Rifle Scopes Vortex Razor HD Gen ii. Best in its price range?

[Chris777]

I’m currently looking to buy the razor 3-18x50. It’s currently going for around 1500. Is this scope one of the best in its price range when it comes to features and quality? Are there any other brands in this price range that you might feel is a better buy?

 

[Centuriator]

Yes!

 

[Wyzrd]

I’ve owned quite a few scopes in that price range, and I think that overall yes, it really is a solid scope in the $1500 range. I’m sure there’s gonna be others who chime in with other brands, but I’ve been really happy with my 3-18 G2 Razor. Locking turrets, good glass, great reticle, solid tracking, amazing warranty just in case, illumination, and a solid track record over the years??

 

[DMP]

I’ve owned quite a few scopes in that price range, and I think that overall yes, it really is a solid scope in the $1500 range. I’m sure there’s gonna be others who chime in with other brands, but I’ve been really happy with my 3-18 G2 Razor. Locking turrets, good glass, great reticle, solid tracking, amazing warranty just in case, illumination, and a solid track record over the years??

 

[DMP]

I am not sure it is the best, I can say that it is the best for me. All my Vortex optics are Razors. Never wished for another brand or model. I may change rifles/caliber, but the scope will always be Vortex Razor.

 

[Chris777]

I’ve owned quite a few scopes in that price range, and I think that overall yes, it really is a solid scope in the $1500 range. I’m sure there’s gonna be others who chime in with other brands, but I’ve been really happy with my 3-18 G2 Razor. Locking turrets, good glass, great reticle, solid tracking, amazing warranty just in case, illumination, and a solid track record over the years??

The main thing I keep coming back to is that Vortex warranty. I just can’t seem to get past it. It makes me feel a lot better putting my hard earned money into a scope I know the company stands behind.

 

[Chris777]

I am not sure it is the best, I can say that it is the best for me. All my Vortex optics are Razors. Never wished for another brand or model. I may change rifles/caliber, but the scope will always be Vortex Razor.

I’ve been seeing a lot of people talking about the higher end Athlon scopes. Apparently those are super popular as well.

 

[Olen_4504]

I’ve been seeing a lot of people talking about the higher end Athlon scopes. Apparently those are super popular as well.

i've had the cronus BTR and now have a razor gen2

the vortex has the edge. glass is pretty similar, but i still think the razor comes out on top.

i actually DO like the BTR floating dot reticle a bit more than the ebr-7c reticle in the razor. same information - just not a cluttered. however, i still enjoy the ebr-7c.


overall for me - the razor wins vs. the cronus btr. i like the turrets better, i like the zero set method better, i like the click-less zero.

i think you'll be very happy with a razor.

 

[PinesAndProjectiles]

I've had a couple of the Bushy Elites. I think the Razors are a better scope. I like the reticles better and the turrets are a few steps above. The zero stop on the Razor is like nothing else that I'm aware of and is super easy to set.

The Razors have been going pretty cheap in the PX, which is where I've bought both of mine.

 

[Moose]

The razor gen11 is an outstanding scope and at that price it is a good buy.Only problem I had with it was the weight.

 

[Steel head]

At that price it’s very hard to beat.

 

[Wyzrd]

i've had the cronus BTR and now have a razor gen2

the vortex has the edge. glass is pretty similar, but i still think the razor comes out on top.

i actually DO like the BTR floating dot reticle a bit more than the ebr-7c reticle in the razor. same information - just not a cluttered. however, i still enjoy the ebr-7c.


overall for me - the razor wins vs. the cronus btr. i like the turrets better, i like the zero set method better, i like the click-less zero.

i think you'll be very happy with a razor.

Agreed. I ran a Cronus BTR for a couple years too, and while it was a great scope, the G2 Razors have those couple extra features that made it win out in the end for me. I ended up selling my BTR and replaced it with a 3-18 RZR with zero regrets. I’m actually thinking of selling my AMG and getting a 4.5-27 G2 RZR as well...?

