It works great in all light except bright sun. That being said I love this scope. I have and Aimpoint also and it is visible in anytime. My Aimpoint is on my entry gun and it is faster than my Night Force at acquiring targets at close range. That being said the Night Force is is still fast and a lot more versatile. It is by far my favorite. I hope that helps.

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Thanks Fit4pain, that's what I was looking for.  I'm just trying to map out a plan for optics for my remaining AR's and prioritize around capability, then map that to my true needs.  As much as I want to run out and buy a bunch of Aimpoints/Magnifiers/NF low powered scopes/larue bases, etc. I need to spend carefully given the prices of these optics.  LOL, imagine that!



Sounds like, even though the reticule is not illuminated, in bright sun the FC-2 design is easy to work with, but not just the pure CQB/point & shoot type of aiming that the Aimpoint is so good at.  I made my mind up a long time ago after all of my reading about optics, esp the lower powered/CQB types that I was going with Aimpoints for my CQB/short range stuff.  The NF would be my intermediate to fill the gap between CQB and my long range NF 2.5-10x on my Mk12 SPR.  I might throw in one Aimpoint or PA 3x Magnifier to add to the Aimpoint/CQB rifles for some added flexibility.  The NF 1-4x seems to have the added bonus of being able to "fill in" in a pinch as a CQB style optic if needed.  That works for me as I'm trying to make sure I buy a good mix of optics and bases so that I can interchage between all of my AR's if needed.  Again, my "systems" approach.



As a side note, for the price, that new Falcon is looking pretty good.  Might be a good one for my dedicated Spikes .22 LR upper and could be used on any of my AR's too.  I like the reticule and I'm happy so far with the quality and features of my two 5-25x Falcons on my R700's.  I'd love to get a NF for my .308 R700 Tactical someday, but hard to justify the cost vs. the usage that gets right now when I need to fill out all of my AR's with optics first.

Nuke them All I did the same thing. I have 3 AR's a 11.5 with a Aimpoint M4, a 16 V-Tac with the Night Force 1x4x24 and AR 308 with a Night Force 2.5x10. My 16 is my do all rifle. If I had to take only 1 rifle it is the one that cover the most bases for me. The 1x4 real bridges the cap between CQ to Perimeter shooting very well. Good Luck

From what I read the Night Force 1x4 is the way to go just not sure of which reticle and to get the zero stop or not.

I only have one shot at this and I can not afford to screw this up......

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

I thought I read some where that the Leupold Mark 4 1.5-5x20mm MR/T M2 with the illuminated reticle can be had with a different reticle then the standard one that we so often see.   Any true to this ?

Looking really hard to find any images of the new Meopta Tactical K-Dot reticle but coming up empty...anybody have a pic or a link to share?

Also...anyone have any idea when the release date of SWFA's SS 1-4x24 is? It looks pretty damn promising as well...

Just starting to run a new USO SN-4 C2 version, 1.5-6X w/ the new C2 reticle in green illum, EREK
1/10 MIL elevation and the US#1 M40 Style 1/10 Mil windage knobs.  Awesome!



 

============================

I talked to Meopta a few months ago and they told me when the website was updated, the Scope would be "fixing" to come on the market???

So, I just check the website every now and then.

.

Is this what you're looking for ? (check for ret pic halfway down the page)

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=507299

I thought they were adverse to doing anything remotely 'tactical' as they were manufacturers of 'sporting' optics only ?

i got my falcon menace 1.5 - 5x 32mm in and have had the chance to zero and screw around with it. I like it. For those interested here's the sniper's hide link for a kind of first review/look:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1994865#Post1994865

I bit the bullet and just ordered a Meopta K-Dot from SKD Tactical...I should have it around the middle of next week...

I hope it's as good as the reviews I've read...

I have this scope without the busy reticle. Mine just has the older style crosshair type. I use it in 3-gun and have 4 or 5 matches with it. My impressions are that it has very good glass, a large clean field of vision, is built like a tank, has good 1/4 MOA turrets with positive clicks, holds it's zero. I have shot out to 300 yards with it and it works very well for me. It is very easy to acquire targets up close with the 1x. It has a diopter adjustment to give you a better initial eye relief and focus,I am by no means an expert, but I do like this scope. I shot an Aimpoint with a magnifier behind it.

Cons would be. The lighted reticle is only good for dusk and darker skies. It fades out in bright sun, although this is the way it is designed. It is not a red dot. The throw lever for the power is very stiff and has not loosened up much. The locks for the windage and elevation turrets tend to loosen up after a few rounds, but have never loosened enough to let them changed the zero. No BDR and the newer reticle is way too busy. I am thinking of getting the 1x8/30 for my next rifle.

Has anyone gotten their hands on the Vortex Viper PST 1-4 yet?

