Delta stryker 4.5-30 vs khales 624i vs USO TS20

T

Tony1

New member
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Good day all,

This is my first real post. I am looking for a new scope for PRS and rimfire competitions. I have settled between a Delta Stryker, Khales 624i or a USO TS20.

I currently have a Vortex Viper Pst Gen 2 and I am not impressed. Back to back with the USO it doesn't compare at all. I tried the USO twice at 2 separate rimfire competitions and after not seeing my bullet fly or where it impacted all day it was incredible to see them fly every shot!

I've also tried the USO against a Razor Gen 2 and it was better for seeing bullet flight than the Razor. The only thing stopping me getting one of these is that it doesn't have a zero stop and the elevation graduations are 0.5mil and I would like 0.2mil.

I have heard great things about the delta stryker and my friend will sell me his khales 624i at a great price but I have no experience with either of these scopes.

The most important thing for me is that I want to be able to see the bullet flight and impact or miss so I can make corrections to not miss multiple times on a target on a stage.

Thank you in advance for any inpt.... I'm very torn.
 
I don't have any experience with either the Kahles or USB scopes, but I do own two Delta Strykers.The first one is the 4.5-30 FFP scope that I put on a precision rifle.I bought this scope based on a suggestion from Peter Dobson ( Hirsch Precision), couldn't be happier with this scope....beautiful optics,34mm maintain tube with lots of adjustments, illuminated reticle, and nice solid turret clicks.You won't find many if any negative reviews on these scopes.The only negative thing I've seen is that their 1st generation scopes had a stiff parallax adjustment.I believe mine is a 2nd generation. ..parallax adjustment is fine.I have shot between 1000-1200 rounds through my rifle in practices and matches at distances between 100-800 yds, and the scope tracks and performs great.The second Stryker is the 5-50 with MOA. I just picked this one up two weeks ago for my F-class rifle, and have only shot it at 100 yds. The Delta Stryker 5-50 second focal plane scope is a very popular target scope here in Atlantic Canada. Adam MacDonald and Gordon Holloway ( two of the best f-class shooters in Canada) are using Strykers.I think that these scopes are a well kept secret (especially at their price point). Both of mine have locking turrets and zero stop.Hirsch Precision has both versions in stock....I think you'll be happy with a Delta....good luck with your decision!
 
I don’t think you can go wrong with any of those choices. In my experience, pick the reticle you like best. If you don’t like the reticle, it won’t matter how good the rest of the scope is.

If you’re still relatively new to the style of shooting, you may want to pick the most affordable scope you’re looking at, knowing your tastes will change as you gain experience. I currently run a kahles 6-24 with skmr3 reticle. It’s a good scope, but I’m thinking of changing because I don’t love the reticle. When I bought it the Internet forums said it was the best reticle for prs. I’ve discovered I want a reticle that shows .5 mils on the main windage, something I didn’t know when I started shooting prs. I want that quick reference point. Everyone’s tastes in reticles are different and you won’t learn what you want or like until after you use it for a bit.
 
Thanks... I’m fairly experienced. Enough to know what I want but my main concern is seeing trace in centre fire and flight in Rimfire. If they do that then I can decide on reticle choices.
 
Thank you for the input. I hope I can try one of these soon to see for myself. I’ve only heard great things too.
 
I didn’t read your first post closely enough. I rarely see my own trace in my kahles, but I can see trace when I spot for others.

Is one scope going to double duty between centerfire and rimfire?

If not, I’ll put in a plug for the athlon Midas tac 5-25. I got one for my rimfire prs, and can watch the 22 flight if I’ve got a good position. The glass is definitely not on the level of the others, but it’s decent and i think it’s a good scope for a 22. I’ve never used it on a centerfire.
 
Seeing trace is the result of two critical scope feature, resolution and depth of field.

Ironically a scope with lower resolution glass a deeper depth of field can be more effective for long range shooting than a scope with high resolution glass and shallow depth of field.

I have a Nightforce NXS 5.5-22 and a Kahles 624 and these scopes are perfect examples of my point.

The Kahles has better image clarity, but the NXS has a deeper depth of field. Spotting trace and reading mirage is actually better with the NXS.

For 22LR, distances are fairly close, and depth of field increases as range is extended, making the 624 less preferable for 22LR, but good for long range center fire.

Guys need to talk more about depth of field when discussing rifle scopes.
 
Thank you for this reply. That is somthing I haven't heard before but makes sense! I think depth of field is what I am lookng for over reselution then
 
I was watching my 22LR bullet flight yesterday with a Vortex Strike Eagle, so its not always a $$ thing to see your bullet flight. Even after a few hundred rounds there are things that I don’t love about the Strike Eagle, but it’s an entry point moneywise.
 
Tony1 said:
Thank you for this reply. That is something I haven't heard before but makes sense! I think depth of field is what I am looking for over resolution then
Click to expand...

There is a guy on YouTube named Dark Lord Of Optics... Now he is about a dry as dirt and his Russian accent is heavy, but if you can tolerate it, he does present some pretty solid observations if you have the patience to check him out.

If you think about what FFP and SFP means, the image is established either at the front of the erector tube or the back. If the image is established at the front of the erector tube, I don't see how it can use the same refraction angles as a SFP scope with the image established at the back... therefore it's probably fair to conclude that SFP scopes will generally have a greater depth of field that FFP of the same overall length.

I'm not an optical engineer, but I would think this is likely true.
 
Last edited:
beaverbank said:
I don't have any experience with either the Kahles or USB scopes, but I do own two Delta Strykers.The first one is the 4.5-30 FFP scope that I put on a precision rifle.I bought this scope based on a suggestion from Peter Dobson ( Hirsch Precision), couldn't be happier with this scope....beautiful optics,34mm maintain tube with lots of adjustments, illuminated reticle, and nice solid turret clicks.You won't find many if any negative reviews on these scopes.The only negative thing I've seen is that their 1st generation scopes had a stiff parallax adjustment.I believe mine is a 2nd generation. ..parallax adjustment is fine.I have shot between 1000-1200 rounds through my rifle in practices and matches at distances between 100-800 yds, and the scope tracks and performs great.The second Stryker is the 5-50 with MOA. I just picked this one up two weeks ago for my F-class rifle, and have only shot it at 100 yds. The Delta Stryker 5-50 second focal plane scope is a very popular target scope here in Atlantic Canada. Adam MacDonald and Gordon Holloway ( two of the best f-class shooters in Canada) are using Strykers.I think that these scopes are a well kept secret (especially at their price point). Both of mine have locking turrets and zero stop.Hirsch Precision has both versions in stock....I think you'll be happy with a Delta....good luck with your decision!
Click to expand...

Another testimony for Delta Stryker. I have played with the Gen 1, Gen 2 and own the latest 2020 edition (Gen 2.x?). The Gen 1 turrets were very similar to the Athlon Cronus (which is a cousin of sorts from LOW). The Gen 2 introduced different locking turrets. Both offered great glass but the complaint was that the parallax was imprecise at longer range (ie after 300m, it was simply a small travel to infinity). The 2020 edition changed the parallax adjustment to cover a wider range to 1500m before the infinity.

I also have a cousin, the Trijicon TenMile 4.5 - 30. Although similar, the overall feel and operation are different and reticle offering is a complete different take (for me, more catered to precision/hunt)
 
I have a 2019 (gen 2?) version Stryker 4.5-30, was well worth the money, and was a great deal for what it is, I liked their reticle choices, went with the DLR-1, not a crowded sight pic, has nice graduations and is easy to use. Turrets have been great. I'd buy another one. Contemplating a Delta Javelin for a 223 I have, just a gopher gun, but, price is right, reticle style works for me, I may do that later in spring. For the people with a more limited budget, it may be a sleeper scope, what I've seen so far on it looks good.
 
209jones said:
I have a 2019 (gen 2?) version Stryker 4.5-30, was well worth the money, and was a great deal for what it is, I liked their reticle choices, went with the DLR-1, not a crowded sight pic, has nice graduations and is easy to use. Turrets have been great. I'd buy another one. Contemplating a Delta Javelin for a 223 I have, just a gopher gun, but, price is right, reticle style works for me, I may do that later in spring. For the people with a more limited budget, it may be a sleeper scope, what I've seen so far on it looks good.
Click to expand...

The Delta Javelin is probably even a better bang for the buck. Delta will say that their Stryker is always going to be better optically and feature wise, but the Javelin offers a lot for the money (ie almost $1000 cheaper in Canada). For most shooters, I don't think they will see any difference between them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom