I'm interested in the Razor but unless I'm missing something, the biggest magnification only goes up to 20x. Are there any plans to offer a Razor HD in 5-25x or similar?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Vortex Razor - max magnification
- Thread starter ReaperDriver
- Start date
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
Me too. Only reason I haven't purchased a razor is because I like a little more than 20X.
Me too. Only reason I haven't purchased a razor is because I like a little more than 20X.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
Not to dissuade anyone from buying what they like, nor am I trying to sell a Vortex Razor to anyone; but I hope you do realize that increasing the power from 20x to 25x, makes a 1000 yd target appear only 10 yds closer (Apparent distance is 50 yds for 20x vs 40 yds for 25x)
For a 1500 yd target the apparent difference is a whopping 15 yds (75 yds for 20x vs 60 yds for 25x).
Just saying you are chasing very little in apparent target resolution in going from 20x to 25x out to 1500 yds or so.
Just saying....
Bob
Not to dissuade anyone from buying what they like, nor am I trying to sell a Vortex Razor to anyone; but I hope you do realize that increasing the power from 20x to 25x, makes a 1000 yd target appear only 10 yds closer (Apparent distance is 50 yds for 20x vs 40 yds for 25x)
For a 1500 yd target the apparent difference is a whopping 15 yds (75 yds for 20x vs 60 yds for 25x).
Just saying you are chasing very little in apparent target resolution in going from 20x to 25x out to 1500 yds or so.
Just saying....
Bob
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to dissuade anyone from buying what they like, nor am I trying to sell a Vortex Razor to anyone; but I hope you do realize that increasing the power from 20x to 25x, makes a 1000 yd target appear only 10 yds closer (Apparent distance is 50 yds for 20x vs 40 yds for 25x)
For a 1500 yd target the apparent difference is a whopping 15 yds (75 yds for 20x vs 60 yds for 25x).
Just saying you are chasing very little in apparent target resolution in going from 20x to 25x out to 1500 yds or so.
Just saying....
Bob</div></div>
I don't think you need over 20X either, but I am trying to follow the math.
So if at 1000 yards a 10x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 100 yards at 1x?
So at 1000 yards a 20x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 50 yards at 1x?
Is that math right?
So at 1000 yards a 25X scope makes a target appear as if it were at 40 yards at 1x is what you're saying? If so, then 50 yards is 25% farther away than 40 yards....so I can see an extra 5X making a difference for some. 10 yards closer is not anything at 1000 yards, but at 50 it's big.
Now, useable maginification due to mirage and a bunch of other factors is debatable. I shot 16X at 1000 recently and did very well against my competitors, many of them were using 24-25x scopes, so I don't necessarily feel that the 20x top end of the Vortex is a drawback.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to dissuade anyone from buying what they like, nor am I trying to sell a Vortex Razor to anyone; but I hope you do realize that increasing the power from 20x to 25x, makes a 1000 yd target appear only 10 yds closer (Apparent distance is 50 yds for 20x vs 40 yds for 25x)
For a 1500 yd target the apparent difference is a whopping 15 yds (75 yds for 20x vs 60 yds for 25x).
Just saying you are chasing very little in apparent target resolution in going from 20x to 25x out to 1500 yds or so.
Just saying....
Bob</div></div>
I don't think you need over 20X either, but I am trying to follow the math.
So if at 1000 yards a 10x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 100 yards at 1x?
So at 1000 yards a 20x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 50 yards at 1x?
Is that math right?
So at 1000 yards a 25X scope makes a target appear as if it were at 40 yards at 1x is what you're saying? If so, then 50 yards is 25% farther away than 40 yards....so I can see an extra 5X making a difference for some. 10 yards closer is not anything at 1000 yards, but at 50 it's big.
Now, useable maginification due to mirage and a bunch of other factors is debatable. I shot 16X at 1000 recently and did very well against my competitors, many of them were using 24-25x scopes, so I don't necessarily feel that the 20x top end of the Vortex is a drawback.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
I think that they would be wise though for Vortex to look at extending the usable range to stay up with the competition (S&B, Premier, Hensoldt, etc.) 5X ranges seems to be more and more the norm, so to stay with the best, it would make sense to offer one, even if the actual benefits are limited.
It is the psychology of marketing as consumers, even education and well versed are still affected by such things when making decisions as to what to purchase.
I think that they would be wise though for Vortex to look at extending the usable range to stay up with the competition (S&B, Premier, Hensoldt, etc.) 5X ranges seems to be more and more the norm, so to stay with the best, it would make sense to offer one, even if the actual benefits are limited.