The Vortex Viper PST 1-4x is not yet shipping. I have one on backorder / preorder at Optics Planet and will post my thoughts in this thread as soon as I receive.
There is no projected availability at this time.
Last official news from Vortex was that they were not happy with the way the dials felt and so were going to redesign / rework as necessary in order to meet their criteria.
AR15.com thread on the Vortex PST

On the Konus M30 1-4, I have discovered that while it normally takes a 2032 battery and the illumination is next to useless in anything other than a dark room, this scope will also accept 2- 2016 batteries which bumps up the brightness to darn near aimpoint levels.  Indoors with the double battery you get quite a bit of internal halo/flare, but outdoors it is hardly noticible.  Obviously, running 6v through a 3v system probably isn't for those of you that are all freaked out about warranties and such, and I would want to do a lot more testing before I used this set up to aim at anything that can shoot back, but it is my intention to use this as a 3 gun optic, and in that role, I am prepared to accept the possibility of a shorter life to get better useability, kind of like loading major 9mm.  That plus the fact that if the electrics do fry, you still have a standard etched reticle [unlike an aimpoint or c-more] to fall back on.  YMMV.

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Great stuff eveyone!  I'm struggling with if I want to jump on a Leatherwood or the Falcon.. or wait for the Vortex PST.  Would love a few reviews on the Falcon but only one is on SH and not updated recently with how it's working out.  Maybe just get the Leatherwood and call it a day.

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

I'm interested to see how some of the more affordable scopes (GRSC, new Burris/Midway exclusive, Viper, etc. ) stack up.

leupold has an illuminated vxiii  [with a circle dot reticle]...1.5- 5 power

Sam:



Is there an optional setting for only illuminating the circle/dot or is the entire reticule always illuminated?



Thanks!

Time to  update the chart the Swarovski is not available with a bullet drop.

Is there any way we could ammend that chart with a column that indicates those that have First Focal Plane reticles?

I have updated the table at the beginning of the thread. The changes are:
-SWFA SS scope has been added though I have only scattered tech specs on it. It is still in prototype stage at this point. I will review one when they are available. Looks like the first reticle they will come in is a mill dot though from the various iterations of their prototypes I know they have kicked around a very nice bullet drop / ranging reticle that looks to be roughly based off of Ed Verdugo's base 10 ranging system. I am hoping that since they obviously have the etching mask for this reticle they will make the scope available with both reticles. I am obviously partial to the bullet drop version.
- I added a focal plane column to the table as skywiser requested. It seemed like a pretty good idea. I have also added and explanation of focal planes for folks who have yet to acquire that knowledge.
- Leupold has set a price for the CQBSS at $4000 I mention this because it made me laugh and brightened my day. I'll just sell my car and go out and buy one right now.
- I have updated the chart with the page numbers of some new review I found informative.
- I added the fact that Swarovski now has new reticle for their 1-6x scope. Its kinda sorta a mil - dot ladder thingy. They call it the BRT. To be honest it makes me scratch my head a bit but at least technically it can range though not very precisely or in my opinion quickly.

As for the reviews of new scopes I am scheduled to review the following:
S&B 1-8x
Premier 1-8x
Vortex Viper PST 1-4x
Vortex Razor 1-4x
Meopta tactical kdot 1-4x
SWFA SS 1-4x
and finally the GRSC 1-6x

I have to admit to not having called the reps in a while regarding many of these scopes so their status is a bit unknown to me. Perhaps next week I will get the time to track them down as several are showing in stock at various places.

I picked up a a Leupold VX-1 1-4x20mm scope this weekend. I have yet to zero it, but the glass is very nice. It looks more like a ~1.25x than a true 1x to me, but a few reviewers on other sites have stated that they can't tell the difference.

When I get a chance to try it out (Wednesday, maybe) I'll post a review.

Announcement in industry forum is that Viper 1-4 PST are shipping next week ( 27 Dec - 31 Dec 2010).
Viper 1-4 PST announcement
This appears to be solid, so those that have them on backorder should be receiving.

Would love to see an illuminated reticule picture of the Viper PST 1 x 4!

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Agreed. I have been eagerly awaiting reviews on this model. For those of us who cant afford a $2000 1-4x, the Viper looks to be about perfect.

I have again updated the table. Things are happening quickly now in the optics world I suspect because of the yearly run-up to SHOT. Here are the changes and updates:

1) As many have noted the Viper PST 1-4x scopes are finished and shipping this week. Supply will not meet demand immediately but expect reviews and such to start coming in.
2) Ed at GRSC now has a fully functioning 1-6x prototype. He is pleased and no further changes are expected before production starts. Price will be considerably higher than the 1-4x as the scope is being manufactured by a different company this time in Japan. The quality is expected to be even higher than his 1-4x. 1-4x production has also been kicked into high gear and soon he should be able to fully satisfy market demand. Having Ed's innovative reticle in two different scopes at two different price ranges should provide excellent options to folks regardless of the individuals budget. I am excited at this development since I believe Ed's reticle to be the best ever designed.
3) I have added the burris TAC30 1-4x scope. I understand this scope is only available through midwayusa.com. These scopes are currently shipping.
4) I have added the new Pride Fowler 1-6x scope. These are not yet shipping.
5) The S&B 1.1-8x has been significantly redesigned. This caused delays in its availability. This also caused all of the stats on the scope to change I have updated its stats in the table. The new stats are an improvement over the old. In some cases a dramatic improvement so the wait may have been well worth it.
6) I have updated various tech specs and prices on several of the soon to be released scopes.
7) Production ready SWFA SS 1-4x scopes have been seen in the wild so I expect these will be forthcoming. A link to a pre-release review with pictures and all can be found here. Once the scope is released I may copy over the text to this thread.

8) The U.S. Govt. is now expressing some interest in the concept of a 1-(n) power illuminated optic with a rapid ranging and bullet drop compensating style reticle. Their solicitation can be seen here. I am surprised to see such forward thinking on the part of the bureaucracy. As I recall it took them well over 10 years to see the potential of the ACOG. One interesting note in the proposal is that it requires the use of CR123 or AA batteries with 700 hours of illumination time. Currently the CQ/T is the only scope to meet this requirement and it does not have ranging capability (though a new reticle would fix this relatively easily.) Similarly, many of the 1-(n) power scopes that use a 3V lithium watch style battery could modify their saddle section to incorporate the larger 3V CR123 battery without changing the design of their optics. I belive a switch in batteries to a longer lasting larger battery would be a great advantage for this class of optic. Hopefully the Govt solicitation will bring this about.

Oddly, the govt request also specifies that the scope be parallax free at 25M. No current scopes in the line up have the parallax set at 25M (usually only red dots are set up for such close parallax.) It seems to me that the Govt may be out of step on this requirement. I believe that having such a close set parallax would cause a scope to have unacceptably large parallax error at range and furthermore would probably make the scope difficult or impossible to focus at extended ranges. It may be necessary to introduce adjustable objectives to this class of scope if this govt requirement is to be met while still producing a usable optic.

On an un-related side note: I am appalled at how poorly constructed the linked Govt document is. I would expect a high school student of moderate intellect to do better proof reading.

Good thread...I would have gone with the GRSC in 1-6, but I figured it wouldn't be available until at least the end of 2011 and I needed an optic for my RFB now.  My Leatherwood CMR arrived yesterday and I can say it has surpassed my expectations.

I have updated the GRSC 1-4x review (page 6 of this thread) to include a box test and power change test.

BigJimFish

I'm the guy that posted the SS 1-4 HD review. It is a true 1X which is blank on your table. I'd also like to apologise for not posting it here in the first place. This thread is the best optics thread I have seen on any board and we all owe you our thanks for the time and effort you have put in to keep it current.

regards

357sig

my question are which ones are considered true 1x  and at 1x act the most like a red dot

I asked this question before in another thread and found that many of the so called 1x4 are not true 1x at the 1x setting

I was told that the trijicon tr24 and burris xtr  (since they were my first choices ) were not true 1x but GSCR and some of the higher end scopes are . I am now set to get the GSCR because its said to be and its coming out in a 1x6

looking at the chart is there a way to determine which are closest to true red dot reflex optic


what standards are these scopes tested as far as durability i'm sure we would like the durability of a acog or aimpoint out of a magnified scope so which one is the toughest

thanks for all the work your putting into the thread

the prismatic is 1x only but it is able to co witness irons through ––acts like a very clear circle/dot [DCD reticle] and has 3"-5" of eye relief ––extremely broad

The SWFA SS 1-4x24 is now listed on the SWFA site for $799

According to the listing they are offering the scope in both capped and exposed turret variations with both types of reticles (total of 4 scopes).

About "true" 1x:
As to the "true 1x" question. I blame Leupold for this since their 1-4x shotgun scope is actually 1.25x at the low end. Ostensibly all the scopes in my table claim to offer a low end that will appear unmagnified to the user when looking at targets that are not really close to the observer. IE the guy across the room won't appear magnified but if your front sight is in your field of view it will be fuzzy and to big. There is much confusion about this point in that 1-4x scopes are true optics that bend light rather than just transparent pieces of glass with dots projected on them. Even at 1x they are bending light and so they can be off a little bit due to oversight on the part of the manufacturer or because the target is to close. The assumption of magnified optics is that the object is far enough away all paths of light from the object to the optic are essentially parallel. When objects get to close this is not the case and they appear to big. As Molon has noted, If you hold a ruler a few feet from any 1-(n) power scope it appears to be to big for this reason. This is not really a problem as we are not shooting at rulers a few feet from our scope (we are shooting at rulers far away from our scope )

Furthermore, 1-(n)x scopes can be confusing because some are labeled as having a 1x low end whereas others a 1.1x. If you were to do the magnification equations involving the focal lengths of various lenses in the array, you would find that a magnification of 1x mathematically would produce an image that looked a little to small. Hence, some of the scope companies designate their scope as 1.1-(n)power. This is mathematically correct but confusing to the consumer. These scopes will appear unmagnified to the user when using them at their lowest setting. It is confusing that some of the companies say 1.1-(n)x and other 1-(n)x when speaking of a scope that appears to the user to be 1x at the low range but is mathematically 1.1x.

Finally, because these scopes are true optics that bend light they can have other optical problems that effect how well they work on 1x. For instance, some scopes can appear fish eyed when looking through them. This can cause problems when using them at 1x since both eyes are not seeing substantially similar images. Other scopes have the problem of being fuzzy near the edges of the image. Because of all the idiosyncrasies of true optics as well as the differences between one mans eye and another it is not really possible to say that yes, this optic is a true 1x and will appear so to everyone in every situation. This is, of course, a very long way of saying that all the scopes in the table are trying to appear unmagnified at their 1x setting with varying degrees of success. Using the scope is the best way to know if you think they have succeeded. Reading detailed reviews is the next best. Hence, this thread.

About durability:
I have thought long and hard about how to review this aspect. I have considered various testing means. I thought about a reciprocating saw but it accelerates in two directions and would tear apart any scope (recoil accelerates only one way.) I thought about trying to adapt an air chisel as it only accelerates one way but the duration and magnitude of an air chisels acceleration is unknown to me and may, or more likely, may not be comparable to that of a rifle. Leupold has a nice rig at the factory that is essentially a calibrated air chisel but I don't really have the time or money to buy the necessary gauges, design, have manufactured, and test such a testing device. Of course, I could take all the scopes to a range and fire a couple thousand high power rifle rounds with each but I'm not made of money so that is not going to happen. You'll note I do my testing of adjustment accuracy with a rimfire to save cash (I am kicking around the idea of adapting my Anschutz for this purpose instead of using my spikes .22lr upper because the Anschutz is much more accurate). I don't get paid for these reviews so I try to be as thorough as I can without getting a lot of cash involved.

So, the long and short of it is that the best ways of assessing durability are to judge by the company producing the scopes reputation and the reviews you see from folks that have used them. This is not ideal since some of these scopes have sold thousands and others 100's of thousands and since some have been used to death and others have sat in a safe. While some, such as the CQ/T, have been used in combat and beaten on for years. Others, such as the CQBSS are brand new and have never been used. I wish I could offer you better information on durability but I am unable to test any of these scopes to my satisfaction and any listing I could give you regarding which scopes I think are tougher than which others would be purely speculation on my part. One of the goals of this thread was to avoid that kind of speculation. I have noticed that forums can often be rife with folks who know a great deal about products they have never used and I have been as guilty of this as anybody.

I should probably thin a lot of this and add it to my post at the beginning of the thread. Props for some good questions Billbo.

Poor quality and my first (and probably only) attempt at a reticle pic.
PST 1-4x24 (MOA) at 1x. Illumination setting at 7 (of 10) which seems about right for indoors/daylight. Looks much much better to the Mark I eyeball. 24 feet down my hallway:


A few rounds on a 500 Meter (547 Yds) Gong:


200 Meters (220 Yds) - 5 shots on an 8" plate to check my initial zero after dialing back from 600M:


1-4 PST in an extended Bobro:


I've only had it out once for the initial sight in, but so far I'm liking it a lot. Very bright and clear. The glass won't match up to my Nightforce - but it's very good. The "practical" difference (for most of us, anyway) will be small.

The following is a review comparing the Vortex Razor HD 1-4x to the Nightforce NXS 1-4x first posted by htony1. The original text can be seen here. I have combined the text of his posts and included just a few of the original plethora of pics. It is a good review, enjoy.


Vortex Razor 1-4 scope came in today and I can't make it out to the range to shoot it. So I got it mounted and started running through some dry fire drills and looking through it at various distances. So far im not loving this EBR reticle. I haven't changed the battery but the illumination is useless in daylight and being in the first focal plane, its REALLY small on the lowest setting. Its pretty cool on 4 power but im thinking this wont be a good three gun optic. Currently its residing on an AR15 / flattop.

I used the focus ring on the back of the ocular lens to fine tune the focus of the reticle to my eye, but it still doesn't seem right.

This scope is bulit like a tank and not too long. I REALLY want this scope to work because it is a solid instrument otherwise

I will get pics up tonight hopefully. I wish there was a way to demonstrate the glass in this scope online. you cant appreciate it until you look through it.