 

[psychosniper]

For that price, I can’t see any reason to take a different route over the Gen II Razor. I’ve had the 3-18 in the past and currently have a 4.5-27. For most of the uses for the rifle it’s on, it has been perfect. Tracking is spot on as far as I’ve tested it to 18 mils and returns to zero every time. I have not had any failures from any Gen II Razors. However, I’ve had to send a Gen I Razor and Gen I PST back to Vortex under warranty and can say my experience with Vortex CS was nothing short of spectacular. I still have both scopes and they are both running flawlessly since.

Unless someone already has a Gen II Razor and wants to try something different in the same price range I would lean toward Delta Stryker HD 4.5-30.

 

[Wyzrd]

The main thing I keep coming back to is that Vortex warranty. I just can’t seem to get past it. It makes me feel a lot better putting my hard earned money into a scope I know the company stands behind.

Yup, I’ve sent a couple of scopes in to them over the years, (Gen1 6-24 PST, and a Gen2 1-6 RZR) and each time they took great care of me! It does add some peace of mind?

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

The current deals on the Bushnell DMR2 Pro and XRS2 (especially with the free Kestrel through GA Precision) make those optics a much better buy, IMO.

 

[Precisiondada]

Agreed. I ran a Cronus BTR for a couple years too, and while it was a great scope, the G2 Razors have those couple extra features that made it win out in the end for me. I ended up selling my BTR and replaced it with a 3-18 RZR with zero regrets. I’m actually thinking of selling my AMG and getting a 4.5-27 G2 RZR as well...?

What does the Razor do better then the AMG in your opinion?

 

[hk dave]

At current prices in the current market, I don’t think the Razor can be beat.

 

[psychosniper]

The current deals on the Bushnell DMR2 Pro and XRS2 (especially with the free Kestrel through GA Precision) make those optics a much better buy, IMO.

Fair enough, but it does not make those optics any better.

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

Fair enough, but it does not make those optics any better.

Not sure what you're trying to say here, honestly.

 

[b6graham]

Not sure what you're trying to say here, honestly.

he's saying just cause they're cheaper and come with a 5700 sportsman doesnt mean theyre better scopes, just that they're more affordable and offer a benefit for someone who doesnt need a razor and could benefit from the kestrel as well

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

he's saying just cause they're cheaper and come with a 5700 sportsman doesnt mean theyre better scopes, just that they're more affordable and offer a benefit for someone who doesnt need a razor and could benefit from the kestrel as well

I've run the XRS2 side by side with a Gen2 Razor more than once, and the XRS2 gives up absolutely nothing to the Razor in terms of clarity or mechanicals, IMO. OP asked if there were other options that might be a better buy, so I gave him one.

 

[b6graham]

I've run the XRS2 side by side with a Gen2 Razor more than once, and the XRS2 gives up absolutely nothing to the Razor in terms of clarity or mechanicals, IMO. OP asked if there were other options that might be a better buy, so I gave him one.

never compared them. was just clarifying the post. i'm more than happy with my razors

 

[Wyzrd]

What does the Razor do better then the AMG in your opinion?

I don’t think it does anything better, just personal preference. Yes, the AMG is lighter, but other than that, I just prefer everything else about the Gen2 Razors.

 

[Chris777]

Aren

I've run the XRS2 side by side with a Gen2 Razor more than once, and the XRS2 gives up absolutely nothing to the Razor in terms of clarity or mechanicals, IMO. OP asked if there were other options that might be a better buy, so I gave him one.

arent they both built at LOW Japan?

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

arent they both built at LOW Japan?

Yep.

 

[psychosniper]

he's saying just cause they're cheaper and come with a 5700 sportsman doesnt mean theyre better scopes, just that they're more affordable and offer a benefit for someone who doesnt need a razor and could benefit from the kestrel as well

@Hollywood 6mm

b6graham summed it up very well.

In addition, I have a fair amount of time using two different XRS2’s next to my Razor. My experiences are opposite. I personally was not impressed by the XRS2. 75 yard minimum parallax with the XRS2 4.5-30x50 vs 32 yards with Gen II Razor 4.5-27x56. Parallax was much more forgiving in the Razor as well as providing a more focused image at the same time than either XRS2 I tested. To my eyes, the Gen II Razor’s edge to edge IQ is better and handles poor lighting conditions slightly better. The Bushnell is not a bad scope by any means. Including a Kestrel at that price point certainly makes it a better buy than without the Kestrel.