It is the psychology of marketing as consumers, even education and well versed are still affected by such things when making decisions as to what to purchase.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jasonk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to dissuade anyone from buying what they like, nor am I trying to sell a Vortex Razor to anyone; but I hope you do realize that increasing the power from 20x to 25x, makes a 1000 yd target appear only 10 yds closer (Apparent distance is 50 yds for 20x vs 40 yds for 25x)
For a 1500 yd target the apparent difference is a whopping 15 yds (75 yds for 20x vs 60 yds for 25x).
Just saying you are chasing very little in apparent target resolution in going from 20x to 25x out to 1500 yds or so.
Just saying....
Bob</div></div>
I don't think you need over 20X either, but I am trying to follow the math.
So if at 1000 yards a 10x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 100 yards at 1x?
So at 1000 yards a 20x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 50 yards at 1x?
Is that math right?
So at 1000 yards a 25X scope makes a target appear as if it were at 40 yards at 1x is what you're saying? If so, then 50 yards is 25% farther away than 40 yards....so I can see an extra 5X making a difference for some. 10 yards closer is not anything at 1000 yards, but at 50 it's big.
Now, useable maginification due to mirage and a bunch of other factors is debatable. I shot 16X at 1000 recently and did very well against my competitors, many of them were using 24-25x scopes, so I don't necessarily feel that the 20x top end of the Vortex is a drawback. </div></div>
Yes, Jason your math is correct.
Take the target distance and divide by the scope power. That is the way the target will appear as if you were looking at it with your naked eye.
So, at 10x @ 1000 yds target will "appear" as being 100 yds away. @20x it will "appear" to be 50 yds away, and @ 25x it will "appear" to be 40 yds away.
If you want to do a test, take your 1000 K yd target and place it 40 yds away, and look at it with your naked eye. Now move it to 50 yds, and assess it again. That's the real difference between 20x and 25x, and it's not much in aiding the accurate placement of crosshairs.
However, if your shooting for groups @1Kyds or your target is very very small, as opposed to say tactical comps, then yes, that extra 5x of magnification or more can be a big help.
In other words, what you are going to do with your rifle, ie: your application, should drive the magnification decision, not current fashion.
But whatever floats one's boat, is OK by me.
Regards,
Bob
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jasonk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to dissuade anyone from buying what they like, nor am I trying to sell a Vortex Razor to anyone; but I hope you do realize that increasing the power from 20x to 25x, makes a 1000 yd target appear only 10 yds closer (Apparent distance is 50 yds for 20x vs 40 yds for 25x)
For a 1500 yd target the apparent difference is a whopping 15 yds (75 yds for 20x vs 60 yds for 25x).
Just saying you are chasing very little in apparent target resolution in going from 20x to 25x out to 1500 yds or so.
Just saying....
Bob</div></div>
I don't think you need over 20X either, but I am trying to follow the math.
So if at 1000 yards a 10x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 100 yards at 1x?
So at 1000 yards a 20x scope makes a target appear as if it were at 50 yards at 1x?
Is that math right?
So at 1000 yards a 25X scope makes a target appear as if it were at 40 yards at 1x is what you're saying? If so, then 50 yards is 25% farther away than 40 yards....so I can see an extra 5X making a difference for some. 10 yards closer is not anything at 1000 yards, but at 50 it's big.
Now, useable maginification due to mirage and a bunch of other factors is debatable. I shot 16X at 1000 recently and did very well against my competitors, many of them were using 24-25x scopes, so I don't necessarily feel that the 20x top end of the Vortex is a drawback. </div></div>
Yes, Jason your math is correct.
Take the target distance and divide by the scope power. That is the way the target will appear as if you were looking at it with your naked eye.
So, at 10x @ 1000 yds target will "appear" as being 100 yds away. @20x it will "appear" to be 50 yds away, and @ 25x it will "appear" to be 40 yds away.
If you want to do a test, take your 1000 K yd target and place it 40 yds away, and look at it with your naked eye. Now move it to 50 yds, and assess it again. That's the real difference between 20x and 25x, and it's not much in aiding the accurate placement of crosshairs.
However, if your shooting for groups @1Kyds or your target is very very small, as opposed to say tactical comps, then yes, that extra 5x of magnification or more can be a big help.
In other words, what you are going to do with your rifle, ie: your application, should drive the magnification decision, not current fashion.
But whatever floats one's boat, is OK by me.
Regards,
Bob
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
Agreed with Bob. I like to shoot for groups and don't participate in tactical competitions. Every little bit of useful magnification really helps when trying to print the smallest groups you can.
