That’s not to say the Cronus is bad by any means, especially considering it goes to 29x, it’s just not as flexible as the Razor.
Reticles
On the Vortex, I opted for the EBR-2C reticle. My Athlon came with the APLR reticle. The Athlon reticle looks mighty similar to the Vortex reticle. They are both amongst my favorite reticles. Some folks love the open center on the EBR-2C and some folks love the floating cross hair on the APLR.
The Vortex reticle has finer gradations near the edges of the reticle which can be used for ranging, while the Athlon reticle has hash marks at every .2 mils. There’s not much to say about the differences except the reticle on the Cronus has thicker subtensions. The Vortex reticle thickness is ideal for this magnification range in my opinion.
Final Thoughts
The Vortex Razor Gen II 4.5-27x56mm belongs squarely in the same tier as the likes of an S&B PMII, Nightforce ATACR F1, Kahles K624i etc. It is definitely an “Alpha” level scope and amongst the best scopes made in the world. There is nothing it does not deliver. While more expensive scopes might deliver a slightly better picture and perhaps more tactile turrets, I can’t imagine someone not being happy with the Razor. There’s just nothing wrong with it except for one thing… weight. Compared to other scopes of this magnification, it’s hefty. From what I know, it’s because Vortex uses a lot of steel where it matters. I’m ok with that. I rather have reliability and repeatability than weight savings. On the average tactical style rifle, once mounted, you’re not going to feel the difference in total weight between this and say an S&B PMII.
Aside from this, the scope is just awesome. Ironically, I recently picked up a 22” 6.5cm gasser and it’s being moved to that rifle so we’ll see how well it balances on a lighter rifle.
Athlon is the new kid on the block. Remember when we could say the same about Vortex? For Athlon’s first attempt at a top tier optic, the Cronus is pretty amazing. I do think it has too many short-comings to sit in the company of some of the “Alpha” scopes I’ve mentioned. However I think we’re going to see amazing things from Athlon in the future.
While I think the Razor is a more refined scope and does everything better, keep in mind, there is a significant difference in price between the two scopes.
I know Athlon has probably addressed many short comings that I’ve written about with the new Cronus BTR, but I don’t have a BTR so I can’t comment on it so this is almost an unfair comparison. However it is the comparison many people made when the Cronus first arrived so here I am… a little late to the party but why not?
If Athlon indeed addressed everything I mentioned with the new BTR (and according to some, they have), then at $1799 for a Cronus BTR vs $2500 for a Razor Gen II, I see Athlon taking a large chunk of the market.
I had very little interest in this new fledgling company named Athlon, but after playing with the Cronus, I have no doubt I’ll be watching what they produce. I expect amazing things from them in the future.
So in closing, if you can’t gather up enough scratch for the Razor (and it’s worth every penny), I think the Cronus is worth a look.