Illumination update: played around with it a little more last night and thougth the illumination was broken. The only setting it would turn on was the 11 (hightest setting). So I intalled a fresh batter and HOLY COW!!!!. this joker is bright. in the garage it looked it looked like the rising sun inside the tube. turned it down to 4 and love it. The range of intensity you can adjust on this scope is good. Hopefully will shoot it some friday or sat.

@ 2x the reticle starts coming into its own. You still get a optic that I think would work for close stuff if needed but the reticle begins to clear up a bit.

@4x the reticle is charming. I can appreciate the FFP reticle now when you spend some time looking through it at this zoom range.....more to come soon. Its growing on me

also.... putting this beside a nightforce NXS this weekend. should be interesting to see a glass comparison. Anybody know if the same MFG. provides glass to Vortex & Nightforce. The razor has a Made in Japan stamp on the bottom BTW.

I can speak of the glass in this vs. a Nightforce NXS 1-4. Both are superb and I would be misguided to rate one bettter than the other. Will put some rounds down range Sat. AM and hopefully have a range report on the scope. The FOV is very generous in this scope

vortex razor 1-4 94.5-24.2 feet/100 yards vs. Nightforce 100ft @ 1x 25ft @4x from the MFG websites.

If I can get a sunny day here I will give some feedback on a daylight visible reticle .

made it out sat morning for some cold and windy range time, especially for SC. Had several scopes that were being zeroed that day using a 50 meter zero with the preliminary sight in planned for 25 yards. POI needed to be about .5-.6" low for a 50 meter zero according to my bulletflight calculations

We put a brand new Nightforce 1-4x24 NXS with the compact mil dot against the Vortex Razor 1-4x24 with the EBR 556 reticle

The nightforce scope was exactly a week and 2 days old since my bud received it from Larue. Both scopes were mounted in the Larue LT104 mount. For the duration of this review the Nightforce rode on a Colt 6940 16" carbine and the Vortex topped a Colt 14.5" factory upper matched to an SBR RRA lower. The pictures below depict the Razor atop a LWRC PSD for fun only, so take that with a grain of salt, just playing potato head with the stuff. At any rate, nightforce was roughly sited in from a previous range session and vortex was only mounted in the mount. Off to the 25 yard line and in about 5 rounds, we had the razor on target.

Before you read this, you should know that my friend purchased the NXS because I recomened it to him. this was about 2 weeks before I picked up the razor. We chose to steer clear of the FC2 reticle because of its 2MOA center dot. The purpose of this scope was going on a 300-600 yard gun. So here we go........



Matech BUIS clearance with a Larue 104


GLASS: RAZOR WINS

Well this was certianly a surprise when you put these two sopes beside one another. . in full disclosure, my previous experience with Nightforce scopes have been the 3.5-15 or 5.5-20 long range scopes used in F-class type shooting. This was my second outing with a compact nightforce, the first being a quick range session after mounting it up on my friends rifle. This was my first ever experience with a vortex optic. Vortex touts this scope as being stuffed with HD glass (high density / extra low dispersion) glass but I was a skeptical and thought it was more a selling point. Also, I know from years of photography that you get what you pay for in glass, focal length, aperture, and construction. Nightforce scopes have always surprised me when compared to the leupold and other mid range optics. The class is crisp and clear and certain features seem to pop out when you looking through them. Whien we mounted up the compact NXS, the glass looked great but the reticle was hard to find (more on that below). When you look through the Vortex, the entire field of view seems to come alive. Edge to edge, the glass makes everything clearer, brighter, with the perfect amount of contrast, at that's at 1x. At 4x there is no lose of clarity its almost like watching a 3D movie. Both my shooting buddy and I agreed that the glass in the Razor was superior to the NXS. You guys are gonna think im nuts, and maybe the NXS we have is a dud, but the razor made the sight picture out of the NXS seem dull  

RETICLE: RAZOR WINS

The biggest surprise of the day for the both of us was how washed out the NXS compact mil dot was. After working the ocular bell to adjust the reticle several times, the crosshair was still very fine. This sucked because the "see through" crosshair in the NXS was a selling point. The illumination was not visible in the 10:00AM sun at any setting. We struggled with finding the reticle in the scope all morning. The Razor was a completely different story. Being in the first focal plan, it starts out small which is faster than I thought. When you crank it up to 4x its loses all the business and is very usable. For some reason I really like the 1.5x and 2x setting on this scope. The reticle seems a litte bigger and more usable at these settings. However, at 1x this scope is MUCH faster transitioning between close targets that I previously thought.

NXS on the brightest illumination setting 1x. (apologize for the terrible pics and flare)


Razor on the brightest illumination setting 1x


Razor on brightest illumination setting 4x


CONSTRUCTION: NXS wins because the compacts are made stateside

Personally, I think that both of these scopes are built and designed extremely well. I like the styling and size of the NXS way better. It seems more streamlined and not as bulky. The Razor weighs 3.2 more ounces than the NXS which isn't much but when you combine the weight and actual size, the RAZOR is a little chunky.......for lack of a better word.

