I've tried both. And after 11 years of calling and roughly 500 dead coyotes, I'll stick with what works for me. But that's my personal preference.
Rifle Scopes Vortex Razor HD LHT!!!
- Thread starter Tyler Kemp
- Start date
I swap my price around depending on the season. While i much prefer ffp, using the lht this past winter for small game I was grateful to have the sfp reticle for the really close shots under 10 yards. It’s easier for me to make a head shot on a ptarmigan or hare with a definite hold over reference Vs a tiny Reticle with ffp.
I’ve had the lrhs and optically the lht is better to my eyes. Everytime I get behind the lht I’m impressed with glass.
I’ve had the lrhs and optically the lht is better to my eyes. Everytime I get behind the lht I’m impressed with glass.
I a slowly wrapping up with my review of the HD-LHT. I have both versions here.
Generally, I like both scopes a fair bit and they are very likely to become my go to recommendations for SFP hunting scopes around $1k.
I would have really liked to see a LHT version of 1.5-8x32 or 2-10x40, but that is probably not in the cards.
On turrets: windage turrets are a little soft, but I have not missed any clicks yet. Still, I never use windage turret on scopes like this aside from sighting in and these are covered, so it is perfectly reasonable.
Elevation turrets are quite nice. Locking feature is a nice thing on a hunting scope and click feel is quite good. With 6 mrad per turn, click spacing is also quite generous which I like a lot. Given the application of the scope, I do not expect to be dialing more than 6 mrad any time soon, but I did check tracking for two turns and it is very repeatable.
Optically, these scopes definitely belong with the Razor family. I think they comfortably outresolve the PST Gen2 and most other things in the $1k or less price range. Center performance is really excellent and edges are not too shabby either. Probably a bit better toward the edges than HD LH was, but similar in the center. Flare control is very good. Contrast rendering is nice and subtle, so low light performance is very nice. FOV could be wider, but I suspect that is the price to pay for long eyerelief, reasonably slim eyepiece and moderate weight.
On SFP vs FFP: most of the people on this forum, me included, would really like to see a FFP version of either of these scopes. However, hunters in America vastly prefer SFP designs. FFP hunting scopes are slowly gaining popularity, but in terms of sales volume it is not even close. Vortex has to go where the market leads it. If enough people ask for FFP, they will make one. There are similarly sized FFP designs out there that they can use, although I think they are 3-4 ounces heavier. If Vortex can find a way to make FFP 3-15x or similar of the same weight, they will make a killing.
ILya
Generally, I like both scopes a fair bit and they are very likely to become my go to recommendations for SFP hunting scopes around $1k.
I would have really liked to see a LHT version of 1.5-8x32 or 2-10x40, but that is probably not in the cards.
On turrets: windage turrets are a little soft, but I have not missed any clicks yet. Still, I never use windage turret on scopes like this aside from sighting in and these are covered, so it is perfectly reasonable.
Elevation turrets are quite nice. Locking feature is a nice thing on a hunting scope and click feel is quite good. With 6 mrad per turn, click spacing is also quite generous which I like a lot. Given the application of the scope, I do not expect to be dialing more than 6 mrad any time soon, but I did check tracking for two turns and it is very repeatable.
Optically, these scopes definitely belong with the Razor family. I think they comfortably outresolve the PST Gen2 and most other things in the $1k or less price range. Center performance is really excellent and edges are not too shabby either. Probably a bit better toward the edges than HD LH was, but similar in the center. Flare control is very good. Contrast rendering is nice and subtle, so low light performance is very nice. FOV could be wider, but I suspect that is the price to pay for long eyerelief, reasonably slim eyepiece and moderate weight.
On SFP vs FFP: most of the people on this forum, me included, would really like to see a FFP version of either of these scopes. However, hunters in America vastly prefer SFP designs. FFP hunting scopes are slowly gaining popularity, but in terms of sales volume it is not even close. Vortex has to go where the market leads it. If enough people ask for FFP, they will make one. There are similarly sized FFP designs out there that they can use, although I think they are 3-4 ounces heavier. If Vortex can find a way to make FFP 3-15x or similar of the same weight, they will make a killing.
ILya
Thats a shame, I think either of those options with the HSR-5i reticle would make a fantastic hunting scope.
I really like the Leupold VX5/VX6 2-10/12 scopes but want a reticle that can hold for wind.
Seems like I'm waiting for a unicorn to appear.
Same. Give us a modernized mil/mil 16oz Mark 4 2.5-8x36 with decent illumination. And FFP as an option, Leupold made a very nice lightweight 1.5-5 FFP for the 300blk a long time ago, too bad it didn’t have matching turrets and a silly reticle.
The original Vortex 2.5-10 FFP could have been a hit too if the scope wasn’t so flimsy. I truly believe there’s a market for a lightweight hunting scope in both FFP and SFP with above average glass (ie VX6HD level) with good turrets for dialing and good matching reticle for wind. In the meantime I’m excited about this LHT.
I wouldn't say Americans vastly prefer it, its just ignorance and lack of exposure. Most hunters are using what they find at the local hunting store or walmart, so your cheap nikon, leupold, simmons, vortex, ect.
The vast majority that have used both, will take FFP for the obvious. The problem is there just aren't many FFP hunting type optics out there and you have to spend $800 to get something decent.
Over time this dynamic willchange and I think as hunters get more education about ballistics and optics, they will migrate towards it. As quality optics get cheaper, It is happening. It removes a couple variables from the equation when it comes to killing game. That makes it easier and less chance of an error. People who care about ethical hunting should be in favor of better shooters.
Last edited:
The average hunter who will shoot take a shot at a absolute maximum 400meters under perfect conditions but will take most shots well under 300meters does not need an FFP scope.
I know plenty of hunters who are far from ignorant and own a plethora of FFP tactical scopes that are more than happy for SFP on their hunting rifle.
This little bubble here on snipershide is not a very good representation of the general shooting scene, neither in the USA nor world wide.
I don't even care about FFP, if the max magnification is 10x then ill be using it on 10x anytime I want to use a wind hold anyway.
I would like to think there is a market out there but I'm not sure there is, Leupold offered their Impact and TMOA reticles with matching MOA turrets in the 2-12 VX6hd which they had long since discontinued, if people were buying them they'd still be making them now.
The also did a Firedot windplex reticle in the OG VX6 which can't have been popular as they discontinued that too.
The average hunter also wounds and misses ALOT of shots. At 400 yards, a .270 using a 130 class drops about 20". That is the difference between a hit in the vitals and a miss, or wounding shot on a deer. A 30-06 using a 180 class drops about 26"
So when the huntard goes an dials his elevation , what power is he on? Is he taking a a shot at half power? Does he get it confused and dial twice the elevation? Or does he just Kentucky windage it?
If anything people here would be more competent and able to deal with the disadvantages. Your average hunter who shoots a box of ammo a year or less, not so much.
Once people understand the difference, its a no brainer. Unless you like doing things the hard and stupid way.
Its like mils and MOA, once you go mils you never go back. Why try to fuck around with 2 systems when you can master one and not have to think.
Its about engineering the process to reduce error and mistakes. A smart person would understand this.
Because its not that difficult, just like using both MOA and MILs is not difficult.
Here's a simple flow chart you can use to help yourself next time you are confused by SFP;
Question, Is my magnification set to the highest setting?
Yes; The reticle subtensions are correct.
No; The reticle subtensions are not correct.
Oh but the same hunters say they never shoot on max power. Its just one more thing to go wrong in a stressful and time sensitive situation.
Its not really that simple. Not all SFP scopes have the correct sub tensions at the highest magnification setting. Even if it is the highest magnification, you need to confirm it is correct at that setting, or gather your dope from there. Max magnification is not nessasairly going to be exactly the same across a bunch of scopes from the same line.
Cheaper than a VX6HD.
Better reticle.
mil/mil.
VX5HD don’t have illum or if they do it’s a firedot duplex.
I did a tracking test when I first got mine.
Zero, up 20 MOA, back to zero, up 20 MOA. Tracking and return to zero were perfect, both groups centered on my vertical line.
I’ve shot it out to 1050 yards at 23 MOA on my 300 PRC, no problems so far.
For a 19 oz hunting scope it’s my favorite so far, I have two of them.
Zero, up 20 MOA, back to zero, up 20 MOA. Tracking and return to zero were perfect, both groups centered on my vertical line.
I’ve shot it out to 1050 yards at 23 MOA on my 300 PRC, no problems so far.
For a 19 oz hunting scope it’s my favorite so far, I have two of them.
Pretty much what you would expect. The 50mm is a little better in low light, but during the day I very slightly prefer the 42mm version.
ILya
Just ordered mine today in the 3-15x50-MRAD-Riflescope-RZR-1591. I can't wait to test it out on my 6.5 PRC.
Has anyone seen any issues with the Zero Stop ring setup?
Has anyone seen any issues with the Zero Stop ring setup?
I have the Seekins Havak as well. They have a 20 MOA base so I am hoping the ring wont really make a difference with the elevation.
Could I get an opinion on how the LHT compares optically to a Bushnell LRTS?
I have both and find them very close with the LHT perhaps having a slight upper hand in edge to edge clarity. They are very similar in terms of feature set but if you're looking to save weight the LHT is significantly lighter
Thanks! FFP sounds pretty nice but yeah there’s a solid weight difference. Good to hear the glass quality is similar.
I'm wondering how the 3-15x50 would compare to the 3.6-18x44 Mark 5HD in low light? Love my Mark 5HD but I have it on a purely hunting rifle, seems overkill and if the Razor is better in low light I'm not sure why I wouldn't try it. I've tried to put my hands on one but everywhere I've looked hasn't had any.
I have all three of the older Razor LH, not LHT. Also, the Mark 5 but in 5-25. The Mark5 is noticably brighter in low light. Almost like a different camera setting. But clarity/contrast is about the same to me.
But, the 3-15 LH is 10oz lighter and SFP if you find them. I absolutely love the LH line up. But, the Mark5 is just a step above them. IMO. If you're interested in a trade lmk.
If you had to choose one of those two scopes which one would you keep? Primarily hunting but some target shooting.
I bought the LHT but I am kind of wondering if I should have gone with a LRTS-i. Those were the two I was stuck deciding between. I wanted to try FFP but was worried about the reticle being too small at low magnification.
The LHT glass is going to be better than the LRTS (not ED glass). LHT is also 7 or 8 oz lighter.
I haven't looked thru an LRTS, but I almost bought one and did a lot of research on it. The x18, FFP and FDE finished seemed nice. But, the glass and the weight on the Razor is what sold me.
I haven't looked thru an LRTS, but I almost bought one and did a lot of research on it. The x18, FFP and FDE finished seemed nice. But, the glass and the weight on the Razor is what sold me.
I'd keep the LRTSi as a comp hunting crossover scope, it's FFP and the reticle is extremely well executed in terms of its usability across the mag range. The LRTSi is also a proven scope, I've has a bunch of the LRHS's and LRTS's and tracking has been perfect with all of them. The glass is so close - to the point of being a wash. For a hunting rifle, I'd lean LHT given the weight savings but keep in mind the LHT does not have the durability track record of the bushnell.
