Viper vs Razor

[Creedmoor shooter]

I have both. Theres no comparison. My razor AMG is better than my gen 2 pst. You really notice the difference and fsr ranges and in low light. Also, the color definition in the razor is much better. The gen 2 pst is still good glass. It's just not what my AMG is

 

[brcfo_outdoors]

I have the LHT 3-15x50 in MRAD with the non-BDC reticle that I got for $800 on clearance and have been happy with it. For simple functionality and weight with quality glass it is a good option. I don't think it is designed to pound nails like my Razor Gen II, but it is significantly more pleasant to carry. As others have mentioned, I don't really mess with anything less than the Razor line, I have used the Viper, and have owned the Crossfire and Diamondback and would say upgrade if you are interested. My only real complaint is the illumination button is kind of annoying and I would rather just have a knob.

To me 50mm is a better option for light gathering than 42mm so I like it in my hunting scopes, but I don't think the latter would disappoint.

 

[johngibbs222]

I've been looking out at scopes in this range, but I shy away from units that have a clear marketing input along with names that don't seem to bear any relationship with what scopes are supposed to do.
I'm just about on the edge of pulling the trigger on a schmidt and bender Klassik 3-12 x 42, it has an illuminated reticle which I find essential and is built like a king tiger tank.
It's also pretty simple, fixed parallax and a turret to vary the reticle illumination, no stupid buttons which is what turned me off of the zeiss. I don't think it has any of the bells and whistles that some of the Vortex scopes seem to have but it ticks all my boxes and it has top quality glass and I'll be looking forward to using the mil system.
Best of all it is on sale here in the UK for about 50% of the mrp which brings it down under vortex and leupold VX-R prices and it fits the ruger mounts on my gun.
Perhaps the only downsides it just has a ten year warranty and some of the fittings that come with vortex scopes are extra, but it is currently 12% cheaper than the razor.

 

[volunteer06]

It will be mostly a hunting gun. Probably 600 yards and in. Will do some target work just for practice purpose farther.

 

[skipglo]

Remember, you get what you pay for.

Not always...! There are so many competitive brands to everything today....paying for a NAME means nothing to me personally...just me

 

[draftpick]

I have both. Theres no comparison. My razor AMG is better than my gen 2 pst. You really notice the difference and fsr ranges and in low light. Also, the color definition in the razor is much better. The gen 2 pst is still good glass. It's just not what my AMG is

The Razor AMG is not even in the same class as the PST 2. Never mind the cost the glass and coatings show through in the field. The PST 2 is what it is, good glass under $800, with good reticle options, decent turrents, I have both and a Gen2 razor. The Gen2 has the best eye box of them all but AMG has really good low light at 6x.

 

[jbenevides89]

The Razor AMG is not even in the same class as the PST 2. Never mind the cost the glass and coatings show through in the field. The PST 2 is what it is, good glass under $800, with good reticle options, decent turrents, I have both and a Gen2 razor. The Gen2 has the best eye box of them all but AMG has really good low light at 6x.

how is the glass in the higher range? I have a PST 2 now and it does great even in the evening hunts if I keep it below 18-20x from 20-25 its a drastic change with how fast it gets dark. I am thinking about getting the AMG or even just a Gen 2 razor but not sure if the benefits are worth the price jump. I like the 600yd+ shots at dusk and depending on where the sun sets dictates how late I can see certain fields. Normally its a 5-10 minute window between dusk, when the groups of deer move through, and too dark to see with the PST.

 

[draftpick]

I don't see any change at max on the AMG, my Razor I usually back to 25 in heavy mirage. I don't have any late evening use with the razor it's on a bench rifle.

 

[Lovellr653]

To the OP, for what it's worth I had every intention of buying a Razor LHT for my current project. That is until I tried out my buddies. I personally don't feel the LHT line is worth of carrying the Razor name. The glass was fine but the magnification ring was awfully tight and hard to adjust, additionally the elevation turret was soft and squishy with poor indexing. The illuminated reticle feature broke before we even got his 280AI sighted in. This is just a single experience I had but felt it was worth mentioning. I have a GEN II Razor and it is in an entirely different class of scope than the LHT which given the Razor designation is misleading IMO. I have an old Viper on a .223 which was my entry into longer distance shooting and feel overall it is equal in quality to the LHT. I am very much an advocate of "buy once, cry once". I've spent so much money buying things twice over the years. Save up and get the best you can afford, you likely won't be regret it. I think going from your current scope to a LHT would be a lateral move that unjustifiably costs you money.

 

[Mschroeder40]

Razor