 

[jda2631]

As long as the weight isn't an issue, Gen 2 Razor is the best sub $2k scope on the market right now, IMO. Especially since you can get them new for a good bit under $2k now. Mark5HD is also great, but I don't know that you will be able find a 3-18 w/illuminated reticle for close to the $1500 you found the Razor Gen 2 for.

 

[CSTactical]

I have to agree that if the weight does not bother you, the Razor Gen 2 is hard to beat under $2,000

 

[pineoak]

I'd pay $150 more and get the 4.5-27x personally.

You lose next to nothing and gain a lot.

 

[Chris777]

I'd pay $150 more and get the 4.5-27x personally.

You lose next to nothing and gain a lot.

I read that the 3-18 has a better field of view.. I don’t know because I haven’t compared the two in person. BUT! I might need the extra funds I would put into the 4.5-27 for some quality rings ?

 

[pineoak]

If $150 is the difference between getting rings or not for your gun... as a friend I recommend you find a new sport/hobby. This one is pricey (though much cheaper than racing boats for sure)

Consider the PST Gen 2 for $650-700 new or the Athlon Ares BTR for $550 to save enough $$$ for ammo.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter how much you spend on gear or have if you can't afford to feed the beast.

I'd rather be the guy driving his Miata everywhere (.22LR or .223 trainer) anytime than the guy with the Ferrari in the garage who can't afford even gas for it after making payments and insurance.

Shooting is fun.

Fingering your $$$$ uber gear at home and reading interwebz forums because you can't afford ammo, range or comp fees, gas to drive there, etc. is stupid.

Make sure you're budgeting so that you have the $$$ to shoot.

I say this in a friendly way, not mean or condescending.

That said, I love the Razor Gen 2. But the PST Gen 2 will do the same thing at 1/2 the price with 95% of the glass. Like everything else, you get less for your $$ as you climb the ladder in terms of common sense, but more in terms of specifics to that endeavor.

Good call using quality rings/scope mount. Seekins, ARC M10, NF unimount, badger or NF rings... all great

 

[One1Bravo]

@Hollywood 6mm

b6graham summed it up very well.

In addition, I have a fair amount of time using two different XRS2’s next to my Razor. My experiences are opposite. I personally was not impressed by the XRS2. 75 yard minimum parallax with the XRS2 4.5-30x50 vs 32 yards with Gen II Razor 4.5-27x56. Parallax was much more forgiving in the Razor as well as providing a more focused image at the same time than either XRS2 I tested. To my eyes, the Gen II Razor’s edge to edge IQ is better and handles poor lighting conditions slightly better. The Bushnell is not a bad scope by any means. Including a Kestrel at that price point certainly makes it a better buy than without the Kestrel.

Same with me. Sold my XRS II for a second Razor.

 

[Chris777]

If $150 is the difference between getting rings or not for your gun... as a friend I recommend you find a new sport/hobby. This one is pricey (though much cheaper than racing boats for sure)

Consider the PST Gen 2 for $650-700 new or the Athlon Ares BTR for $550 to save enough $$$ for ammo.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter how much you spend on gear or have if you can't afford to feed the beast.

I'd rather be the guy driving his Miata everywhere (.22LR or .223 trainer) anytime than the guy with the Ferrari in the garage who can't afford even gas for it after making payments and insurance.

Shooting is fun.

Fingering your $$$$ uber gear at home and reading interwebz forums because you can't afford ammo, range or comp fees, gas to drive there, etc. is stupid.

Make sure you're budgeting so that you have the $$$ to shoot.

I say this in a friendly way, not mean or condescending.

That said, I love the Razor Gen 2. But the PST Gen 2 will do the same thing at 1/2 the price with 95% of the glass. Like everything else, you get less for your $$ as you climb the ladder in terms of common sense, but more in terms of specifics to that endeavor.

Good call using quality rings/scope mount. Seekins, ARC M10, NF unimount, badger or NF rings... all great

? Lets not get confused. The extra 150 isn’t going to break my bank or anything. It’s not like if I make this purchase I won’t be able to pay my mortgage or fees my kids hahaha. I budget myself so I don’t go over board.

I don’t need to extra magnification to be honest. Extra 150 spent on magnification I will have and probably won’t use. Better spent somewhere else.

I get what your saying though and appreciate the friendly advise.

 

[b6graham]

? Lets not get confused. The extra 150 isn’t going to break my bank or anything. It’s not like if I make this purchase I won’t be able to pay my mortgage or fees my kids hahaha. I budget myself so I don’t go over board.

I don’t need to extra magnification to be honest. Extra 150 spent on magnification I will have and probably won’t use. Better spent somewhere else.

I get what your saying though and appreciate the friendly advise.

is isnt the extra magnification. its moving the 'normal' range closer to center. 10-15x is middle versus closer to optical top. weight and length are the same.

because honestly, unless you hunting (way wrong optic if that's the case) you're not gonna spend time at 3 or 4.5x anyways. you'll probably hover closer to an 8x bottom and the statistical FOV advantage is gone as the 4.5-27 is 56 versus 50mm

 

[22-Dasher]

There is only one down fall with Vortex’s warranty and that is you will be using it....

Also, for sure get the extra magnification. You will never regret it

 

[Chris777]

is isnt the extra magnification. its moving the 'normal' range closer to center. 10-15x is middle versus closer to optical top. weight and length are the same.

because honestly, unless you hunting (way wrong optic if that's the case) you're not gonna spend time at 3 or 4.5x anyways. you'll probably hover closer to an 8x bottom and the statistical FOV advantage is gone as the 4.5-27 is 56 versus 50mm

I had thought about that. That with the 18 power I would be losing field of view vs 18 power on the 4.5-27. Unless I’m understanding you wrong?

Now that you guys are mentioning it I might say screw it and get the 4.5-27 anyway. Why the hell not right? ?

 

[b6graham]

I had thought about that. That with the 18 power I would be losing field of view vs 18 power on the 4.5-27. Unless I’m understanding you wrong?

Now that you guys are mentioning it I might say screw it and get the 4.5-27 anyway. Why the hell not right? ?

no you're understanding right

 

[Rob01]

There is only one down fall with Vortex’s warranty and that is you will be using it....

Bullshit. Razor II scopes are very reliable.

 

[Chris777]

Bullshit. Razor II scopes are very reliable.

I had heard that in the early days vortex had some pretty bad quality control issues but now a days everyone raves about vortex. I have a hard time believing top notch competition shooters are using razor gen 2’s cause they are shitty.

 

[wade2big]

i've had the cronus BTR and now have a razor gen2

the vortex has the edge. glass is pretty similar, but i still think the razor comes out on top.

i actually DO like the BTR floating dot reticle a bit more than the ebr-7c reticle in the razor. same information - just not a cluttered. however, i still enjoy the ebr-7c.


overall for me - the razor wins vs. the cronus btr. i like the turrets better, i like the zero set method better, i like the click-less zero.

i think you'll be very happy with a razor.

I like everything about the Razor and AMG line except the way they zero. I dispise this immensely. Oncex zeroed they are there but the process is annoying and it takes me many more shots to get a zero. I like to fire a shot, measure, fire a shot, measure then fire a three round group. Center of group, measure and make last adjustment if necessary. Good to go. Dont need to fire another sighter.

With the razor, the markings inside the turret for the clickless zero are just suggestions. Turning the adjusting a mil does not mean a mil will be shown on paper when firing the next shot. Reminds me of zeroing a capped turret hunting scope.

Bushnell got the zero stop and zeroing method on point. Can not be improved i don’t think.

 

[Rob01]

I had heard that in the early days vortex had some pretty bad quality control issues but now a days everyone raves about vortex. I have a hard time believing top notch competition shooters are using razor gen 2’s cause they are shitty.

Never with the Razor II line. People forget Vortex offers scopes from $199 to $2500 and most every issue is a lower priced optic and they all get lumped in together.

And you are right about their use. The Razor II line is reliable. People wouldn't use them in matches if they weren't.

 

[Huskydriver]

There is only one down fall with Vortex’s warranty and that is you will be using it....

Also, for sure get the extra magnification. You will never regret it

4 gen 2 razors and not a single issue

 

[Rob01]

I like everything about the Razor and AMG line except the way they zero. I dispise this immensely. Oncex zeroed they are there but the process is annoying and it takes me many more shots to get a zero. I like to fire a shot, measure, fire a shot, measure then fire a three round group. Center of group, measure and make last adjustment if necessary. Good to go. Dont need to fire another sighter.

With the razor, the markings inside the turret for the clickless zero are just suggestions. Turning the adjusting a mil does not mean a mil will be shown on paper when firing the next shot. Reminds me of zeroing a capped turret hunting scope.

Bushnell got the zero stop and zeroing method on point. Can not be improved i don’t think.

Sorry but every Razor II I have the internal adjustments correspond perfectly to what I need to adjust. I zero my scope just like you said. Usually takes about 3 shots. No issues with any of my scopes.

And the clickless zeroing is a great feature for people who want a perfect zero. Having had to have been close enough when zeroing for years it's nice to be able to dial between clicks and get right on. I know some don't like it but it's one of the best features on the scope in my opinion.

 

[wade2big]

great scope at its price but i wouldn't describe it as "BEST"

Then what is? Were you waiting on someone to ask that?

 

[Huskydriver]

Sorry but every Razor II I have the internal adjustments correspond perfectly to what I need to adjust. I zero my scope just like you said. Usually takes about 3 shots. No issues with any of my scopes.

And the clickless zeroing is a great feature for people who want a perfect zero. Having had to have been close enough when zeroing for years it's nice to be able to dial between clicks and get right on. I know some don't like it but it's one of the best features on the scope in my opinion.

Seriously... One of the absolute easiest to zero scopes with bomb proof no fuss zero stops out there.

 

[wade2big]

Sorry but every Razor II I have the internal adjustments correspond perfectly to what I need to adjust. I zero my scope just like you said. Usually takes about 3 shots. No issues with any of my scopes.

And the clickless zeroing is a great feature for people who want a perfect zero. Having had to have been close enough when zeroing for years it's nice to be able to dial between clicks and get right on. I know some don't like it but it's one of the best features on the scope in my opinion.

I can move other scopes (Bushnell, SwFA, etc) from rifle to rifle and can literally shoot three shots tk zero and bang steel out to whichever distance. Can’t do that with the Razor or AMG. I would never purchase one with the intentions of moving it around. The cost of ammo wasted could buy you a second scope.

The absolute zero thing is a gimmick. You cannot hold a .05 mil difference one way or the other while shooting. Who cares if your 100 yard zero is a 1/8” one way or another. That error is statistically insignificant.

That being said the gen ii razor is my favorite scope.

 

[Rob01]

Not a gimmick for me. I have had scopes that I was a little high or left or right and being able to get a perfect zero is great.

I move my scopes around too. No issues at all. I have one scope that has been on at least 6 rifles of different calibers. When I move I take a shot, measure, adjust, take another and usually in with 3 shots. Simple.

 

[Jonnyb0381]

I’ve been seeing a lot of people talking about the higher end Athlon scopes. Apparently those are super popular as well.

Superior is a stretch. They are decent but imo they dont really compare to the Raxor Gen 2 or Leupold Mark 5

 

[Olen_4504]

I like everything about the Razor and AMG line except the way they zero. I dispise this immensely. Oncex zeroed they are there but the process is annoying and it takes me many more shots to get a zero. I like to fire a shot, measure, fire a shot, measure then fire a three round group. Center of group, measure and make last adjustment if necessary. Good to go. Dont need to fire another sighter.

With the razor, the markings inside the turret for the clickless zero are just suggestions. Turning the adjusting a mil does not mean a mil will be shown on paper when firing the next shot. Reminds me of zeroing a capped turret hunting scope.

Bushnell got the zero stop and zeroing method on point. Can not be improved i don’t think.

never had that problem.

 

[Olen_4504]

Sorry but every Razor II I have the internal adjustments correspond perfectly to what I need to adjust. I zero my scope just like you said. Usually takes about 3 shots. No issues with any of my scopes.

And the clickless zeroing is a great feature for people who want a perfect zero. Having had to have been close enough when zeroing for years it's nice to be able to dial between clicks and get right on. I know some don't like it but it's one of the best features on the scope in my opinion.

same, never had a problem. internal adjustment = movement on paper