Agreed with Bob. I like to shoot for groups and don't participate in tactical competitions. Every little bit of useful magnification really helps when trying to print the smallest groups you can.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
Thanks, Bob. Wasn't debating one way or the other, I don't own a scope about 16X right now, just wanted to make sure that I understoon the logic and math behind it.
Thanks, Bob. Wasn't debating one way or the other, I don't own a scope about 16X right now, just wanted to make sure that I understoon the logic and math behind it.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McKinneyMike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that they would be wise though for Vortex to look at extending the usable range to stay up with the competition (S&B, Premier, <span style="font-weight: bold">Hensoldt</span>, etc.) 5X ranges seems to be more and more the norm, so to stay with the best, it would make sense to offer one, even if the actual benefits are limited.
It is the psychology of marketing as consumers, even education and well versed are still affected by such things when making decisions as to what to purchase. </div></div>
When did Hensoldt come out with a 5x?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McKinneyMike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that they would be wise though for Vortex to look at extending the usable range to stay up with the competition (S&B, Premier, <span style="font-weight: bold">Hensoldt</span>, etc.) 5X ranges seems to be more and more the norm, so to stay with the best, it would make sense to offer one, even if the actual benefits are limited.
It is the psychology of marketing as consumers, even education and well versed are still affected by such things when making decisions as to what to purchase. </div></div>
When did Hensoldt come out with a 5x?
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
I too do not own a scope over 16x and have found that I don't need it as I find that I usualy run my scope around 10x. Fighting mirage along with heart rate and breathing with the higher magnifications 20x+ is counter productive for me. I see plenty of folks who believe they can burn their rounds into the target by increasing magnification instead of good sight picture coupled with sound fundamentals insuring that the reticle is clear and sharp in contrast to the target. I find it akin to people that get way too much horsepower in a vehicle that they can't drive anyway. The rule of thumb as I learned it years ago was 1 power to every hundred yards you will be shooting. This was the rationale given for the 10x Unertl I used. I guess the question you need to ask yourself is how much useable magnification do I need and be realistic on its effectiveness. Spotting scopes are much better suited for fine detail than a rifle scope.
I too do not own a scope over 16x and have found that I don't need it as I find that I usualy run my scope around 10x. Fighting mirage along with heart rate and breathing with the higher magnifications 20x+ is counter productive for me. I see plenty of folks who believe they can burn their rounds into the target by increasing magnification instead of good sight picture coupled with sound fundamentals insuring that the reticle is clear and sharp in contrast to the target. I find it akin to people that get way too much horsepower in a vehicle that they can't drive anyway. The rule of thumb as I learned it years ago was 1 power to every hundred yards you will be shooting. This was the rationale given for the 10x Unertl I used. I guess the question you need to ask yourself is how much useable magnification do I need and be realistic on its effectiveness. Spotting scopes are much better suited for fine detail than a rifle scope.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: platypus</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fighting mirage along with heart rate and breathing with the higher magnifications 20x+ is counter productive for me. </div></div>
I hear this argument over and over again (HR, breathing) and I just don't get it. It not like the rifle and the scope are NOT moving around because of breathing and heartrate at lower powers - its just that you don't see it. Actually, I would rather SEE the movement due to HR and breathing and therefore can compensate for it. Shooting on low power doesn't make it go away just because you can't see it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: platypus</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fighting mirage along with heart rate and breathing with the higher magnifications 20x+ is counter productive for me. </div></div>
I hear this argument over and over again (HR, breathing) and I just don't get it. It not like the rifle and the scope are NOT moving around because of breathing and heartrate at lower powers - its just that you don't see it. Actually, I would rather SEE the movement due to HR and breathing and therefore can compensate for it. Shooting on low power doesn't make it go away just because you can't see it.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
Reaper, you are correct that the heart rate and breathing are still there just not as magnified. Lower magnification is so you can concentrate on driving the rifle instead of trying to work through some mystical Zen bullshit of stopping your heart and breathing. I typically do not have the luxury of finding my special spiritual shooting place that allows me to go ninja mind and body control. My shooting typically involves a miserable position, with terrible weather conditions, horrible lighting, and the very distinct opportunity for the range to become a two way affair. I will concede that the high magnification is a great training tool, run just a mile, climb a wall, do some push up with your gear on then set up for your shot all while under the clock and see how much you fight the bump to get that well placed shot. My thinking is based on the same philosophy and experience of shooting unsupported iron sights and that is except your wobble zone and learn to shoot through it breaking the trigger at the same point every time. Maybe on a flat range under the shade while laying on my Temerpedic shooting mat and sipping on a cold soda with the closest thing in the area resembling a life threatening hazard would be the off chance of alien abduction, a high power scope would be fun to shoot. Bench rest is a great place for the high power scopes as it greatly minimizes the human factor of driving the gun. Just some food for thought, your mileage will most certainly vary. Each on to their own I am simply offering what works for me and why, buy what works for you because ultimately it is your money.
