Im building up my Ruger RPR 6.5CM rifle and am down to glass selection. This is my first step into the long range precision world and max range would be around 1000 yards. Rifle will mostly be used for target but occasionally will go hunting.  Im still a ways away from refilling the gun fund for this part but Ive been thinking a lot about it.

I started my budget at $1500 so I was set on the Gen1 Razor 5-20x.

Then I made the mistake and opened the budget up and I've spiraled out of control haha. My uncle has strongly recommended I go Nightforce NSX 5.5-22 (he has 5 of them) around ~$2k. From what I have read, the Gen1 Razor has the edge in glass but it seems like the eyebox on the NF is better.

From what I have read around here and snipershide, the glass on the ATACR has a good edge on the NSX line so Ive already decided that if I'm going to spend $2k, Ill spend the extra couple hundred and upgrade to the NF ACTAR F1 4-16x (~$2400). 16x should be fine at 1000 yards right? Now the problems is, I am in Razor AMG and Gen2 territory. The 3-18x and 4.5-27x are around $2200-2500. I saw a 4.5-27 Razor the other day in a display case and it looked f**king massive. Unfortunately it was busy and I didnt get to look thru it or hold it but it sure as hell looked heavy. Besides magnification, do these offer any advantages over the ATACR F1? At max magnification, is one more usable than the other? How usable are the reticles at normal hunting ranges? Sometimes I worry on the FFP scopes, the reticles will be way to hard to see at low magification. The other option I have is looking for a used ATACR 5-25 or F1 5-25 as those seems to be around this price range as well.

So to summarize:
Max 1000 yards. Mostly target shooting but some hunting.

Stick with Gen1 Razor

or upgrade to:

NF ATACR F1 4-16x
AMG 6-24x
Gen2 Razor 3-18x
Gen 2 Razor 4.5-27x
NF ATACR (F1) 5-25x (used only)


So many options with no ability to really get hands on with them and test them out. What say you?

these are all large scopes. i own a atacar f1 4-16 and a gen2 razor 3-18 and 4.5-27. i like the razors better. the f1 is lighter but is not tiny by any means.

gen 1 razor is a fine scope as well.
the one thing high magnification has over the lower is you wont need much of a spotting scope out to say, 3-400 yards. i dont even set one up when shooting the 4.5-27

its usable magnification unlike lower end optics

Attached File

Attached File

Honestly stick with the gen 1 razor or scopes in that price range. Get some time and experience on the gun and upgrade to your liking based on your own experience.

Higher end scopes offer: premium glass, unique features, and unique reticles. You may or may not need those and won't know until you have more experience shooting long range.

All of the FFP options you listed are winners. Id personally prefer magnification range to go up to 20x at a minimum for 1000 yard shooting.

Sport Optics has the Gen II Razor 4.5-27x for $2200.

Also check out the Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x for around $1700

If your going to spend that much you should get the IOR Valdada Recon. Blows the socks off anything else. 40mm tube, 4-28x50. FFP. Indestructible. Lightweight and compact for the mag size. Ive heard many say, who own S&B's and Steiners, that its the best scope in the world.

Easy there turbo.

40mm tube would definitely narrow your ring selection down. Still only a 50mm objective. I've heard great things about Valdada but not sure I would go that far.

Rings are readily available though. Youre not going to find them at walmart though if thats what you mean.

Not ready to go to $3200 plus rings. The stuff I listed can all be found under $2500 and sometimes closer to $2000 if I find it used, exception being the ATACR 5-25 F1.

Theres a guy selling a used us optics for 2000 in the EE

How about the Valdada 6-24x56 FFP? They offer in MRAD and MOA and looks like they sell for just under $2k if you can find them. Not sure about the center dot on the reticle but looks like a solid choice. Not a lot of reviews out there though. @popnfresh did a good review a few years ago. Wonder how it's held up.

4400 rounds with it now, 1900 of those being heavy recoiling 230gr loads, no issues with it works great. I prefer the dot reticles, no problem shooting 3" plates at 500yds with it, good enough for my needs. It does have a 35mm tube limiting ring choices to high dollar options.

Op what reticle or type of reticle are you liking the most? (Regardless of the scope)

I'm a big fan of the ior dot reticles, but I had one fail. Dropped it off in October 2016. Just got a replacement today. 

Trying to decide if I'll keep the brand new one and worry, or sell it at a loss for something else.

I havent been able to personally use any of them but I like the looks of all of them. Mil-R/MOAR, EBR-2C and the EBR-7 all look good to me. I wish I didnt like some so I could toss them out of consideration.

Is 16x enough for 1000 yards? Im starting to lean towards the Gen2 Razor since it will go all the way to 27x or if a used ATACR 5-25 happens to pop up

Oh.....

I was worried you got involved in a land war in Asia.

Eta:....just noticed I wasn't in GD.   Carry on...

"Is 16x enough for 1000 yards?"

To do what?  Shoot 4" clays? 18" steel? F-Class?

I had little problem hitting 18x22" steel at 1000 with cheap chinese 10x glass.  Not that I would recommend it, but it was "enough".

My old eyes find it easier to work with 20x plus magnification and better glass for prone, supported target shooting.  It's nice to be able to dial it back to deal with heavy mirage.

16x is plenty for 1k, more is nice but I have no problems with my 3.5-10 Mark4  past 1k. To be honest, I find more need for magnification at 100yds than I do at 1000yds. As mentioned above it depends on what you are doing.

If you use a target point of aim appropriate for your reticle and mag level you can use anything really. I would recommend no less than 15x for target shooting to 1k.

Having compared ATACR 5-25 and Razor Gen II 4.5-27 so about the same magnification, directly against each other, I'd say the optical quality for both was excellent. The ATACR was lighter, but longer, Gen II had better features, locking turrets. A real toss up. Vortex has awesome warranty.

I'd get a smaller magnification scope for an offhand rifle, but the RPR is not an offhand rifle. No way a 14x or 16x would make me happy.

In the end, unless NF has some crazy LE discount I'm not aware of, Razor Gen II is cheaper for me. I will take extra features but more weight for less money.

I'd get the new Viper PST Gen II 3-15x44 over a Gen 1 Razor,  just due to the same turrets oractically (10 mils still gets 1000y in one rotation on PST Gen II) glass quality gap being smaller in PST now (3-10x they look same), Gen 1 only jumps up in optical quality over 10x but weighs more, costs more, illumination set up is less ideal, etc. so not worth it on an off hand 1000 max rifle in 6.5 Creed.

Then again, the SHV is also a contender in that lower mag category.

Price and warranty work questions drive me Vortex.

Replacing a 5-25x50 Burris XTRII, Im using now, for frame of reference, which is mechanically great, but has horrid CA past 15x. Wonkiest optical set up ever with tiny eyebox.