Considering it for a soon-to-be-completed .270 Winchester. I've had difficulties warming up to Vortex scopes in general but I'm partial to the 1.5-8 X 32 size and could like the reticle.

Glass is equivalent to ________________???


thx.

I really like the G4 reticle and have been considering the 2-10 or 3-15

Great scope, better glass than VX3 in front of my eyes, killed 3 deer and 3 hogs with mine so far... slight weight penalty, but I love the ability to dial down until I can see the end of the barrel through the scope. Helps with point and shooting in thick brush in low light where reticles dissapear, just "dot the i" with the barrel for snap shooting.

Like the dot reticle too. Look for one on sale.

I like the glass on my 2x10 x40 , one of my favorite scopes.

Good feedback all, thank you.
Have any of you compared it to, say, the Swarovski Z3?

In the store it looks just as good as a Z3.I have not had a Z3 Side by side outside the store. I bought that Razor last year for my 7-08 Montana and I have enjoyed it very much. Glass is better than VX3 and better than my Kahles. I had no problem loosing the reticle 30 min after sunset.

http://www.rokslide.com/gear/optics/442-review-vortex-razor-1-5-8x32-riflescope

Anyone know or have you tried to mount this scope on a long action? The OP was talking about mounting it on a 270, but the length is slightly shorter than the Leupy 2.5-8? Considering one of these on a Kimber 84L or Tikka Superlight with 16Bore rings.

Thanks

Excellent point - I was wondered this same thing.

Looking thru the bottom of a milk glass that has yet to be washed.

I mounted the 2-10x40 on my NULA model 28 I had to use a talley extended front mount to get it to work...but so far I am really liking the scope, great glass on par with vx6 great reticle and so far the dialing has been spot on!

When I first got mine,I mounted it on my Sako Finnlight 270 just to see if it would work. I had no issues with it and ER was fine. I've had several 3.5" ER scopes that wouldn't work for me on that rifle because I would have to crawl the stock.

The 1.5-8X32 Razor HD LH has a very good eye box. It is not critical at all about head alignment or eye relief. I would say that if it will fit within the rings then ER should be fine for you.

The thing that gets me to think about the 1.5-8x32 is the FOV.

Is it really as large as Vortex claims?

I have a 1.75-5x32 Diamondback on my BLR and more expensive scopes can't touch the FOV that scope offers. In the thick brush where I use that rifle it's fantastic.

The Razor is supposed to rival the FOV of my Diamondback with much better glass.

Dan

I haven't measured it but it's fantastic. I can see half the barrel on 1.5. The thing I like most is that the image goes right to the edge of the aluminum with zero tunnel effect. I use my Montana for a walk around thick woods rifle and the Razor is perfect in that role.

I found it to compare very favorably to my Leica. Don't own one but checked it out at Vortex and they let me do a 'walk around' in the parking lot. I'd have probably bought it that day but it was a display only at the time.

Day I checked it out was easily in the last half-hour of daylight, and overcast to boot. Still impressively crisp, great resolution.

Really liked the G4 reticle as well. I think it would make a great hunting scope.

The FOV sounds to be exactly like my Diamondback then. I have a custom 7x57 carbine that needs one of those Razors.

Dan

Dan,I can't imagine why anyone needing a close range,small,light weight scope, wouldn't absolutely love the 1.5-8 Razor.

Ditto, on low power I can see the last 6" of barrel on my adirondack. Basically the barrel from the end of the stock onward is in view...

Good exchange. Thank you gentlemen. I'll check it out.

For what is worth, I've got this scope on my 458SOCOM and it is working great. I am, naturally, partial to the reticle, but that is a personal choice.

The scope itself is likely my favourite tweener on the market right now.

As soon as I get my hands on the Leica ER5 1.5-8x32, I will do another tweener scope article most likely.

In the meantime, I am enjoying the HD LH quite a bit. It is very good optically. I doubt you will do better for the money. Critically, it has an excellent eyepiece design, so acquiring the target is very fast.

ILya

I look forward to the comparison to the Leica. I am a big fan of Tweener scopes and I like the Razor a bit better than my previous favorite,the Kahles CL 2-7X36.

ILya,

Interesting you brought up the ER5 1.5-8x32 - that's the scope I had pegged for this rifle.
But it's been 2+ years since that model was announced and still no product.

Seems everyone has pretty favorable thoughts on the Razor but some habits die hard and it's just going to take me overcoming some serious mental hurdles with the Vortex brand.

I had some of the same issues with getting a Vortex. This is my first. This Razor however is made by LOW in Japan,so I don't expect any quality problems.

It's gonna take me a bit more to work up the nerve.

I do not think the ER5 1.5-8x32 is quite out yet. As soon as it is available, I will get my hands on one. I suspect I will look at the 2-10x50 ER5 first since that is likely to be first one out.

ILya

ILya,

Regarding the ER5 1.5-8x32, I was told "a couple months yet" by a Leica official.

I sure hope there are an awful lot of red faces within that company regarding the amount of time it's taken for these to become reality.

Ron Spomer overview in January 2015.
https://youtu.be/JAfTN8FOiCc

Have been pondering both the HD LH 1.5-8 and the Leupold VX-5 1-5x for a rifle used for still hunting whitetail.

1.5x is fine for me and the Vortex looks like a good choice, but have always wanted a true 1x on the bottom end.

Both scopes are fairly light (13.4, 13.1),considering what is deemed light today and both have similar mounting latitude with the VX5 having the edge...if I did the math right--both a bit less than the Leupold 6x42, say.

If the duplex reticle is the same in the VX5 as the one in the VX6, it should be a good one in low light.

The 4 is my favorite reticle for low light, but do prefer a heavier type crosshair for moving deer...for whatever reason.

edit-should say the VX5 has more mounting latitude than that--I just used 2.30" for the objective length, the same as the Vortex, to figure. fwiw...

its 11 inches long, how would that work on a long action rifle?

fwiw....

I add the eye relief to the scope length and then subtract the length of the objective bell--as the bell is ahead of the front ring.

That gives me a better indication of fit (for me) comparing to other scopes on rifles knowing their LOP and where the bases are fitted.

Figuring that way, that Razor model is 1/4" "shorter" than a 6x42 Leupold, for example. That particular Razor is too short for me on a long action like the M-70 or mauser with a 13.5 LOP, but it would be fine on a factory BAR or Kimber 84.

All relative...may be different for you...

I bought a minox 3-9 a while back and was dispointed, and have tried to stay with main stream scopes. I am considering a BLR in 358 which this might work with. I hate to buy a scope to find that mechanically its worse than the VX3.

For those using the 1.5-8x32 how has it stood up to the test of time? I just received one and will start shooting with it next weekend. I did some side by side comparisons and it did very well. I love the reticle. Perfect for what I’m doing. The eye box is rather sensitive to any lateral eye movement.
Edit: after mounting on a rifle I’m excited about this scope. Going to put it on a Barrett Fieldcraft in 6.5 Creedmoor to start. Also have a Kimber 84M in 338Fed in need of a scope.

Mine is doing fine, I have used it on a couple different rifles and it adjusts properly. It is a strictly a set it and forget it scope for me though. The clicks are fairly mushy,which is my only complaint,which won't matter at all as long as it stays zeroed.

Thanks. The clicks on mine are not super crisp, but enough so to be easy dial. Not that I intend to dial other than sighting in. Big fan of this reticle though. Ignore the image at a distance, it appeared much sharper than what my cell phone captured. That’s roughly 1.5mi away.

I am glad you like the reticle.

I originally drew it with mrad subtensions, but the idea is the same.

ILya

Before I learned about this reticle I had written what I would want in a hunting rifle reticle. It was a German #4 with some windage reference. So yes, I like this!

1.5x and seeing the barrel in this application takes some getting used to though!

I like that reticle. Thanks for posting the pics.

Also, I’ve compared to a few other scopes, and one thing was to see which reticle/scope was useful the longest after sunset. This scope/reticle slightly surpassed my Nightforce SHV 3-9 with the Forceplex reticle. Both outlasted my SWFA SS HD 3-9, SWFA SS 6x and a Burris FFII.

SKane
I've had 2 vortex scopes both vipers go bad on me. So I was very sceptical about this scope. I bought a 3-15 because I love the reticle and the weight. So far it has been perfect. There worth the money in my opinion.
Will

I like that reticle too. The center dot perfectly covers one of those quarter sized target dots at 100 yards. It's just about perfect. Some tritium on that dot would have made it perfect.

Another thing that is hard to tell in the pictures is how the view goes all the way to the aluminum rim. In the above picture the camera just isn't all the way adjusted. That black you see around the image like on most scopes is gone with this one.

I see this one came back to life.

Gentlemen, thank you for the input. I decided to travel a bit different (and weightier) path.

Yea! That's the way to roll as long as you can afford it. I've used both though and would rather have the optics and power range of the Razor........if only it was as bullet proof.

I like it Scott, alot. What's the scoop?

I do like the Nightforce. Just heavier than I’d prefer. If this Vortex has issues I’ll put my SHV on. I’d love the NF 2.5-10x32, from what I’m seeing the difference in light gathering of the slightly smaller objective is minimal.

Rifle is looking mighty fine.
If that's your 270, you did great.
Congrats my friend.

JG,
The rifle was originally a .280 that I sent out for a new barrel and overall makeover.
Nathan Chesney (hbrifles.com) had new barrel in hand right about the time our friend BobinNH passed away so a new .277 tube was ordered in honor of his favorite chambering.

Anyway, I originally wanted a reasonably svelte scope for this rifle but I've gotten somewhat accustomed to the NXS on other rifles. The extra 6-7 ounces isn't a deal breaker for me.
Nathan got the weight of the stock down so nicely that it's really only a couple of ounces from where I'd planned with a Leupold 2.5x8ish scope.

I don't think Bob would approve of the jazz-hands-paint and pad but hey, it's a .270. LOL

I jabbed with Bob in pm’s quite a bit.. I laugh to think of what the conversation would’ve been when I killed a buck with the model 70 270 last year Shooting 170 EOL’s and a 5.5-22 NXS that was half the length of the rifle!

rosco-

Yeah, that would have been conversation fodder for sure.

Went online to check them out and noticed Cameralandny no longer carry’s Vortex, anyone know why?

I sure wish they'd release a mil-based G4BDC! I have one of these bound for a little BRNO Effect FS in .243, but I'm a mil guy. I'll learn to work with it, as I love everything else about it for a light weight, set-and-forget SFP hunting optic, but I'd buy one in mil in a heartbeat!

You and me both. I keep trying. If they do not do it, perhaps I'll convince some other manufacturer to use it. My original concept was effectively a mil version of what became G4 BDC reticle with an illuminated center dot. I still want to see that in a scope, so I'll keep at it.

ILya

I don't know why NF does not sell the number 4 in North America, that would encourage a lot more hunters to use their products.

jimmy, perhaps we begin by showing some good faith in referring to our rifles as "stalking rifles".

ILya, I am sure, working together, we could convince one of a few mfg's to do it

Not really. Outside this forum, no one wants Number 4’s, thicker reticles, small objectives, etc.

Well, that may be. I certainly don't know but suspect there are more guys shooting targets than still-hunting whitetail in any seriously dedicated fashion.

For me, still hunting in often dim light, snap shooting is more often than not. I do better with a heavy crosshair. Once they bolt and are underway, nothing is perfect. Too, late evening you are sitting 99% of the time hopefully closer to wherever you left the truck.

Lightweight is better as I not growing younger nor the days shorter.

fwiw, I did call Leupold on the VX5 and the reticle's subtension are thinner than they appeared.

I’ve found the G4 BDC reticle to be as good a hunting reticle as I’ve found. I’d take it over the Forceplex every time. Very precise for shooting at paper or at longer distances, some windage reference, while also very good for quick pointing and for visibility in dark timber/low light. A NF SHV 3-10 with that reticle would be a great scope by my estimation.

I applaud your enthusiasm. One of these days, I'll convince someone to make a "Dark Lord" special for me,

ILya

With your love for the tweener range scopes for hunting (like me) and the advancement of technology,I hope it will be a 1-8X42 with your G4 mill, illuminated dot.

I like the subtensions of that reticle. It looks well thought out--like a blend of a #4 and a #1 with the bonus BDC feature.

While I appreciate a fine lit dot for precision, can definitely live without it with that 16" center if conditions were dim enough to fade the dot and the finer bars on the 32mm objective scope.

There are good technical reasons why 1-8x42 is unlikely. However, there is already a 1.5-9x45 (I am testing it), and while a little heavy, it would be a very good platform for such a reticle. Riflescopes are a very saturated market, but there are still a few niches that can be addressed. Perhaps, I'll do it at some point.

ILya

I also think there are good reasons why manufacturers are making straight 1-8x scopes now. The trijicon FFP 1-8 x 28 is not too bad at 1X or 8X to my eyes, however I am liking the idea of the 17 ounce NX8,but thanks to this discussion now looking at the reticle in this vortex 1.5 -8 x 32 this looks interesting as well, just don't know if it would compete with the 1X scopes on the low end regards FOV and speed of use.

Yes,I spotted that Delta just before you mentioned it on here a few months ago. I have been wanting to read your full review. If it needs the weight to be dependable,I do love the power range for eastern whitetail where I might go from 3 yards visibility to 300 several times a day.

It is sitting on my 280Rem Tikka right now and is working really well. At 1.5x, I can easily see the barrel in the FOV and one interesting thing that occurred to me is that for quick shooting, I sorta "put the muzzle on the target and pull the trigger". It works surprisingly well. Also, the illuminated dot is quite bright and easy to see even during the day. Even without that, the reticle is thick enough for low light use.

Overall, I am pretty impressed. It is a fairly basic scope, but as a general purpose design, it is a really compelling option. If Delta does not figure out their importer issues, I might just import a couple of models myself when I am done with the testing.






ILya

I like everything about it except that I wish it were a bit lighter. I wouldn't lighten it however to sacrifice mechanical integrity. I also like that it's long enough to mount on a long action. Do you have any concerns about possible warranty work down the line?

Is it as bright,and does the image fill the ocular, like it does on the Razor HD LH?

How much does the delta weigh? It says made in Japan, LOW? I am beginning to wonder how different these scopes really are. I know NF focuses on durability and repeatability above all else, but I have to wonder with a 34mm scope made in maybe the same factory how is it not durable and repeatable? Still liking the idea of the 17 ounce NSX8 and yet 45 mm at 8x is intriguing. Nice number 4 as well are they etched or wire reticles?

I havn't yet done a proper side-by-side with the HD LH. At first blush, it looks in the same ballpark in terms of image quality, but first impressions are just that: first impressions.

It is definitely a substantially larger scope than HD LH.

ILya

This reticle is called 2D and it is basically a #4 with two additional lead dots. The scope also comes with a regular number 4 reticle.

The weight is close to 24 ounces.

It is made by LOW. LOW, like all OEMs, builds to spec and there are always some differences between the assembly tolerances, component selection, etc. A lot of what people say about Nightforce is a result of very successful marketing, but they are definitely very good in keeping OEMs in line and in doing very careful QC. That makes a big difference.

Delta seems to have a very good track record of maintaining QC with their LOW products (they are pretty big in Central and Northern Europe, so I talked to some of the people who carry their scopes and they are very happy with quality and consistency).

ILya