Turrets: NXS WINS

This NXS came with the capped .25 MOA turrets and the Razor came with the exposed, standard .25 MOA turrets. The Nightforce has good positive and audible clicks. They give you a tactile and audible signature that you adjustment has been made and you can do this without having to move the gun or take your eyes from the scope if the caps are removed. The turrents on the Razor don't need to be locking because they were the hardest turrets I have ever adjusted. Althougth the elevation and windage adjustments are marked clearly to allow quick / easy adjustment, both turrets took A LOT of force to move them. I don't know if something was wrong with my scope or not, but they were very hard to move. They were positive, but for every adjustment I had to reposition to adjust. its not the same click you hear with the NXS but more of a tactile only response. Tracking was accurate and spot on with both optics which is great. They both do what you tell them to with no issues. Personally, Im a big fan of the .250 MOA adjustments. Im used to them and it gives me the flexibility I like. Due to the size and ease of adjustment the NXS was easier to me. I do love the indicator mark on the RAZOR though

Illumination: RAZOR WINS

For this review it was hands down the razor. It the almost noon sun (bright clear day) the illumination was visible at each power setting. Now its not going to be like an aimpoint / eotech / acog illumination but bright enough for picking up targets 25-100 yards @ illumination on 11. Very cool

The NXS's reticle was just barely daylight visible and this was a huge disappointment. Actually the illumination in this scope is usless unless its dawn / dusk or inside in a dim environment. Maybe the FC2 reticle sucks in more light but this was a huge disappointment to myself and the new NXS owner. talk about feeling like heel, recommending this based on prior experience with other nightforce scopes and encountering this afield...............ooops. Both scopes were sporting fresh batteries as well for the test.

ZOOM RING: RAZOR WINS

The zoom ring on the razor was pretty sweet. the 1, 1.5, 2, 3, and 4 magnification settings have a rear facing indexing marker combined with the small fiber optic tube to identify what power your own. The zoom ring swings freely and rubber coated ring is a nice tough. Offers a positive purchase, smooth rotation, and quick adjustment. The NXZ's zoom ring is smaller and somewhat stiffer and adjusting it was a little more of a pain. This is another example of Vortex putting a lot of thought into a portion of the design that I think will pay dividends.

One interesting lesson I learned about the razor is when the battery CR2032 battery is low it only works on the 11 setting. I thought something was wrong with the scope before I changed it and bam. much brighter with tons of adjustment. There is a big difference between the 10 and 11 setting as well. Looks to me that Vortex put some effort into the 11 setting to get a much more usable daylight lite reticle.

CONCLUSION:

Both agreed on Sat. that the Razor's image quality, clarity, and good reticle (and growing on me every outting) make it a better choice dollar for dollar. I really wish it was made in the US because thats important to me. Whatever the case, the razor has just about everything going for it you could imagine. Personally, I would like to play with a second focal plane version with the Viper PST 1-4 reticle using this glass and some turrets that were easier to adjust. I just can't say enough about this glass. Its been a couple years since I had a Schmidt & Bender in my hands and although I remember it be ultra clear (and heavy) I don't feel comfortable making a comparison. Would like to do the road though. I certainly thought the Nighforce would have surpassed the Razor or at the very least held its own, but for everyone there sat, the razor surpassed it in just about every category. Also, when I called Vortex to ask about a possible reticle swap when I first got the scope, they said they didn't have enough reticles or the setup to do that right now. But they were VERY helpful and kind on the phone. I got the feeling that they would help me if there was a problem. I like that as well from a company. I haven't called Nightforce with a question before so I can't speak of the their customer service.

If I can get my hands on a Viper PST 1-4 x 24, I wlil do a side by side of them as well. If you have any questions, shoot me an email

hope this helps somebody down the road. Look for more reviews when budget allows:

Razor beside NSX.

I thought I'd add my review of the Trijjicon TR24R to this. Since it's long and has lots of images I'm just going to add a link to it instead of trying to add it all here.
http://www.recoilsports.com/2011/01/review-of-the-trijicon-tr24/

Here's a cut&paste of my Burris Tac30 review from the Bullpup Forum, and btw, the Tac30 weighs 13oz w/o mount according to my electronic scale (all the official literature says 17oz):

This is my first venture into magnified optics on the STG and I probably wouldn't have tried this if it wasn't for astigmatism that's making std Aimpoint/Eotech reticles increasingly difficult to use.

Anywho, I first tried the 1x Leupold Prismatic (shucks and other comments, what an improvement in accuracy now that I can see the target more clearly!) which appears to be as close to an Aimpoint/Eotech you can get w/a lensed optic. *Very* nice and a big improvement for my needs but the reticle (while very usable) didn't seem optimal.

Did some research & swapped a few emails w/Dawg180, decided to give the Burris 1-4x Tac30 a try. Unfortunately, the Burris PEPR mount I originally tried added around 9oz to the weight of the setup (+5oz for the E4 optic rail) so Dawg talked me into trying his Talon30 scope mount. Wow, only 6oz (7 if you add BUIS) so the total setup is only 1oz heavier than my Eotech/BUIS/E4 rail setup and looks *good*.

First impressions of the Tac30 were very good, a FOV even greater than the Prismatic's! (And the Prismatic's FOV is at least 60% greater than through my Eotech!) Reticle is great w/the outer circle like an Eotech reticle on steriods & a 2.4moa center dot w/BDC out to 600yds. Only complaint so far is that the illumination button, while fast to turn on, is slow to adjust and turn off (I'd rather have seen the usual rotary switch unless someone has a reason this particular pushbutton setup is superior...)

Ran to the range this morning to sight-in the Tac30 and try it side-by-side w/my Eotech, here are my observations:

Attached is a pic of the final 10-shot sight-in group at 100yds w/the Tac30 at 4x using Prvi Partizan M193. Group measured almost exactly 2"x2" (that's excellent for a military-style weapon w/basic FMJ ammo, might've been tighter but the Tac30's center dot measures 2.4" at 100yds). While the magnification certainly helped w/this, I think most of the credit goes to the Tac30's focusing ocular which allowed me to make the target very sharp & crisp instead of slightly blurry.

Did most of my carbine class drills w/both the Tac30 (reticle black and unilluminated) and the Eotech. Tac30 seemed at least as fast as the Eotech from all positions (including urban & rollover support-side prone) except when shooting from my back and holding the rifle out at arm's length like a pistol. Aiming from that position was still possible but slower because the Tac30 doesn't have the Eotech's unlimited eye relief so my usable FOV through the Tac30 shrank the further away it got from my eye.

The Tac30's reticle is superior to the Prismatic's circle-crosshairs as the Tac30's circle is very thick and easier to pick up quickly both black or illuminated (see pic) whereas the Prismatic's lines are wider and very thin making it more difficult to see against some backgrounds and slower to center on-target.

I remember how much I loved the wide FOV through the Eotech but compared to the Tac30 it feels restrictive now. When looking through both optics and moving my head up & down and from side-to-side I lose the reticle w/about the same amount of up & down movement but the Eotech is a little more forgiving of side-to-side movement.

The Talon30 mount I'm using now restricts me to using 30mm tubed optics but has the advantages of being strong, light & has provisions for BUIS on the top of the scope rings. Since you can't use BUIS through a scope this allows for instantly-available BUIS in case of optic failure just by slightly changing your cheekweld to chinweld (with an Eotech or other similar optic you either run w/the BUIS always deployed and interfering w/your FOV or take the time to deploy them in case of optic failure).

Eotech pros:
Combat proven, uses common AA batteries, fast reticle, no parallax, no eye relief, more rugged.
Eotech cons:
100% bettery-dependent, relatively short battery life (compared to Aimpoints), electronic switch causes slight battery drain even when turned off, control buttons slow to turn on & adjust, unusable in case of battery/electronics/switch failure, more reported problems than Aimpoints and other optics, no BDC (bullet drop compensator), doesn't correct for vision defects, BUIS interfere w/FOV if deployed 24/7.

Tac30 pros:
Fast reticle w/BDC out to 600yds (see pic), much wider FOV, isn't 100% battery-dependent, BUIS deployed 24/7 and instantly available, w/BUIS weighs only 1oz more than Eotech w/BUIS, magnification available for precision shooting or target identification, focusing ocular corrects for vision defects, uses the same CR2032 battery that the wife's Aimpoint Micro uses.
Tac30 cons:
Parallax at shorter ranges, doesn't have unlimited eye relief, slightly less forgiving of head position, less rugged (extremely rugged 1-4x's are available but are heavier & *much* pricier), focusing ocular must be adjusted for each user, doesn't use common AA batteries (but then battery illumination isn't needed much and even the rifle's AA taclight is more than sufficient to make the Tac30's unilluminated reticle very visible in lowlight situations), quick/easy to turn illumination on but slow to adjust (not sure if this is important as I think it could permanently be left on the lowest setting for lowlight use).

Conclusion: 3-gunners use 1-4x scopes almost exclusively for their combat-style competitions and don't seem to find a scope's inherent optical drawbacks or ruggedness a hindrance, even at very close ranges where Eotechs/Aimpoints really shine. My limited testing hasn't yet revealed any flaws that I consider fatal (hope to do a night shoot tonight for more comparisons) and I really like the magnfication/BDC/focusing ocular options. The non-AA battery is a minor point for me as it is rarely used, has a 10yr shelf life (w/spares in the buttstock) and is the same type used by the wife's Aimpoint Micro (she gets 50K hrs of 24/7 use on one battery) so my battery logistics are simplified.
Tomac

STG-556 w/Talon30 & Tac30:


10-shot 100yd group using Prvi Partizan M193 w/Tac30 at 4x:


Tac30 reticle at 50yds & 4x(Tac30 reticle pics courtesy of deadduck357):


Tac30 reticle at 50yds & 1x:


Tac30 reticle illuminated at 50yds & 4x:


Leupold Prismatic reticle:


Leupold Prismatic reticle illuminated:

I have been very busy lately remodeling my master bath but I found some time to update the table to try to reflect the additions from shot show. I still need to track down the Kruger people about their scope though they have never responded to any information requests I have given them in the past. Also, I heard unconfirmed rumors about an IOR 1-10x in the works but I have seen nothing. Thanks to Tomac for the post of the TAC 30 revew. I have also seen some good reviews about the SS 1-4x but really haven't had the time to insert them myself. Perhaps when the bathroom is done.

Couple of updates needed in the original spreadsheet:
At least what I could fine, the following prices need adjusted:
Burris XTR 1-4=  standard price is around $650-700 now.
Pride Fowler CQLR 1-4 is way off= normal price I found is $1099

I have received and have completed testing the following scopes for review:

GRSC 1-6x prototype
Vortex 1-4x razor HD
Vortex 1-4x Viper PST

Hopefully by the end of this week I will have posted the first review from this batch. The Razor will be first because I must return it very quickly to Vortex. Next will be the GRSC and last the Vortex Viper. I should also update the table to include some new scopes and to index the reviews on the last several pages.

Hello all-   This is my first post here so wanted to introduce myself. I have been lurking for some time and have found this site to be incredibly informative, and much of the info here has helped me out a lot.  I'm not a weapons expert my any sense of the term, just an average Joe who owns a few things, hits the range on occasion, and firmly believes in defending your home court. Anyway, decided to join up today and share my nickel's worth on the vari-scope topic.  

I've shot several optics on my AR15 over the years- ACOG, Eotech, Aimpoint, Leupold and a few chi-knockoffs, and frankly was getting tired of having to swap optics depending on whether I was shooting up close or at distance. The concept of an optic that I could leave on and would serve both purposes seemed like the way to go so I started researching. This particular thread has been by best source of info, and my huge thanks to the OP for providing this.

I ended up going with an optic that was not on the page 1 list of this thread- the IOR Valdata 1.5-8x24 35mm with a list price of $1595 (maybe this should go on the list?).  Ref: http://www.valdada.com/product/a2655086-d6e1-4df9-ba34-42428d8b0c8b.aspx

I was originally leaning towards the Leatherwood or Ed's GRSC 1-4, as they both seem quite remarkable for the price point- Especially the GRSC with it's reticule and FFP optic, and selectable from red or green illumination.  The new Trijicon Accupoint looked remarkable as well until I saw the lame reticule and lack of BDC (what are they thinking??), so scratched that.  

I ultimately determined that I'd need a bit more than 4x though (recalling 100yd and 200yd views through the 4x ACOG), so I started looking at optics that went up to 6x / 8x / 10x.  Very pricey indeed :D.  Most did not have a reticule I liked.   I came across the IOR 1-8 CQB model on the Valdata site and then checked out several reviews (some here on AR15 like this one: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=512475&page=1 ) and they all seemed quite positive. I liked the reticule (suspiciously similar to Eds reticule- I'm sure there is a story behind that..), and I ended up calling Valdata and talking to Val.  Very nice guy, quite helpful and informative. He hooked me up with the latest model just in, apparently it has several design updates including a thinner horseshoe (.05 MOA) and the horseshoe is fully illuminated. The mag ring is redesigned with a quick throw riser, and I got the one with the exposed BDC knob for use on a .308 as well (probably my next purchase).  Val cut me a great price and included a set of alloy high mount rings.  I should receive it this week, so I will post some pics and initial thoughts once I get it in hand.  

It is a SFP optic so I do have some slight concerns there, and even though it is relatively compact it has some weight to is (28 oz w/ rings IIRC).  It is not a true 1x (1.5) but I was assured it would work great for fast acquisition up close- so we'll see. I am very intrigued by Ed's upcoming 1-6 model and look forward to seeing it.

Thanks and I hope my comments are considered relevant and on topic for this thread.

Quick bit of info on another source of 35mm mounts-   I found on the Valdata site they have some very nice looking scope rings / mounts including cantilevered with QD.  Price looks reasonable for the quality.  They offer them all in 1", 30mm and 35mm.  
Linky: http://www.valdada.com/catalog/978f0f63-4813-48dd-9b22-7ac9db234e51.aspx