Re: Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x44 Riflescope
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RonHam</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For you guys with this scope do you find the lack of a parallux adjustment limiting? I was all set to pick up a Vortex 2.5-10 untill I noticed the lack of adjustment, I still need to research the necessity a little more.
Thanks</div></div>
I have taken this scope out to around 800, and I haven't had any issues. The magnification is low enough to where it's really not an issue.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ring</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
u might want to move the rings as far apart as you can.. the way you have it set in the pic will make the scope more prone to bending damage if dropped... </div></div>
I already did. That was from the spring after the scope came off of an M1A.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: boone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I have this scope and disagree whole heartedly. You need to move your scope further back, space out your rings further, and mount to your receiver without bridging the gap. Your having eye box issues do to how you have to scope mounted. Not trying to be dick just giving you a observation that will help you.
BTW nice looking AR hope she shoots as good as she looks.</div></div>
The scope can't go back further. That's where it needs to be for my eyes to see it. I have a short length of pull that gets shorter and shorter as time goes on. The eye box issues are likely a mix of the scope and my eye. I have a lot of time behind Zeiss and Swarovski glass, so it would be fair to say that my assessment may be a bit skewed based off of personal bias. Still, this is not exactly an unheard of issue with Vortex, as the Razor HD had a very particular eyebox (which has been redesigned for the new models). You probably don't see the issue, but I notice it. That's the thing about optics though-there is a lot left open to individual interpretation.
Bridging the gap isn't an issue with that particular rail. The Troy MRF is a very solid rail with no flex. I intentionally mounted it across the gap to test Troy's claims that the rail was solid and could be mounted to, and so far I have observed no deviation or issues. I will eventually go to a unimount based off of the receiver. I'm going to be overhauling the rifle over the winter to do some changes, at which time I'll likely invest in a LaRue or ADM mount. As it stands, the rifle is pulling .460 MOA.