Vortex Razor Gen 2 4.5-27

J

JNA

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
247   0   0
Hey guys,

I have been thinking about upgrading my current Nightforce NXS to a vortex razor 2 and was wondering if they really are worth that much money? Originally i was looking at getting an s&b but their prices keep going up and if im spending that much on a scope i want to know i can keep it for life and it will work.
 
A lot of guys in the States claim That vortex is $1000 cheaper than the S&B so they opt for the cheaper Vortex . In Canada they are approximately the same price. If they were the same price in the States I doubt they would sell many.
 
If you're in the market for a new far-looker, here is a very in depth review of 18 tactical scopes. Personally, it's the best scope review I've come across to date. The level of detail he goes in to is impressive to say the least!

Also, his "What the Pro's Use" articles provide a good look into what the boys in the big leagues are using.

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/

Gerhard
 
I own the Razor Gen 2. (and Gen 1 for that matter)

I do not have experience with S&B, but NSX and ATACR scopes.

Features, glass clarity, controls, reticle, FFP, finish, appearance, (assumed) durability, field of view, etc. All top notch. I don't know how it could get much better?

While it is an expensive unit, it'll be a scope that doesn't leaving you wishing for things.
 
Grouse River said:
If you're in the market for a new far-looker, here is a very in depth review of 18 tactical scopes. Personally, it's the best scope review I've come across to date. The level of detail he goes in to is impressive to say the least!

Also, his "What the Pro's Use" articles provide a good look into what the boys in the big leagues are using.

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/

Gerhard
Click to expand...

The review posted doesn't include the 4.5-27x Gen 2 Razor...
 
Shibby, excellent observation! Later on in the review/comments he goes on to explain why he doesn't have the Gen II included. My goal with my reply to the OP was to give him some solid info on how various high end tac scopes compare when put through what I feel is a very thorough test. Lets hope for a review next year that includes the Gen II or latest iteration! I would also agree with you that the clarity is really good.

Gerhard
 
I have the the 4.5-27 myself and it really is a amazing scope, Shibby pretty much summed it up, it is well worth the money. Also they seem to be extremely popular with the PRS crowd if you follow that sorta thing.
 
Hey guys thank you for the experiences/advice. I must admit i was expecting the prices of the s&b to be way more than what is shown at wolverine, but my question is how good is s&bs warranty? As im hoping this scope lasts me a lifetime and i have a rendency for making things not work. Dont believe me.....I jammed an AK in vegas... hence why im hopi g this vortex is the next best thing since sliced bread
 
I bought my sb in October, put over 900 rounds down range. Not a single issue. Yes there is only 1 year guarantee, but as long as It not purposely damaged they are really good at looking after their customers. If you want sb quality with vortex warranty then tangent theta is the answer.
 
There a great scope but as others have said in the states there quite a bit cheaper than the S&B's but up here there so close that I would just get the S&B(that's what I did). Another great option I would consider is the NF ATACR F1 but there Mil reticles leave something to be desired imo. I'm not saying the Razors aren't good. I have a Razor spotter, a 1-6 and have spent some time behind the 4.5-27 and you really can't go wrong with it either.
 
Issues:

- ATACR (non-F1) is not FFP, nor locking turrets (big deal?)
- PM-2's tunneling on certain models. (optional locking turrets)
- Razor's weight (it's a pig)
- Reticle choices (consider all options)
 
Shibby! said:
Issues:

- ATACR (non-F1) is not FFP, nor locking turrets (big deal?)
- PM-2's tunneling on certain models. (optional locking turrets)
- Razor's weight (it's a pig)
- Reticle choices (consider all options)
Click to expand...

FFP has it's ups and downs - it's not the be all and end all. If you're gonna be mostly target shooting, then I prefer SFP because on lower powers a FFP reticle is almost useless, and when it's cranked right up you lose a lot of the lower part of the reticle for holdovers. SFP's are usually a few hundred less money as well.

What's tunneling??

They're all pigs!!! You're looking at 2.5lbs for any of these things.

Unless you're an actual operator, the click of a S&B turret is more than enough to keep it where you want it.

