Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics ATHLON HELOS BTR 2-12 vs. SIGHTRON S-TAC 3-16

No worries,

I can’t believe everyone missed this easy jab.

I remember back when Stick was touting Leupy’s…at least we’re past that BS

So what are you touting, in fact what is your point?

I have changed my mind on different things over the past 10+ years too. Bust sticks balls all you wish I don’t care but pick something other than the Leupold stuff. 10-15 years ago I didn’t like Brussel sprouts now I love the way my wife fixes them. Some things change. Sometimes we change I guess.

Update after using both for a few months...the Athlon is a better hunting scope but the Sightron is much easier to use at the range and for busting rocks and for what I use scopes like this for, I'll probably end up putting these STAC FFP/MIL scopes on a bunch of rifles.

The Athlon reticle (as Stick has said many times) is an awesome practical reticle. The heavy part of the crosshair is about like an old Leupy *heavy* duplex...very thick and very visible in low light even without the illumination turned on.

The Sightron FFP MIL reticle is about like a Leupold regular duplex. Pretty solid out to the end of legal shooting light but getting closer to dark you will lose the reticle, basically like most hunting scopes. Note this still a much more visible reticle in low light than say a Bushy DMR 3-21.

In short...if you want a locking windage turret and a heavy duplex reticle with a heavy center dot...basically a big game hunting reticle...the Athlon is the clear winner. I have one living on one of my Whelens and I'm about to move a second one to a 338WM. The Athlon is also just a nice scope to get behind at 2x. Big FOV and not picky on head position. It's almost hilariously better in that regard than my NXS 2.5-10...if I had to take a shot in a hurry I'd pick the Athlon every time over my NXS 2.5-10, not to mention the reticle is much heavier and easier to use in low light.

Where the Athlon was less perfect was at the range. For shooting targets much smaller than 2moa, it sometimes got tough as the reticle feels like it subtends about 1.5 inches at 100 yards (Athlon says it's .3 mils).

Also, the ilium knob on both my Athlons are so stiff it mostly takes two hands to get them turned on without running the parallax to either infinity or to 10 yards. The reticle is heavy enough you don't always need the illumination but worth mentioning.

The Sightron illumination is pretty easy to turn on. You might bump the parallax knob but you won't run it completely out of focus. The Sightron has less erector travel but with 20 moa bases it'll get you past 1200 yards with most cartridges.

Sightron glass may be (to my eyes) marginally brighter at dusk, but that is mostly splitting hairs. At the same power at both dusk and full dark both scopes wer pretty similar to a several different VX-3's.

I'll keep the two Athlons but I will probably end up owning more of the S-TAC FFP/MIL scopes. They're quite a bit easier to use shooting steel and I only need 15 mil of travel for most of the shooting I do. The zero stop works well and if I need to take it hunting I'll pull the windage knob and tape a cap over it.

Regardless it's surreal to use a $500 scope (in either case) that has parallax adjustment, tracks perfectly, and has a very good reticle for its intended purpose.

Give the 4-20 Helos a try. I’ve both and prefer the 4-20 for the same reasons you mentioned, it’s reticle is a hair thinner I believe than the 2-12. For hunting, either or will do, but the 4-20 covers both pretty well for me.

Great review though. Thanks TX

You are using the dot in the Athlon the wrong way
Don’t dab it on the target, rather visualize the bullet hitting at 12 o’clock on the dot and use the top center of the dot as your aiming mark

I'll give the 4-20 a shot.

That occurred to me, thanks, the first time I sent a round downrange. It's the only way to shoot for group with this or any other scope with a thick center aiming point or thick reticle (or with irons). But every other scope I own works just fine putting the crosshairs where I expect the bullet to impact.

The Athlon is a great scope and I'll keep using them on the two rifles I've got them bolted on. At 2x in low light they are truly awesome which is not the case with any other FFP scope I can think of off the top of my head.

But there seemed to be a general consensus that the Athlon was better in all ways for all purposes vs their equivalently priced competition, which was not the conclusion I came to. For dinging steel and busting rocks I prefer the Sightron. If someone needs the extra elevation and doesn't mind the thicker reticle, more power to them.

good advice . I unconsciously starting doing this on shots over 300 yards and dawned on me why my shooting improved with a dot

Just a heads up we have launched our Labor Day Sale

I bought two of the Athlon and one Sightron in question early this summer.
I like the Athlon better, although one of mine eats batteries. That aside, I like the reticle and the locking turrets. The Sightron windage knob is way too easy to turn. I took the windage knob off and am grinding down a rubber leg cap to cover the mechanism. Still too much rubber as it interferes with ejection unless I tip the rifle to the right as I run the bolt.
I like both reticles. I think the Athlon will be better for hunting in timber and I probably prefer the Sightron for plains hunting. I like the illumination of both. The glass is as good as I need for hunting.