Reaper, you are correct that the heart rate and breathing are still there just not as magnified. Lower magnification is so you can concentrate on driving the rifle instead of trying to work through some mystical Zen bullshit of stopping your heart and breathing. I typically do not have the luxury of finding my special spiritual shooting place that allows me to go ninja mind and body control. My shooting typically involves a miserable position, with terrible weather conditions, horrible lighting, and the very distinct opportunity for the range to become a two way affair. I will concede that the high magnification is a great training tool, run just a mile, climb a wall, do some push up with your gear on then set up for your shot all while under the clock and see how much you fight the bump to get that well placed shot. My thinking is based on the same philosophy and experience of shooting unsupported iron sights and that is except your wobble zone and learn to shoot through it breaking the trigger at the same point every time. Maybe on a flat range under the shade while laying on my Temerpedic shooting mat and sipping on a cold soda with the closest thing in the area resembling a life threatening hazard would be the off chance of alien abduction, a high power scope would be fun to shoot. Bench rest is a great place for the high power scopes as it greatly minimizes the human factor of driving the gun. Just some food for thought, your mileage will most certainly vary. Each on to their own I am simply offering what works for me and why, buy what works for you because ultimately it is your money.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
I understand what you are saying platypus. But from a pure marketing and sales point of view, I think the Razor would be much more alluring if it were a 5-25 model. Most high end optics utilize the 5X magnification (10X in the case of March). It's always nice to have too much magnification as opposed to not enough in my opinion and would love to see the Razor in a 5X zoom model, possibly a 5X-25X or a 6X-30X.
I understand what you are saying platypus. But from a pure marketing and sales point of view, I think the Razor would be much more alluring if it were a 5-25 model. Most high end optics utilize the 5X magnification (10X in the case of March). It's always nice to have too much magnification as opposed to not enough in my opinion and would love to see the Razor in a 5X zoom model, possibly a 5X-25X or a 6X-30X.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ......... That's the real difference between 20x and 25x, and it's not much in aiding the accurate placement of crosshairs........ </div></div>
Which makes a point I learned while shooting at CVT with Vern Harrison. His 18X "flea" scope has the IOR reticle that is open at center with a tiny center dot. His optic was much easier to keep centered on a 10" X 17" steel target at 1000 yards than my Horus H-25 reticle which is rather thick at 17X in my USO. More magnification would have worked against me and made my reticle even thicker, obscuring more of the target. A 10 X 17 inch target looks pretty small at 1000 yards.
Guess thats why the BR guys like fine cross hairs with nothing on them. Then again, they like their magnification too. Sorry for the ramble........
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ......... That's the real difference between 20x and 25x, and it's not much in aiding the accurate placement of crosshairs........ </div></div>
Which makes a point I learned while shooting at CVT with Vern Harrison. His 18X "flea" scope has the IOR reticle that is open at center with a tiny center dot. His optic was much easier to keep centered on a 10" X 17" steel target at 1000 yards than my Horus H-25 reticle which is rather thick at 17X in my USO. More magnification would have worked against me and made my reticle even thicker, obscuring more of the target. A 10 X 17 inch target looks pretty small at 1000 yards.
Guess thats why the BR guys like fine cross hairs with nothing on them. Then again, they like their magnification too. Sorry for the ramble........
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
Why are y'all talking about 1000 yards as if it were the end of the "useful range" world? With today's rifles and ammo (e.g. 338LM, Cheytac whatever) one should consider distances of 2000+ <span style="text-decoration: underline">meters</span> - where every extra bit of magnification could count. These scopes seem to be designed to deal with it - so expecting higher max magnification is perfectly reasonable.
The fact that not hitting the target is often the shooter's fault (rather than that of his equipment) detracts nothing from another fact - that a scope with greater magnification makes extreme range shots <span style="text-decoration: underline">easier</span>.
Why are y'all talking about 1000 yards as if it were the end of the "useful range" world? With today's rifles and ammo (e.g. 338LM, Cheytac whatever) one should consider distances of 2000+ <span style="text-decoration: underline">meters</span> - where every extra bit of magnification could count. These scopes seem to be designed to deal with it - so expecting higher max magnification is perfectly reasonable.
The fact that not hitting the target is often the shooter's fault (rather than that of his equipment) detracts nothing from another fact - that a scope with greater magnification makes extreme range shots <span style="text-decoration: underline">easier</span>.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mouse07410</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why are y'all talking about 1000 yards as if it were the end of the "useful range" world? With today's rifles and ammo (e.g. 338LM, Cheytac whatever) one should consider distances of 2000+ <span style="text-decoration: underline">meters</span> - where every extra bit of magnification could count. These scopes seem to be designed to deal with it - so expecting higher max magnification is perfectly reasonable.
The fact that not hitting the target is often the shooter's fault (rather than that of his equipment) detracts nothing from another fact - that a scope with greater magnification makes extreme range shots <span style="text-decoration: underline">easier</span>. </div></div>
I can speak for me about using the 1000 yard reference. That's as far as I've shot my 308 with the 17X USO with the thick reticled Horus H-25 reticle.
Heck, my shooting world ends at 100 yards unless I'm willing to drive 5 hours, and that range ends at 1000.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mouse07410</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why are y'all talking about 1000 yards as if it were the end of the "useful range" world? With today's rifles and ammo (e.g. 338LM, Cheytac whatever) one should consider distances of 2000+ <span style="text-decoration: underline">meters</span> - where every extra bit of magnification could count. These scopes seem to be designed to deal with it - so expecting higher max magnification is perfectly reasonable.
The fact that not hitting the target is often the shooter's fault (rather than that of his equipment) detracts nothing from another fact - that a scope with greater magnification makes extreme range shots <span style="text-decoration: underline">easier</span>. </div></div>
I can speak for me about using the 1000 yard reference. That's as far as I've shot my 308 with the 17X USO with the thick reticled Horus H-25 reticle.
Heck, my shooting world ends at 100 yards unless I'm willing to drive 5 hours, and that range ends at 1000.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ReaperDriver</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: platypus</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fighting mirage along with heart rate and breathing with the higher magnifications 20x+ is counter productive for me. </div></div>
I hear this argument over and over again (HR, breathing) and I just don't get it. It not like the rifle and the scope are NOT moving around because of breathing and heartrate at lower powers - its just that you don't see it. Actually, I would rather SEE the movement due to HR and breathing and therefore can compensate for it. Shooting on low power doesn't make it go away just because you can't see it. </div></div>
When youa re working form a positional standpoint your mind and if you "slap the trigger" become a big issue. Perhaps and even larger issue when you see the whole world moving thorugh the scope.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ReaperDriver</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: platypus</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fighting mirage along with heart rate and breathing with the higher magnifications 20x+ is counter productive for me. </div></div>
I hear this argument over and over again (HR, breathing) and I just don't get it. It not like the rifle and the scope are NOT moving around because of breathing and heartrate at lower powers - its just that you don't see it. Actually, I would rather SEE the movement due to HR and breathing and therefore can compensate for it. Shooting on low power doesn't make it go away just because you can't see it. </div></div>
When youa re working form a positional standpoint your mind and if you "slap the trigger" become a big issue. Perhaps and even larger issue when you see the whole world moving thorugh the scope.
Re: Vortex Razor - max magnification
Well, I haven't shot anything beyond 900m either - and that using only 10x of my Vortex Razor HD (capable of twice that much), as those were the instructions in the class. <span style="font-style: italic">BTW I <span style="text-decoration: underline">love</span> EBR-2 reticle, and have hard time deciding between EBR-2 with its 0.2 mrad subtentions for ranging (and nice Christmas Tree - but hard to see unless at max magnification and then some) and EBR-3 with great 0.1 mrad subtentions for ranging (but no drop tree) for my next Vortex.</span>
But we're talking about what our equipment should be capable of doing, not what our frail skills are!
Well, I haven't shot anything beyond 900m either - and that using only 10x of my Vortex Razor HD (capable of twice that much), as those were the instructions in the class. <span style="font-style: italic">BTW I <span style="text-decoration: underline">love</span> EBR-2 reticle, and have hard time deciding between EBR-2 with its 0.2 mrad subtentions for ranging (and nice Christmas Tree - but hard to see unless at max magnification and then some) and EBR-3 with great 0.1 mrad subtentions for ranging (but no drop tree) for my next Vortex.</span>
But we're talking about what our equipment should be capable of doing, not what our frail skills are!
Similar threads