Reticles are a personal choice. I like the "christmas tree" style (Horus, G2DMR, etc), but have recently been berated into a MOAR-T (I was told that christmas trees belong at christmas). At the end of the day, if you're not a sniper, you're gonna click up and over, and then lay the cross/dot on your target.


Have you decided MOA or Mil? Do you want illum or not?? (I don't think non-operators need illum, but that's just me).

-J.
 
JayCarver said:
There a great scope but as others have said in the states there quite a bit cheaper than the S&B's but up here there so close that I would just get the S&B(that's what I did). Another great option I would consider is the NF ATACR F1 but there Mil reticles leave something to be desired imo. I'm not saying the Razors aren't good. I have a Razor spotter, a 1-6 and have spent some time behind the 4.5-27 and you really can't go wrong with it either.
Click to expand...

I compared my sb to the atacar. The comparison at a hour before sunset, light rain. I couldn't see holes on white at 200 or 300. While with my sb bullet holes were visible until 15 min after sunset at 300m. They were black blobs but visible. I would spend more money on a sb. The optical clarity is lacking as well. It looked like glass coke bottles. Extremely dark and not crisp unlike the sb. I guess you can say I've drunk the sb kool-aid I'm just too blown away about the quality of the glass.
 
Gunneegoogoo said:
FFP has it's ups and downs - it's not the be all and end all. If you're gonna be mostly target shooting, then I prefer SFP because on lower powers a FFP reticle is almost useless, and when it's cranked right up you lose a lot of the lower part of the reticle for holdovers. SFP's are usually a few hundred less money as well.

What's tunneling??

They're all pigs!!! You're looking at 2.5lbs for any of these things.

Unless you're an actual operator, the click of a S&B turret is more than enough to keep it where you want it.

Reticles are a personal choice. I like the "christmas tree" style (Horus, G2DMR, etc), but have recently been berated into a MOAR-T (I was told that christmas trees belong at christmas). At the end of the day, if you're not a sniper, you're gonna click up and over, and then lay the cross/dot on your target.


Have you decided MOA or Mil? Do you want illum or not?? (I don't think non-operators need illum, but that's just me).

-J.
Click to expand...

Research S&B tunneling and watch youtube videos. The PM2 is an old (but still really good) scope. This is one issue they haven't resolved.

I believe you also need to research FFP a bit more. Your comments are not correct.

Different people have different uses. Some may want locking turrets. Then again I'm not an operator...., but when I compete i"ll be using them as a safety factor.

I also don't agree with telling people to not hold over. While this is once again my experience, hold-over is invaluable when shooting long range. Quick wind calls, quick follow-up, etc. Having a reticle that allows more accurate measurement (rather then dead space holdover) and being always accurate (FFP), are exceptional things to have at your dispense. You might argue that "if you are shooting long range you are at max magnification" Which is also untrue. Not all scopes are reticle accruate at max zoom. Coupled by this, in truth many, like myself, shoot the exact opposite. 12-18x for long range, max zoom at shorter ranges. Plenty of reasons why, but not limited to more accurate guaging of wind and more precise shots where it matters. At least from my experience, the ATACR and Razor (likely S&B as well) have exceptional FOV so you can accurate assess the situation before sending one down range. Having this increased FOV is a must in a scope of this price range.

With that all said, I believe the OP has plenty of information to base their decision. They really can't go wrong picking any one of the scopes mentioned. Do your homework, find out what you need or want, and make your best decision based off that information.

Good luck. While they are unbelievebly expensive, they are something you can enjoy for the rest of your life.
 
I am looking for an illuminated, ffp, preferaly christmas tree reticle (H59 for S&B and EBC-2 MRAD for vortex) all MRAD.
 
bsand said:
I compared my sb to the atacar. The comparison at a hour before sunset, light rain. I couldn't see holes on white at 200 or 300. While with my sb bullet holes were visible until 15 min after sunset at 300m. They were black blobs but visible. I would spend more money on a sb. The optical clarity is lacking as well. It looked like glass coke bottles. Extremely dark and not crisp unlike the sb. I guess you can say I've drunk the sb kool-aid I'm just too blown away about the quality of the glass.
Click to expand...

Having owned and used both my PMII and my ATACR, if you can claim a discernible difference in light transmission between the two, you have incredibly gifted vision or the bolded part applies to your relationship with S&B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom