Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 5/13/2018 2:51:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/13/2018 2:59:00 PM EDT by Scottyman]
I can't decide between these three. I'm leaning towards the PA Platinum, but couldn't find any comparisons of the glass quality to the others. The Razor apparently has great field of view and eye box forgiveness, but the reticle is so so. Youtube doesn't have any videos comparing the optical quality.

The scope will be put on a Tavor .308. HD, target shooting and hunting. Brightness, clarity and minimal distortion is needed for lower light woods activities.
Link Posted: 5/13/2018 3:37:07 PM EDT
The PA 1-8 and Accupower 1-8 are FFP 1-8 locking open turret scopes.
The Vortex razor gen 2 is SFP 1-6 closed turret.

They're pretty different scopes, figure out what you want and that'll help narrow down your choice.
Link Posted: 5/13/2018 4:00:22 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:
The PA 1-8 and Accupower 1-8 are FFP 1-8 locking open turret scopes.
The Vortex razor gen 2 is SFP 1-6 closed turret.

They're pretty different scopes, figure out what you want and that'll help narrow down your choice.
View Quote
Yeah, I'm aware. I want the one with the best optical quality. Everything else is secondary.
Link Posted: 5/13/2018 4:21:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Scottyman:

Yeah, I'm aware. I want the one with the best optical quality. Everything else is secondary.
View Quote
In that case, the Trijicon is probably your best bet.
They're all japanese LOW scopes, and relatively similar in design and build quality.
But the Trijicon has an objective that's 36% larger in surface area, which will translate into more light transmission and a better exit pupil than any other minor adjustments that exists across the 3 scopes.
Link Posted: 5/13/2018 4:25:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Scottyman:

Yeah, I'm aware. I want the one with the best optical quality. Everything else is secondary.
View Quote
I have owned all three of the above, and it's hard to tell which one had the best glass as all three were superb in that department.

So in that respect you may want to actually want to look at the secondary aspect of each of those optics. I honestly couldn't tell much difference in their optical quality.

I guess if I were to nitpick I'm going to say the eye box on the Vortex, and Trijicon were the most forgiving at 1x. Even with that all three are really close.

You also may want to take into consideration that everybody's eyes are going to see through these optics a little differently and you're going to get some very different answers.

Hopefully a couple of our optics gurus will post in here shortly and be able to really give you the more scientific details. Still really hard to judge unless you've actually looked through them yourself.
Link Posted: 5/13/2018 4:27:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/13/2018 4:27:17 PM EDT by gman556]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:

In that case, the Trijicon is probably your best bet.
They're all japanese LOW scopes, and relatively similar in design and build quality.
But the Trijicon has an objective that's 36% larger in surface area, which will translate into more light transmission and a better exit pupil than any other minor adjustments that exists across the 3 scopes.
View Quote
I am going to also agree with the above statement.
Link Posted: 5/13/2018 11:37:15 PM EDT
Subjectively the PA Platinum likely has the best reticle...
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 12:57:42 PM EDT
I’m pretty sure the PA and Trijicon are made in the same factory.

PA has a better reticle.

Vortex is good, arguably the best. But I can’t get over the PA reticle; it’s simply that good.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 1:30:02 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:

In that case, the Trijicon is probably your best bet.
They're all japanese LOW scopes, and relatively similar in design and build quality.
But the Trijicon has an objective that's 36% larger in surface area, which will translate into more light transmission and a better exit pupil than any other minor adjustments that exists across the 3 scopes.
View Quote
Everything I came to post already said in this post.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 1:47:08 PM EDT
What about the Burris XTR II 1-8?
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 5:36:15 PM EDT
Pretty sure the Burris is made by LOW now as well, at least the 1-8 model is. I have been through them all, and it really comes down to reticle and turret preference. Nobody makes a perfect 1-8 and the glass is really similar in all of them. I preferred the reticle and turrets of the Trijicon, and that is the one I still have. The NF NXS isn't/wasn't worth the price difference to me and the only thing it offered was brighter illumination which doesn't matter to me since I run an off-set RMR anyways. I can deal with the extra ounces of the Trijicon.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 6:09:14 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kb1:
Pretty sure the Burris is made by LOW now as well, at least the 1-8 model is. I have been through them all, and it really comes down to reticle and turret preference. Nobody makes a perfect 1-8 and the glass is really similar in all of them. I preferred the reticle and turrets of the Trijicon, and that is the one I still have. The NF NXS isn't/wasn't worth the price difference to me and the only thing it offered was brighter illumination which doesn't matter to me since I run an off-set RMR anyways. I can deal with the extra ounces of the Trijicon.
View Quote
Hows the eye box with the Trijicon? The Razor doesn't just have a decent field of view, but it looks like the image goes all the way to the edges of the scope--if you know what I mean. Practically zero tunnel effect at 1X--not sure about 6X. How does the Trijicon compare? The others?
I wish I could compare all 3 side by side! Ahhh! If I could afford the Kahles, I'd get it.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 6:57:21 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Scottyman:

Hows the eye box with the Trijicon? The Razor doesn't just have a decent field of view, but it looks like the image goes all the way to the edges of the scope--if you know what I mean. Practically zero tunnel effect at 1X--not sure about 6X. How does the Trijicon compare? The others?
I wish I could compare all 3 side by side! Ahhh! If I could afford the Kahles, I'd get it.
View Quote
At the same mag, the triji eyebox should be slightly better with the larger objective.
The eyebox will be obviously slightly tighter at the top end, since it goes up to x8.
Link Posted: 5/17/2018 9:12:15 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Scottyman:

Hows the eye box with the Trijicon? The Razor doesn't just have a decent field of view, but it looks like the image goes all the way to the edges of the scope--if you know what I mean. Practically zero tunnel effect at 1X--not sure about 6X. How does the Trijicon compare? The others?
I wish I could compare all 3 side by side! Ahhh! If I could afford the Kahles, I'd get it.
View Quote
1x is better with the Trijicon. Still not a true 1x, but it closer to a true 1x than the Vortex. The ocular edge of the Trijicon doesn't disappear as well as the Vortex, but it still not bad at all.
Link Posted: 5/18/2018 1:45:21 AM EDT
had the trijicon 1-8

i liked everything about it except the reticle.
Link Posted: 5/18/2018 6:39:39 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jormungandr:
had the trijicon 1-8

i liked everything about it except the reticle.
View Quote
What didn't you like about the reticle? I'm curious since I've been researching which 1-? to put on the larue I just bought.
Link Posted: 5/18/2018 8:06:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/18/2018 8:08:24 AM EDT by Scottyman]
Ok. It's down to the PA P and the Trijicon. Prefer the ACSS reticle, but can settle for Trijicon's if the glass/image is a touch better.
As I understand, there's some illumination bleed onto some of the numbers on the Trijicon's reticle. Have yet to see a video that accurately reproduces it.
Link Posted: 5/18/2018 9:10:19 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Scottyman:
Ok. It's down to the PA P and the Trijicon. Prefer the ACSS reticle, but can settle for Trijicon's if the glass/image is a touch better.
As I understand, there's some illumination bleed onto some of the numbers on the Trijicon's reticle. Have yet to see a video that accurately reproduces it.
View Quote
I think I'm down to the same two choices. I've got about a month to decide.
Link Posted: 5/18/2018 6:42:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By nlm23:

What didn't you like about the reticle? I'm curious since I've been researching which 1-? to put on the larue I just bought.
View Quote
The center crosshair is huge on 8x, makes for precision shots at 8x with long distance pretty difficult. its a great reticle at 1x though.

Originally Posted By Scottyman:
Ok. It's down to the PA P and the Trijicon. Prefer the ACSS reticle, but can settle for Trijicon's if the glass/image is a touch better.
As I understand, there's some illumination bleed onto some of the numbers on the Trijicon's reticle. Have yet to see a video that accurately reproduces it.
View Quote
There is definitely illumination bleed onto the other numbers on the trijicon. Not even a little bit, its definitely noticeable right away.
Link Posted: 5/18/2018 7:10:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/18/2018 7:36:29 PM EDT by Scottyman]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jormungandr:

The center crosshair is huge on 8x, makes for precision shots at 8x with long distance pretty difficult. its a great reticle at 1x though.

There is definitely illumination bleed onto the other numbers on the trijicon. Not even a little bit, its definitely noticeable right away.
View Quote
Looks like the intersection of the crosshairs for the MOA model is .75 MOA. Is that correct? So, 3" at 400?
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 12:33:09 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jormungandr:

The center crosshair is huge on 8x, makes for precision shots at 8x with long distance pretty difficult. its a great reticle at 1x though.

There is definitely illumination bleed onto the other numbers on the trijicon. Not even a little bit, its definitely noticeable right away.
View Quote
That's the big con for me on that optic. Otherwise I dig it for sure but it does bleed more than most.
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 6:14:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/19/2018 7:59:15 AM EDT by Scottyman]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mrgunsngear:

That's the big con for me on that optic. Otherwise I dig it for sure but it does bleed more than most.
View Quote
Does the bleed create any flaring onto the non etched areas of the image at appropriate setting levels?

You reviewed the PA Platinum 1-8--How does that compare to the Trijicon? Eyebox, field of view, image quality from 1 to 8X ect.
Link Posted: 6/1/2018 5:52:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2018 5:55:13 PM EDT by WrenchGuy]
Rex has a good review of the PA 1-8 Platinum...



And of course, MrGunsngear has a great review too.
Link Posted: 6/1/2018 11:24:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/1/2018 11:25:22 PM EDT by nihilsum]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kb1:
1x is better with the Trijicon. Still not a true 1x, but it closer to a true 1x than the Vortex. The ocular edge of the Trijicon doesn't disappear as well as the Vortex, but it still not bad at all.
View Quote
First I have heard this from anyone who has used both. Usually feedback is the opposite on 1x performance.
Link Posted: 6/2/2018 7:29:40 PM EDT
Have you considered trying the nx8? I had the Trijicon and didn’t love it.
Link Posted: 6/7/2018 1:41:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/7/2018 1:43:18 PM EDT by B505jcm]
Can't go wrong with the Primary Arms. I couldn't tell the difference in glass quality between the Trijicon and the PA and I liked the reticle better. My next big money scope is almost assuredly going to be a Kahles, although I'm holding out hope that they release a 1-8 soon like Swaro. If they do and the cost of the K16i drops from 16-1700 to 12-1400 then it would be a no brainer for me to go to the k16i. That being said, I have no plans to give up any of my PA's.
Link Posted: 6/10/2018 12:22:04 AM EDT
You may want to hold out for the PA Platinum Griffin or Raptor M2.

They will be replacing the currant 1-8 and have a chevron center aim and redesigned ACSS reticles.

The Griffin is hands down going to be the most versatile LPVO reticle on the planet. Nothing else even comes close.

The PA Platinum is daylight bright for sure at 1x.
Top Top