I'm in the market for a scope to use on a bolt action gun set up for long range steel shooting. Will be building a 6.5 Creedmoor and the specifics of the rifle I'm still working out.
I'm trying to decide what FFP scope to put on this. I'd like to do most of my shooting out to 1200 yards with the potential to reach out to a mile after sufficient practice and in the right conditions.
The only scope I currently own is an SWFA SS 3-15x42 FFP on my precision AR build. Its been an awesome scope so far. I just put that out there to give you an idea of what I'm used to using and the level of quality I expect. I've shot my friend's 6.5 Creedmoor with an Athlon Cronus on top and it was indeed a beautiful scope but I didn't find myself hating my SS after getting back behind it so I don't think I'm terribly picky optically.
The most important thing to me is mechanical tracking accuracy. And then the other stuff.
I've been looking at the gen 1 and gen 2 Vortex Razor's (5-20x50 vs 4.5-27x56). Let's just say I have access to special pricing on these two scopes and can get either one for substantially less than what they normally go for. That being said, there is still an $840 price gap between the two. I've heard the gen II is without a doubt the better scope in every way with glass that is up there next to S&B. I like the idea of the thinner reticle on it. I have pretty good eyesight and enjoy a thin reticle to be more precise. I also like the idea of more top end magnification for spotting, etc. even though shooting I doubt I've ever need more than 20x.
I have seen a youtube video with poor tracking on the 5-20x50 but I think that was probably a lemon. It got me curious though so I reached out to Vortex and asked what their acceptable tolerance is for accurate tracking and apparently it is 1 click in 100 clicks which would be 0.1 mrad for every 10 mrad of adjustment. The representative said they almost never see that though. Nonetheless I feel that is a fairly large amount of error to have. I would rather see 0.05 mrad for every 10 mrad. Sounds like the tolerance limits are the same for the gen 1 vs the gen 2 and yet I don't think I've read a single tracking issue with the gen ii? Should I be concerned with either of these scopes for tracking?
Has anyone compared these two scopes? Is the gen ii worth the $800 extra? $800 would buy me a whole lotta practice ammo. That being said I don't want to skimp and regret my decision.
Any help would be much appreciated.
I'm trying to decide what FFP scope to put on this. I'd like to do most of my shooting out to 1200 yards with the potential to reach out to a mile after sufficient practice and in the right conditions.
The only scope I currently own is an SWFA SS 3-15x42 FFP on my precision AR build. Its been an awesome scope so far. I just put that out there to give you an idea of what I'm used to using and the level of quality I expect. I've shot my friend's 6.5 Creedmoor with an Athlon Cronus on top and it was indeed a beautiful scope but I didn't find myself hating my SS after getting back behind it so I don't think I'm terribly picky optically.
The most important thing to me is mechanical tracking accuracy. And then the other stuff.
I've been looking at the gen 1 and gen 2 Vortex Razor's (5-20x50 vs 4.5-27x56). Let's just say I have access to special pricing on these two scopes and can get either one for substantially less than what they normally go for. That being said, there is still an $840 price gap between the two. I've heard the gen II is without a doubt the better scope in every way with glass that is up there next to S&B. I like the idea of the thinner reticle on it. I have pretty good eyesight and enjoy a thin reticle to be more precise. I also like the idea of more top end magnification for spotting, etc. even though shooting I doubt I've ever need more than 20x.
I have seen a youtube video with poor tracking on the 5-20x50 but I think that was probably a lemon. It got me curious though so I reached out to Vortex and asked what their acceptable tolerance is for accurate tracking and apparently it is 1 click in 100 clicks which would be 0.1 mrad for every 10 mrad of adjustment. The representative said they almost never see that though. Nonetheless I feel that is a fairly large amount of error to have. I would rather see 0.05 mrad for every 10 mrad. Sounds like the tolerance limits are the same for the gen 1 vs the gen 2 and yet I don't think I've read a single tracking issue with the gen ii? Should I be concerned with either of these scopes for tracking?
Has anyone compared these two scopes? Is the gen ii worth the $800 extra? $800 would buy me a whole lotta practice ammo. That being said I don't want to skimp and regret my decision.
Any help would be much appreciated.