Vortex Razor HD Light Weight Offering

[Pdvdh]

Scott,
I didn't take it negatively at all. Your post and photo did cause me to wonder if I had missed it in my HSR-4 reticle manual. I don't like to spread false information. So I wanted to make sure I'd gotten it right.

All in all it's a minor point and I was pretty sure it would have to be set at max power. Except I did spend maybe 25 minutes reading and re-reading the two manuals.

Anyhow, the Thread is getting off-track. When I get my scope mounted, I'll provide some comparisons to my 3.5-18x44mm Swaro. My feedback should help add value to prospective purchasers. I'll run some turret tests and compare the resolution and light transmission to my Swaro. There's still not a lot of reviews on the Forums and internet. Trust me, I searched the internet diligently in the effort to reassure myself before parting with the money. I found mostly positive feedback, but very little extensive reviews or comparisons. Just enough good feedback to proceed with the purchase.
Paul

 

[yawn]

Iv just finished the very same comparison.
I found the Razor to very good across the board. The adjustments on mine are ok, the indents are positive enough to feel and got a little better after some use, the windage is actually better than the elevation but they are a ggod step up in feel on my Z5 balistic turret. Dialing around the grid for 20 minutes I couldnt find any issues at all, it dialed perfectly in line with the vertical post (unlike my VX6) and as close to .25 as I could measure. Magnification ring is a little stiff and there is a faint noise on rotation but acceptable. Glass is very good. I had an old friend , a camera buff and understands image quality far better than I, he was looking at a z5 for a new rifle. After some time spent with both hes ordered the Vortex. Comparing the two as the light faded I couldn't separate them, I used some glossy magazines with different font sizes at 40yds, if I couldn't read it with the razor the Z5 gave me no advantage. The Razor was a slightly less forgiving with eye position but it only showed up at the edges, get it right and the picture is very nice all the way across. I finished by looking at some alpacas about 150 yds away. Again by the time It was to dark for the razor the Z5 was of no more use.If I had to call it Id say the z5 glass by the slimiest of margins but that might just be my swarovski bias showing through. I like the HSR4 ret. This of course is s sample of one but to me, bottom line, given the price difference over here of nearly $1000 NZ , the razor is far better value.

looking forward to your impressions.

 

[Pdvdh]

Thanks for posting. Sounds encouraging. I need to get mine mounted on the rifle, and then I can compare them more fairly. Light transmission will be difficult for me this time of the summer as our days are about 21 hours long.

My initial impressions on the turrets, scope power ring and eye box forgiveness match your comments. The glass seems quality to my eye. I'll be comparing resolution at about 300yds. I'll calculate the vertical turret value and consistency returning to zero on a graduated testing target set up at about 110yds, with the rifle secured to a bench.

 

[yawn]

Hopefully your will perform as well as the one I have here. Just reading my note and a couple of points I missed, the Razor is shorter over all, has a better FOV on low mostly due tobeing 3x as against the z5s 3.5 and the razor will focus quite a bit closer on full x
15 moa /turn and isnt limited to 13.25moa as the Z5 is with the zero stop. Although the razor has no zero stop.
A few pis.

 

[Pdvdh]

The verticle click value on my 3-15x42 Razor HD LH is 0.26738"/100yds, as best as I can measure it on a graduated target at a distance of 99yds. That's the click value I'm entering into my ballistics program.

Vortex advertises 1/4 moa/click at 100yds, which = 0.26180"/100yds. So the verticle click value on my scope is slightly high at 2.13% greater than Vortex advertises. My method of measurement might be accurate to ~ 0.5%. I don't know what tolerance level Vortex sets on their turrets. I know Sightron's tolerance level is +/- 5%. Which is why anyone cranking turrets to engage game animals at 1000yds needs to perform a turret click value determination on their individual scopes. A 5% click value error at 1000yds is a ~9.6" error at 1000yds with my rifle.

Most importantly - My reticle returned to it's starting location on my target thru two consecutive turret twisting tests. So far - so good.

For you mathematicians:
My reticle moved 18" over 68 clicks at 99yds. The inches/click/100yd turret value is calculated as:

(18"/68 click/99yd) x (100) = 0.26738"/100yds

Consider this fact, related to the accuracy of my finding. If my reticle actually moved 18 1/8" at 99yds, compared to my visual estimate of 18" at 99yds, that 1/8" of visual error produces an error of 0.7% in my click value calculation. I think I can discern 1/8" at 100yds on my graduated testing target. But probably not 1/16". Also, I could be off 1 yard on the 99yd distance measurment. I didn't pull a steel tape. I used two lazer range finders - a Leica 1600 and an 8x30 Swarovski. A 1/2 yard distance error would add another 0.5% error to my turret value calculation. So my error could pretty easily be in the neighborhood of 1%. Still, I measured a 2.13% discrepancy.

 

[Pdvdh]

Magnification ring is a little stiff and there is a faint noise on rotation, but acceptable.

Yup. I hear the metal across metal noise while rotating the power adjustment ring - only after I mounted the scope on the rifle. Not a grating noise or a rough rotation, by any means. A very slight reverberation? Not enough to ever be heard by a game animal or a varmint.

 

[Danehunter]

"...this model features a second focal plane reticle design." (From the Vortex manual)

That, gentle readers, means this scope MUST be cranked to max power to get accurate reticle subtension readings.

A FIRST focal plane, like my SWFA 3 -15 x 42 scope (2/3 less money than this Vortex), can read mil sub tensions at ANY power setting but my old Burris Black Diamond scope must be set at max power, meaning it's an SFP reticle.

SFP scopes are cheaper to make than FFP scopes. I prefer FFP, mil/mil scopes for competition and hunting. My $1,800. Bushnell ERS 3.5 - 21 x 50 tactical scope for competition is not the most expensive its class but certainly is an excellent FFP scope with a great H59 reticle.

If you have the disposable income the new Vortex Razor HD AMG at 28.8 oz. is what you want. But it's over $3,000.! It's entirely made in the USA, every screw, lens nut and bolt. It has a new design of reticle lens bracket that allows it to be a 30 mm tube with almost the same brightness as Vortex's 34 mm tube Razor HD scopes.

 

[scottyboy]

FFP vs SFP aside, after all we knew what we were buying, this is a pretty **** good scope that id put side by side your SWFA any day of the week. Not every one likes a "shrinking" reticle at varying magnifications

 

[Rich Coyle]

It has a new design of reticle lens bracket that allows it to be a 30 mm tube with almost the same brightness as Vortex's 34 mm tube Razor HD scopes.

Tube diameter has nothing to do with a scope's brightness.

 

[Pdvdh]

If I put a 28.5 oz scope on my rifle, I'd need a wheel barrow to haul it around. If I put a 34 oz scope on it, I'd need an ATV.

 

[yawn]

Yup. I hear the metal across metal noise while rotating the power adjustment ring - only after I mounted the scope on the rifle. Not a grating noise or a rough rotation, by any means. A very slight reverberation? Not enough to ever be heard by a game animal or a varmint.

Yes thats it. Its barely audible.
I got 40 ish rounds under it now if only from my .222 Rem but out to 500+ yds.
Iv bought a few optics over the years to try, Im a bit of a skeptic when it comes to internet reviews, plenty didn't make the grade and Iv moved them on but i think this ones a keeper.

 

[Danehunter]

wildcater,

Sorry, I thought I had typed "height" and something else and evidently made a typo that the "spellcheck" interpreted as "brightness".

I meant to say it has almost the same height (vertical) and horizontal adjustment as the 34 mm tubes from Vortex. I need to check my replies before I hit "SUBMIT".

Eric B.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

"

If you have the disposable income the new Vortex Razor HD AMG at 28.8 oz. is what you want. But it's over $3,000.! It's entirely made in the USA, every screw, lens nut and bolt. It has a new design of reticle lens bracket that allows it to be a 30 mm tube with almost the same brightness as Vortex's 34 mm tube Razor HD scopes.

The AMGs are selling for $2200 to $2500.

 

[Pdvdh]

I've just finished the very same comparison.
The Razor was a slightly less forgiving with eye position but it only showed up at the edges, get it right and the picture is very nice all the way across.

If I had to call it I'd say the Z5 glass by the slimmest of margins but that might just be my Swarovski bias showing through. I like the HSR4 ret.

Looking forward to your impressions.

Had the HD LH in the field yesterday, along with my Swaro Z5 3.5-18x44mm, and a Sightron SIII 6-24x50mm. The conditions for comparisons were not good, due to some heat mirage. I was handicapped focusing on the .338 diameter holes on the paper at 280yds due to mirage. So I couldn't make any definite conclusions on resolution as the mirage was changing from moment to moment.

But to the extent I compared the two scopes, I'm tending to agree with your findings. The Z5 is a little easier to get behind with the eye, and the Z5 may have a very slight edge in glass quality. Time will tell. Heat mirage on a cloudy day is unusual here with the temps in the mid-60s, so that wasn't expected. I too, was very happy with the HSR-4 reticle on the target.

I've already compared the Z5 to the Sightron SIII. The Sightron SIIIs have remarkable resolution for the purchase price and fully kept pace with the Z5 as far as resolution in those prior comparisons.

I wanted a lightweight scope, with a lower power option than 6-24X, and the 3-15X was a happy compromise for my current rifle project.